the GreenFrauds gave to me. . . "
Here's a report of the confrontation, but note that it's from BBC News, so I don't necessarily believe a word. But the BBC is at least reporting this, more than the U.S. lamestream media is doing, so it's worth noting. The report said that 30,000 demonstrators threw bricks and broke windows and marched to demand action at the UN climate change summit.
This is the video posted at Brietbart TV.
PJTV has another good video about the Copenhagen climate summit. Joe Hicks interviews Sen. James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) about the attack by Barack Obama and the U.N. on United States' sovereignty.
Inhofe: Let’s face it, President Obama is going through a very arrogant period of his life. He really, maybe in his mind, he thinks he can do these things. But he has just said, we don’t care what you say in Congress, you have defeated it, therefore I’m going to do it. That’s what’s upset some Democrats and republicans.
Several Democrats were upset because the president has announced that he’s going to make a speech on the 18th where he’s going to say what we’re going to commit to, which is a 17 percent reduction by 2020. Well, he can’t do that, and Senator Jim Webb, for example, he’s a Democrat, he was very outspoken in his opposition to the president doing this, and other Democrats were too.
Here’s what he’s trying to do. He came out with the “endangerment” finding. A lot of people don’t know what that is. The easiest way to explain it is, he’s been trying to get a Cap and Trade through ever since he’s been in office, and it happened long before that—it goes all the way back to Clinton/Gore—and since he knows he can’t, the one good thing about him going after endangerment, that’s his admission that he can’t do it, the votes aren’t there, it’s dead. He wants to do it administratively, through the Executive, what the Congress will not do. Some of his Democrats are going to have to remind him that we have three co-equal branches of government.
About the expectations next week for Obama at Copenhagen, Time Magazine, which ought to change its name to Obama Time since this rag has given itself completely over to sucking up to the Obama administration, has this to say: "A lot will depend on whether Obama's fellow leaders think he can move the Congress to deliver on carbon cuts and long-term financing — and do it in a timely fashion," said Alden Meyer, the director of strategy and policy for the Union of Concerned Scientists. "It's still possible we could have a negative outcome, but I am feeling more optimistic than when I got here." Undoubtedly, the President feels the pressure. Just as he has been on nearly every other challenge facing the world today, Obama will be key.
In other Copenhagen news, people are writing about Herman Van Rompuy. Who is he? He's a Belgian-Flemish politician, currently serving as President of the European Council. On 19 November 2009, Van Rompuy was designated the first permanent president of the European Council under the Treaty of Lisbon. Note the word "designated." This guy wasn't elected to anything. He will be in the position until 30 May 2012. Maybe this is the position that Barack Obama is angling for. Always before in his brief and unexceptional employment history, Obama has used a previous job as a stepping stone to another, bigger job. It seems as if the guy couldn't care less about a job once he has it--he merely wants it to use to get to the next one (like his 145 undistinguished days as a U.S. Senator). If Obama could destroy U.S. sovereignty and force us into a "one world government" position, then we too could become part of the European Council--and then Obama could take on his next job as president of the EU Council, although undoubtedly he would change the title to King of the World.
Van Rompuy is the one who said this: "2009 is also the first year of global governance with the establishment of the G20 in the middle of a financial crisis; the climate conference in Copenhagen is another step towards the global management of our planet."
Like everything in Europe, the “presidency” was a backroom stitch-up, and neither the French nor the Germans wanted a charismatic glamorpuss in the gig stealing their respective thunders. A Belgian nonentity was just what they were looking for. Being a nondescript yawneroo was the minimum entry qualification. And, by those standards, Herman van Rompuy is performing brilliantly.
In his article, Steyn quotes his boss at the National Review, Rich Lowry, who says that the good news of Obama's increasingly banal speeches (like the one he gave in Oslo) is that he's not nearly so boring as this guy, Herman Van Rompuy. Thus the HVR explanation, since in the U.S., you could ask a thousand people to tell you who HVR is, and 1000 out of 1000 wouldn't have a clue.
Steyn points out that Obama's numbers have dropped, yet the Obama speech writers don't seem to know that: They seem to be the last guys on the planet in love with the sound of his voice and their one interminable tinny tune with its catchpenny hooks. The usual trick is to position their man as the uniquely insightful leader pitching his tent between two extremes no sane person has ever believed: “There are those who say there is no evil in the world. There are others who argue that pink fluffy bunnies are the spawn of Satan and conspiring to overthrow civilization. Let me be clear: I believe people of goodwill on all sides can find common ground between the absurdly implausible caricatures I attribute to them on a daily basis. We must begin by finding the courage to acknowledge the hard truth that I am living testimony to the power of nuance to triumph over hard truth and come to the end of the sentence on a note of sonorous, polysyllabic, if somewhat hollow, uplift. Pause for applause.”
Stein continues: When you consider all the White House eyeballs that approve a presidential speech, it’s truly remarkable that there’s no one to scribble on the first draft: “Scrub this, Fred. It makes POTUS sound like a self-aggrandizing buffoon.”
His article continues in the same vein. It's Saul Alinsky's Rule #5, straight up, baby: "Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage." And getting back to Copenhagen, Day Eight, Stein has this to say about the conference: Copenhagen--whose inauguration of a transnational bureaucracy to facilitate the multitrillion-dollar shakedown of functioning economies would be the biggest exercise in punitive liberalism the developed world has ever been subjected to. . . . Stein asks, where do you move if you don't like global governance; what polling station do you go to to vote it out?
Another one of my favorite political writers is someone whose identity is completely unknown to me or to anyone else, as far as I know: he's (I assume it's a "he"; his writing sounds to my ear like a he) Dr. Zero at HotAir. I've mentioned him before as someone worth reading no matter what the topic. Today he has an article titled "A Memo to the Gobal Warming Cult," in which he tells warmists that their 30-year con job schtick is over.
Dr. Zero tells warmists in his memo that their day is over, and here are the things they're not going to be able to do, because we are on to you:
- You're not going to be able to frighten the world into reducing its population.
- You're not going to succeed in terrorizing free people into embracing totalitarianism.
- the rest of the world will no longer politely ignore swarms of private jets and limos ferrying you to carbon-belching “climate summits,” where you draw up plans for the Western proletariat to live as primitive hunter-gatherers.
- we're not going to allow a pampered elitist who once flew around the world to attend cricket practice, tell us that we need to make do without air travel and ice water.
- We’ll never be foolish enough to allow a band of fanatics to use “peer review” to rule all dissenting opinion out-of-bounds, then declare themselves the proud owners of a mighty consensus.
- we will never stop demanding the raw data, and we’ll drown you in laughter when you mutter something about deleting it by accident.
- Your status as "scientists" is on probation. You may no longer issue pompous lectures.
- You will stop propagandizing our children. We will prepare them to deal with you.
- You will stop trying to make climategate go away by ignoring it or lying about it.
- You will answer for the sins of the damage you've done to real science.
Here are some good posts relating to ClimateGate and energy warmism fraud at American Thinker:
"The Obama Energy Fiasco" by Jeffrey Folks. Whatever happened to President Obama's urgent campaign appeal to "free America from dependency on foreign oil"?
"The Wages of Climategate" by J.R. Dunn. As the CRU (Climate Research Unit) uproar plays itself out, it may well fracture the left-scientific partnership that has distorted scientific research for decades, along with providing a much-needed whipping for environmentalism, the most influential offshoot of contemporary leftism.
No comments:
Post a Comment