Why the Left Will Never Abandon ‘Global Warming’

ClimateChangeIt won’t surprise readers of this column to learn that the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCG) insists that unless “global warming” is addressed, the planet promises to suffer all manner of evil.   Courtesy of “coastal flooding” and “storm surges,” “urban populations” especially are susceptible to “the risk of death, injury, and disrupted livelihoods [.]”

To a far greater extent than any other issue, that of Global Warming reveals what makes the leftist mind tick.

That the leftist aches from the very marrow of his being for the consolidation of power and authority in a central government is a no-brainer.  While there are ways in which governments use their power to which he objects, the leftist has never known a limit on the amount of power at a government’s disposal with which he could rest comfortably.

So, the leftist has always wanted Big Government.  And this insatiable lust for unlimited government is inseparable from his disdain for the nation-state and its concomitant “nationalism”: national boundaries impose a limit on the extent to which government can expand.  The logic of Big Government has a life all of its own, pointing beyond the nations in which it takes root toward the rest of the planet.  It is self-perpetuating, much like a disease that can’t desist from moving from host to host until it dies.

There is no issue short of a conflict with an extraterrestrial race that better serves the global aspirations of Big Government than that of Global Warming.

The conservative philosopher Michael Oakeshott contrasts two fundamentally different models of a modern (“nation”) state.  On the one hand, modern states have been looked upon as “civil associations,” associations of human beings doing their own thing and bound together by nothing more or less than the law.  The latter, in turn, doesn’t tell associates what they must do, but only how they must do, or refrain from doing, whatever it is that they choose to do.  Since laws are not policies designed to bring to fruition some grand master plan or vision for the nation, government, from this perspective, is not visionary or activist.

Rather, government serves the function of an umpire or a referee: it exists solely to ensure that the rules (laws) of the association are observed by all of its members.

Modern states have also been thought of as “enterprise associations.”  The government of an enterprise association is visionary, activist.  It leads by policy; it doesn’t rule by law.  The members of an enterprise association are not related to one another as one law-abider to another, but as “joint-enterprisers,” comrades-in-arms, fellow-travelers.

“Global Warming” is made for the idea of the state-as-enterprise association.

Even war, the stuff of which collectivist dreams are made, isn’t quite as amenable to the lover of Big Government as is Global Warming.  War insures the centralization of power and the transformation of government into an agent of activism.  However, from the perspective of the leftist, the zealot of Big Government, war—because it always pits one actor against another—exacerbates “nationalism” and, thus, actually limits the growth of government.

Global Warming is another proposition altogether.  The term “Global Warming,” far from being descriptive, is chock-full of imagery of death and destruction of epic proportions.  The term is what logicians since Aristotle have referred to as an “appeal to force,” a rhetorical device designed to at once circumvent rational argumentation and coerce people into bending to the will of its apologists.  It is the secular equivalent of Hell or Armageddon in both the images that it calls to mind as well as the uses (i.e. the instillation of fear and the consolidation of power) to which it is put.  Like Hell or Armageddon, there is no one that is safe from its clutches—unless they turn to, not Almighty God, but Almighty Government.

And since Global Warming is, well, global, it provides the golden opportunity for the governments of the world to either join forces or synthesize with one another.

In the process, national sovereignty and individual liberty will be relegated to the dustbin of history.

Global Warming is the gift that keeps on giving to the leftist.  This is why he will never give it up.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • Gamal

    Global warming fits the leftists view of history which is that America and American industry is the oppressor and ruiner of the planet. It is a way to bring the hated American industry to its knees. It’s a way to redistribute the wealth that from the leftist viewpoint America has plundered from the world.

    • lisa741

      My Uncle Aaron just got an awesome 12 month
      old Audi A5 Convertible only from working part time off a home computer… find
      out here F­i­s­c­a­l­P­o­s­t­.­ℂ­o­m

  • herb benty

    True, all too true. One world government is the goal. Check out the statue in Neuchadnezzar’s dream in the book of Daniel. World rulership has been attempted for thousands of years, this latest push, using excuses like, “global warming”, will be crushed by our wonderful Almighty God Himself. Satan is behind this of course.

    • spyeatte

      I think there might just be enough chaos and bad people with enormous egos in the world, that would make actual one “world government” impossible. Mix in religion and we will have permanent but limited and unlimited turmoil. Of course, I could be wrong.

  • truebearing

    You can’t take the “war” out of Global Warming. The Left has an issue that they can use to ratchet up fear while inciting hate against those who supposedly threaten the lives of everyone by refusing to submit. It is a war that pretends to be based in science, but is targeted primarily at the uneducated. The less education a person has, the more vulnerable they are to pseudo-scientific BS.

    Since the Left has always wanted to destroy those who produce, whether it is mining, coal, oil, or manufacturing, Global Warming is the one-size-fits-all-capitalist demonizer. Only those who “comply” with carbon regulations, ie pay-off the global government, are allowed to stay in business. The goal of the international Left is International Environmental Fascism. A mutant hybrid of past ideologies derived from Marxism, blended with earth worshipping pagan religion. It is a global syncretic religion that everyone must submit to, or be sacrificed to the Earth gods.

    If they succeed, this is our Grave New World.

    • wildjew

      You make a good point. Like evolution, global warming provides a means (a pagan religion) to explain the universe absent a Creator.

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        Exactly. The Leftists’ worldview allows for a “creation”, but excludes a Creator.

    • John Bluespoons

      That is absolutely perfectly said. Thank you truebearing!

      • truebearing

        Thanks. It would be nice if I was entirely wrong though.

        • Lightbringer

          Every thinking person wishes you were entirely wrong. Unfortunately, you are entirely right.

          • truebearing

            That’s not good. Being right about the Left isn’t a pleasant thing. They are fundmentally evil.


      Grave New World. Very clever!!

  • Kill Kommunism

    This lie also lays the groundwork for their plans to murder 90% of humanity. The plague they intend to unleash would be just another symptom of “climate change.”

  • Flicker

    The earth, and now the “globe”, has always been a particularly understanding god, it requires little and offers much. And even if you have other gods before it, it doesn’t mind. Even those who see the order, and the temporal king, as most worthy, there is nothing wrong with an expedient collaboration with gaia to consolidate power and appease the healthy wealthy masses. Ask the world’s impoverished and disenfranchised what is important and you will find a very different perspective.

  • Flicker

    The Bible does speak to this. It says that God will never again the earth with flooding, but that one day something like a burning mountain will fall into the ocean creating vast destruction. The reaction? The Bible says that no one will repent even though they see the devastating effects. And today? There is a push to send into outer space a killer-asteriod monitoring sataellite so that we can head the nxt one off.
    Oh, and to flat-earthers, the Bible does refer to the earth as round or a ball in space. I trust the Bible more than the Global Warmongers.

    • notme123

      Genesis 8:22

  • notme123

    It’s all about money…for the chosen chief supporters, like Al Gore.It’s made him(them)richer.


      It’s more about idealism and wanting to design a God that they like and can control.

  • Softly Bob

    “unless “global warming” is addressed, the planet promises to suffer all manner of evil. ”

    Yes, of course. Just exactly what a Leftist defines as all manners of evil is not really the same way that a sane person would define it.
    Muslim terrorism, economic collapse, restrictions of freedom- these are the real evils but the Left are stumbling blind men when it comes to such things. They see evil only where they want to see it and reality is completely lost on them. These people always put their ideology first, because they are either evil themselves or have been completely duped by it.

  • EL CID

    Anyone with any historical knowledge knows that the climate changes. Example: 1930’s in the southwest experience extreme drought. Then, there was an unprecedented period of wet weather that allowed for the West to flourish. We are now headed for dryer times again. These cycles are normal.

    We learn, even from Joseph in the bible, that the way to act is to plan for the future using every tool under your control. Joseph does NOT tell Pharaoh to fix the weather! He tells him to build silos to store more grain.

    There are so many environmental issues that we, the international community, could address with the proper leadership, such as better management of fish stocks to name one. And, no one but an idiot would deny that cutting down on the use of fossil fuels is a laudable goal for many reasons.

    But, the high priests of the Left have everyone’s mindshare on an issue we cannot control–climate. By doing this, they have done the world a great disservice. Instead of acting, we are debating philosophy.

  • nimbii

    Agenda 21 is alive and well. John D. Rockefeller wrote a check to the UN in the 50’s for the real estate in Manhattan. He and other internationalists thought the UN would be the vehicle for them to manage the economies of member states and assure wealth and power for them.

    Unfortunately for them and us, other interests in the UN soon stocked it with tin-pot dictators and tipped the balance of power making it useless and ineffective except for the permanence of self-serving policies such as Agenda 21.

  • Christopher Riddle

    “Global Warming”(or whatever is currently in vogue as a reference)is The RELIGION OF The LEFT!It offers them Unlimited Power to control the individual(what you eat,drink,drive,how much energy you consume,where that energy comes from,etc.ad nauseum)!!!This Is Their DREAM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • noname

    PLEASE, PLEASE look online at Operation American Spring.org, and patriotsforamerica.ning.com, constitutional emergency. Of course, YOU WILL NOT HEAR ABOUT THIS IN THE MSM. PLEASE RESEARCH AND PASS THIS INFORMATION ON. THANK YOU, and sorry for shouting.

  • Wolfthatknowsall

    AGW (or as it’s now called, AGCC … Anthropogenic Global Climate Change), has only one purpose: Total control by a global extra-national entities, such as the United Nations with its Agenda 21. It’s completely about government power, as long as individual governments play along with the global government.

    What the proponents of global government haven’t counted on is being used by aggressive powers at the national level, to serve their individual interests. China, Russia, and others, will never be dominated by anyone or anything else, as long as their military power exceeds them. With the decline of US power, there will be nothing to stop these nation-states from empire …

    … the Leftists have forgotten about this.

  • SoCalMike

    Politics is religion for the Left.
    In the name of the State, the Bureaucracy and the Holy Environment, Amen.
    Don’t waste your breath trying to have factual conversations with religious zealots. Just mock them, their belief in their false god and expose their willingness to never hesitate to cram their false god down everybody’s throat.

  • Chiron_Venizelos

    We knew we were in trouble when the environmentalists began claiming dolphins were equal to humans. Think of it; it’s ALL gone down hill from there, with some sort of guilt trip laid onto the same people who brought our society forward. I do not feel guilty for being one of the superior beings on my planet and for having a constructed home (however modest) with heat and cooling to dwell in.
    Neither should anyone else feel guilty for those same things!


      I’m pretty sure we did not descend from monkeys, either. How preposterous!!

    • justquitnow

      Who asked you to feel guilty about your modest dwelling and your common utilities and comforts?

      • Chiron_Venizelos

        On Monday, it was the UN, who reminded me that Ageda 21 would correct the overconsumption of energy by all Americans while third world nations lived in squalor, so the redistribution of wealth (passing through the UN, of course), would help me atone for having been a capitalist.
        On Tuesday, it was Al Gore, who said I should be ashamed because my home has HVAC, and must remit money to buy carbon credits to make everything “fair.”
        On Wednesday, it was the Sierra Club (or it might have been PETA), who told me that since I had electric lights, I was endangering turtles and bats who depended on the darkness to help them find food.
        On Thursday, it was Mr. 0bama, who said our country (of which I am a citizen) emitted too much carbon into the atmosphere. (He immediately jumped on his jet for a 7-day Earth Day tour, in which he will cause the emission of more than 357 TONS of carbon into the atmosphere, which is more than ten humans will release in their entire lives!
        On Friday, it was the EPA, who warned me that global warming was “settled science” and that it was partly my fault because I drive a car.
        On Saturday, it was Cheryl Crowe who told me I was guilty of polluting the atmosphere because I used more than one square of toilet papers to wipe my bum.
        On Sunday, it was Patrick Kennedy, who told me that heating my home in the winter caused too many snow flakes to melt when they hit the roof and this prevented the natural formation of glaciers.

  • Ellen_L

    The issue is really whether one believes that the individual has rights and the purpose of society is to help us live together and each to prosper on his own activity or one believes that government can dictate the best way to use all resources including the people.
    There are two related reasons for choosing the former. First, the life of each individual is the standard of value which he/she must use to prosper – this is the moral argument. Second, there are too many factors that constantly change that go into even simple decisions for anyone to determine the best course for society; only a market driven by the choices of each individual can act in a way that best allocates resources – this is the economic argument.
    You are right climate change focusing on the world as a whole and intimidating people by fear and guilt of poor decisions seems to reduce complex questions to sound bites. Thus we can’t even learn by bad decisions since nothing is done in a timely fashion and a single system with little feedback makes too many restrictions on everyone. Thus, even the well intended folks encourage fear mongers and power seekers. We do need to consider our environment but globally enforced simplified restriction by force is the worst way to do so.

    • WW4

      We buy a lot of cheap goods from China. We employ Chinese workers. We borrow money from China. The market chooses China because China is cheap. But because they are unburdened by environmental regulations (not to mention the need to treat workers well) you can see pollution on your skin and clothes, there, after a day in their cities. I wouldn’t say we share China’s values–but our markets support them.

      We like our cars. We like our gas. Sure, there are very workable green technologies (in construction, for example), but we don’t seem to be in any hurry to adopt those at a scale that makes them affordable for the average person.

      So our markets, now, would seem to tend toward pollution.

      • Ellen_L

        Notice that China is a more controlled country than we are. Before one can regulate industry or technology the industry or technology must exist. It is the free market that allows technology to grow and to experiment with new better ways of doing things. Regulation and edicts will not grow ideas, a free market with individuals competing for trade will.
        Try focusing on fundamentals rather than incidentals and you might be able to see the patterns involved and why China is still more polluted than we are – it is not the market that is to blame. That China is finally badly trying out markets is good not bad. That we are so over regulated that it is cheaper to transport and import less quality goods does not speak well of your complaints that we would like to fill our desires without more controls.

  • seewithyourowneyes

    As long as free countries exist (and that may not be for much longer) there will exist evidence that free people create a higher standard of living for their poor than do Marxist countries. This evidence must be eliminated, hence the destruction of the nation-state.


    Good description by Kerwick of the Leftist mind. Leftism is its own religion, and its tenets must be accepted on faith. Any deviation is dangerous and must be punished as heresy.

  • verneoz

    Leftists use Global Warming as the gateway to expanding government with more taxes to penalize citizens for driving the wrong sized car and living in the wrong sized house. The enablers, so called climate scientists, use Global Warming scare tactics to obtain more funding for their enterprise.

    • David

      It’s all about forcing it down our throats. We got the first taste of that with Obama Care.

  • Infovoyeur

    Well, I simplistically had thought that the Right, hated idea of “climate change,” for only two reasons & simpel at that. (1) Psycho-Political: don’t want Big Govt. telling us what to do, and (2) Psycho-Economics: we want to exploit the Earth resources without obstacles.
    But these comments suggest a much more wide-and-deep cause of Global Warming Phobia so to speak. An Economic-Social-Istic-Politicized system many of who’s goals to truly impose and prevail, are efficiently “fuelled” by the environmental “scare.” This expose bears farther consideration.

    • liberalism is a mental illness

      Leftard. Got a house? Got a car? Probably not. Think the climate is going to stay the same forever?? Leftard

    • Sussex Girl

      Um, you are aware that NASA has been monkeying with the data for years, specifically by lowering the temperature records for the 1930s to make today’s temperatures look higher on graphs; and you are aware that temperature stations around the country have had to be relocated because they were poorly sited, like next to parking lots; and you are aware that European glaciers have been receding since the 1800s because that was when the planet finally began warming after the Little Ice Age; and you are aware that the Medieval Warm Period, when the Vikings grew wheat in Greenland, was warmer than it is today; and you are aware that twice now emails have been leaked that document a clear and disturbing pattern of collusion by the warming camp to suppress information and keep papers by skeptics out of technical journals; that Kevin Trenbreth of the NCAR actually admitted “We can’t account for the lack of warming, and it’s a travesty that we can’t,” right?

      Global temperatures have not warmed in 17 years, since 1998 (during a visit to Australia to deliver a lecture at Deakin University in February 2013, the UN’s climate change chief, Rajendra Pachauri, acknowledged the 17-year pause in global temperature rises, confirmed by Britain’s Met Office, but said it would need to last “30 to 40 years at least” to break the long-term global warming trend), yet CO2 has continued on its upward trajectory.

      Many scientists (US, Russian, Danish, and more) are watching the Sun and are calling for a Maunder Minimum, which was stinking cold. For 400 years, starting with Galileo, astronomers have watched the sunspots as they form and disappear on the Sun’s surface. During the coldest periods (the Maunder Minimum 1640-1680, the Dalton Minimum 1790-1830, a smaller minimum from 1880-1915, and a very little one from 1945-1977), there were few to no sunspots.

      We are in Sunspot Cycle 24. Originally, during Cycle 23, observers thought Cycle 24 was going to mimic Cycle 4, which occurred during the Dalton Minimum. However, three years ago, the National Solar Observatory published three separate reports stating that the sunspots are going to hit a low and may disappear altogether. 400 years of observation reveal a clear pattern: fewer sunspots, colder temperatures; more sunspots, warmer temperatures.

      We could get into a whole discussion of the AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation and the PDO (the Pacific Decadal Oscillation) and how they affect temperature, but enough is enough. CO2 does not drive temperature (some indications are that temperature drives CO2 levels with an 800 year lapse). After several years of very changeable weather, the planet is going to slide into a very cold period. One Russian paper calls for a Maunder-type minimum (as does Don Easterbrook, professor emeritus of geology at Western Washington University and expert on the glaciers in the Cascades, especially Mt. Baker) starting in 2020 and lasting until at least 2040. Better get your long johns ready.

      • Lightbringer

        Excellent post. But it’s wasted on poor infovoyeur, who probably can’t read.

      • justquitnow

        And isn’t oil just created naturally by the earth and we will never run out of it?

        • truebearing

          Maybe we won’t. An asteroid the size of Mars could land in your back yard, obliterating you and the earth. look at the bright side.

    • liberalism is a mental illness


    • CosmotKat

      Most people who oppose the idea are informed and your comment is ignorant. You make stupid assumptions based on your partisan view. I mean, really how banal can you be?

    • liberalism is a mental illness


  • T800

    their biggest wrong assumption is that the OTHER NATIONS are going to cut back on their CO2 emissions too. the exact opposite is happening;the other nations are increasing them. China is building over 100 new coal-fired plants,Japan and Germany are closing their clean nuclear plants and going back to coal-fired generators.ALL of Africa burns wood,straw,and coal for their energy needs,and Asia and South America are right behind them in burning plant matter for energy.
    Their CO2 production increases FAR outweigh the cuts that America could make even if they stopped making CO2 entirely.

    it’s NOT about the environment. it’s about destroying America.

    • liberalism is a mental illness

      Well said


      Yes, it is the essence of insanity that other nations will stop their pollution.

      I recently was told of someone who visited China and shared that people have to take their clothes off after one day because they are black and heavy with soot from all the pollution.

    • tagalog

      The latest slant is that we are now being told that India and China (and the other industrializing nations) are coming to their senses and adopting non-polluting techniques and getting away from coal and non-renewable energy sources.


      • Schmitty

        Yeah and Syria is giving up their chemical weapons. Lol

  • Andy_Lewis

    Ain’t no cure for stupid, Jack. But I guess you’ll find that out the hot way

    • liberalism is a mental illness

      Ewww. Scary leftard. Stupidity is believing the climate doesn’t change. Stupidity is fearing climate change. The climate has been changling ever since the beginning of Earth. Leftard.

      • Andy_Lewis

        You really are all bozos on this bus, aincha? And your pseud is classic projection.

        • liberalism is a mental illness

          Leftard. What we’re bozos because we’re not frightened by a naturally occuring event?? Leftard

          • Andy_Lewis

            The scientists say it isn’t naturally occurring at all. And I’ll take their word over that of any internet clown show.

          • liberalism is a mental illness

            Leftard. The atmosphere has been warming for 15,000 years. There are an equal number of scientists saying that the rise in temperature is not the result of man but is rather just a normal fluctuation in the temperature cycle. Leftard. You actually believe everything you see and hear on TV and the internet?? Leftard. Do you see it getting hot anywhere?? Maybe your scientists are actually alarmists.

          • Andy_Lewis

            What part of “one-time Arctic melting” don’t you get, rightard?

          • liberalism is a mental illness

            Panic leftard panic!! The polar ice caps have been melting for 15,000 years. “One time arctic melting” is a tern envirotards made up to scare the masses. Apparently it worked on you. As I said: only leftards turn naturally occuring events into disasters. Leftard.

          • Andy_Lewis

            The scientists say otherwise. I” go with them over you, rightwat.

          • liberalism is a mental illness

            If scientists said that dolphins ruled the world would you believe them? Leftard

          • liberalism is a mental illness

            I actually just Googled “one time arctic melting” and it doesn’t even exist. Leftard.

          • Andy_Lewis

            It damn sure does exist as a phenomenon. The PHRASE, i made up in a desperate attempt to dumbphuque the discussion down to yer level. Sadly. I didn’t succeed. Rightfork.

  • justquitnow

    Literally no one believes that. No matter what’s happening in the world, FPM turns around, takes out the “lefty” construct it has been working on for years and punches the doll in the face. Take that lefty…hater of goodness.

    • liberalism is a mental illness


      • justquitnow

        No you cult weirdo….no “lefttard”…me rational human being…you belief based moron. Derpy derp derp.

        • liberalism is a mental illness


          • justquitnow

            It’s your range that’s so impressive. Next time someone yells, “hey who’s a cult moron that can reenforce what I’m saying”….don’t volunteer.

          • liberalism is a mental illness

            Leftard. Are you drunk?? What’s this about cults??

          • justquitnow

            You faith-based boy.

          • liberalism is a mental illness

            Faith based?? What does that mean?? Leftard


      Goodness??!! We’ll have to agree to disagree fundamentally.

  • http://historyscoper.com/ T.L. Winslow
  • liberalism is a mental illness

    Climate change is a natural and normal event that has been going on for billions of years. I mean is the climate the same today as it was when dinosaurs roamed the Earth? Of course not!! Silly leftards turn natural and normal events into disasters which further demonstrates the backward psychology of the typical leftard. Silly leftards.

    • tagalog

      You don’t understand fully. The litany goes like this:

      1. Once (at some unknown time) there was some (as yet unknown) optimum temperature level on earth;

      2. Humankind’s industrialization disturbed that optimum temperature, creating danger for the world;

      3. Until humankind makes the decisions necessary to bring the global temperature back to the optimum level, we humans are committing a great wrong to all the earth and creating the conditions for global disaster;

      4. Once the optimum global temperature is reached, humans will have attained salvation for all life.

      Notice how close this adheres to the Western conception of religion. Once we lived in the Garden of Eden, then we sinned and were expelled, now we must seek accommodation with God, and once we do, we will be saved.

      • liberalism is a mental illness

        Hi Tagalog. Interesting comment.. I’ve never heard before that thete was at one point in time an optimum temperature. Sounds realistic. Can the planets temperature fluctuate a little bit from time to time?? Cheers mate.

        • tagalog

          That optimum temperature thingie, don’t you think there’s something like that going on in their heads? I mean, if we’re going to reduce our carbon footprint, it’s going to take us to some temperature that they find acceptable, right?
          Also, I notice in this debate that the libbies, who ordinarily think of humans as a cancer on the earth, think in terms of accommodating human beings (and present-day human society) by adjusting climate, as they seem to think humans can do. I mean, colder temps -a lot colder- will be much better for the polar bears, won’t they?

          • liberalism is a mental illness

            Lol!! Nice. It’s likely that in about 50 years we’ll have the technology and machinery to control the temperature of the atmosphere. Cheers.

  • tagalog

    It’s a little simpler than that:

    1. People who become climatologists (or other experimenters) favor systems where the money for experimentation is unlimited. Government provides that.

    2. Private industry often has an agenda that it discloses to the experimenter when it seeks to fund research; government’s agenda can be kept secret, and the experimenter can be told something that reassures his values.

    3. People who become climatologists like the idea of worldwide authority because it makes requiring people to reduce their carbon footprint so much easier than if the world had to rely on persuasion.

    4. For climatologists, persuasion is far too slow, and relies too much on the idiotic ideas of the Great Unwashed. The hoi polloi must be led, and led quickly.

    5. Private industry expects results; government will act on anything that expands their power.

  • Flowerknife_us

    When will the Wizards of Smart start pointing out that the Planet has been “warning” for the last 15.000 some years. The time period Scientists have given for the peak of the Last Ice Age. There is evidence of some periods of “warmer” and “cooler” periods within that same time frame, The Planet still was warmer or warming over that time period.The proof being that the Polar Ice Cap never returned to anywhere near the size it started at.

    Can these Wizards please explain how Human involvement set off this chain of events 15,000 years ago

    Was there not. far more life of the Animal Kingdom variety than the Human at that time?

    The Planet was here long before us and will be here long after us.The only Question now is how long the Environmentalists will let us enjoy it

    The environmental movement has long sense morphed from common sense pollution control. Now with Carbon Dioxide deemed a pollutant, living is a crime subject to regulation and punishment. It may take a while to actually feel the punishment for being overweight, there by producing excessive CO2 emissions. But, we can get a taste of things to come when 75 Coal fired Electrical Plants being shuttered come January-without any replacements ..

    • liberalism is a mental illness

      Very well said. Kudos.

  • Fudge

    They are insane. Insane, commie control freaks who should be locked in institutions, not in positions of power.

  • physicsnut

    they will not abandon Global Taxes either !!!
    the leftoid idiots blabber on about Piketty because they think they can do the
    one-upmanship thing.
    They won’t have to actually read it, just mentioning it will supposedly intimidate people – just like walking around with Karl Marx’s Capital

  • Texas Patriot

    Jack Kerwick: Modern states have also been thought of as “enterprise associations.” The government of an enterprise association is visionary, activist. It leads bypolicy; it doesn’t rule by law. The members of an enterprise association are not related to one another as one law-abider to another, but as “joint-enterprisers,” comrades-in-arms, fellow-travelers.

    As recognized by Adam Smith in his classic treatise Wealth of Nations published in 1776, all nations are joint enterprises of their respective citizens who are in direct competition with other nations for economic dominance in international trade. Unfortunately, that is a competition that the United States has been losing for more than forty years, and we are now nearing the point of bankruptcy. The key metric is balance of international trade. When a nation consumes more than it produces, it is defined as having a negative balance of trade, and America has had a negative balance of trade for more than forty years.

    Unfortunately that situation is not likely to change anytime soon. As Dr. Rob Atkinson demonstrates in his ground-breaking treatise, Innovation Economics: The Race for Global Advantage, (Yale University Press, 2012), the governments of other competitors in the international marketplace are taking steps to insure that their nations will be more competitive. Those steps include lower corporate taxes, incentives for investment in plant and equipment, incentives for high technology research and development, a better educated and more physically fit work force, government provided health care for all citizens, etc. etc. etc.


    As Lee Iacocca recognized a long time ago when he took over management of the nearly bankrupt Chrysler Motors in the late 1970s, the fact that American businesses are required to pay for the health care expenses of their employees, virtually assures that American car manufacturers will not be competitive in world markets. Why? Because American manufacturers are required to add the cost of health care to their automobiles, which automatically makes American cars more expensive on the world markets.

    Unfortunately, over the last fifty years, as a direct result of America’s failure to take the necessary steps to remain competitive in the international marketplace, America has gone from being the strongest manufacturing nation and the largest creditor in the world, to a nation that has rapidly and repeatedly lost jobs and even entire industries to foreign competition, with the result that we are now the largest debtor nation in the world. And what is worse, there is no end in sight to this profound loss of American international competitiveness. As any student of history knows, modern warfare is always won by the nation with dominant industrial and technological prowess, and unless we begin to fight to retain those qualities, there will come a time in the not too distant future when America is no longer the dominant player in either category.

  • john

    Let’s remember leftist article in one of their rags, Time mag, about global COOLING:

  • pat roberts

    Global warming is a false crisis created by crafty liberals with financial interests in green companies. Al Gore has gotten filthy rich over this scam. It’s a shame that our tax dollars have been hijacked and funneled into their bank accounts. These criminals should be shot.

  • TokyoTengu

    The flaw in the Leftist love of Global Warming as a tool they will not give up is that not every nation has swallowed the Kool-Aid and many are puking out what they stupidly ingested to start with. China and India are not going to give up their dreams to placate Western Enviro-weenies, nor is Russia and Southeast Asia. Japan is serious about sustainability but tempers its policies with realism and genuine conservation efforts.

  • Media Mentions

    It upsets me when global warming is used as a political tool. Not so much because nothing will get done about it but more so because we don’t even know what IT is. I once thought I had GW figured out, but then catching up on news, blogs and debates (PressReader being a personal favourite http://www.pressreader.com/profile/Spotlight/bookmarks/global_warming), it turns out that the picture is far more nuanced and infinitely more complex than originally thought. Point is, we don’t fully understand it, and manipulating something nobody understands as a political ploy isn’t exactly an allstar move.