Right Wing Nut House



Filed under: Climate Chnage, Politics — Rick Moran @ 4:09 am

Got up this morning and shoveled 4 inches of Global Warming off my driveway.

I updated the old weather joke because it actually did snow 4 inches last night — a “Midwest Express” that roared through the plains bringing a springtime blast of winter’s dying breath. We are likely to have a couple more of these little surprises before we can officially celebrate the advent of the warming season. It better get here quick. Opening Day is a week from Tuesday.

I also altered the cliché above in honor of “Earth Hour” - one of those earnest, silly liberal attempts at “raising the consciousness” of people about one cause or another. Who can forget such planet altering events as “Hands Across America” or “Live Aid” concerts, or the “Let’s Give More Money to Africa so the Kleptocrats can fatten their Swiss Bank Accounts” concert? The total impact on public policy and probably on people’s “consciousness” was about the same as watching an episode of “Dancing with the Stars” — without the advantage of seeing scantily clad women twirling and dipping like Whirling Dervishes.

The attempt to raise the profile of Global Warming as an issue was apparently a success — at least among the left. I asked an elderly neighbor whether he was going to participate in Earth Hour by shutting off his lights for 60 minutes. When he discovered that the event was to take place at 8:30 local time around the globe he just shrugged his shoulders and said, “Betty and I are already in bed by then. Maybe I should turn off the TV?”

I assured him that the target of this protest were electric lights and not essential stuff like TV’s. He thought perhaps he would turn off the nightlight in the bathroom but then he wondered if the Earth Hour folks would cover his medical costs if his wife stumbled and fell in the dark. I didn’t have an answer for him and just let it drop.

Of course, Global Warming deniers celebrated Earth Hour a little differently and probably had more fun with their participation given the circumstances. Many on the opposite side of AGW debate decided to turn every single light in their houses on for that hour. The response was declared to be “stupid” by leading lights of the left.

“Stupid” as opposed to what? Believing that it makes one iota of difference to anyone, anywhere, anytime that turning off your lights for an hour does anything except make the participant feel a false sense of moral superiority not to mention an obnoxious piety about an issue that, despite claims to the contrary, is still open for scientific debate?

Pardon me but the very idea that Earth Hour will show anybody anything, prove anything to anybody, raise the consciousness of anyone who doesn’t already have their consciousness raised on the issue, change any minds, alter the science, frighten politicians, or “help save the planet” is idiotic and bespeaks a frightening ignorance that is more dangerous than global warming itself.

I have news for my buddies on the left; Earth Hour was “stupid” - an insult to common sense, a slap in the face to reason and logic, and a as far from “reality” as the “reality based community” has ever strayed. It was a pointless waste of time and effort and calling your opponent’s counter-protest” “stupid” was more revealing of your inner demons on this issue than you realize.

Of course, all protests are “stupid” unless liberals start them. They are the arbiters of what is worthy of protest and what isn’t. They are the judges as to whether a protest is legitimate or whether it is “stupid.” Hence, all protests not started by liberals are, by definition, illicit by nature. In fact, by trying to delegitimize protests not given the liberal seal of approval, and dismissing them as “stupid,” the left demonstrates its love of authoritarian tactics in dealing with its opponents.

The AGW deniers “protest” was actually a clever way to mock the event — something that flew so far over the heads of Earth Day supporters that it didn’t even muss their hair on the way by. And there was plenty to point a finger at and laugh. First and foremost, the schoolboy earnestness with which these events are planned and executed, accompanied as they are by grandiose claims of importance and significance. Is it stupidity or hubris that makes the left think that ordinary people care one whit what they think is important? Yes all sorts of government buildings and landmarks as well as “socially conscious” corporations dimmed their lights for Earth Hour but how many individual citizens in various countries did the same? Grandiose claims of a billion people participating cannot possibly be proved — which is why AGW advocates are using that number. It might not even be close to the truth but it sure sounds impressive, doesn’t it?

Using their logic, I can claim that 100 million Americans participated in the counter-protest mocking Earth Hour and I would have the exact same legitimacy in making that assumption as they have in saying that a billion people dimmed their lights at 8:30 on Saturday night. The only difference is I’m not an AGW proponent which means my estimate is automatically “illegitimate.”

Being humorless twits that many in the AGW movement have shown themselves to be, the concepts of irony and sarcasm are as alien to them as if they originated on the moon. Hence, the idea of turning one’s lights on instead of off makes the counter-protestors dangerous and not simply trying to make an attempt at humor — a somewhat lame attempt I’ll admit but a better response to global warming than the United Nations is set to announce.

It seems the UN has got it in its head that it can run the economies of the entire planet. The same folks who ran the Oil For Food program for Saddam and ended up stealing more money than in any other caper in human history are proposing to “reorder” the economies of the world and save us all from rising temperatures.

This 16 page note that will be distributed at the climate change conference in Bonn next week and will form the basis for action when the “Copenhagen Accords” replace the Kyoto treaty in 2012 is the most draconian, sovereignty-destroying, illiberal plan ever devised by the UN. Every nightmare the right has ever had about the UN will come to pass if even part of this plan is adopted.

Now, it is not likely much of this plan will actually be adopted. The idea of the UN dictating to the United States, or any other industrial democracy, which economic policies they are to follow, from which new power plants they will permit to taking the power to impose tariffs away from our Congress, is ludicrous.

But it is instructive as to what the AGW crowd thinks they can get away with in the future. The plan calls for a reduction by the US of 20-40% of its emissions by 2020 and 90% by 2050 — an impossible goal that would destroy our economy. That result is secondary to the idea that the United Nations would have the power to regulate our energy consumption, our energy industries, and all industries that produce anything by burning fossil fuels.

As I said, a mad plan that has no chance of being ratified by the Senate — today. What the future will bring is anyone’s guess. A few more years of hysteria over AGW and it is foreseeable that people will be willing to give up anything in order that the United Nations save them. And the longer this economic crisis continues, the more likely people will be willing to give up their sovereignty. Like President Obama relying on the crisis to pass his left wing agenda items that have nothing to do with economic recovery but everything to do with “reordering” America, the world body will seek to use a crisis that they themselves manufacture in order to grab control of the world’s economy. And they will be cheered on by the very people who believe any protest not deemed by them as legitimate is by definition, invalid.

This streak of leftist authoritarianism manifests itself most noticeably in the debate over AGW. Stifling debate by threatening to try as criminals people who disagree with them, declaring an end to the scientific method by saying that the debate about AGW is “over,” spreading lies about skeptics by positing the notion that they are all being paid by oil and coal companies, attempting to ruin the careers of scientists who disagree with them, and seeking to censor scientific studies that challenge AGW orthodoxy — all point to a desire by AGW advocates to control minds by not allowing any dissent.

The fact that these tactics are generally supported by liberals is indicative of their own doubts about the efficacy of climate change and their desire to close their own minds to any information that would cause them to doubt, or otherwise alter their perception about the debate over AGW. This makes leftists not only authoritarians but stupid ones at that — a very dangerous combination that the United Nations appears to be counting on in order to make their plan a reality.

Personally, I am agnostic on the issue. Free people deciding freely to reduce CO2 levels while the jury is still out on climate change is fine with me. We should rely on the scientific method, one of the crowning glories of the western world: observation, hypothesis, predictions, experimentation.

To date, the authoritarian left has prevented this from dominating the global warming discussion. Perhaps it is due to so many of their observations proving to be wrong, or their hypotheses not panning out, or their experiments blowing up in their faces, or their predictions not coming true.

In that case, it is understandable why the left has taken to doing everything in their power to stifle free speech and debate over global warming.

 This article originally appears in The American Thinker


  1. Ohhh so cynical, Rick….! We, who actually turned off our lights for one hour, are entitled to our say and actions as much as you are to yours. We did not harm anyone by doing that. That’s democracy. It is unfortunate that you feel you have to debase others because of your cynicism.

    Nice strawman you set up there. If you can point out where I say you are not entitled to turn off your lights, you win a cookie. It bothers me not that you participated in a useless, pointless exercise. You can do it every day if you want.

    But of course, if you don’t say that I want to take away your democratic right to protest, that would ruin your self image of being a martyr, persecuted by your enemies for your beliefs. Someday, you may very well experience that feeling of being persecuted. But it won’t be from right wingers. It will be from your friends on the left.


    Comment by Pat Harkins — 3/30/2009 @ 4:28 am

  2. We did not harm anyone by doing that.

    No, but you furthered an idea that decidedly does. Isn’t it interesting that the enviro-whackjob left, and alQuieda share a common goal? That being, to return us to the 14th century.
    You see, in both cases, by controlling who gets to use technology, they both get to chose who advances, and who ends up on the dust heap of history.

    If you can point out where I say you are not entitled to turn off your lights,

    Oh, that’s the goal and make no mistake. Who would ahve thought the federal government could reach into GM’s board room and hire and fire it’s members? YOu may notice it happened over the weekend. That level of power didn’t happen quickly, but advanced slowly over time. The boiled frog.

    Of course you think I’m stretching this stuff. I’m not. Witness David Owen in the NEw Yorker the other day:

    The popular answer—switch to hybrids—leaves the fundamental problem unaddressed. Increasing the fuel efficiency of a car is mathematically indistinguishable from lowering the price of its fuel; it’s just fiddling with the other side of the equation. If doubling the cost of gas gives drivers an environmentally valuable incentive to drive less—the recent oil-price spike pushed down consumption and vehicle miles travelled, stimulated investment in renewable energy, increased public transit ridership, and killed the Hummer—then doubling the efficiency of cars makes that incentive disappear. Getting more miles to the gallon is of no benefit to the environment if it leads to an increase in driving—and the response of drivers to decreases in the cost of driving is to drive more. Increases in fuel efficiency could be bad for the environment unless they’re accompanied by powerful disincentives that force drivers to find alternatives to hundred-mile commutes. And a national carbon policy, if it’s to have a real impact, will almost certainly need to bring American fuel prices back to at least where they were at their peak in the summer of 2008. Electric cars are not the panacea they are sometimes claimed to be, not only because the electricity they run on has to be generated somewhere but also because making driving less expensive does nothing to discourage people from sprawling across the face of the planet, promoting forms of development that are inherently and catastrophically wasteful.

    One beneficial consequence of the ongoing global economic crisis is that it has put a little time back on the carbon clock. Because the climate damage done by greenhouse gases is cumulative, the emissions decrease attributable to the recession has given the world a bit more room to devise a plan that might actually work. The prospects for a meaningful worldwide climate agreement probably improved last November, with the election of Barack Obama, but his commitments to economic recovery and carbon reduction—to bringing the country out of recession while also reducing U.S. greenhouse emissions to seventeen per cent of their 2005 level by 2050—don’t pull in the same direction. Creating “green jobs,” a key component of the agenda, is different from creating new jobs, since green jobs, if they’re truly green, displace non-green jobs—wind-turbine mechanics instead of oil-rig roughnecks—probably a zero-sum game, as far as employment is concerned. The ultimate success or failure of Obama’s program, and of the measures that will be introduced in Copenhagen this year, will depend on our willingness, once the global economy is no longer teetering, to accept policies that will seem to be nudging us back toward the abyss.

    All of this is based on the Gorebot relgion of global warming, the evidence for which is suspect at least and in truth, a monumental construct of lies and disinformation. The very basis of our freedoms, and our economy… our mobility and our technology…is being challanged here, by a myth. And the spreading of this movement is facilitated by things like ‘earth hour’.

    Comment by Eric Florack — 3/30/2009 @ 5:40 am

  3. Just a random thought, but how much energy do you suppose was wasted organizing this ‘event’?
    I would not be surprised at all if more energy was used emailing, phoning, posting, twittering and texting both before and after the great ‘de-illumination’ hour than was saved by the pointless show of stupidity in and of itself. I can only imagine the breathless anticipation of many of the participants sitting the dark, just waiting for the magical hour to come to an end so they could quickly jump back online and tell all their facebook friends the joyous rapture they felt doing their part to save the world. Get a life!

    Comment by Michael S. — 3/30/2009 @ 6:40 am

  4. Earth Hour made me feel good. I turned on each and every light in the house and started both SUV’s so they could idle in the driveway. Just for the hour.

    Maybe on Earth Day I’ll burn some old tires.

    Comment by CZ — 3/30/2009 @ 7:39 am

  5. I turned on ALL MY LIGHTS for that hour. What a crock.

    Comment by Jeff — 3/30/2009 @ 7:40 am

  6. After the last 2 winters in Wisconsin I no longer believe in global warming. I would like to get away from burning oil because the countries that produce it are mostly our enemies. Lets get more solar and wind energy going producing good manufacturing jobs in the process. As far as rightwingers losing their minds about people who believe in global warming, to me its another excuse for radical conservatives to pile on anything they see as Democrat or liberal. After getting their asses handed to them the last 2 elections I understand their anger and bitterness. They’ll stay in the minority for a long time with their rigid ideology.

    Comment by Joe — 3/30/2009 @ 8:47 am

  7. All you need do is check out a night photo (space) of North Korea. If that’s your life style old Kim might let you in to enjoy it.
    How did O’Dumbo and his anti-american crown convince people that progress is bad and they will provide what (they think) you need. Prepare for the coming communist train wreck.

    Comment by Scrapiron — 3/30/2009 @ 10:02 am

  8. Joe’s got it bad. BDS has already been declared an incurable mental illness. Do your part, voluntarily committ yourself to the rubber room motel before you do the self inflicted steak knife to the heart routine. (happened in this area last week)

    Comment by Scrapiron — 3/30/2009 @ 10:09 am

  9. I’m not a fan of empty gestures.

    But you’re wrong to suggest that lefties have no sense of humor. DailyKos did a very clever job of mocking a Right wing version of same: Glen Beck’s “we surround them” insanity.

    And you’re wrong to suggest that conservatives take such things in good humor. Billboards or events promoting atheism, for example, are not generally treated with hearty good humor by right wingers. In fact major elements of your party have spent quite some time and energy trying to cram their particular religious ideas down all our throats for a very long time now. And not with a lot of gentle ribbing and wry asides, either.

    This leftist authoritarianism meme is true. Unfortunately so is the rightist version of same.

    Comment by michael reynolds — 3/30/2009 @ 10:41 am

  10. Joe forgot nuclear. I thought Dems liked science? I thought O said he was going to follow it? Apparently not enough campaign contributions from the nuclear industry flowed to O and the Dems.

    And why shouldn’t I think that? I grew up knowing that the party of big business is the Republican party. But what have we seen over the last six months? Fannie, Freddie, Goldman Sachs and now AIG all give, via their officers, far more money to the Ds than the Rs. I wonder why?

    Comment by EBJ — 3/30/2009 @ 12:16 pm

  11. EBJ

    The financial sector gives more money to the dems because the financial sector thinks that is the best way to control Washington. When the Republicans were in control of D.C., the Wall Street geniuses gave their money to the GOP.

    The change you see in Wall Sreet’s “monetary free speech” dollars reflects the shift in power between R’s and D’s. They will give more “free speech” dollars to the Republicans when the GOP can gain control again.

    No conspiracy. Simply, American Democracy as it has worked my entire adult life.

    Comment by bsjones — 3/30/2009 @ 1:00 pm

  12. I wonder what the “carbon footprint” would be to have the entire UN pushed into the East River ?

    Comment by Neo — 3/30/2009 @ 11:20 pm

  13. The richest part is the Gore family didn’t dim their lights at their Nashville mansion. Floodlights continued to illuminate the trees that line their driveway.

    Also an agnostic, and increasingly an atheist on this particular issue, I have a word for those who believe it to be true: all you did was hurt yourself.

    Comment by jackson1234 — 3/31/2009 @ 9:07 am

  14. One of the same kind of actions as the Earth Hour is the Tea Party fad that is sweeping the nation, despite a virtual blackout in the media.

    For example, there will be a Tax Day Tea Party in Richmond VA, on April 15th, that no newspaper or radio/tv commentator has deigned to mention. (location: Kanawaha Plaza; Time: 6 pm-7:30 pm)

    But, this fad has a diametrically opposed thrust; that is, to demonstrate against Obama spending, the AGW thrust of the Administration, the creeping socialism that is becoming more and more detectable, the raising of taxes that will inevitably come real soon now, and, hopefully, to send a message to the current Democratic regimes in VA and DC that they are going to face serious problems in the next election if they do not change course.

    More importantly, these Tea Parties are wonderful recruiting events for grassroot workers that get the Conservative message.

    Comment by mannning — 3/31/2009 @ 1:55 pm

  15. Weds. morning links…

    Here’s a cruise I would enjoy
    The pythons of the Everglades. Sheesh.
    Sounds like a fine new Chaplin bio
    What is it about American self-hatred? (I don’t know - I don’t have any of it.)
    NY State once again attempts to drive people and business…

    Trackback by Maggie's Farm — 4/1/2009 @ 3:53 am

  16. Over at my blog today I ‘journal’ about my personal attempt to fight Earth Hour in my school district. It’s a fun post- I submit some data and logic on the issue and get called names and my teaching ability is questioned. The thugs rose up and attacked me when I questioned their religion in our little high school in Michigan. Anyways, for fun you should check it out.

    Comment by A Conservative Teacher — 4/1/2009 @ 8:16 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress