Tea Partiers' Next Target: The Climate Bill
Conservative activists are using a film called "Not Evil, Just Wrong" to fight cap and trade legislation. We watched it so you don't have to.
The Tea Party movement earned its stripes at town hall protests this summer by claiming that Democratic health care reform efforts would result in defenseless grannies being hauled before "death panels." Now the tea partiers have a new target—the cap-and-trade legislation moving through Congress—and new, unlikely victims to protect—the poor.
One of the key recruiting tools in conservative activists' push against the climate bill is a recent documentary called Not Evil, Just Wrong. The film styles itself as the latest conservative answer to Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth. It has no commercial distributor, but instead debuted on an October 18 webcast heavily promoted by social conservative organizations like Focus on the Family and the American Family Association, as well as local Tea Party groups. Organizers claimed the online premiere attracted some 400,000 viewers.
Now the tea partiers are calling for local chapters to host screenings on November 21. An Escondido, California, branch recently invited members to a "record-setting international Cinematic Tea Party," in terms reminiscent of a social justice rally: "Join the Resistance against the extreme environmentalism that threatens the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of millions of people in the developed and developing world; this is the new road to poverty in America." (To facilitate these screenings, the filmmakers are selling a "Platinum Party Pack" on their online store, which for $99.95 gets you all the fixings for a rockin' party: invitations, T-shirts, posters, and even a small red carpet.)
Red carpet notwithstanding, Not Evil is unlikely to garner its creators, a pair of Irish former journalists, any Oscar nominations. The film is poorly organized and rehashes the familiar talking points of climate change deniers—global warming as bad science; climate concerns as hysteria akin to that over killer bees, etc. Pushing those views are the usual suspects, including Patrick Moore, the Greenpeace founder turned nuclear power lobbyist, and Thatcher-era British politician Sir Nigel Lawson.
Where Not Evil differs slightly from the standard denialist script is insistence that cutting carbon emissions will hurt the poor. "For too long, with environmentalists, it's not enough about people," says Ann McElhinney, one of the filmmakers, in an interview. "Is it warming? Is it cooling? Who knows? Is it caused by us? There's even more disagreement about that. All of these things should be about people. We should be fighting for the poor."
To that end, the film introduces 30-year-old Tiffany McElhany, a stay-at-home mom portrayed as a potential casualty of any environmental legislation that would shutter coal-fired power plants. The filmmakers met her in a hotel lounge in Vevay, Indiana, population 1,600. After they told her about the movie, she replied, "If Al Gore could walk a day in my shoes for a few days, he wouldn't be doing the things he's doing." McElhinney and her coproducer/director husband, Phelim McAleer, had found their star.
In the film, they send McElhany on a Michael Moore-inspired road trip to try to deliver a handwritten letter to Gore at his Tennessee mansion. Naturally, he's off on a private jet somewhere. The stunt isn't very funny—but McElheny's role isn't to provide satiric commentary. It's to embody the prosperity that coal and other dirty industries have brought to places like Vevay.
And by all appearances, the McElhanys enjoy an idyllic rural life. Thanks to Tiffany's husband's $16-an-hour job making mufflers for Toyota, the family has bought a new house in the country. The film lingers on shots of the family eating pancakes and their daughter playing the saxophone. At one point, McElhany waxes poetically about coal, which fires a power plant just across the river and therefore employs a number of Vevay residents. "Why would anyone want to take that away? It would mean less funding for schools, possibly less schools; it would mean an extreme cost-of-living rise. It would mean kids like my kids wouldn't be able to play in bands, wouldn't be able to do ballet class because there is just not going to be the extra money anymore in an everyday household to pay for these things," she says.
While the filmmakers may be sincere in their concern for low-income people, their film is populated by a cast of discredited characters, some of them familiar from recent corporate astroturf efforts. Case in point: Roy Innis, the head of the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), whose group participated in a "Stop the War on the Poor" campaign launched by a lobbying firm connected to Alaskan oil interests in order to push for more oil drilling in the US.
Not Evil presents Innis as the leader of a historic civil rights group fighting to reinstate use of the pesticide DDT, whose ban the film blames for the daily malaria deaths of more than 300 African children. But CORE is better known among real civil rights groups for renting out its historic name to any corporation in need of a black front person. The group has taken money from the payday-lending industry, chemical giant (and original DDT manufacturer) Monsanto, and ExxonMobil. Last year, Mother Jones reported that oil and gas interests recruited Innis to serve as the lead plaintiff in a legal challenge to listing the polar bear as a threatened species.
When I asked the filmmakers why they didn't acknowledge Innis' conflicts in the film, they claimed ignorance. "We didn't pay him anything!" McElhinney exclaimed. "Which industry is Al Gore getting money from?" demanded McAleer, who says that whether Innis received payments from Exxon is beside the point.
It turns out that McElhany's story, too, is more complicated than Not Evil would have you believe. She is by far the documentary's most compelling character, and seems poised to become a minor heroine to the Tea Party crowd. Yet for all her talk of the bounty that coal has brought to Vevay, when I contacted her for this story she disclosed that her husband was laid off in March and has been unemployed ever since. It appears that a lot of dirty industry jobs have disappeared with no help at all from environmentalists.
Page 1 of 1 
McElhany's story sounds
McElhany's story sounds bogus from top to bottom. With a mere $16/hour job, her husband supports the whole family, can afford new house, send the daughter to saxophone and ballet lessons....? Sure real estate my be cheap in rural Indiana, and maybe the McElhanies are especially frugal, but I still find it hard to believe they can afford this lifestyle on a single $16/hour wage.
Tea Parties
Tea Parties are a great libertarian movement and exercise of our rights targeting big gov from the Patriot Act to Cap and Tax. TH meeting never talked about Granny's but many had read hr3200 and it is a terrible violation of your rights, I'm sure the larger newer one is a horror. 31000 scientist have a paper refuting CO2 as causing warming,
climate follows solar magnetic activity, the Earth has been warmer many times recently
But the control governments could have by regulating CO2 is so great they won't give up without a fight even while the Earth is cooling. But the issue is already over in the real scientific community.
English next time, please.
English next time, please. That was utterly unintelligible.
CO2 BS
I'm thinking the individual above, judging by the way his/her comment was written, uses English as a second language. However, I understood their point and will clarify that some for you, seeing as you're confused. The popular theory regarding CO2 as a major global warming agent is based entirely upon poorly constructed, computerized climate models. Computer modeling is a new science, barely out of infancy, and is not an accurate way to predict future weather/climate patterns, especially if the data used is flawed. Consider your nightly weather report, which relies on similar modeling, and think about how accurate that is.
There is a concise report, backed and signed by over 31,000 American scientists, over 9,000 of whom are PHD's and most of whom work in relevant fields, that explains CO2's effects on climate and uses solid, empirical evidence to show that CO2 does not warm the earth, that the earth has been much warmer in the past than it is now (with no detrimental effects) and that various factors contributing to the earths cool/warm phases, such as solar radiance, oceanic phases, etc, are not considered or utilized by the climate models mentioned previously.
The popular CO2 greenhouse warming theory IS based on poor science and the legislation we face because of it is dangerous. The proof is there for you, and anybody, to research, if you're so inclined. But if you're comfortable with some "journalist" at Mother Jones telling you what to think, what to believe, then that's your prerogative.
I've read the IPCC's 2007 report that supports the CO2 global warming theory. I've also read several reports, including the one I mentioned that is backed by over 31,000 scientists, and have come to the conclusion that we have been duped. It wasn't long ago that I simply took articles like this one and ate them up, believed every word. I believed 100% in anthropogenic CO2 warming and pretty much thought the earth was screwed. It was because I realized my opinions had been formed for me through fear that I decided to research this for myself.
Al Gore, a politician, in addition to bringing you CO2 global warming, also brought you NAFTA. Do your own research. Inform yourself. After that, you're as entitled to your informed opinion as others are entitled to their uninformed opinion (that's most everybody else).
Anthropogenic Global warming - Based on observations
The stratosphere is cooling while the troposphere - the lower atmosphere - is warming because the amounts of heat trapping gases are growing as a result of human activities. If solar activity was the cause of warming (and the sun's activity is at a 100 year minimum) both the stratosphere and the troposphere would be warming. The cooling of the stratosphere is key evidence that increasing levels of greenhouse gases are causing global warming.
Moreover, the oceans are warming and storing heat. If additions of greenhouse gases had no effect (a physical impossibility) and all the observed temperature changes could be explained by release of heat from the oceans by changes in ocean currents as suggested by certain global warming deniers, the oceans would be cooling and losing heat to the atmosphere.
Anyone, even Mickey Mouse, could sign the list of 31,000 "scientists".
Observations show that the earth is heating up. Global warming deniers are either ignorant, delusional, or greedy people who don't care what happens to our grandchildren.
If the signatures
are similar to the petition I saw, anyone can sign their name and claim to be a PhD in a "relevant field".
Talk to an actual climatologist. A lot of good work is being done, but it runs contrary to what Exxon Mobil et al want you to hear, so they will stifle it.
The sheer arrogance displayed by those who deny climate change is amazing. What if they are wrong? Will we do what we always do and react to the damage as opposed to preventing it? Green technology is coming... it will create jobs and wealth. Whether we want to be the leader on that and actually once again have an industry in this country with an exportable product or if we want to merely be on the sidelines as a future consumer of that product is up to the leaders in Washington.
And yet, using the IPCC's
And yet, using the IPCC's own figures, Monckton suggests that a total cessation of all anthropogenic CO2 formation for 33 years would be required to reduce the terrestrial temperature 1 degree fahrenheit. That means no combustion, no dairy, no transportation, no home heating, very little industry at all, which would clearly be far more damaging to humans than coping with warming.
monckton is a fool
Monckton is a liar and an idiot. Disregard everything he says and anyone who believes him...
Sir Monckton
So when you don't agree with what someone says, everything should be ignored? Perhaps if you had the brains to listen to some of the man's arguments and the proof he supports them with, you'd realise he has a point or two.
Extrapolation is Riskier than Interpolation
And yet, using the IPCC's own figures, Monckton suggests that a total cessation of all anthropogenic CO2 formation for 33 years would be required to reduce the terrestrial temperature 1 degree fahrenheit. That means no combustion, no dairy, no transportation, no home heating, very little industry at all, which would clearly be far more damaging to humans than coping with warming.
AGW, yes. CO2 the driver? I'm not convinced.
All the things you state may be true. However, it may not require elevated CO2 to occur. Temperatures "soared" between 1910 and 1940 with little help from CO2. The predominant greenhouse gas will always be water vapor.
The Anthropogenic Global
The Anthropogenic Global Warming Hypothesis is a decidedly weak scientific hypothesis because of the absence of confirmable observations that support it. The computer models used by the UN Panel on Climate Change have never made a prediction that was verified by direct observation. The computer models were designed in 1979, and have been under continuous refinement since that time. Still in over 30 years, not a single prediction made by the computer models can be confirmed by direct scientific observation. This is a fact, and it alone it renders the premise that there is some kind of factual consensus confirming the Anthropogenic Global Warming Hypothesis moot.
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change wrote in its Special Report on Emissions Scenarios in the year 2000, "Scenarios are images of the future or alternative futures. They are neither predictions nor forecasts." Further, "The possibility that any single emissions path will occur as described in the scenario is highly uncertain," and finally, "No judgment is offered in this Report as to the preference for any of the scenarios and they are not assigned probabilities of occurrence, neither must they be interpreted as policy recommendations."
FACT: A simple linear regression of the average ambient temperature of the Earth and the parts per billion of CO2 in the atmosphere over the last 500 years indicates that mathmatically CO2 can account for no more than 7% of the variation in temperature over the last 500 years.
FACT: Bacteria emit 6 times more CO2 per year than all of human activity and yet in the entire 4.5 billion year history of the Earth, the kind of "runaway" global warming proposed by the UN Climate Pannel has never happened.
FACT: The average ambient temperature of the Earth has decreased every year for the last 12 years, despite the UN Pannel on Climate Change's predictions to the contrary. On the other hand, Solar scientists predicted the cooling based on solar cycles. Verifiable scientific observations lend credibility to scientific hypothesis, not Al Gore.
FACT: CO2 is only a trace gas in the Earth's atmosphere. The greehouse gas responsible for 90% of the heat trapping in the Earth's atmosphere is water vapor. The Anthropogenic Global Warming Hypothesis is based on CO2 causing some kind of chain-reaction with water vapor. This phenomena has never been observed in the Earth's atmosphere despite decades and billions of dollars in research.
FACT: All of the ice core resrearch has revealed findings that the corelation between CO2 levels and temperature changes are INVERSE to those predicted by the Anthropogenic Global Warming Hypothesis. That is to say that the ice-core samples are unanimous that the CO2 levels go up on average 800 years AFTER the temperature rises. Based on the same logic used by AL Gore, this would mean that the temperature rising CAUSES CO2 to increase.
FACT: In medieval times, the temperature was warmer than it is now. In climatological circles it is referred to as the Medieval Optimum. The warming period that began shortly after that period and continued on until the late 1990s began 300 years prior to the Industrial Revolution when CO2 levels were much lower than they are now. On the other hand, the temperature over the last 12 years has decreased precisely when the CO2 levels have increased.
A valid scientific hypothesis must account for all known facts. I gave you a short list of facts that cannot be accounted for by the Anthropogenic Global Warming Hypothesis, there are many many more. Therefore, the Anthropogenic Global Warming Hypothesis is demonstrably invalid.
junk
The petition you mention is junk. 9,000 Ph.D.? Ha, Ph.D.'s in what? Not climatology that's for sure. Many aren't actually Ph.D.s but M.D. and dentists. Yeah, like I'm going to rely on my dentist's views on climate change..... I might add that just because 'scientists' have signed the petition doesn't make them right. How many had studied the problem, read the evidence, or frankly even thought about the problem? This is simply an appeal to authority disguised as something else.
Maybe the next time you need to go to the Dr. you should ask your Dr. to circulate a petition on your diagnosis and use that for your treatment. Makes sense right? I hope not for your sake.
What we are going to have to deal with
Weather you want to believe we've caused climate change or not is your own business. You should, however, open your eyes and see that climate is changing. Our ways of life will not be our grandchildren's. Yes climate has changed before, but ecological systems have been completely altered because of it. The Earth doesn't care if we can survive the changing climate, we have to look out for ourselves if we want to survive it. The fact is, our grandchildren will not get to know icecaps or coral reefs among other things. These kinds of things balance our ability to subsist in the environment. If we don't do something about it, conditions on the earth are going to be unlivable for us.
Please don't be ignorant because it makes it more comfortable for now. For whatever reason our planet is changing and we are going to have to fight to keep our place on it.
Where were the Tea Parties a little over a year ago?
Bebo, how is HR3200 a violation of your rights? I really want to know exactly what HR3200 will do to take away your rights. Also, 31000 scientists? Where do you get that? Please don't reference a blog or a blog referencing another blog. That is what most I've seen as an alternate to the climate change theory. Seems like one joker drums up some idea and then a number of other people reference that as a fact. Concrete evidence that 31000 have a paper refuting........show me where you got this from.
I really want to know why there were no Tea Party activists last year, or the year before, or the year before that? Bush's 8 years outspent both Reagan and Clintons 12 years combined. Combined!! That is a fact. Taking away your rights as in the patriot act, that is also a bush idea. So, when people start complaining about Obama or the current situation we're in, think back about a year or two and then look at where we are now. Is there a magic law or whatnot to make things better instantly? No. However, the Dow is over 10k and I'm starting to get some sales again so things are looking up. When you start whining about how Obama this and Pelosi that, think about who got us into this mess. Maybe you can get your tea bagger buddies to grab a broom and help clean up after Bush/Cheney. That's who you should be crying foul too. Don't complain about the janitor that comes in and cleans up after someone else makes the mess.
The party of no seems hell bent on not grabbing a broom. They just want to play armchair quarterback on how the mess they created is fixed. That is a tragedy.
Geez.
where were the tea parties?
The tea party didn't exist because the money that backs it was busy doing other things. Now they've decided to fund right wing populism. That's right, coal mining interests and Rupert Murdoch are funding the loopy right wing populists, who mindlessly do others work. And the funny thing is that most tea baggers dont' even realize who they are working for!
Anyone who cares about our
Anyone who cares about our military families should support legislation that helps eliminate our need for foreign oil, foreign natural gas, foreign energy supplies.
This is about the security of our country. Senator Lindsey Graham understands this.
Why is the Tea Party goers trying to make owned by the middle east, Russia, Venezuela, and China?
Every American should want energy that is supplied 100% by America.
Energy independence
-
tagged as:
- solution
Look around, for too long politicians have obstructed energy from domestic sources; the time has come to Flip This HOUSE.
read a book, GUSHER OF LIES, to understand how long, how far behind the demand we've fallen; and then realize that CLEAN ENERGY IS A DIRTY LIE.
Tea Baggers are all pointed in the wrong direction
-
tagged as:
- solution
I want to see
American solar panels and
American wind turbines and
American electric cars getting made in
American factories outside
American cities and towns, just like Vevay, Indiana, by
American workers, like Mr. McElhany, making an
American wage and belonging to an
American union, using
American made machine tools and
American hands.
Why doesn't the US Chamber of Commerce?
Why don't the tea baggers?
What you will see: Chineese
-
tagged as:
- solution
What you will see:
Chineese solar panels
Chineese wind turbines
Indian and Korean electric cars
American poverty
American business owners making companies profitable by moving overseas
American starvation
Political elites sitting pretty while stealing taxpayer money
makes a lot of sense NOT
So, these political elites certainly won't be living in the US, because of the American poverty. I guess they won't even be trying to collect taxes in the US, because of American poverty....
In the meantime, you just sit and keep stewing in your intellectual poverty.
Gusher of LIES, go read a book
Stephanie Mencimer continues the parade of lies related to clean energy; the FACT that there is no possibility of generating renewable energy to replace anymore than 15% of our electricity. IN FACT, the addition of 3 to 5 plug-in electric cars will likely over-load a local grid; the fact that ETHANOL has corrupted every politician, and we continue to SUBSIDIZE (TAXES) "green" power, all the while chasing away business and industry.
People that work (or get laid off, like myself) are waking up to find FEDZILLA in every room of the house, while libtards scream about conservatives protesting gay marriage. The reality of the green movement, is that greenies care more about "environment" than children.
Good thing it is a FACT that
Good thing it is a FACT that EVERYTHING you type in ALL-CAPS magically becomes TRUE.
If you keep finding fedzillas in every room of the house you should maybe consider getting yourself a good mothra or two to fight them off.
Jesus fuck!ng christ, I am
Jesus fuck!ng christ, I am almost to the point where I am actually hoping for catastrophic climate change to occur just so I can say to these witless ninnies "WE TOLD YOU SO".....But even then I'm sure they would continue to blame it on, I dunno, the Sun, or Satan, etc.
It is not about climate change, it is a need for another change
"The reality of the green movement, is that greenies care more about "environment" than children."
Now I think you should take a second and think.... have you heard of Lois Gibbs and the Love Canal. I care very much that Hooker Chemicals buried toxic waste in a canal, selling it to a school district for a dollar. Those children have persistent side-effects. If you have not heard of it, here is a government website: http://www.epa.gov/history/topics/lovecanal/01.htm
If you think that corporations have grown some type of morality, look at New York State and the push from massive dirty energy companies looking to drill for natural gas. Despite the likely event of water pollution for millions of New Yorkers.
http://www.propublica.org/feature/new-yorks-gas-rush-poses-environmental...
There is plain evidence that persistent air pollutants from coal fired plants a causing health problems, further, it is proven it is causing acid rain. Let us not dwell on climate change, there are plenty devastating effects happening to children today, and will only worsen for the children of the future.
However, the science is no where near complete on climate change, but the MAJORITY of the science does support human influenced climate change, as illustrated by the International Climate Change Panel commissioned by the United Nations.
If you don`t want to consider the ICCP, maybe you think they are "libtards" but it is a fact that the oceans are currently carbon sinks absorbing CO2 but during the process it is causing the the ocean to become more acidic. This is killing the great barrier reef and appears to be a killer of phytoplankton with shells.
http://www.ocean-acidification.net/
The problem is that we need a diversified energy sector, we need to become more energy efficient. We need to invest in public transit instead of freeways. We need to create food security for the nation, creating food sources that are nutritious and grown nearby. We need to eat less meat, did you know that the beef from McDonalds is feed by corn, along with a mixture of growth hormones and antibiotics.
What we need to do is stop our exponential demand for more, more energy, more consumption, because, we are making a nation of gluttons. Literally and metaphorically, people are becoming fat, diabetic and at risk to heart disease, while each day the young die oversees fighting for American hegemony.
Now, I may be one of those "libtard greenies" who believe in a future for the worlds children.... but I would be happy to see Ron Paul in power.
http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/global-warming/
Ron Paul, recognizes a need for action on global warming, moreover, he recognizes the need for energy security. If you believe in the "right wing" policies, then you should consider Ron Paul, as he inhibits anything good about the right.
Instead people support blue republican like McCain, or neo-conservatives, like Bush or Romney who believe is deficit spending and massive government. I find it difficult to argue with the right when many are ideologically indoctrinated by the monopolized media.
I am sad. To see the our plastic filled oceans turn into acidic love canals, with acid rain pouring, and mountain tops exploding around me.
Good luck, I hope you are or I are not the next victim of our unhealthy society, at least I can always get free health care from Canada, I swear even children don't mind waiting in line.
It is not about climate change, it is a need for another change
"The reality of the green movement, is that greenies care more about "environment" than children."
Now I think you should take a second and think.... have you heard of Lois Gibbs and the Love Canal. I care very much that Hooker Chemicals buried toxic waste in a canal, selling it to a school district for a dollar. Those children have persistent side-effects. If you have not heard of it, here is a government website: http://www.epa.gov/history/topics/lovecanal/01.htm
If you think that corporations have grown some type of morality, look at New York State and the push from massive dirty energy companies looking to drill for natural gas. Despite the likely event of water pollution for millions of New Yorkers.
http://www.propublica.org/feature/new-yorks-gas-rush-poses-environmental...
There is plain evidence that persistent air pollutants from coal fired plants a causing health problems, further, it is proven it is causing acid rain. Let us not dwell on climate change, there are plenty devastating effects happening to children today, and will only worsen for the children of the future.
However, the science is no where near complete on climate change, but the MAJORITY of the science does support human influenced climate change, as illustrated by the International Climate Change Panel commissioned by the United Nations.
If you don`t want to consider the ICCP, maybe you think they are "libtards" but it is a fact that the oceans are currently carbon sinks absorbing CO2 but during the process it is causing the the ocean to become more acidic. This is killing the great barrier reef and appears to be a killer of phytoplankton with shells.
http://www.ocean-acidification.net/
The problem is that we need a diversified energy sector, we need to become more energy efficient. We need to invest in public transit instead of freeways. We need to create food security for the nation, creating food sources that are nutritious and grown nearby. We need to eat less meat, did you know that the beef from McDonalds is feed by corn, along with a mixture of growth hormones and antibiotics.
What we need to do is stop our exponential demand for more, more energy, more consumption, because, we are making a nation of gluttons. Literally and metaphorically, people are becoming fat, diabetic and at risk to heart disease, while each day the young die oversees fighting for American hegemony.
Now, I may be one of those "libtard greenies" who believe in a future for the worlds children.... but I would be happy to see Ron Paul in power.
http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/global-warming/
Ron Paul, recognizes a need for action on global warming, moreover, he recognizes the need for energy security. If you believe in the "right wing" policies, then you should consider Ron Paul, as he inhibits anything good about the right.
Instead people support blue republican like McCain, or neo-conservatives, like Bush or Romney who believe is deficit spending and massive government. I find it difficult to argue with the right when many are ideologically indoctrinated by the monopolized media.
I am sad. To see the our plastic filled oceans turn into acidic love canals, with acid rain pouring, and mountain tops exploding around me.
Good luck, I hope you are or I are not the next victim of our unhealthy society, at least I can always get free health care from Canada, I swear even children don't mind waiting in line.
Tea-baggers answer to Al Gore and An Inconvient Truth
Where do kooks like Red Ryder and Bebo get the total lunacy they so boldly spout? I'm surmising that they are regular listeners to Limpaugh, Hammity, Beck, Savage et al. If so it is no wonder they and the millions who get their news from Fox, the Washington Times and the weekly standard are so ill informed and totally misled. They get the ongoing Corporate lies specially packaged as populist messages by corporate PR departments then delivered by the aforementioned millionaire mouthpieces on the Fox payroll. These poor fools are some of the most ill informed and educated people on the the planet, but seem to revel in their lack of education, as they denigrate science and scientists because they got all the facts from Rush, Glen and the other corporate shills on radio, TV and print. This "film" is simply laughable as are these folks and their "news" sources.
Tea Partiers' ...
-
tagged as:
- result
Man made global warming is a hoax and all the variations of it such as "man made climate change" are just vehicles for governments to tax and regulate us more and more.
The tea parties will continue as long as politicians and governments continue to steal our money and bankrupt our nation.
Wait a minute...
The tea parties will continue as long as politicians bankrupt our country huh?
Where in the H3LL were you people for 8 years??? Why in the H3LL do you listen to people like Dick Armey who enabled the past 8 years to happen??? Why in the H3LL do you seem poised to allow the same schisters that collapsed our economy to do it again???
Either you are disingenuous about your stated goals or you are the most gullible "born every minute" suckers ever to come down the pike!!
"The reality of the green
"The reality of the green movement, is that greenies care more about "environment" than children."
Wow, i mean really, seriously? "greenies" are evil childless monsters that hate humans and put trees first? I mean forgive me for going extreme, but just to point out, this is a load of stereotypical regurgitated jargon.
just calling it like it is.
It really annoys me when people use children as this sort of empathy shield. "oh what about the pour children!?!" What, people in their 20', 30's, 80's are some how less defenseless or less important? I'm sorry but give it a rest. Everyone is in an equally bad spot here, age has nothing to do with it.
To fight against any action to localize power creation, or clean up our rivers, or decrease any possible impact we may have on our climate, regardless if it's true or not, is extremely foolish.
If we are wrong in our estimations of our effect on the environment then perhaps we loose money due to over regulation of emissions and energy consumption.
If we are wrong and we do nothing, not only do we loose money, but we also loose the stability of our already shaky environment, and you think loosing jobs at a coal plant is bad. You loose homes, you loose crops, you loose infrastructure, you loose a great deal more.
The negatives of doing nothing and being wrong are far worse then doing something and being wrong. Weigh in those calculations before you start spouting off badly reiterated anti environmental rhetoric.
I live in Vancouver B.C. a place that is well known for it's unpredictable weather. I've spent my entire life here and over the course of the years i've watched the population grow, the pollution increase, and the weather change dramatically. I cannot speak for the rest of the world. But our effect is undeniable to me, the sooner we all agree, the faster changes are implemented, the cheaper they become, and the faster we can all get back to business.
Let it go, lets just get down to work and get it done. Is that not what your new president preached?
Oh! its quite monotonous. I
Oh! its quite monotonous. I don't like this kind of protests and rally. Tea party is just a get together party nothing harm in it.
Got news for y'all. Even if
Got news for y'all. Even if 100% of what the "greenies" say about "Global Warming" is true and the U.S. is the guilty party for it the U.S. can't do much about it. If we stop using coal, oil, natural gas, etc.... here and there rest of the world doesn't play by the same rules, it only shifts where the consumption and pollution happens. The resulting shift will cost American jobs, it will cost the American economy greatly as well. If India and China don't put the same restrictions on manufacturing in thier countries that we do (and enforce them) , it will make the job outsourcing we've seen in the past look like a practice run!!
Americas unilatteral desire to be green is admirable, but is ending up with America fighting for its economical prosperity with [at least] one arm tied behind our backs!!!
Lets go green, but lets make sure the whole world is going to go along with us. Let Americans get the opportunity to actually develop the green technologies and power sources to where they are sufficiently reliable BEFORE we cut off the use of less than "green" energy sources. Cutting our own noses off to spite our faces will only benefit the rest of the world that arent going to go green before us.
Steven Hawkings believes
Steven Hawkings believes that carbon being put in the atmosphere by humans is causing global warming. If you think that you have a better understanding of these sciences than Dr. Hawkings, then more power to you. However, if you do believe this, I would see a shrink ASAP, because highly delusional.
Hawking a climatologist? Really? And, here's the REAL issue...
Hawking is not a *climate* scientist. Do you go see an orthopedic surgeon for a toothache because orthopedic surgeons and dentists are both "doctors', so they each must know it all?
The BIG point is... even if the threat of climate change is NOT an imminent emergency, is there anyone stupid enough to believe it's really OK to keep dumping endless poison into our biosphere and that that will *never* catch up to us??
What we're doing now is absolutely NOT sustainable. That means, in plain terms, it HAS to end SOMETIME. We can end it on our own terms, now, like sensible grownups, or we can just let it boil over into a huge, fatal mess eventually. Just a question of when.
Saying, "Why now?" is just like saying, "Not in my backyard"... Basically, let it be somebody else's problem, don't disrupt my cozy, shuttered cocoon...
Mis-guided Trust
Funny, that this article is doing exactly what the writer and editor are accusing the ring-wing tea party people of doing. Spreading mistrust and confusion to even more Americans. I am not on any defined side, however if I had to choose a side than its with the people of the world, and here's how I see things.
You have a corrupt bunch of millionaire politicians, some of which have been in power for more than 50 years. Without term limits, the Congressional leaders rarely change. And it is no secret they have become ridiculously wealthy in the process. I will attach a small list of the richest punks, along with how rich they are, at the end of my post. Although the history of the corruption could be traced back to the beginnings of humanity I am sure, let's focus on the current century. This much is for certain, a group of the richest men in America at the time conspired together to form certain organizations that would ensure their position of power for many generations to come. To that end, a group of such bankers met in secret on Jekyll Island in 1913 to form the Federal Reserve Act, and the central banking empire that exists today and that Andrew Jackson sacrificed his career to shut down so many years ago. The main purpose of this was to create a central banking system whereby every single dollar, peso, yen, whatever that is spent, must first pass through the central bank (or its branches), and then is paid on the other side. To make this work, a fractional reserve system was implemented, whereby banks only hold, say 10%, of the money they get from customers. The rest they loan out or just plain spend. What this system allows the banks that are members of the private Federal Reserve bank (formed as a corporation in Delaware, a law lax state) to do is to freeze substantially all transactions almost instantly whenever they want to by taking away the credit facility from both sides of the transaction. And there you have a recession. 15 and counting, and each time these politicians, and the banks they really work for, get even richer by buying cheap, consolidating the competition, and relieving payrolls of corporations. In 1960, out of a total non-farm work force of 54,274,000, there were 15,687,000 manufacturing workers in America, representing 29% of the total. By 2009, out of a total estimated labor force of 134,333,000 non-farm workers, there were only 12,640,000 manufacturing workers, representing just 9% of the total. In the 1980s, there were about 7,000 machine tooling companies in the U.S., with about $25 billion in annual revenue. Today, the U.S. is ranked 7th in the world, and output has dropped to a disturbing $3.8 billion.
That, folks, is just the tip of the iceberg. The interest cost of servicing the $11 trillion in debt owed largely to China, Saudi Arabia, and a few others, amounts to about $26 billion a month, or roughly $300 billion annually. With total tax receipts declining sharply (as an example, the IRS took in the least amount of tax revenue this April 15th in its history, and that was before losing millions of more workers), and amounting to about $2.5 trillion, that's a big chunk of change we pay to cover just the interest. By 2019, and thanks in no small part to the huge budget deficit passed by Obama this interest cost is expected to exceed $806 billion annually. Scared yet? Here's some more then....at its current cost of $300 billion, we could fully fund the Departments of Commerce ($8.1 billion), Education ($68 billion), Homeland Security ($42.3 billion) HUD ($52.3 billion), Energy ($23.2 billion), Justice ($25 billion) and labor ($49.6 billion) for the entire year.
Where will all that money come from? The politicians say the greedy corporations, or the rich..yeah ok. You agree with that? Then understand this...The total 2008 profits of Exxon Mobil ($45.2 billion), General Electric ($17.41 billion), Wal-Mart ($12.7 billion), and IBM ($12.3 billion) only totaled $87.61 billion. So if we taxed them 100%, it still would cover more than a few months of interest....if the Chinese government doesn't do what the credit card companies are doing to us now, raising interest rates to ridiculously high rates without notice, just because they can.
The government has been putting IOU's into the social security fund almost from its inception, spending the money on everything else. The Social Security Administration estimates the trust fund will run dry around 2037, before many of us retire. But that's if the IOUs are all paid back, which is all but impossible to achieve since the currently projected unfunded liability is about $13.6 trillion. So, forget getting a social security check. You think it will come from medicare funding? Then consider this...medicare parts A and B have combined unfunded liabilities of $68 trillion. And since passing the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, medicare part D has racked up unfunded liabilities of $17.2 trillion. David Walker, the former comptroller general of the United States, called medicare part D "probably the most fiscally irresponsible piece of legislation since the 1960s.) Where will that come from I wonder. And Obama requested $634 billion to be put into a "universal health-care reserve fund", never bothered to mention the money isn't available and the program could never be funded.
Not to mention the government has doubled the money supply since 2008. By artificially manipulating the market and the people investing in it, the bankers have managed to profit whether the dollar's value falls or raises, as evidenced by the stock market's recent roller-coastering. Regardless, the inflation caused by printing money and thereby devaluing it is already affecting many Americans in the form of higher food costs and other necessary resources. And we haven't seen the worst of it yet.
So, approximately 27 million are out of work (check the U6 jobless rate here http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t12.htm), and we are so advanced we are literally phasing ourselves out. When you build a machine to do a man's work, you take something away from the man. The real estate players have over-built billions of square feet of real estate when there was never a demand, both residential and commercial. Arguably the only thing that kept America out of a depression in the 80s. What industry do we now rely on? Other than debt collection, we look to health care, the beacon of employment. I have several clients that are hospitals, and are not going to make it. Buried in debt like many others. But wait? This industry relies on, to be profitable, its customers to be really sick, like permanently sick. Adding allowing arcenic in our water supplies and adding another poison intentionally, Sodium Flouride (read the back of a toothpaste tube, its POISON), and perhaps even other chemicals certainly isn't helping. Stress on over worked brains is causing Alzheimers in millions, we are lied to and told to inject an untested, outdated vaccine in our perfectly healthy bodies in the chance we might catch the flu. Well, don't worry about catching it if your injecting into yourself. You've got it! And, like many industries, its shelf life is expiring as the mainstay of the hospital practice is getting old, and younger generations can neither afford to, or care to, run to the doctor every time our nose runs.
So, you have a corrupt government, a bankrupt, debt based monetary system, an empty social security and medicare fund, more spending than ever before in history, and we have to rely on the very Congressmen and women that caused all this for their own greedy gains, and perpetuate it today because they don't care to fix what's working for them. What do we do? We feeble-mindedly blame the president every 4-8 years. Bush sucked! Then Clinton sucked! Then Bush sucked...again! Now, dammit Barrack Obama sucks! But wait, they did all get really rich doing what their doing. Can't blame them for that right? Right, Americans would rather blame each other. An impotent waste of energy. Here's why their never going to help us and why we must take back the power or welcome the next step in our evolution:
Congress
Jane Harman (D-Calif)$558,544,002
Darrell Issa (R-Calif) $526,300,001
Robin Hayes (R-NC) $272,241,999
Vernon Buchanan (R-Fla) $401,156,971
Michael McCaul (R-Texas) $104,215,000
Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) $143,974,989
Carolyn B. Maloney (D-NY) $83,585,994
Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-NJ) $72,286,000
Nita M. Lowey (D-NY) $70,503,415
Gary Miller (R-Calif) $65,462,000
Tom Petri (R-Wis) $66,891,999
Denny Rehberg (R-Mont) $59,814,997
Kenny Ewell Marchant (R-Texas) $53,178,582
John Campbell (R-Calif) $45,102,000
F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis) $28,460,630
Steve Pearce (R-NM) $38,030,000
Heath Shuler (D-NC) $41,521,996
Bill Foster (D-Ill) $35,890,000
John M. Spratt Jr. (D-SC) $33,702,995
David Dreier (R-Calif)$29,688,000
Tom Price (R-Ga) $29,270,233
Fred Upton (R-Mich) $25,871,000
Rosa L. DeLauro (D-Conn) $27,234,999
John Linder (R-Ga) $26,649,998
Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) $21,584,999
Senate
Barack Obama (D) $15,466,043
Max Baucus (D-Mont) $1,363,000
John Kerry (D-Mass) $388,292,172
Herb Kohl (D-Wis) $251,647,996
Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass) $163,298,999
Jay Rockefeller (D-WVa) $127,533,003
Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) $125,692,020
Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif) $115,998,023
Bob Corker (R-Tenn) $98,169,998
Gordon H. Smith (R-Ore) $63,895,999
Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) $51,599,001
Claire McCaskill (D-Mo) $44,437,005
Elizabeth Dole (R-NC) $48,218,910
Hillary Clinton (D-NY) $51,232,000
John McCain (R) $37,743,009
Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn) $40,536,648
Johnny Isakson (R-Ga) $24,284,999
Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) $21,938,002
Ben Nelson (D-Neb) $15,889,000
Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) $14,263,001
Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) $13,857,999
Evan Bayh (D-Ind) $13,942,000
Mitch McConnell (R-Ky) $12,720,999
Arlen Specter (R-Pa) $11,762,000
Judd Gregg (R-NH) $10,521,000
Chuck Hagel (R-Neb) $10,916,000
Sam Brownback (R-Kan) $9,911,000
Back to the MJ article
The makers of the film, Not Evil, Just Wrong, made a previous film, Mine Your Own Business that received funding from the Canadian mining company, Gabriel Resources. In that film the Irish husband and wife team proposed that environmentalists were busily undercutting local economic development by contesting the creation of mines and thereby create local jobs. Many of their supporters beat their chests that indeed environmentalists are standing in the way of economic development. Yet, what these people often miss out is that mining is not the only option for economic development. In fact, mining and other extractive industries not only create environmental destruction, but often create the basis for the emergence of violent conflict (remember blood diamonds?) and corruption. The Irish filmmakers lead one to believe that if only environmentalists would get out of the way then poverty would vanish through the good works of the mining industry. Kind of reminds me of the old commercial, "Without Chemicals Life itself would be Impossible".
professional backing of the movie
I don't know if you know this or not, but the makers of the anti-climate change movie are backed by some pretty good corporate interests as well. Their PR firm is FD Dittus, a PR firm owned by Financial Dynamics. This is no grassroots campaign, as MR has implied. There is money behind this tea bagging, and it's big money.
GLOBULL WARMING
It is obvious to anyone with a reasonable amount of intelligence & awareness of the weather that we are in a period of global COOLING, not warming. The original global warming assertions did not say anything about this cooling. Therefore what was said is invalid. Mr. Gore's movie was discredited by a British court which set forth nine (9) major fallacies contained therein. To be shown in British schools a 56 page rebuttal had to be shown with it.
It makes sense to be more energy efficient. However, these 'green' efforts tend to be extreme & not very practical. If one looks hard enough it becomes apparent that the greenies believe that there should be far fewer of us. How many, well a worldwide population of 1B seems right to them. The difficulty & the unconscionable moral & ethical cost of this effort doesn't seem to faze them in the least. Unfortunately, there aren't enough white jackets available.
Renewable energies such as wind & solar are much more expensive than coal & will not constitute more than about 15% of the total energy needed to run our society. The greenies aren't too thrilled about this anyhow. They don't want to allow transmission lines run to wind farms or the actual creation of solar farms. Hydroelectric has to go, so many poor fishies are killed. And, of course, forget about nuclear. France gets about 70% of its power from nuclear plants. Maybe they may actually know something.
If energy independence is truly wanted then potential energy sources have to be exploited. It is as simple as that. The greenies talk out of both sides of their mouths. On one hand, they want energy independence but on the other hand they block the practical efforts to achieve it. The greenies, aka liberals, are contemptuous of the rest of us. We are just supposed to starve & freeze to death in our unlit homes to please them.
Something has to give and what is blowing on the wind, so to speak, is not good. The consensus of opinion on the internet points to a revolution to striaighten all this out. Namely, liberals, lawyers, lobbyists, corruption, politicians, judges, the trashing of the Constitution & many more long standing ills.
huh, cooling?
Not quite sure I agree with your cooling comment, NOAA data suggest otherwise --
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/global-jan-dec-error-bar-p...
Here's an idea! If you
Here's an idea! If you believe in global warming, don't eat meat, drive electric cars, use solar panals at home, wear heavy clothes in the winter, and cut your carbon footprint as much as you can.
I don't believe in global warming, so leave me alone. If you are right your efforts will save us all and you can be the hero!
If I am right, I am not inconvenienced by your lunacy.
P.S. If Al Gore really wants to "save the planet" why isn't he working for free as a non profit instead of positioning himself to receive billions of taxpayer dollars making him one of the richest men in the world if cap and tax is passed.
who cares
Who cares about Al Gore? What, is he like the patron saint of global warming? Not for me. As for leaving you alone, well I didn't ask you to read the article, didn't ask you to blog. In fact, I'd happily leave you along, go back to your cave....
I will happily drive my SUV
I will happily drive my SUV back to my cave (equipped with all the latest electronic, power consuming, carbon footprint enlarging gadgets) just as soon as cap and tax is a dead bill and we have rational politicians in office that won't try to tax me to death.
Republican market driven solution
You do realize that Capt and Trade was developed by Republican party hacks as a market solution to environmental waste....
By the way, don't leave the engine running on that SUV, because the carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide will accumulate in the cave and cause you to suffocate.
Just goes to show that even
Just goes to show that even a Republican can make a mistake every now and then.
And the carbon monoxide makes a great garnish for dead cow products.
yes, Republican mistakes
Tea Pot Dome
Watergate
Spiro Agnew
Iran Contragate
Weapons of Mass Destruction
That old US senator who liked to hang around in airport toilets
Republican Congressmen waiting to meet really interesting teenage Capitol Hill pages
Southern Republican Senators who like hanging around with prostitutes
Republican Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld authorized the rape of children in Iraqi prisons in order to humiliate their parents into providing information about the anti-American insurgency.
Vice President's who shoot their friends in the face
elect minority Presidents
...and I'm just getting started with the 'few' Republican mistakes....
...oh I forgot, "I can see Russia from my house"
well....
Jack Ambramov
Scooter Libbry
Governors who lie about a walk in the woods, who are really having a shag in Argentina on state TAX DOLLARS
Rep. Randy Cunningham (seeking contributions now in jail)
AND some of those other gems of moral certitude, Rev. Jimmy Swagger, Rev. Jerry Falwell (he was just a jerk, sorry and so is Pat Robertson), Rev. Jim Bakker...
Oh, sorry, my fingers are wearing out from all this typing and I haven't really gone that far back in history.
Did I mention the Republican contribution of GW Bush? Somebody said the Republicans were the party of ideas, and I guess we just misunderestimated what those ideas were.....
Oh, wait, climate change, that's what we're talking about.
Tea pot dome, watergate,
Tea pot dome, watergate, Spiro Agnew, senator in bathroom, prostitutes, and the pages incident are good examples of corrupt politicians. If you really wanted to compare corruption in politics, i'm sure that we could match a democrat for each republican all day long.
WMD was an intel mistake that started under Clinton (he also believed that Saddam had WMD's).
there are two sides to the Iran contra affair, (Although in hindsight, we should have used Iran as a nuclear test site when Regan was in office)
I have a hard time buying the Rumsfeld story.
And no, I wouldn't go hunting with Dick Cheney!
