Tuesday, June 3, 2008

Climate For Freedom in Peril

The Senate is taking an entire 30 hours to debate the Lieberman-Warner climate bill (the so-called Climate Security Act).

That sentence contains at least three ridiculous points by my reckoning.


No. 1

That something as serious as a severe hampering of every business in America should be decided after only 30 hours of Congressional debate is clearly absurd. That said, Congressmen typically don't read much of what they vote on, so at least they'll be giving it more attention than what they usually do. That they will is a sign they are taking the subject seriously.

Also, the essential contents of the bill have been known for some time. So, little in it will be a surprise to anyone not living in a tree like some Greens who might advocate the bill's contents.


No. 2

Still, that it should take 30 hours, rather than 30 seconds, to dispose of one of the biggest efforts to date to chain industrial civilization since its birth is beyond ridiculous. It's evil, plain and simple.

Individuals, which is what the people who work for and invest in businesses are, have a right to use the Earth for their own benefit. Nothing in what they're doing is having nor will have the severe impact on the climate that the bill's advocates claim make it necessary.

No one's health or well-being is going to be significantly harmed by producing CO2 at projected levels over the next 100 years. Even if it did, contra science, this bill will not do anything to change that. It will only further the takeover of the economy by the new Communists — the Greens and their partners-in-crime in Congress.

At the same time, it will be a huge cost in hard dollars as well as new wealth that will not come into existence if the bill is passed. Businesses will have to needlessly spend billions to curtail their output. Those who buy their goods and services will spend billions more to get less, which is after all the ultimate purpose of the Greens.

But some money will definitely change hands as the ever-eager gamers of the system strive to bribe the politicians every which way from Sunday to accomplish their ends.

In a system of that kind, it's impossible to separate the otherwise honest who are paying extortion from those who are happy to take advantage of the Byzantine arrangements that will exist for grasping a buck. This is only one of the many things that make that bill evil.

No. 3

That it is called the Climate Security Act is just more insulting icing on a moldy cake. Trying to speciously associate this power grab/business enslavement piece of legislation with 'security' is nothing more than fear-mongering. If there's anything we don't need from Green-pandering politicians it's adding gasoline to the fire that their partners in the major media are already fanning so excellently well.



You have to be some special kind of stupid to advocate that businesses produce less, and that less efficiently. You have to be a (today) typical kind of immoral to propose chaining them when they're doing so much good. Even apart from the utterly obvious fact that people need more goods and services cheaper, not fewer that are more costly, businesses have a right to freedom of action.

It's that freedom, not the climate, that is in peril.

2 comments:

Marcus said...

I saw an interview with Inhofe today by Glenn Beck and he was sure it wouldn't pass. Let's hope.

Jeff Perren said...

I've read several places that the odds of passage are slim. But those same sources say it doesn't matter much because the new President and Congress in 2009 will take up something similar.

So, per disgustingly usual, we'll have to fight the battle all over again. And, will because it isn't being opposed for the right reasons. "Too expensive, too complicated, too much bureaucracy," etc, etc are all correct, but not the basic evil that needs to be exposed.

What's not being said by the bill's opponents is that individuals/businesses have a right to freedom of action, which necessarily includes producing CO2 (at least for now). Also, that (as you already know) the facts about climate now and future don't justify any of the actions being advocated.

Lots of people are saying that, and really well, such as Peter Cresswell. But, so far, the Greens are still winning.

We need a surge to wipe these Green ideas out.