Austin Hill:
Have you noticed that the cries of the cultural and political “left” in the U.S. are becoming more venomous and shrill? As President Barack Obama flails on the international stage and approval for his domestic agenda and his party in Congress slips away, so-called “progressive” Americans are also watching something else slip away: the chances of politicians and government bureaucrats getting a strangle-hold on the petroleum energy industry.
The stated goal of progressive energy policy is to stave-off “global warming” (or “climate change” or “climate disruption” or whichever term progressives choose at any given moment), and the means to that end is curtailing oil production and consumption. But expanding government power to force a reduction in oil production and consumption and in turn to mandate “green energy projects” is the only way to make it all happen, so progressives say, and anybody who dares to doubt the agenda is a “climate denier” and to be despised.
Legitimate questions that thoughtful people might otherwise have about “climate science” or the economic viability of alternative energy projects shall not be expressed, and concerns about conflicts of interest or corruption with “climate activists” are to be ignored. Consider for example the excerpt below from New York Times contributing columnist Timothy Egan. In a May 8th piece about billionaire brothers David and Charles Koch, Egan wrote, in part:
“They have used a big part of this fortune to attack the indisputable science on climate change, to buy junk scholars, to promote harmful legislation at the state level, to go after clean, renewable energy like solar, and to try to kill the greatest expansion of health care in decades.”
Did you get that? The “science” that animates global warming policies is “indisputable” regardless of how many scientists dispute it. “Clean, renewable energy” is to be praised- always – no matter how much American taxpayer money gets handed-over to green energy companies that end up going bankrupt and never producing any energy at all.
And here’s something else about which American progressives seem completely unaware: free people on at least three different continents have elected governments that are abandoning the progressive goal of destroying the petroleum energy industry and moving in the exact opposite direction of the Obama Administration. One of the most obvious examples of this is just a bit further northward, but right here in North America.
Here I thought this headline was going to be about so-called education of public school children.
The ”progressive,” Left’s collective mind is already closed.
There is a growing desperation on their part in the US exactly because the Europeans are waking up from their elitist-progressive nightmare.
American media simply does not cover Europe because it is the only way to hide what’s happening.
But the web (which the Left is trying to control) does have the news from Germany as it cuts back wind/solar and grows its coal power.
The web still can inform us about UKIP, the anti-elitist party of non-PC people which is poised to take control of the UK’s Parliament after the May 22nd vote.
The web shows how Putin tries to use his oil and natural gas as a weapon to expand his dying Russian populace by appropriating more lands where people speak Russian.
Just don’t sit back and wait for the Leftist media to tell you.
The first mistake this article makes is assuming that progressives have minds.
The Party of Science my ass.
My observation is liberals/progressives preach tolerance and diversitybut in actuality cannot tolerate diversity that does not fit within their narrow defintion of it.
“The great global warming swindle – Full version”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtevF4B4RtQ
That may be the “Stated goal” by leftist politicians and the greens movements PR staff, but when they speak amongst true believers in their Kumbaya circles their stated goal changes to pushing for the ultimate goal of complete abandonment of “fossil fuels” and making everything that burns them obsolete.
(Oh yes, I know quite a few of these folk (friends, family and though my many assorted social circles,) and they often bombard me with their eco-fanatic nonsense. They think that because I am a pro-agriculture conservationist, that I must also be “one with them.” Arguing with ideological fanatics is boring and counter productive, as t’s better to spend your time debating with people who understand logical analysis and who will discuss issues based on facts rather than propaganda and talking points.)
@Nanny G:
That is why the left has been trying every trick in the book to control the internet and shut-up conservative sites and those like Drudge who will not bow to their politically based regulatory edicts. It is also why Obama wants to hand over management of the web to the other nations of the world, most of who have a long history of heavy handed censorship and propaganda. I have not been able to ascertain where Obama thinks he has such authority. The internet was created by various acts of Congress, so it should require Congressional approval before a President can hand off the duties and responsibilities of a US government entity to any foreign nation or international body.