Commentary: Climate change one of many incessant anti-Trump waves lapping against shores of truth
As is so typical of the Trump-hating Liberal Left, the title “Tide of truth on climate change keeps rising” for the piece by the Roberts duo was classic bait & switch. This op ed wasn’t so much about climate change, which is a fallacy. It was an attack on our president, and the claims in those attacks were equally fallacious.
But first, let’s deal with climate change, a phrase that used to be “global warming” until the misguided and uninformed proponents realized that there was no such thing, ergo the spin itself had to change.
Yes, climate change is real. It’s been real since our planet formed some 4 billion or more years ago. It’s called weather, folks, and it changes by the minute. Carbon emissions, the use of fossil fuels, fireplaces, outdoor barbecues, gasoline powered automobile engines, and so on have virtually nothing to do with our climate. Pollution of any sort is not healthy for terrestrial life forms, of course. But to think that we lowly little homo sapiens affect global weather is the utmost in absolute and almost religious arrogance.
Over the eons and long before our forebears walked the Earth, our planet experienced countless periods of cooling, warming, cooling again, warming again, ad nauseam. Indeed, the last glacial period ended some 11,500 years ago. Temperatures rose, ice melted, and glaciers receded, and back then there were no SUVs or coal-fueled power plants. So why did the freeze start to thaw? Simple: the planet’s natural cycles. Period.
President Trump’s “ridiculous assertion that an unusually cold Thanksgiving undermined the report ... mandated by Congress”?
Well, a week or so ago, none other than NASA reported that global temperatures had actually dropped, not increased. Is NASA then also ridiculous? Should we instead believe Al Gore and Barry Sanders, for example, both of whom travel regularly in high-carbon-footprint private jets instead of a less-polluting-per-passenger/miles airliner? Can you say hypocrisy?
If you’re concerned about CO2 emissions and the gas’ build-up in the atmosphere, why not ban outdoor jogging? For sake of another sheer silliness, one could easily draw a correlation between the increase of atmospheric CO2 and the increase in fitness madness.
We inhale oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide, so quit running, jogging, and bicycling, kids. Your respiration is fouling the air.
Taxes and the national debt? So you want to believe the Congressional Budget Office, which accurately predicted eight of the last two recessions? Or how about David Axelrod who, as a “senior adviser to Barack Obama,” participated in a presidential administration that in eight years saw the national debt increase by more than it had under the presidencies of Bush the younger, Clinton, Bush the elder, Reagan, Carter, and Nixon combined? In other words, consider the sources.
The fact is that per Trump’s tax plan -- and coupled with ongoing de-regulation -- revenue is flowing back into the United States, and consumers and businesses alike simply have more money to spend. Companies are hiring, GDP is up, the stock market is booming ... in short, it’s working.
It will take time and patience, but the strategy will be successful – just as it was for JFK and then Ronald Reagan.
Foreign affairs? The easiest way to put it is that “America is back.” Unlike his predecessor, President Trump does not bow to Middle East potentates, does not whisper to Russian diplomats that he soon will be “able to be more flexible,” has not “quietly” black-bagged millions to Iran, and that at state dinners in other nations he is not essentially seated at the kids’ card table in the kitchen.
Foreign leaders may not like him, but they know he is a serious man. They also know that he means what he says, and for the benefit of the American people he says (as in tweets) a lot, and he does what he said he would do.
“Obama judges”? With all due respect, Chief Justice Roberts was out of line with his “sharp rebuke” of Trump’s criticisms. In his remarks, Roberts himself asserted the importance of an “independent judiciary.” How is it, then, that he can justify his opinionated and implicitly political retort? And please, can Justice Roberts explain why the 9th Circuit is notorious for Liberal Left decisions and a record of having their decisions repeatedly overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court?
I could go on. But why bother? The tide of lies, misrepresentations, and resistance from the Democraps rises evermore.
Climate change is merely one of the incessant anti-Trump and anti-Conservative waves lapping against the shores of truth and reasonability. Apparently, Mr. & Mrs. Roberts have fully hopped aboard, slurped the Kool-Aid, and surrendered control of oars and tiller to that tide. For all of us, I hope the ebb comes soon.
Michael C. Westlund is a resident of Clarkdale