As summer temperatures scorch various parts of the world, climate change activists are predictably warming up their seasonal racket: President Biden flying to Massachusetts to give an emergency climate speech, Secretary Buttigieg rushing to the talk shows to panic about how short on time we are, and that's just the beginning.
Last week the Left became apoplectic over the announcement from WV Senator Joe Manchin that he will not be supporting climate spending in a massive reconciliation bill. After inflation surged over 9% in the last year alone, it would seem that caution on large government spending packages would be greeted with more appreciation than what the "moderate" Democrat is receiving from the political movement he has unwisely hitched his wagon to.
But when news broke that Manchin was a no-go, likely dooming any hope Democrats had for major climate legislation before the midterm elections in November, the rage and sorrow poured from the left like an Exxon Valdez oil spill.
* * *
* * *
As someone who has written about the increased anxiety issues faced by our youngest generations, I am well aware of the multitude of studies that suggest it's all tied to chemically treated foods, lack of nutrition, over-medication, and the fast-paced, internet-driven, technologically obsessed world they inhabit. But I can't help but think that much of it can be tied directly to this kind of psychologically deranged behavior of adults.
The reason that kids panic about their planet incinerating around them isn't because of GMOs. It's because their parents hug them and cry like it's the end of the world when a Senator votes against a spending bill.
Though I don't think it's as serious of a war on reality as what we see with the progressive assault on gender and sexuality, anyone who has truly convinced themselves that climate change is strictly a man-made problem – one that man has both caused and has the ability to manipulate through laws and regulations – have only accomplished that through some meticulous and painstaking editing of historical climate realities.
This last week I was going through a retiring minister friend's personal library to pick out some books he was giving away. I couldn't resist grabbing this classic:
We love to laugh at the lunacy of would-be prophets who predict the end of the world. They aren't scientists, they are snake-oil salesmen and everyone thinking rationally knows that. The fact that Edgar Whisenant was a former NASA engineer didn't make his specious forecast of doom any more legitimate. So why do the very educated progressives who cackle at rubes like Whisenant not feel even the slightest bit sheepish to have tied their own intellectual credibility to men like Al Gore? This is the man who said in 2006 we had 10 years to enact radical climate change policy in order to avoid environmental Armageddon.
How do they passively accept the panic-of-the-moment charades that occur each summer when they know where we've been in the not-so-distant past?
I mean, here's 50 years of other similarly failed climate catastrophe predictions – this stuff isn't hard to find. It's a willing suspension of disbelief, and for what end? Control? Power?
Not only that, but when hysteria such as the climate madness takes root, little if any legitimate conversation is spent noting the potential unintended consequences that come from the proposed solutions.
I'm reading a lot about how Senator Manchin – a "multimillionaire with a Maserati," may be controlled by duplicitous oil company executives these days. Maybe so. But in the grand scheme of things, is there anyone who thinks that's worse than being controlled by these reckless and deranged doomsday forecasters?
