Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Reality: 1 Enviroweenies: 0


True to form, congressmen and women decry the fable that is Global Warming, hold vigils and rallies, and slap bumper stickers on their cars but when it comes right down to it they can't get it done. Leave it to the liberal media to spin this into a great loss for the environment.

Note the language (emphasis mine):

Congress retreated Friday from the world's biggest environmental concern - global warming - in a fresh demonstration of what happens when nature and business collide, especially in an election year.

I am certain there are bigger environmental concerns than Global Warming, especially in light of the UN's (and others') proclamation that the earth in now cooling. Oops. Your pants are down and your bias is showing.

Furthermore, nature and business didn't collide here. If you haven't noticed, the "Green" movement isn't just a cottage industry anymore, it is big, and presumably profitable business.

What collided here was the liberal power grab that is the Global Warming/Cooling movement and economic realty.

Don't get me wrong, I care about the environment and I don't want to leave the planet worse than we found it for our grandchildren. On the other hand, gas prices are very high right now and while for us it's just a nuisance, for many it is a financial burden that can't be borne indefinitely by a significant segment of our nation.

And guess what...them's voters!

"At the beginning of the summer driving season (you) offer a bill that would send gas prices up another 53 cents a gallon for goodness sake," Republican leader Mitch McConnell needled the Democratic majority.

"This is a massive tax increase on the American people," proclaimed Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., who is among Congress' dwindling skeptics when it comes to global warming, having once called it all a hoax.

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., one of three chief sponsors of the bill, disputed both assertions, saying the bill would provide tens of billions of dollars a year in tax breaks for people facing high energy costs and for other measures to ease the transition from oil, coal and other fossil fuels, which are the cause of impending changing climate.

She argued that people actually may end up paying less to fuel their cars because a price on carbon emissions would accelerate the push for more fuel efficient vehicles and alternative fuels.

Sure Barb, but I don't think they can wait that long. I face high energy costs! Does that mean I'd get a tax break? No? Why not? Oh, because I don't vote for fiscal liberals. Gotcha.

No comments: