In June 2017, President Trump said, “Before we discuss the Paris Accord, I’d like to begin with an update on our tremendous—absolutely tremendous economic progress since Election Day on November 8th. The economy is starting to come back, and very, very rapidly. We’ve added $3.3 trillion in stock market value to our economy, and more than a million private sector jobs. I have just returned from a trip overseas where we concluded nearly $350 billion of military and economic development for the United States, creating hundreds of thousands of jobs. It was a very, very successful trip, believe me.”
And then he said, “As president, I can put no other consideration before the wellbeing of American citizens. The Paris Climate Accord is simply the latest example of Washington entering into an agreement that disadvantages the United States to the exclusive benefit of other countries, leaving American workers, who I love, and taxpayers to absorb the cost in terms of lost jobs, lower wages, shuttered factories, and vastly diminished economic production. Thus, as of today, the United States will cease all implementation of the nonbinding Paris Accord and the draconian financial and economic burdens the agreement imposes on our country. This includes ending the implementation of the nationally determined contribution and, very importantly, the Green Climate Fund which is costing the United States a vast fortune.”
So in June 2017, our esteemed super hardworking president maked the extremely wise and prudent decision, clearly on behalf of the best interest of almost all Americans, as he should, to withdraw the United States from the almost painfully ridiculous and lopsided Paris Accord and then got blasted by the progressives and their legacy media. Here’s a little sample of the reaction around the same time based on an article in the Federalist titled “15 Over-The-Top Reactions To Trump’s Withdrawal From Paris Climate Deal.”
Billionaire and faux environmentalist Tom Steyer said withdrawing would be a “traitorous act of war.” Scientific American implied the world would immediately become a desolate, apocalyptic place. Quote fabricator Neil deGrasse Tyson said Trump wasn’t science-y enough to know science things good. Actress Patricia Arquette suggested a class-action lawsuit against the president’s decision to stop participating in a voluntary agreement. The Sierra Club said President Trump had abandoned us all now. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said the president is a racist because “Pulling out of the Paris Agreement would be a massive step back for racial justice, and an assault on communities of color across the U.S.”
And finally, because the popular morning show on FoxNew had a conservative guest who spoke critically about climate change and must be actively trying to destroy the earth, Eric Wemple wrote in the Washington Post that ‘Fox & Friends’ is a planetary threat. Has our world gone crazy over climate change or is this all just a bunch of hyped up nonsense to help a small group line their pockets with more of our tax money? I’m Matt Tullar and here’s my opinion and please be sure to comment and share this video. Help us improve and get the word out to as many as possible. Thank you.
According to Wikipedia, “Drinking the Kool-Aid” is an expression used to refer to a person who believes in a possibly doomed or dangerous idea because of perceived potential high rewards like saving the planet. The phrase often justifiably carries a negative connotation. It can also be used ironically or humorously to refer to accepting an idea or changing a preference due to popularity, peer pressure, or persuasion. In recent years, it has evolved further to mean extreme dedication to a cause or purpose, so extreme that one would “Drink the Kool-Aid” and die for the cause.
Anybody remember Jim Jones and the totally insane mass-murder ‘suicide’ at Jonestown, Guyana in 1978 that resulted in 918 deaths? Rather than allowing the world to discover his complete and diabolical socialist fraud he’d sold to misguided followers as the perfect jungle paradise commune protesting capitalism, the self proclaimed messiah Jones first orders his armed thugs to gun down U.S. Rep. Leo Ryan (D-Calif.) and his escaping entourage and then commands the rest of Jonestown to either drink the cyanide-laced Kool-aid willingly or be injected by force. It was a nightmare and forever a metaphor of the evil of socialism.
In last week’s articled titled “Climate Change – P1: Schooled By Chicken Little,” we explored how our American socialist public school monopoly has failed us so badly that many of us are not only unable to distinguish reasonable dialogue from pure nonsense but as a result, we are increasingly more susceptible to large scale fraud and even to electing these fraudsters to represent us in Congress. We also promised to reveal the big secret why people claim the sky is falling and explore Al Gore the king of climate change hype.
So the big secret is money, your money and various schemes to have as many people as possible drink the Kool-Aid, proclaim the sky is falling and use your money via more taxation, more stupid regulation, more international negotiation or lost employment income, or lost return on your investments to pay for schemes to save the world from almost immediate destruction. So let’s begin with an explanation of the Paris Accord or that agreement within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, dealing with greenhouse-gas emissions mitigation, adaptation, and finance, signed in 2016 by the Obama administration. And most importantly, how this agreement was going to do almost nothing to improve the environment while at the same time punishing the economy, the taxpayer, and all the citizens of the world’s leader of environmental protection.
In 2017, President Trump also said, “Compliance with the terms of the Paris Accord and the onerous energy restrictions it has placed on the United States could cost America as much as 2.7 million lost jobs by 2025 according to the National Economic Research Associates. This includes 440,000 fewer manufacturing jobs—not what we need. Believe me, this is not what we need, including automobile jobs, and the further decimation of vital American industries on which countless communities rely. They rely for so much, and we would be giving them so little. According to this same study, by 2040, compliance with the commitments put into place by the previous administration would cut production for the following sectors: paper down 12 percent; cement down 23 percent; iron and steel down 38 percent; coal, and I happen to love the coal miners, down 86 percent; natural gas down 31 percent. The cost to the economy at this time would be close to $3 trillion in lost GDP and 6.5 million industrial jobs, while households would have $7,000 less income and, in many cases, much worse than that. Not only does this deal subject our citizens to harsh economic restrictions, it fails to live up to our environmental ideals. As someone who cares deeply about the environment, which I do, I cannot in good conscience support a deal that punishes the United States, which is what it does, the world’s leader in environmental protection, while imposing no meaningful obligations on the world’s leading polluters. For example, under the agreement, China will be able to increase these emissions by a staggering number of years—13. They can do whatever they want for 13 years. Not us.”
So why did President Obama sign this bad deal? While I certainly cannot explain his true motivation for egregiously compromising the United States in the Paris Accord, I am convinced it was motivated by his general interest in dragging down America with more socialism and the intention to allow a select group to profit at the expense of the rest of us. And among this group is the most successful climate change Chicken Little or none other than Bill Clinton’s former Vice President, Albert Arnold Gore Jr. After his 2006 book and film titled “An Inconvenient Truth, The Crisis of Global Warming” convinced a cadre of U.S. socialist public school monopoly snowflake graduates like myself that global warming was real, man-made, and would be globally cataclysmic if we didn’t act immediately, we had a dramatic climate change that encouraged mass Kool-aid drinking. Fortunately for myself, newly acquired spirituality saved me from my addiction to Kool-aid, melted my belief in snowflake victimhood, and once again allowed me to be reasonable objective about many things including climate change.
Meanwhile, talk of emissions trading, also known as cap and trade, a market-based approach to controlling pollution by providing economic incentives for achieving reductions in the emissions of pollutants was widespread and being heated up by Gore and his buddies. The idea was to create a central authority of bumbling government bureaucrats to sell or allocate a limited number of permits to discharge specific quantities of pollutants per time period. Polluters are then required to hold permits in amount equal to their emissions. Polluters that want to increase their emissions must buy permits from others willing to sell them. Financial derivatives of permits can also be traded on secondary markets. So remember, certain individuals stand to profit greatly from stupid climate schemes paid for with your money via more taxation, more stupid regulation, more international negotiation, or income lost from job loss or lost return on your investments.
In the end, all of the increased costs or profits gained must come from you, the American citizen. In 2009, U.S. Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) challenged Al Gore’s motives for supporting climate change legislation including his links to a firm that would make millions from cap and trade. And if you think this was being done for greed and not to save the planet then, as Gore stated, “you don’t know me.”
Blackburn said, “You talked a little bit about people have to have trust in what you’re doing and I think you know that this bill is going to fundamentally change the way America works and it’s going to affect families. We’ve all talked about how it affects individuals and what it’s going to do to their budgets and what it’s going to do to jobs in this country. And given the magnitude of those changes, I think it’s really important that no suspicion or shadow fall on the foremost advocates of climate change legislation. So I wanted to give you the opportunity to kind of clear the air about your motives and maybe set the record straight for some of your former constituents. And I’ve got an article from October 8th New York Times magazine about a firm called Kleiner Perkins, a capital firm called Kleiner Perkins. Are you aware of that company?”
Gore laughed and said, “Yes, I’m a partner in Kleiner Perkins.”
Blackburn said, “So you’re a partner in Kleiner Perkins, okay. Now they have invested about a billion dollars in 40 companies that are going to benefit from cap-and-trade legislation. So is the legislation that we are discussing here today, is that’s something that you are going to personally benefit from?”
Gore said, “I believe that the transition to a green economy is good for our economy and good for all of us. And I have invested in it but every penny that I have made I have put right into a nonprofit, the Alliance for climate protection to spread awareness of why we have to take on this challenge. And congresswoman, if you believe that the reason I have been working on this issue for 30 years is because of greed you don’t know me.”
Blackburn said, “Sir, I’m not making accusations. I’m asking questions that have been asked of me and individual constituents that were seeking a point of clarity.”
But it was all a bunch of nonsense. According to a Blaze TV article titled “8 Highly Inconvenient Facts for Al Gore 10 Years After His Infamous Movie,” Pierreguy Veer writes like the unreliable NASA climate models, nearly all his predictions fell flat. And with elections lurking around the corner, make sure you don’t elect one of his followers. Unless, of course, you want to destroy America’s economy once and for all. So just for the record, sea levels did not rise at an alarming rate, CO2 is not the earthly temperature knob for the planet, neither severe hurricanes nor severe tornadoes increased, polar bears did not die and are just fine, the arctic ice did not all melt but actually grew, the Sahara desert didn’t get drier but instead gained moisture and plant life, and finally, CO2 is not pollution but is in fact, actually desirable especially for global agriculture. In 2018, Mark Mathis of Clear Energy Alliance allowed us to finally get to know the king of climate change hype with his video titled Al Gore’s Inconvenient Hypocrisy.
Mathis said, “While it’s great fun pointing out Gore’s astonishing hypocrisy, there’s a more important point to be made here. Gore had to know his electricity bills would be scrutinized when the new film came out, yet he became an even bigger energy hog. What the former vice president’s actions tell us is that it’s more important for him to live the life of an energy-guzzling fat cat than it is to be a crusader who lives modestly so he actually has some credibility. Finally, and this is the most important fact of all, when Al Gore’s term as vice president ended, he was worth about2 million bucks. He then focused all his attention on becoming the world’s chief climate change alarmist. It was an extremely lucrative career move. He’s now estimated to be worth $300 million. So ask yourself. What’s driving Al Gore? Is it really a sincere concern for the planet. Or, is sounding the alarm about climate change a great way to get rich?”
And of course, it wasn’t just Al Gore that was going to make money. All kinds of people were hitching their get rich dreams to the climate change wagon train. Scientists, universities, NASA, the Democratic Party, media groups like CNN and the Weather Channel with its CEO David Kenny and all kinds of organizations addicted to your government money. In the following exchange, respected climate scientist John Coleman schools Chicken Little CNN after it had obviously drank the Kool-aid.
Weather Channel founder and climate scientist John Coleman said, “Nice to be on CNN. Hello to all your viewers. I resent you calling me a denier. That is a word meant to put me down. I’m a skeptic about climate change and I want to make it darn clear that Mr. Kenny is not a scientist. I am. He’s the CEO of the Weather Channel now. I was the founder of the Weather Channel not the co-founder.” CNN interrupts with, “And I’m glad you did because I’m addicted to the Weather Channel…” Mr. Coleman regained his pulpit with, “Listen, I’m talking now. Hold on just a minute. I’m not done. And CNN has taken a very strong position on global warming that it is a consensus. Well there is no consensus in science. Science isn’t a vote. Science is about facts. And if you get down to the hard cold facts there’s no question about it. Climate change is not happening. There is no significant man-made global warming now. There hasn’t been any in the past and there’s no reason to expect any in the future. There’s a whole lot of baloney and yes, it has become a big political point of the Democratic Party in part of their platform. And I regret it’s become political instead of scientific but the science is on my side.”
CNN then attempted to marginalize Mr. Coleman and said, “I don’t think we are going to come to a conclusion about the topic right here. What I do want to know…” Mr. Coleman then interjects with, “Well I know we’re not because you wouldn’t allow it to happen on CNN but I’m happy that I got on the air and got a chance to talk to your viewers. Hello everybody. There is no global warming.” CNN said, “What I do wonder when you see the government, when you see NASA, and you see other institutions say that 97% of climate scientists agree, do you think they are making it up? What I don’t understand is how do you square that?” Coleman replied, “Well that’s a manipulate figure and let me explain it to you. The government put out about $2.5 billion directly for climate change research every year. It only gives that money to scientists who will produce scientific results that support the global warming hypothesis of the Democrat Party position. So, they don’t have any choice. If you are going to get the money, you gotta support their position. Therefore, 97% of the scientific reports published support global warming. Why? Because those are the ones that the government pays for and that’s where the money is. It’s real simple, but that doesn’t mean it’s right. That doesn’t make it true. That only makes it bought and paid for. The money goes in circles.”
Every year, that’s $2.5 billion of your tax money going to generate fraudulent evidence, to buy acorns to hit Chicken Little on the head and to pay for many Kool-aid drinking parties. Socialism at its wicked finest. Here’s more biased reporting from CNN and sage wisdom from the distinguished John Coleman.
CNN said, “I’m not a scientist so I’m not going to try to refute you on the facts.”
Coleman said, “Boy, that’s the truth. And so please stand back from this issue and let the two sides be on the air. There are 31,000 scientists who have signed a petition that says it is not valid, that my position is correct and we’ll keep battling and we’ll prevail in time but I don’t know if we will do it in my life time.”
CNN said, “I do hope viewers are googling the data you’re sharing because I do think its skewed. I have to say that.”
Coleman said, “No, it’s not true and I hope you will go to the websites that present the papers that show that none of this alarmism about ice and heat waves and drought, none of it is happening.”
CNN said, “Is the Weather Channel part of the conspiracy?”
Coleman said, “Well the Weather Channel has bought into it. As I say, they have drunk the Kool-Aid, but so has all the media. That’s no big surprise.”
CNN said, “Let me read to you what the channel said this week.”
Coleman said, “I have read the Weather Channel statement.”
And then again attempting to marginalize Coleman, CNN said, “Let me read it to the viewers then, after you appeared on Fox, they did put out this statement distancing themselves from you. They said, ‘Mr. Coleman does have a place in our company’s history, and we appreciate the contributions he made 30 years ago. However, we want to be clear: John Coleman is no longer affiliated with our company.’ How did you feel to see them disavow you in that way?”
Coleman replied, “Oh, no problem. I mean that’s all accurate. And the statement that’s on their website, which they reissued this week was written back in 2007. And that’s a rather reasonable ‘warmist’ statement. It’s not full of alarmism. It’s not full of the sky is falling. It’s a pretty reasonable statement. The programming they put on the TV is not reasonable and when they put on their climate geeks, those aren’t scientists. They’re nuts.”
CNN said, “You sound like a man disappointed.”
Coleman said, “They never put on a real skeptical scientist. They don’t give us any spot on their channel. That’s too bad that they don’t.”
CNN said, “You sound like a man disappointed by the channel that you helped create?”
Coleman said, “Oh. I’m terribly disappointed. I created a channel to give people their weather. To tell them what the weather is now and what it’s going to be where they live and in their region. And keep them posted on the weather and serve a real purpose. And that channel has been totally distorted and become strange as it can be.”
So, while all kinds of people were and still are trying to work this climate change hoax to their advantage for money or power, those of us who learned the lessons of Chicken Little and have either stopped drinking the Kool-aid or who never drank the Kool-aid in the first place, can better understand more reasons why they keep attacking our man in the White House, why they are wrong, and why they need to be held accountable for lying sincerely with science.
Of course, after so many years of being taken advantage of by so many politicians, many of us are rightfully skeptical about most politicians. However, by making the right call on the Paris Accord and climate change policy in general, President Donald Trump further demonstrates his competence as a great leader who really does have our back and does have our best interest in his heart. Here’s what former Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency Scott Pruitt had to say in 2017.
In 2017, former Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency Scott Pruitt said, “America finally has a leader who answers only to the people, not to the special interests who have had their way for way too long. In everything you do, Mr. President, you’re fighting for the forgotten men and women across this country. You’re a champion for the hardworking citizens all across this land who just want a government that listens to them and represents their interest. You have promised to put America First in all that you do, and you’ve done that in any number of ways, from trade, to national security, to protecting our border, to rightsizing Washington, D.C. And today you’ve put America first with regard to international agreements and the environment. This is a historic restoration of American economic independence. One that will benefit the working class, the working poor, and working people of all stripes. With this action, you have declared that the people are rulers of this country once again. And it should be noted that we as a nation do it better than anyone in the world in striking the balance between growing our economy, growing jobs while also being a good steward of our environment. We owe no apologies to other nations for our environmental stewardship. After all, before the Paris Accord was ever signed, America had reduced its CO2 footprint to levels from the early 1990s. In fact, between the years 2000 and 2014, the United States reduced its carbon emissions by 18-plus percent. And this was accomplished not through government mandate, but accomplished through innovation and technology of the American private sector. For that reason, Mr. President, you have corrected a view that was paramount in Paris that somehow the United States should penalize its own economy, be apologetic, lead with our chin, while the rest of world does little. Other nations talk a good game; we lead with action, not words.”
In 2017, President Trump said, “The Paris Accord would undermine our economy, hamstring our workers, weaken our sovereignty, impose unacceptable legal risks, and put us at a permanent disadvantage to the other countries of the world. It is time to exit the Paris Accord and time to pursue a new deal that protects the environment, our companies, our citizens, and our country. It is time to put Youngstown, Ohio, Detroit, Michigan, and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, along with many, many other locations within our great country before Paris, France. It is time to make America great again. Thank you.” Next time, we’ll explore the alarmist exploitation of children and see just how funny all this nonsense can be in Climate Change P3: Laughter Is The Best Medicine.