Roger L. Simon

'Climate Change' in the Land of Gruber/Obama

Soon-to-be Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is “distressed” by the new deal on “climate change” (née “global warming”) made between China and the U.S. on Obama’s trip to Beijing.

I know McConnell is from Kentucky and takes energy policy seriously,  but he should relax.  There’s about as much chance of this agreement being honored as I have winning next year’s Derby… as the horse.  The reason is so simple I will abandon propriety and put it in caps: NO ONE  BELIEVES IT!

And there are so many reasons for that I could fill several posts but I’ll give just a few.  You can add more.

1. Most Americans don’t think Obama tells the truth about anything, let alone something as controversial as climate. They just made that clear by voting him down in about 237 elections, if you believe Obama’s own assertion that his own policies were on trial.

2. No one really knows if “climate change” exists or, if it does, whether its danger is remotely worth the money to correct it, although we do know that “global warming” has not occurred for eighteen years and counting and there is, if anything, global cooling with record lows being set everywhere, the Antarctic ice cap also at record levels, etc.  (Yes, yes, climate is not weather, blablabla.  Climate is… anything you want to say it is.)

3.  Anyone who still believes in “climate change” is likely to be:  a. a profiteer (like the financial wizards who put together those “carbon exchanges” a few years back, making off with billions before they went belly up), b. a scientist looking for a handout,  c. a bureaucrat or official of a Third World country looking for a handout, d. an official of the UN (virtually the same as c),  e. a moral narcissist, preferably rich, who thinks he knows better than us idiots, scientific training not required (cf. Tom Steyer, this year’s George Soros wannabe),  f. a true-believing liberal camp follower of the sort that doesn’t care when Nancy Pelosi says you have to pass Obamacare in order to know what’s in it (this is the largest group), or g. a journalist blinded by panic about losing their job if they dare to tell even part of the truth or wander off the reservation.

How do the Chinese figure in all this? Since they break into practically every computer we own, we can assume they also read our newspapers and watch Fox News (maybe even MSNBC, Heaven help them).  Besides Obama’s being a lame duck who was clobbered in the last election, they are fully aware of his myriad lies and prevarications from “If like your plan…” to red lines in Syria.  No one trusts him, even members of his own party.

The Chinese therefore know any deal with Obama is just for show, meaningless.  But to make doubly sure, they arranged for the language in the agreement to say “intend” to reduce their emissions by such-and-such by 2020 — “intend,” the mother of all wiggle words.  (I “intend” to win the Oscar in 2016, even though I have not written the script yet.) Actually, the Chinese, as usual, did a brilliant job of using Obama for their own propaganda, knowing full well that he was desperate to be back in the news for something positive, preferably as far from D.C. as possible.

It’s worth noting that the Chinese do have a bad pollution (not “global warming” or whatever anti-science Lysenkoist junk term Obama and his cronies want to concoct) problem.  But my guess is they will get around to solving it themselves for selfish reasons.  Beijing air quality is horrible.  The Politburo can’t stay inside at the Ritz Carlton all the time. Obama’s will have nothing to do with it.

So, as I said, Mitch McConnell should relax.  Not that he shouldn’t oppose the deal, but in the end this will be the least of his problems. Obama is only making a fool of himself, at least in the eyes of the Chinese and probably most people who see the reality of the situation.

But not as a big a fool as Jonathan Gruber, the MIT professor and putative architect of Obamacare, who has been caught on three videos explaining why it was necessary to overcomplicate and lie about the Affordable Care Act in order to pass it. (At least he read it.  I doubt Obama did and I know Pelosi didn’t.)  Besides the professor’s sleazy Gramscian elitism that doesn’t do much for the reputation of MIT, Gruber has something unconscious and disconnected about him that suggests a personality disorder.   He doesn’t seem to quite get why people might be upset that his deliberate obscurantism completely undermines democracy and the founding documents of our country.  After all, he means well.  (The ends justify the means meets Asperger Syndrome)

In fact, it’s actually quite fascist, reminiscent of Mussolini in a way.  But that makes Gruber the perfect adviser for Barack Obama, whose approach to governing is becoming ever closer to Il Duce’s statism.  No doubt the professor is very concerned about “climate change.”  I wouldn’t be surprised if he would like to see all “denialists” removed from the MIT faculty.  Fortunately for Richard Lindzen, he has already retired.