Archive for September 13th, 2007

Liberal Hypocrisy –

13 September 07

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is a convicted felon and heroin junkie. He has stated that anyone who disagrees with his extremist environazi position is a traitor. If someone on the right stated that anyone who disagreed with them was a traitor the liberal press would crucify them. For days. Look how long they howled for Don Imus’s blood. The Duke Lacrosse case got tons of press when they were after the player’s hides. I noticed a whole lot less coverage of their clearing and the crazy DA’s indictment. Bobby, Jr. won’t have this. He is a liberal, and so is the press. They like him.

Dianne Feinstein is guilty of using her senatorial committee position to steer military contracts to her husband’s arms firm. You don’t see that one in the press. They like her.

Edward Kennedy is a drunk. He is either a murderer or guilty of drunken incompetence while leaving Mary Jo Kopekne to die a horrible death. The press likes him.

John Kerry is a liar and a giver of aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States while in a condition of war. He met, as a private citizen, with the representatives of the North Vietnamese government while shooting was still going on. This is a matter of public record. It is also recorded at the North Vietnamese museum, with Kerry shown as one of their heroes. It is also against the law, and can carry the death penalty. This is beside the issue of whether or not he has lied about his service in Vietnam. His stories have been inconsistent and the Swiftboat Veterans were there. The press wasn’t. But they like him.

Joe Kennedy made his money as the banker for the mob. Edward owns lots of oil company stock. (So does Michael Moore).

And so on. Not that the Republicans are any better, but the press does crucify them. If they blow their noses wrong. Whether there is a real story or not.

I see that the Kerry’s have several limousines and SUV’s. I don’t see them with any hybrid cars. I don’t see them with ethanol, which doesn’t work. Corn has to be subsidized to make ethanol from corn even vaguely affordable. When corn is used for ethanol, the price of staples goes up. Taxes go up. The price of fuel goes up. The poor are the ones that suffer most. Some compassion. But wait – Brazil makes it work nicely! Well yes. They do. They use sugar cane for ethanol, not corn. Corn is a lousy energy hog. It takes more energy to grow it than it yields. Sugar cane is pretty efficient. We don’t have enough land that is available for sugar cane to amount to beans where fuel is concerned. Anyway, where was I. Oh yeah, the Kerrys are not called to task. The liberals like them.

I see private jets used by all these rich, environmentally conscious liberals. When (rarely) anyone in the press has the temerity to question the use of private jets, the rationale is that “emission reduction credits” are used.

Let’s see. Emission Reduction Credits. ERCs. That’s where you don’t reduce your own pollution, you buy these credits from someone who has reduced pollution below the mandated levels and can therefore sell their credits.

So, the conclusion here is that if you are rich enough, you can buy the credits to maintain any lifestyle you damn well please. Kind of like the indulgences that the Medieval Western Church was selling. Rape, murder, adultery, whatever. Just buy your way out. Of maybe it was more like the draft in the Civil War. You could buy your way out of the draft. If you had $300 you could avoid service by paying someone else to pay the final price. I don’t see a whole lot of difference.

I don’t know that I have a lot of beef with people who honestly believe that we should reduce environmental impact. That is a worthy goal that should be everyone’s. We might disagree on how to get there. That’s ok. What does really bite is the worship of these lying hypocrites that lead the libs. If Republicans act anywhere near like these people, the outcry from the press and the mass of libs is loud and long. I only ask that the playing field be level. Hold these lying slimeballs to the same standards. Hate speech is hate speech, whether by RFK, Jr. or some wild-eyed ethnic hater.

It is popular on the left to characterize the Nazis as right wing. Not so, totalitarianism is the last thing a conservative can embrace. A conservative is interested in individual freedom. For everyone. Any group that would use the power of government – read armed force – to force a particular view and behavior on the populous is to be in the same bed with the Nazis. Whether the goal is power for the sake of power, or to eradicate some hated group, or to force the use of certain light bulbs, or to force some type of salvation on everyone else. Including environmental purity. Using the force of law to effect social change is always tricky and highly dangerous. What is started with the best of intentions (the road to Hell is paved with) will almost always be hijacked by extremists if there is any force involved at all.

If we really have a climate change problem – and the final scientific proof does not seem to be here yet, but there does seem to be anecdotal evidence – then instead of panicking about a light bulb or using one piece of tissue paper, or expecting cars to go away, we had better figure out the consequences. We had a climate change back in 535-536 AD. (And have had others throughout recorded history). We didn’t have any industry to blame, but the consequences were rather severe. Including famine. Do we need to think about preparing for a famine? Even the back-to-the-earthers are going to be in a hurt if crops won’t grow. I submit that if we are having climate change, then coping with the consequences and good scientific examination of the causes and possible cures are more important than trying to base public policy on a populist movement. If we waste our effort in going the wrong direction, we may feel warm and fuzzy and virtuous, but people could die if we are wrong. Lots of people. If it is within out power – doubtful, but possible – and we are to achieve any significant cure then this must be a coordinated worldwide effort. This will take people and nations all working together. Not trying to grind the ax of blaming the US for everything. Not exempting the Chinese and Africa. (Both pollute more than the US now. Both have worse human rights records than the US ever did). Everyone. Together. Rationally. No more killing because someone’s religion is different. How are you going to persuade them to stop?


%d bloggers like this: