Except For U.S., Global Warming Compliance Is Cooling Down

President Obama, Al Gore, and many others such as billionaire Democrat Tom Steyer, would have us believe that we need to do more to fight global warming.  They like to claim that 97% of scientists "agree" that climate change is man-caused and needs to be controlled.  However, that theory is based on only 79 scientists who responded to an online poll in 2009.  But, when it comes to priorities Americans wants our government to tackle, climate change finds itself just one-up from the bottom:

With none of the doomsday predictions coming true, it is becoming increasing difficult for Americans and others around the world to believe that fighting global warming is worthwhile.

Just last week, Australia became the first industrialized country to dump its emission tax; and, South Korea seems poised to delay its 2015 implementation of their carbon taxation system.  Both of these countries may just be the tip of the proverbial iceberg when it comes to cooling attitudes on global warming.  For example, earlier this year, the European Union signaled that it may relax its compliance with its own carbon reducing mandates.

So this begs the question.  Why is President Obama so hell-bent on controlling carbon when the rest of the world seems to be going in the opposite direction?  Controlling carbon is not a go-it-alone option.  Even if we reduced all of our emissions, the rest of the world would easily make up for it with their increased activity.  This is especially true when you look at the massively increasing carbon output of countries such as India and China as they attempt to become more affluent.

The simple fact is that many are no longer buying into the climate change hysteria and wildly predicted disasters that just aren't happening.  Apparently, the alarmists have never heard about "Chicken Little".  And, in this country, we have a President who is now siding with a minority by still treating climate change as a national priority.

References:

The Myth of the Climate Change '97%' - Wall Street Journal: https://www.google.com/search?q=The+Myth+of+the+Climate+Change+%2797%25%27&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=sb

Australia abolishes tax on carbon emissions: http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/d852822a-0d67-11e4-bcb2-00144feabdc0.html#axzz37vNhvKsL

S.Korean finmin says planned carbon market flawed, wants delay -paper: http://af.reuters.com/article/commoditiesNews/idAFL6N0PT3CZ20140718

Europe, Facing Economic Pain, May Ease Climate Rules: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/23/business/international/european-union-lowers-ambitions-on-renewable-energy.html?_r=0

The Democrats, Citizen's United, and the "Evil" Koch Brothers

Last October, Senator Bernie Sanders stood on the steps of the Supreme Court building and railed against the high court's Citizen's United decision that allowed corporations to spend and attempt to buy votes with huge campaign donations.  In his ire he singled out the Koch brothers (Koch Industries) as examples of billionaires and corporations buying votes:



What's interesting about this video is that there are two placard holding individuals from the CWA (Communication Workers of America), a labor union, standing in solidarity with old Bernie.

Now, while it is true that the Koch Bros. and their corporation contributed $18 million in campaign donations in the recent years with 90% going to Republicans and only 8% going to Democrats, that was peanuts in comparison to the donations made by the CWA.  That union spent more than $36 million -- double that of the Koch's -- with 86% going to elect Democrats and the balance spent on Democrat initiatives and pro-labor Independents.  Not one dime was spent on Republicans. At least the Koch brothers spent some of their money on Democrats. Of the top 156 campaign donors who spent $5 million or more, 31 were labor unions.  In total, those unions spent $808.5 million dollars of which 81% went to Democrats and only 11% went to Republicans.

For years, liberal politicians have demonized the Koch brothers and Citizen's United case.  At the same time, those very same liberals were unabashedly taking nearly a billion dollars from unions.  They also don't mind it when other left-leaning billionaires, like Warren Buffet, contributed to their campaigns or when multimillionaire Hollywood types would fund raise for them.  In fact, when California billionaire Tom Steyer pledged $100 million in campaign funds in support of Democrats and environmental issues, none of those who would normally castigate big-time Republican donors uttered a single word.

The simple fact is that Democrats don't want any opposition.  They don't want Fox News.  They used the IRS in keeping many Tea Party activists from gaining tax free status, and they certainly don't want any villains like the Koch's contributing money to Republicans.  They also want the average American to believe that those evil brothers are destroying Democracy by buying votes with their massive wealth. On the other hand, they gleefully accept millions from labor unions and other rich campaign donors. It is impossible to wade through hypocrisy so deep!

References:

Center for Responsive Politics: Top Campaign Donors: https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php

Tom Steyer planning $100 million campaign push: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/02/tom-steyer-campaign-donor-103617.html