Steve Milloy writes:
Hillary Clinton endorsed the Obama climate plan and slammed coal industry in speech at the BIO conference this week. Clinton also hit the media for giving air time to skeptics.
The BIO audience erupted into applause at these comments— possibly because earlier in her interview she stated she favored states insuring biotech entrepreneurs against risk/loss.
Her climate comments begin at about 19:26 into the clip and run about 9 minutes. Audio video quality is not the best, but good enough.
evanmjones says:June 27, 2014 at 10:28 am
They say the smoke alone is worth a thousand pounds a puff.
________________________________
Eh? Is Hillary into Bill’s cigars as well, now??
R
nothing is funnier than the truth……..
It satisfies the big donators and besides its much easier to talk about GW than anything serious, like personal wealth, Benghazi, Monica etc etc etc At least her daughter is doing well from her $10M+ condo(She was broke too when she left home, but has worked hard and saved her money)
I hope someone will post a transcript of her climate-related words.
Clinton wheels out the old 97% myth and then adds an extra 1% for good measure.
“The debat is over” yet again.
Hey the dabate never even started yet, ask Mann ask Schmitt.
Voting for a persona for President is a joke. It’s all about party platform, even when that platform is based on fraud and tauntology.
The uber rich like the Clintons, the gores, the obamas, could care less if you starve because your electrical bill tripled.
– They care less if you healthcare bill trippled from $300 to $1300 because that amount of money is inconsequential to them.
– They care less if you lose your job because they do not know what that is like or what it means.
– They care less if you freeze in the winter, ice building up inside your house, and you blanket off rooms so that you can heat one room to a livable degree…because they have never known that.
– They care less about science and reality because the propaganda wave is more important to them then fact and reality.
The social elitists could care less since they live the grand life that we pay with 99% of all new wealth going to their buddies….while us peasants scratch for fire wood.
Such mindless climate mumbling from the Matron of democraticity will do nothing to advance respect and status for women. Instead it will reinforce negative stereotypes of females of a certain hair color. Condoleeza Rice would have been 100 times better as a leader role model for the ladyfolk.
If America elects Silly Hilly, I’m going to move farther away from the border.
Regarding the Clintons I recommend a documentary in the Why Poverty series.
“Stealing Africa”
Bill appears at about 43 min. .
You gotta follow the green — the money, that is.
You write like these are bad things. How long ago was the goal to make people more self-sufficient? The goal is now to make people more dependent, unable/unwilling to take care of themselves. See The Road to Serfdom — hard times lead to desperate things, such as giving up liberty and rights for security and material gain (at someone else’s expense).
I respectfully submit – via my blog post from yesterday – that the origins in the climate issue of skeptics not deserving fair media balance is a talking point apparently invented by the late Stephen Schneider, circa the 1980s: ” ‘Skeptic Climate Scientists Do Not Deserve Fair Media Balance.’ Spread This Line Widely; NEVER Check its Veracity and Don’t Examine its History.” http://gelbspanfiles.com/?p=1886
Ms Clinton mentions the media “false equivalency” bit at the 27:40 point. By one way of excellent example, the US PBS NewsHour has literally never offered the kind of ‘unfair balance’ situation she speaks of over the last 18+ years: “PBS NewsHour global warming coverage: IPCC/NOAA Scientists – 18; Skeptic Scientists – 0*” http://junkscience.com/2012/07/13/pbs-newshour-global-warming-coverage-ipccnoaa-scientists-18-skeptic-scientists-0/
Gary Pearse said:
June 27, 2014 at 11:02 am
If America elects Silly Hilly, I’m going to move farther away from the border.
————
Comrade obama is in process of deleting the borders. Mustn’t impede the migratory habits of the heroic International Workers, ya know.
Mark and two Cats says:
June 27, 2014 at 12:12 pm
Gary Pearse said:
June 27, 2014 at 11:02 am
If America elects Silly Hilly, I’m going to move farther away from the border.
————
Comrade obama is in process of deleting the borders. Mustn’t impede the migratory habits of the heroic International Workers, ya know.
————
Oh wait – that’s just the southern border. He wants the Canadian border intact to keep out the pipeline.
@more soylent green!
You write like these are bad things. …See The Road to Serfdom — hard times lead to desperate things, such as giving up liberty and rights for security and material gain (at someone else’s expense).
You bring the issue into hard focus with exceptional depth of field.
After 36 years (Carter Administration), it is time to reread The Road to Serfdom. … And pass it on to my children.
Here’s Schopenhauer on that topic:
Guess she’s not planning on being president.
Someone on her staff must have arrived to the conclusion there is still political value in the rhetoric. Like Obama, neither one of the Clinton pair could even begin to explain what a molecule is.
@aaron chmielewski 12:46 pm
I think Hillary is hoping Climate Change will be a moot point after Obama uses his pen at the Rio+20(+3) Sustainable Development Goal Conference in Paris in Sept-2015.
This coming winter Hillary is likely to be in a nomination battle with whoever else wants the job. If we have another winter even close to the one we just had, don’t be surprised if one of her democratic opponents calls her out on this. There are a lot of Democrats from Coal states. You know that there is going to be a lot of coal money pushed onto ‘their’ candidate.
Once the economy crashes, my only hope is that there will be a day of reckoning because the need for a cleanup of the political class is absolutely overwhelming. All the idiots that have managed to climb the political ladder must be purged.
The local seafood restaurant is having a special on flounder this week. It’s caught (off guard) in icy gold waters at varying depths to which it might sink to. The fishermen say almost any lure will catch this flounder but it’s easiest to catch when it’s floundering. The current inhabitant of the WH, himself not a seafood lover, was just about ready to send it back to the kitchen until he noticed that the caretakers of that residence were prone to get even if he didn’t like the food they served him. So he kept it on his table for a while till he could quietly slide it under the door. (He prefers sliding his leftover food under busses when they’re available but he was afraid this one would splatter clear across the country and give his staff even more of a mess to clean up.) I’ve heard this flounder has to be poached in the sweetest wine imaginable because it tends to get very sour with age. In fact, it’s one of the few, if not only, seafood dishes where the chef might actually add cups of sugar to the broth to try and sweeten it up a little. Reservations for this entree have to be taken two years in advance: not necessarily because there’s demand but because it takes forever to prepare.
What else could she possibly endorse that Obama has had his hand in that would not catch her on fire? Think about it.