The epitome of 'denial'

Rick McKee, editorial cartoonist for the Augusta Chronicle, sends me this political cartoon about climate change which he posted on his Facebook page and the WUWT Facebook page.

It sums up perfectly what is wrong with our current political leadership: they are more worried about climate change than they are immediate threats with a clear and present danger.


According to Breitbart, Hillary Clinton made the comments at a recent paid for speaking engagement in Las Vegas. I guess when you get that kind of money, you’ll say anything for hire.

The topic is explosive, not so much for the climate change part, but for the other two elements in it. Commenters should be be warned that we’ll snip any inappropriate comments.


0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Rick K
September 7, 2014 9:00 am

Thanks for posting, Anthony. There’s a lot of truth in there which makes it so powerful.

Leo G
Reply to  Rick K
September 7, 2014 5:08 pm

There’s an ironic truth in Hilary Clinton’s assertion:

“The threat is real, and so is the opportunity … if we make the hard choices.”

I can only agree that her hard choices are the real threat.

Peter Jones
Reply to  Leo G
September 8, 2014 4:46 am

Al Gore showed how the opportunity is real!

Mickey Reno
September 7, 2014 9:03 am

I’ll just say that, in the event she decides to run for President, please don’t vote for her. It DOES make a difference.

Reply to  Mickey Reno
September 11, 2014 12:41 am

Oh, I would give ANYTHING for Hillary Clinton to run in the next election–it would guarantee a Republican win!

Reply to  wbaltzley
September 16, 2014 7:48 am

I think you over estimate Republican voters. They didn’t turn out on 2008 for McCain and they didn’t turn out in 2012 for Romney even after all of the things that Obama and his administration did before the election. So, what exactly is it that makes you think they are going to turn out for the 2016 election against Hillary?

September 7, 2014 9:04 am

The Ebola outbreak in Africa is looking increasingly out of control. There is some evidence it has limited airborne capability, though the WHO denies this. Ebola is an airborne disease in pigs and some other mammals, so a more virulent human airborne version is very much on the cards. The symptom free incubation period is up to 3 weeks. It is 50 – 90% lethal. It is evolving rapidly, every new victim helps Ebola learn to exploit our weaknesses.
Why the f*ck are politicians still gabbling on about the climate?!

Ian W
Reply to  Eric Worrall
September 7, 2014 9:56 am

The worrying thing about this outbreak is its mutation rate, which has accelerated greatly since the smaller outbreaks in the 90’s where there was said to be a very slow almost no mutation rate to the current one that shows quite an extreme mutation rate 300 mutations (identified) since May UK is now concerned about the influx of more than 20,000 students from the same area of Africa as University terms start.

Reply to  Ian W
September 7, 2014 7:08 pm

Thousands of students from West Africa are due back here in the USA any day now. The Universities are poopooing any “issues:. Could it be greed for their tuition money, you think?

Reply to  Ian W
September 8, 2014 10:54 am

The reaction to Ebola is amazing. Here you have a disease that could easily find its way to India, China or Indonesia and Kaboooooooom! This is an urgent problem not the trace rise of the trace gas co2. In fact the rise is good.

Reply to  Ian W
September 9, 2014 11:37 am

“Why the f*ck are politicians still gabbling on about the climate?”
Money(donations, payback) and power

Dodgy Geezer
Reply to  Eric Worrall
September 7, 2014 10:27 am

And we still have an issue with near-earth objects impacting us, which would do a climate change in a fraction of a second. And probably lots of other nearer and more dangerous threats…

Rhoda R
Reply to  Eric Worrall
September 7, 2014 1:59 pm

Eric, the Govt can’t tax ebola.

Reply to  Rhoda R
September 8, 2014 10:36 am

you get the gold star for best comment.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
September 7, 2014 6:01 pm

It’s not airborne, until it is, then it is.
This is a real problem so it will not be addressed.
I still want to know what Obama and Hillary were doing while the ambassador was being killed in Benghazi.

Paul Bell
Reply to  Eric Worrall
September 7, 2014 9:45 pm

I wouldbn’t sweat Ebola, it is just the panic of the week. It’s only killed 1500 -2000 people this year. Malaria on the other hand has killed over 500,000 this year, but it is a boring disease so no press. Ebola is basically like global warming, a non problem that some are hysterical about.

Reply to  Paul Bell
September 8, 2014 1:45 am

It’s not a problem, until it is, then it is. Every new disease began as a non problem, spreading among population we don’t care (or even would get rid of !). Then it either really became under control, or … not.
So, sure, Malaria is far worst, but, still, don’t underestimate this new enemy

Reply to  Eric Worrall
September 16, 2014 7:52 am

They are still blathering about climate change/global warming because its popular with us Democrats, and ebola isn’t a real threat until it shows up in the US. We have the 97% “consensus” that proves that global warming is the hot button issue

Reply to  Baronstone
September 16, 2014 9:06 am

They sure are trying hard to GET ebola to show up here…

Bill Gannon
September 7, 2014 9:04 am

Rich McKee, Thank you

Reply to  Bill Gannon
September 8, 2014 7:26 am

Your welcome!

kelly burgess
September 7, 2014 9:04 am


September 7, 2014 9:05 am

But Hillary also believes the moderates in Syria should have been supported when they were… you know…. still alive. All that’s left now in Syria are murderous psychos on both sides. Apparently Obama considers this horsesheisse…
I was actually considering supporting her on her election – her talks of interventionism is exactly what the world needs today. However her extreme views on climate and violent videogames make me think otherwise.

Reply to  Wu
September 7, 2014 11:18 am

The moderates are not all dead. Most of them joined ISIS.

Reply to  DirkH
September 8, 2014 3:15 am

You mean the ones that were swallowed up or murdered by ISIS and other mad jihadis?
Moderates wanted a secular, free Syrian society, ISIS is the exact opposite. Ideologically, what you are saying makes no sense. When those fighting for the moderates switched sides to ISIS, they were “moderate” no longer.

Reply to  Wu
September 7, 2014 5:48 pm

What about her views on sniper fire? Personally, I could not vote for someone who would have their finger on the nuke button, and might imagine suddenly that they are under sniper fire and the like. I’d like a president who can distinguish reality from fantasy please.

Reply to  brockway32
September 8, 2014 3:18 am

The thing is… everyone’s memory isn;t 100% and a lot of times our brains fill in the gaps. Not everyone is recorded in everything they say unlike politicians so it’s easy to say “Politicans are liars”. Everyone lies, intentially or otherwise, but only those on the public forum are called up on that.
Hillary seems to exaggerate when filling the gaps. She needs to quit doing that, otherwise she’ll be labelled “gaffe-prone” and probably not even get selected.

Reply to  Wu
September 7, 2014 7:19 pm

Henry Kissinger’s Thoughts On The Islamic State, Ukraine And ‘World Order’
And comments on Hillary as Prez

Reply to  Wu
September 7, 2014 7:43 pm

Her intervention in Libya and support for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt didn’t work out so well. Nor arming the anti-Assad fighters in Syria with former Libyan weapons, via Turkey, which is what Benghazi was all about. Now ISIS has ex-Libyan shoulder-launched surface to air missiles.

Bloke down the pub
September 7, 2014 9:05 am


September 7, 2014 9:06 am

Climate change is what? Oh she means more “urgent” than say saving those 700 Yazidi girls and women from the slave market in Mosul? Too late Hildabeast you dolt.

M Courtney
Reply to  redleg
September 7, 2014 12:20 pm

This may get snipped but… let’s please remember the victims of Boko Haram in Nigeria (as well).
We all wanted them to “bring back our girls” but slavery seems to have become more profitable.

Tom J
September 7, 2014 9:11 am

Since Las Vegas is reputed to be one of the cities on their list of 3 or 4 US cities to hit with a terrorist act it would seem Hillary’s speech there is quite inappropriate. But then again, if she invited Bill along he might’ve had a pretty good time if he got out of Clark County.

Dodgy Geezer
Reply to  Tom J
September 7, 2014 10:28 am

Las Vegas? Can I contribute?

September 7, 2014 9:13 am

Nothing is more “urgent” than keeping the Hildabeast out of office in the next election.

Reply to  redleg10
September 7, 2014 5:50 pm

Unless the alternative is Elizabeth Warren.
And the reason the politicians remain focused on climate is twofold:
1) They pretty much screwed up everything else (foreign policy, economy, jobs, healthcare, etc)
2) You can’t squeeze money out of the other threats.
Oh…and one more
As Louis Black said while playing a politician in one of his skits…”But it’s HARD!…it’s really HARD!”
Money. Always follow the money.

September 7, 2014 9:28 am

Whilst I fully understand the sentiment of this message and applaud the message I am saddened and disheartened by it at the same time. America and the western democratic nations it envelopes can’t do anything about the climate change issue. The other issue is one of their own making. As a soldier who fought for your freedoms against the very people this cartoon demonises all I have to say is “I told you so”.
Never was the reactionary principle more evident.

Reply to  zootcadillac
September 7, 2014 11:25 am

Deep thanks for your service.

September 7, 2014 9:31 am

This is just one of many reasons to not vote for Hillary. Some others:
a) Bill
b) Benghazi
c) Compulsive lying (“dodging sniper fire”, “dead broke”, inter alia)
d) James McDougal
e) Mary Mahoney
f) Vince Foster
g) Ron Brown
h) Ed Willey
i) Jerry Parks
j) Kathy Ferguson
k) Bill Shelton
l) Suzanne Coleman
m) Paul Wilcher
n) Johnny Lawhorn Jr.
o) Kevin Ives, Don Henry, Keith Coney, Keith McMaskle, Greg Collins, Jeff Rhodes, James Milan, Jordan Kettleson
p) Major Bill Barkley, Jr., Captain Scott J. Reynolds, Sgt. Brian Hanley, Sgt Tim Sabel, Maj. Gen. Bill Robertson, Col. William Densberger, Col. Robert Kelly, Spec. Gary Rhodes, Steve Willis, Robert Williams, Conway LeBleu, Todd McKeehan

John A
Reply to  Kate Forney
September 7, 2014 12:03 pm

Whatever your attitude to Hilary (and I can guess you weren’t going to vote for her in anyway) the Benghazi thing is not one of them:
Amongst the conclusions of the GOP-lead investigation:

— Intelligence agencies were “warned about an increased threat environment, but did not have specific tactical warning of an attack before it happened.”
— “A mixed group of individuals, including those associated with al Qaeda, (Moammar) Khadafy loyalists and other Libyan militias, participated in the attack.”
— “There was no ‘stand-down order’ given to American personnel attempting to offer assistance that evening, no illegal activity or illegal arms transfers occurring by U.S. personnel in Benghazi, and no American was left behind.”

But just because there’s nothing there doesn’t mean that some people will not use the nothing to beat her over the head. Like Whitewater. Again and again.
Now as far as I can see, the cartoonist is entirely correct. Climate change has had its day as the “scare du jour”, which comes as something of a relief.

Reply to  John A
September 7, 2014 1:40 pm

Oh, how charmingly naive. Believing anything out of Washington is only for the incurably credulous, which either you are, or you are being brilliantly sardonic.

Reply to  John A
September 7, 2014 2:12 pm

Note that the comments about Benghazi report were a SF paper’s report of a democrat’s version of a document that is still classified. For a direct contradiction of the ‘stand down’ comment, see rerun of the Benghazi special 8 pm EDT tonight on Fox. I think everybody should wait a bit before ‘declaring victory’ on either side of the Benghazi debate.

Reply to  John A
September 7, 2014 3:35 pm

Fox News: Blockbuster Benghazi Book Reveals Source of ‘Stand Down’ Order
You celebrate too early, John A.

Cold in Wisconsin
Reply to  John A
September 8, 2014 12:05 pm

What about the video? Lying through her teeth to the American public seems to be forgotten in the post-mortem analysis. What did the investigation conclude about that? I might be somewhat favorable toward Hillary were it not for that despicable fabrication. We know that the Clintons are very particular when it comes to the definition of the truth and know how to parse the truth in a myriad of ways, but I can’t forgive her for that cynical political falsehood.

Reply to  Kate Forney
September 7, 2014 12:20 pm

You forgot the cattle futures and the White House travel office! What about Hillary Care?

Reply to  Kate Forney
September 7, 2014 1:22 pm

The real reason Hillary is unelectable is Waco. You can not immolate women and children inside their home because of their religious beliefs.
I’m a lifelong Democrat that will never vote for Hillary because of this unconscionable act carried out by Janet Reno under orders from the Clintons.

Reply to  Brian
September 8, 2014 8:06 am

Yes, I know of other life-long Democrats who suddenly realized after Waco the lengths the Clintons will go through to cover up or promote whatever they perceive will sustain their political power and agendas.

Brad Rich
Reply to  Brian
September 8, 2014 9:37 am

The person in charge of the Justice Dept. at the run-up to the Waco attack was Bill’s buddy Webster Hubbell. Janet Reno was just the scapegoat in subsequent hearings. And the objective was to get rid of the four Arkansas state troopers (Steve Willis, Robert Williams, Todd McKeehan, and Conway LeBleu) that were witnesses to Paula Jones’ encounters with Bill, which assassinations they accomplished by assigning them to the BATF and putting them in harm’s way. The Branch Davidians were a smokescreen.

September 7, 2014 9:34 am

Note that the newspaper article says “She usually requires those who pay her six-figure fees for speeches to also provide a private jet for transportation — only a $39 million, 16-passenger Gulfstream G450 or larger will do.”
If climate change is such an overweening concern then why does she insist upon such a massive carbon footprint?

Alberta Slim
Reply to  Taphonomic
September 7, 2014 9:39 am

Carbon footprints do not matter anymore as it has been proven that CO2 released from burning fossil fuels has negligable effect on global warming/climate change.

Alberta Slim
Reply to  Alberta Slim
September 7, 2014 9:40 am

“negligible” sorry!

Reply to  Alberta Slim
September 7, 2014 11:17 am

Well we know that; but she should be a little bit more cautious lest her victims notice it as well.

Tom J
Reply to  Taphonomic
September 7, 2014 11:11 am

Because their carbon footprint is different then our carbon footprint. You see, the carbon footprints of the commoners reek of flatulence whereas the carbon footprints of the well connected, and the elites, are sweetly perfumed and thus able to perfumigate away the catastrophic consequences of their profligate consumption compared to the consequences occurring from the consumption by us lesser folks. Simply put: their carbon exists on a higher plain than our carbon. Their carbon, you see, is magical and effervescent.

Reply to  Tom J
September 7, 2014 12:01 pm

How much does it cost to get that kind of carbon??

Reply to  Taphonomic
September 7, 2014 12:16 pm

Because she thinks she’s important and therefore the normal rules don’t apply to her.

Reply to  Taphonomic
September 7, 2014 12:17 pm

The CO2 from a Private Plane transporting a speaker who’s a “Defender of the Climate” is imbued with “magikal properties” that alows the biosphere to sequester the CO2 preferentially, inversely any CO2 emitted from the generating the electricity to charge Anthony’s electric vehicle is imbued with “magikal properties” that prevents the biosphere from sequestering the CO2, ever.

Reply to  Taphonomic
September 7, 2014 6:17 pm

What is Bigfoot’s carbon footprint?

Reply to  jarthuroriginal
September 8, 2014 11:04 am

I didn’t realize that AlGore’s new nickname was Bigfoot. ‘Bigwaist’ or ‘Bigwaste’ seems more appropriate.

September 7, 2014 9:39 am

I think some of the reason that Obama and Clinton are making insane noises about AGW, is to please their backers. Clearly some of the big funders of Obama’s political aspirations and Clinton’s future presidency bid, are devout AGW zealots. But both are like Al Gore, as long as the money flows in they will say anything!

Alberta Slim
Reply to  ConfusedPhoton
September 7, 2014 9:42 am

Absolutely! They are puppets.

Reply to  ConfusedPhoton
September 7, 2014 11:30 am

Makes sense.

Lloyd Martin Hendaye
September 7, 2014 9:42 am

MzBill is inappropriate.

September 7, 2014 9:47 am

I would post this on my Facebook page, but I would probably lose (alienate) a lot of my friends and family members. Didn’t John Kerry say almost the exact same thing about climate change?

Reply to  J. Philip Peterson
September 7, 2014 9:53 am

Yes John Kerry did, and here is the quote from Feb. 16, 2014:
“When I think about the array of global climate – of global threats – think about this: terrorism, epidemics, poverty, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction – all challenges that know no borders – the reality is that climate change ranks right up there with every single one of them. And it is a challenge that I address in nearly every single country that I visit as Secretary of State, because President Obama and I believe it is urgent that we do so.”

Mark T
Reply to  J. Philip Peterson
September 7, 2014 2:46 pm

If you were to lose friends over this post, perhaps you should reconsider what the word friend really means?

Boulder Skeptic
Reply to  J. Philip Peterson
September 7, 2014 3:37 pm

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” –Edmund Burke
I’m wondering when, or even if, there will be a point again when truth, conviction and pure pursuit of knowledge is more important than the next grant (for climate scientists) or the number of friends we have on Facebook (for the majority of us).

Reply to  J. Philip Peterson
September 7, 2014 3:43 pm

A free society is one where it is safe to be unpopular. 
— Adlai Stevenson II, American politician, presidential candidate (1900-1965)

Peter Dunford
September 7, 2014 9:49 am

So Hill-Dog is smaller than a Chihuahua.

September 7, 2014 9:50 am

“Hillary makes whopper statement in Las Vegas to get the youth vote.”

Robert of Ottawa
September 7, 2014 9:53 am


September 7, 2014 10:02 am

We don’t get the detail over this side of the Atlantic. Which politicians in US are arguing that something serious should be done about IS – such as putting troops on the ground?

September 7, 2014 10:07 am

I think another Clinton administration would be kind of fun because you could juxtapose Hillary as. Commander in Chief with Bill as Philanderer in Chief.

Dave Wendt
September 7, 2014 10:11 am

If it were just HRC spewing this bilge it would be bad enough, given that the current MSM meme is that she is essentially the inevitable choice for our next affirmative action “Fearless Leader”. Unfortunately this seems to have been nominated as the flavor of the moment talking point for the entire BHO administration, the Dems, and most of the CAGW crowd.
In a sense I have always sort of agreed with those who hype the incredible dangers of CAGW, although my logic for supporting that notion has always been completely different. To me CAGW has always presented an existential threat to all humanity, not at all because of anything that the weather may present, but because the harebrained and highly hazardous “solutions” being enacted and demanded for the phantom problem of the Demon CO2. Given the EPA’s ongoing assault on our energy system it will probably take good luck on the level of divine intervention to avoid multiple occurrences of people dying cold in the dark over the remaining Winters of the Bamster’s reign.

September 7, 2014 10:16 am

Let us not neglect that today a “near Earth object” — a freakin’ giant meteor! (1) — grazed commercial space near our lovely little green planet. We only saw it coming a week ago. We have no way to deflect such a thing if it comes directly on target. If one such does hit, I guan-freakin’-tee that it will change the climate sooner, more, and worse than any amout of carbon dioxide.
We got war, (in risk subcategories of religious, political, econmic, and due to simple miscommunication) and as ever famine, plagues, (old and new, tuberulosis and ebola, not to mention smallpox being discovered “leftover” in research lab closets and Black Death being dug up by Indiana Jones-style grave robbing wanna-be anthopologists) volcanoes, earthquakes, prison rape, homelessness among the mentally ill, hydraulic dam failures, unemployment, misallocated resources under the control of economically-illiterate tyrants, and, in the US alone, over 1,000,000 full time practicing lawyers! I could 100% agree with the 97% about global warming and STILL put the priority on “doing something” about that particular hazard behind space defense; which is itself behind several of the other hazards I actually worry about.
(1) or a relatively tiny little asteroid. Who cares?

Reply to  pouncer
September 7, 2014 10:27 am

The Lawyers undoubtedly comprise the greatest existential threat to civilisation.

Reply to  grumpyoldmanuk
September 7, 2014 11:42 am

We need the lawyers to clear up the compensation claims after the giant meteor has hit.

Reply to  pouncer
September 7, 2014 2:29 pm

(2) At this point, what difference does it make?

September 7, 2014 10:19 am

So just to clarify, observations prove there has been no warming worth a camels arse for the thick end of 20 years (and possibly as long as 25) yet there are some who continue to call ‘climate change’ / ‘global warming’ the greatest threat facing the entire planet?
They make the lunatics at IS look rational.

September 7, 2014 10:26 am

I’d say the Ebola outbreak is the biggest threat right now, far beyond ISIS. If it mutates to a more communicable form, ISIS-type nuts will probably make sure it spreads beyond Africa:
Make haste on experimental Ebola treatments, urges World Health Organization group
By Jon Cohen 5 September 2014
Science Magazine
Researchers and health professionals should fast-track extraordinary efforts to give people unproven treatments and vaccines in locales hard hit by Ebola, more than 200 experts attending a World Health Organization (WHO) forum recommended today.
“We have to change the sense that there is no hope in this situation to a realistic hope,” said WHO Assistant Director-General Marie-Paule Kieny, who spoke at a press conference with two other attendees of the consultation. More people have become sick and died from Ebola in the last few months than in the 4 decades since the virus was discovered, she noted.
Ebola Is Rapidly Mutating As It Spreads Across West Africa
August 28, 2014
For starters, the data show that the virus is rapidly accumulating new mutations as it spreads through people. “We’ve found over 250 mutations that are changing in real time as we’re watching,” Sabeti says.
While moving through the human population in West Africa, she says, the virus has been collecting mutations about twice as quickly as it did while circulating among animals in the past decade or so.
***”The more time you give a virus to mutate and the more human-to-human transmission you see,” she says, “the more opportunities you give it to fall upon some [mutation] that could make it more easily transmissible or more pathogenic.”***
Disease modelers project a rapidly rising toll from Ebola
By Kai Kupferschmidt 31 August 2014
Science Magazine
Extrapolating existing trends, the number of the sick and dying mounts rapidly from the current toll—more than 3000 cases and 1500 deaths—to about 10,000 cases by 24 September, and ***hundreds of thousands*** in the months after that.
If the disease keeps spreading as it has, most of the modelers Science talked to say WHO’s estimate will turn out to be conservative. “If the epidemic in Liberia were to continue in this way until the 1st of December, the cumulative number of cases would exceed 100,000,” Althaus predicts. Such long-term forecasts are error-prone, he acknowledges. But other modelers aren’t much more encouraging. Caitlin Rivers of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg expects roughly 1000 new cases in Liberia in the next 2 weeks and a similar number in Sierra Leone.
The models are only as good as the data fed to them; up to three-quarters of Ebola cases may go unreported. The modelers are also assuming that key parameters, such as the virus’s incubation time, are the same as in earlier outbreaks.

Mark and two Cats
Reply to  Winston
September 7, 2014 10:53 am

“I’d say the Ebola outbreak is the biggest threat right now, far beyond ISIS.”
Ebola plus terrorism. The US southern border is an open invitation for a ruthless, well funded group, ie ISIS, to send in operatives with, say, dirty bombs made of clothing and body parts from deceased Ebola victims, or even live carriers and have them wander about in schools and shopping malls.
Hillary and Bill would argue “It depends on what the definition of ISIS”.

Reply to  Mark and two Cats
September 8, 2014 3:49 am

poetic justice would be the isis mobs getting it and decimating themselves.
we can hope

Reply to  Winston
September 7, 2014 10:53 am

Thank you …for these links.

Reply to  Winston
September 7, 2014 11:12 am

It took them a model to extrapolate an exponential trend.
Well I extrapolated the exponential – one doubling per month – and the worldwide mortality by Ebola will equal the worldwide natural mortality in SEPT 2015.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Winston
September 7, 2014 3:31 pm

Surely god will only let the right people die.

Reply to  Jeff Alberts
September 7, 2014 5:30 pm

Death to God is nothing. He’d just say “welcome home”.

September 7, 2014 10:29 am

Politicians love to talk about solving Climate Change. It is so far in the future that they will long be retired before the voters can judge their results.
The economy, national defense. These on the other hand are issues to be avoided, because they call for real solutions today, and most politicians have no solution. Taxes and regulations will not put people back to work, nor will they discourage your enemies.

September 7, 2014 10:30 am

Reblogged this on Public Secrets and commented:
From “climate change” to the fake “war on women” campaign, it amazes me that anyone takes Democratic candidates seriously, when they themselves refuse to address genuinely serious issues.

September 7, 2014 10:31 am

A hallmark of liberalism is cowardice. This is the root of the problem. Can anyone remember a time when lefty did not appease the aggressor or somehow blame the victim for the aggressor’s actions? Liberals live in a perpetual Stockholm syndrome. Pathetic.

Leon Brozyna
September 7, 2014 10:41 am

It’s not just Billary that’s pushing this lost agenda … there are plenty of the clueless going along for the ride.

September 7, 2014 10:56 am

There is a very virulent strain of respiratory virus targeting kids in Missouri and throughout the Midwest. Kids are being hospitalized at an alarming rate. Luckily, local and federal government remain laser focused on the more pressing and urgent issue of climate change.
Meanwhile meteorites have been consistently doing fly-bys by the earth, and luckily the ones that have hit so far did not have the mass or velocity or landed in remote areas resulting in minimal damage. However, astronomers estimate there are 2,400 objects relatively near the Earth that are about a quarter mile across. A rock like that hitting the earth would produce a 5,000-megaton blast and a 7.1 Richter-scale shock. Depending on where it hit could devastate civilization as we currently know it. Even though civilization hangs in the balance, we do not even have early warning systems never mind any plans to mitigate a deadly rock heading toward earth.
I am not promoting we develop a multi-billion dollar anti-meteorite tax, but if I was forced to be disaster taxed, I’d rather be taxed on a program to avoid a meteorite cataclysm. Think of the technology breakthroughs that came about due to the race to the moon, imagine the technology innovation from such a new ambitious program. Again not promoting the idea, just sayin’.
So how can it not be glaringly obvious that there are many other disasters (war, viruses, plagues, meteorites, political corruption) on the urgency scale than climate change.

September 7, 2014 11:18 am
Closest approach is about now. Its size is estimated 20 meters.

The asteroid 2014 RC will safely buzz Earth at 2:18 p.m. EDT (1818 GMT) on Sunday. At that time, the asteroid will pass over New Zealand and fly just inside the orbits of the geosynchronous communications and weather satellites orbiting Earth … , 2014 RC will be about 21,126 miles (34,000 km) from Earth’s surface.

September 7, 2014 11:20 am

I’m sorry, but just about everything currently happening in the US and the world is more important than the possibly microscopic influence of Mann made CO2 on climate. I do agree, however, that climate policies themselves are important… they are destroying economies and keeping hundreds of millions of people in poverty. Inexpensive, reliable power is the foundation to a better life. The Siren’s call of climate change has been the genesis of a massive number of laws, rules, regulations and taxes. Imposed, we are told, to stop the climate from “changing.” How does that work? I’ll tell you, by strangling the world’s economies and sucking up resources that could be used to advance the human condition. The real consequence, those policies are driving the world’s poor back into the Dark Ages.
Politicians have taken the apocalyptic fortunes told by warmists, in the guise of science, and along with their puppets in the media have used it to wrap us up in chains. If you’re on their side, you get lavish grants, subsidies, perc’s for your industry… not so much if you’re poor. The US used to be the world’s bread basket. Now we are forced, by law, to burn corn in our cars while the price of food skyrockets. The wheat we used to supply to the world at a fair price is now scarce as more farmland shifts to growing that subsidized corn.
If you’re in Africa you’ve got to fight to get a real power plant built that could help raise your country out of the Stone Age. Up step the Climateers at the UN and the rest of the corrupt world governments they slap down those evil coal plants. Next they turn to their other face and pressure those poor countries to invest their little money in “renewable” technology that barely works… but it makes their friends and donors rich, gives them talking points and keeps the lid on the poor. Wealthy nations, that already have real energy, are taxing their citizens for the money to pay off the corrupted 3rd World under the guise of climate “reparations.” As if pay offs will stop the climate from changing. Global cooling, warming or climate change or whatever poll tested moniker is in vogue this week will not hurt a single soul in Africa. Lack of reliable power for basic industry and lack of fuel for agriculture and sky high grain prices will kill millions. You want the real terrorists… look to Progressives like Clinton along with rest of the politicos, government bureaucrats, and their cohorts in climate “science” that are regulating millions into early graves.

Reply to  nielszoo
September 7, 2014 3:16 pm


September 7, 2014 11:28 am

They’re rioting in Africa
There’s strife in Irain
There’s hurricanes in florida
And we all need rain.
The whole world is festering with unhappy souls
The French hate the Germans
The Germans hate the Poles
Italians hate Yugoslavs
South Africans hate the Dutch
And we must do our best to love somebody very much.
But we can be grateful
And thankful and proud
That man has been endowed
With a mushroom shaped cloud.
And we know now to be thankful
That to this very day
Someone has not set the spark off
And we’ve not all been blown away
They’re rioting in Africa
There’s strife in Iran
What nature doesn’t do to us
will be done by our fellow man
(Merry Minuet – 1959?)

September 7, 2014 11:56 am

It takes somebody who doesn’t think it takes a village.

Gunga Din
September 7, 2014 11:58 am

Ignore real threats in favor of an imagined threat that will rake in more cash and power.

Gentle Tramp
September 7, 2014 12:01 pm

Given the alarming facts that many of the most brutal “Islamic State” Killers are young muslims which were socialized and educated by idealistic and liberal teachers in Europe, and that muslim population is growing extremely rapid there, one can only be bewildered of the strange situation, that the European main stream media seem to be more concerned about the very questionable possibility of a dangerous Global Warming in the year 2100 than about the rather higher probability that Europe will be a part of the “Islamic State” then.
A truly pitiful case of denial of reality…

M Simon
September 7, 2014 12:51 pm

There is too much money in it.

M Simon
September 7, 2014 12:56 pm

September 7, 2014 at 11:28 am
I thought it was Tom Lehrer. It is actually Sheldon Harnick .

Reply to  M Simon
September 7, 2014 4:35 pm

Kingston Trio made it known to me, too.

September 7, 2014 1:17 pm

Don’t get me wrong, I am no fan of any of the Clintons and Mrs. Clinton is a prime example of a hypocritical (self-snip — bad word that starts with a B) but the simple fact is that all politicians are corrupt, liars, and out to fleece the “common man”. This post highlights a real public example that we can all see, but the politicians all are so dirty that they make “The House of Cards” TV show look like it is a white wash of politics. (either version; but the the Brit version was way better)
No one gets elected to national office year in and year out without becoming very wealthy. Why do you suppose that is? (perhaps one or two counter examples in my lifetime)

Reply to  markstoval
September 7, 2014 1:26 pm

So if all are “corrupt, liars, and out to fleece the “common man”.”, who would you vote for for US President?

Reply to  J. Philip Peterson
September 7, 2014 1:44 pm

As a believer in the non-aggression principle, I would not vote for anyone. Humans are meant to interact with each other in a voluntary, mutually beneficial way; much like the Irish did for at least a 1,000 years and maybe for 9,000.
History teaches us that every State (government) will sooner or later brutalize its own citizens. It is usually the poor and other minorities that get it first. As the American police state gains ever more power, notice that even wealth is no longer a shield against the minions of the state.

Reply to  J. Philip Peterson
September 7, 2014 7:25 pm

September 7, 2014 at 1:44 pm
A believer in the “non-aggression principle” would not have lasted long in ancient, pagan Ireland. In the Bronze and Iron Ages, the island suffered constant warfare among clans and petty kingdoms. Its perpetual violence spilled over into post-Roman Britain, to include slave raiding, as in the case of St. Patrick. and invasion of what is now SW Scotland by the Scoti, who drove the native Picts out of that region.
Nor did Christianity do much to quell the native aggressiveness of Gaelic culture. Invasion by Vikings did however lead to fewer and stronger local kingdoms in the areas remaining free of foreign domination, although Viking slave raids from their Dublin base continued to plague the whole island, until the subsequent Anglo-Norman conquest.

Mac the Knife
Reply to  markstoval
September 7, 2014 2:54 pm

… but the simple fact is that all politicians are corrupt, liars, and out to fleece the “common man”.
No. That false canard is the excuse used by sooooo many to not vote. It is also used to justify not taking the time to identify honest candidates that they will support with both personal time and money, to get them elected and simultaneously displace the corrupt.
I personally know ‘politicians’ that are highly ethical and honest, from school board members on up. I provide my personal time, labor, and money to help get them elected. You should also.
Everyone accessing WUWT should be actively identifying honest candidates and working to get them elected. YOU can make a difference, if you will only make the effort!

Mac the Knife
Reply to  Mac the Knife
September 7, 2014 3:02 pm,_2014
Elections for the United States Senate will be held on November 4, 2014, with 33 of the 100 seats in the United States Senate being contested in regular elections whose winners will serve six-year terms from January 3, 2015 to January 3, 2021. Additionally, special elections will be held to fill vacancies that occur during the 113th United States Congress. Currently, there are 36 Senate seats to be decided in November 2014, 21 of those now held by Democrats and 15 by Republicans. Polls in early September indicate the GOP will make gains and perhaps take control of the Senate by gaining six seats…..
YOU can make a difference, but you have to do more than talk about it here on WUWT.
There are just 2 scant months left before the Nov 4th elections. Find local, state, and federal candidates you can support and ‘put your money, time and labor where your mouth is’.

Reply to  Mac the Knife
September 7, 2014 3:36 pm

Great speech. I first heard something like that in the ’60s. It is utter BS of course but if it makes you feel good about participating in politics then go for it. We have been trying to “make it better” for over 200 years. Any day now some election will make it all better! /snark
You go vote, but I refuse to be part of the charade.

Reply to  Mac the Knife
September 7, 2014 4:51 pm

“Everyone accessing WUWT should be actively identifying honest candidates and working to get them elected.”
Bingo. Politics is ironing out the differences in opinion between honest people but there is no place for compromise between truth and lies, between good and evil.

Reply to  Mac the Knife
September 7, 2014 6:00 pm

Well said, Mac. I’ve got an up-and-comer, small gummint believer I’m supporting for state office. If everyone does a little bit, things can change, but first we have to apply the brakes. Then we can see about shifting into reverse.

Reply to  Mac the Knife
September 7, 2014 6:57 pm

You are 100% correct, Mac. I am so tired of people saying “They are all rotten”. If they are, it is because we are rotten. Whoever said this great experiment called America would be easy? We were founded on blood an sacrifice. It is us who are weak, not politicians.
“Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud, is the only maxim which can ever preserve the liberties of any people. When the people give way, their deceivers, betrayers, and destroyers press upon them so fast, that there is no resisting afterwards. The nature of the encroachment upon the American constitution is such, as to grow every day more and more encroaching. Like a cancer, it eats faster and faster every hour. The revenue creates pensioners, and the pensioners urge for more revenue. The people grow less steady, spirited, and virtuous, the seekers more numerous and more corrupt, and every day increases the circles of their dependents and expectants, until virtue, integrity, public spirit, simplicity, and frugality, become the objects of ridicule and scorn, and vanity, luxury, foppery, selfishness, meanness, and downright venality swallow up the whole society. “
– John Adams, Novanglus Letters, 1774
Now more than ever before, the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness and corruption. If it be intelligent, brave and pure, it is because the people demand these high qualities to represent them in the national legislature…. If the next centennial does not find us a great nation … it will be because those who represent the enterprise, the culture, and the morality of the nation do not aid in controlling the political forces.
James Garfield, the twentieth president of the United States, 1877

Reply to  markstoval
September 7, 2014 4:33 pm

“…all politicians are corrupt, liars, and out to fleece the “common man”” “As a believer in the non-aggression principle, I would not vote for anyone. “, – markstoval
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” – Edmund Burke

Reply to  markstoval
September 7, 2014 8:09 pm

As a believer in the non-aggression principle, I would not vote for anyone.
When it comes to aggression, it is what the other guy believes in, not what you believe in that matters.

September 7, 2014 1:20 pm

Reblogged this on gottadobetterthanthis and commented:
Refusing to believe what you can see for yourself is denial. Trivializing political topics (or scientific topics or religious topics) by calling opponents deniers is harmful in all regards.

September 7, 2014 2:38 pm

Sooner or later these folks will run out of low information voters and they will be out of power.

Mark T
Reply to  jjs
September 7, 2014 2:59 pm

In walks the current attempt to nationalize public education: Common Core.

Leonard Lane
Reply to  jjs
September 7, 2014 11:21 pm

No they won’t. That is why we have open borders, illegal immigrants, and amnesty, to keep the leftists in power and keep the poor and minorities down on the plantation.

September 7, 2014 2:55 pm

Wow. Millions of people would vote for her for president. The weather here is beautiful considering. Something.

September 7, 2014 3:33 pm

McCain’s secret meeting with crISIS:
Once you smash a country to pieces, it’s easy to frame & blame your victims — and without a mote of shame.

Reply to  Khwarizmi
September 7, 2014 7:04 pm

We won in Iraq and did put it back together again, until Obama stupidly pulled out.
These gains that Obama and Biden bragged about, until they blew it.
Barack Obama and his vice president, Joe Biden, claimed Iraq as their victory.
Biden in 2010:
I am very optimistic about—about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You’re going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You’re going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government.
Obama in December, 2011:
We’re leaving behind a sovereign, stable, and self-reliant Iraq with a representative government that was elected by its people. We’re building a new partnership between our nations. And we are ending a war, not with a final battle, but with a final march toward home. This is an extraordinary achievement, nearly nine years in the making.

Reply to  Macrena Sailor
September 7, 2014 7:56 pm

Had Obama insisted on a status of forces agreement leaving even a single heavy brigade in the country, ISIS would never have had a chance there, but would have stayed in Syria. It’s not just the military force, but the leverage the US would have had with Maliki to force him to act less like an Iranian puppet tyrant, suppressing Sunni Arabs, and more like leader of the whole country, Shi’a, Sunni and Kurds.
Of course Iraq was never a genuine country, anyway, but was born broken. It was held together by brutal force and the minority Sunni Arab dominated military, especially after overthrow of the Hashemite king by the Baathists, who eventually produced Stalinesque Saddam.

Sceptical lefty
September 7, 2014 5:29 pm

Two points:
1. A principled decision not to vote is fundamentally wrong, as you would be deciding to have exactly the same effect as you would if you were too stupid to find your way to a polling booth. No matter how execrable the candidates, one has to be marginally less detestable than the others.
2. If man-made climate change is catastrophically affecting the planet, NO sacrifice is too great to address the problem. ISIS is barely relevant in this context. The problem is that the ‘strong’ evidence for the developing climate catastrophe is contrived and the real evidence is weak. Even so, decent science is not going to win the war: it’s the simple fact that the world is no longer perceptibly warming and, for the average person, it never was. If the climate can be shown to be warming again the anthropogenic warmists will be reinvigorated and a provable anthropogenic connection will self-evidently (for them) exist. In the absence of a palpable disaster it is difficult to keep the people in a state of alarm.

Jason Calley
Reply to  Sceptical lefty
September 7, 2014 7:47 pm

Regarding point one: You judgement that “A principled decision not to vote is fundamentally wrong” is based on a couple of assumptions that (to me) are demonstrably wrong. First, there is the assumption that the elections are fairly counted and conducted. Do five minutes of Google time on “vote rigging” and you will find things like this: Secondly, even if one candidate is marginally better than the other, we need to also assume that publicly available information is adequate to determine which is better. Thirdly, the marginal superiority of the candidate in question has to be greater than the marginal benefit I receive from not wasting my time analysing the candidates and going to the polls. Fourthly, by voting, I have given my tacit approval of a system which may still (“may still”? More like “almost certainly will”), put an evil person in charge of government. Fifthly, even if my vote were to make the difference between an evil person in charge and a good person in charge, the system itself is still based on fining, kidnapping and killing people who have neither broken a bone nor picked a pocket (to paraphrase Jefferson.) Sixth, if any election ever comes down to one vote (mine) then the courts today will not accept the results and will demand a recount. The recount will then validate or throw out ballots until they reach the desired outcome.
If we had an honest system with fair processes and laws based on natural rights, I would vote. We don’t. I stopped voting a few years ago. The system is so corrupt that I refuse to give my sanction to it. Instead, I usually spend that day doing gardening.
(I will admit that the two major parties are not exactly the same. The Democrats give speeches explaining how they are socialists — and then do what they say. The Republicans give speeches claiming to be conservatives — and then do what the socialists want.)

Walter J Horsting
September 7, 2014 5:30 pm

Hillary’s Huma the Muslim Brotherhood leader in the State Department helped steer the Obamantional policy in the Middle East. I think denial of the Islamification of Europe coupled with ISIS is a major threat, it does follow however a major impact event.

Reply to  Walter J Horsting
September 7, 2014 7:50 pm

Both Clintons are deep in the Muslim camp. Bill gets hundreds of thousands for each “speech” in the Gulf region. Of Hillary’s close personal confidant and more, Arabist Huma Weiner, ’nuff said.

September 7, 2014 5:51 pm

I know that guy in black….it’s Emmanuel Goldstein

September 7, 2014 6:14 pm

“Commenters should be be warned that we’ll snip any inappropriate comments.”
Which leads me to believe there is such a thing as a propriate comment 🙂
Shouldn’t pose the question if you don’t wanna hear the answers.

September 7, 2014 7:11 pm

I’ve seen this on several different blogs lately, mostly national news sites. Guess who the writer is referring to:
1. He is different from the other politicians.
2. He will rise from obscurity.
3. He will speak boastfully.
4. He will try to change the times, perhaps to define a new era, related only to himself.
5. He will attempt to change the laws to gain an advantage for himself.
6. He will not answer to a higher earthly authority. He will do as he pleases.
7. He will not believe in any god at all, except for himself.
8. He will hate a nation that initially, will have some control over him, but he will destroy this nation.
9. He seeks total political control for own glory, not democratic republic or anything really for the people.
10. He will have great earthly success. He will succeed in whatever he does.
11. He will be a mega-liar who actively opposes the truth. He will fling truth to the ground, be insolent and skilled in intrigue. Through his shrewdness he will cause deceit to succeed by his influence.

No, it isn’t Pee Wee Herman…

Reply to  dbstealey
September 7, 2014 7:18 pm

Julius Caesar ?

Reply to  dbstealey
September 7, 2014 9:27 pm

The Antichrist – from a list of attributes in the Book of Daniel

Reply to  sirra
September 8, 2014 4:46 am

To be specific:

Daniel 7:23-25 [21st Century King James Version (KJ21)]
23 “Thus he said: ‘The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down and break it in pieces.
24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise; and another shall rise after them, and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.
25 And he shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws; and they shall be given into his hand until a time, and times, and the dividing of time.

Yes, everyone would all agree that Obama is “wearing out the saints of the Most High” — on both sides of the political aisle.
The next verse seems to be very prophetic too …

26 But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end.

… perhaps a reference to the upcoming 2016 Presidential elections?

Dave the Engineer
September 7, 2014 7:14 pm

Guys it is a cult. Reality has nothing to do with it.

September 7, 2014 7:36 pm

Could be. Except I don’t think they had blogs back then.☺

john robertson
September 7, 2014 8:13 pm

Great cartoon, right on the money.
Hillary also leads from behind, picking her meme of the day by polling the plebes.
So while she prattles on about social justice, climate changing and promotes other activities that act like rust to our social institutions. The real world has out paced her again.
These cowards are always a day of year late and completely out of touch.
But she and her fellow progressives will insist it is not their fault.
If you miserable taxpayers would have the decency to answer those constant polls , honestly and transparently, then she would know where to lead you.
So those of us who refuse to answer polls are the reason Hillary and her kind are so stupid.
See it’s all our fault.
But it has been apparent for years that our progressive friends will never recognize evil.
They make every excuse for evil people, they excuse the zombie like evil of massive bureaucracy and say such nonsense as ;”We need to find the root causes” of people who plant bombs in civilian crowds.
There is no word for evil in their world.
Yet all their political cures for our society are destructive to our society
I am coming to feel these apologists are actively enabling those who wish us ill and seek to kill.

September 7, 2014 11:00 pm

Imagine she was not talking about climate change but about an asteroid about to strike Earth in 50 years. 97% scientists agree that there the asteroid is out there, some believe it will strike earth, some think it will miss. There is no perfect scientific evidence for either. Now, what is bigger threat, terrorism or the asteroid? The answer is not how things are, but how you believe things are. In reality, they’re unrelated.
Of course in case of this site, it obviously hits the spot.

Reply to  Kasuha
September 8, 2014 3:30 am

So if “97% of scientists” agreed on an asteroid’s approach to earth, then you could be sure that the 97% wasn’t measured by bogus, intellectually dishonest survey.
The thing about the trajectory of orbiting objects is that there’s no fatuous attribution to man-made causes by those who wouldn’t recognize an over-fit model it it hit them in the head. The positions of objects in the solar system have been accurately predicted for centuries.
On the other hand, if astronomers consistently made incorrect predictions about the position of the moon, it would be hard to get excited about the next headline-grabbing “asteroid impact”.

Reply to  Kasuha
September 8, 2014 4:43 am

The fundamentals of astrodynamic calculation are well established, have been successfully demonstrated in millions of instances and continue to be used on a daily basis with no debate as to measurable positional accuracy beyond a given small degree of remaining uncertainty – one yet below the uncertainty that existed over 50 years ago which was in itself so small back then that it had no impact on our first manned missions into outer space.
In stark contrast, climate calculations are not established at all, have no demonstrated success at predicting climate and their predictions have a range of uncertainty that exceeds the bounds of a threshold that is thoroughly subjective, unmeasurable and untestable – “good or bad”.
So no – you are wrong. A parallel that begins to look fair would be 97% of 12th century scientists all working for the same church all agreeing on an asteroid strike without the slightest idea of how gravity behaved, admitted ignorance of the the complexity of celestial mechanics, no mathematical means to prove their prediction and ZERO demonstrated ability of having ever predicted an asteroid strike in the past. All that and they really would have had little idea of exactly “how bad” such a strike would be but certainly support their church leader that continued funding was needed to determine such detail citing every geologic formation in view as being the result of an asteroid strike and that asteroid strikes were God’s will so WHO WOULD DARE TO CHALLENGE GOD???

September 8, 2014 2:05 am

Ebola cases are doubling every 28 days, on analysis of current figures. (See If this were to continue, the entire world population would be infected by May 2016. To hell with climate change and asteroids.

Krudd Gillard of the Commondebt of Australia
September 8, 2014 2:22 am

If you think Billary is a problem, imagine how you will feel when Obama’s wife is announced as her running mate.

September 8, 2014 4:22 am

How is ISIS a threat, exactly? Narcissistic and stupid journalists are not worth sending our boys over.

Reply to  Charlie
September 8, 2014 5:33 am

Yeah, let’s not worry. Why bother even analyzing their intentions until after they have taken over Pakistan nukes.

September 8, 2014 4:42 am

Reblogged this on Maley's Energy Blog and commented:
Yes, indeedy.

September 8, 2014 5:03 am
But not to worry, President Obama has just recognized this threat and said he would immediately plan to “degrade and destroy” ISIS.
Later he revealed details of this destruction plan, which will certainly have those jihadists shaking in their boots: He will form a committee with other UN nations to discuss the threat and try to figure out a way to reduce ISIS to a “manageable problem”. Yes, that means ISIS would no longer be a “threat”, but just a “problem”, which OHB can easily manage between (and during) his rounds of golf.

Brad Rich
September 8, 2014 9:38 am

But nobody’s explained the cartoon with Hillary in the hand of the big terrorist. So this is a subliminal to illustrate deniers are the terrorists?

Reply to  Brad Rich
September 8, 2014 12:59 pm

> … nobody’s explained the cartoon …
Ok, the terrorist is thinking that Hil is a “denier”, because she is “in denial”. That is to say, she is denying that ISIS is the most urgent issue facing our nation, and the world. That’s what ISIS wants us to believe, at least, and, at most, is a bigger threat to world peace and stability than all the other jihadist threats combined (because in a sense they are all the world’s jihadists combined).
Why is this funny? Because it is ironic that liberals like Hil use the term “denier” in an attempt to discredit climate skeptics, yet she seems to be denying the scope of the ISIS threat.
So it’s ironically funny that this big terrorist is calling her a “denier”.
Got it?

September 8, 2014 9:57 am

I guess I’m the only one who thinks this cartoon both confuses the issue plus paints anyone who disagrees with Hillary’s alarmism as a murderous fanatic.

Reply to  harkin
September 8, 2014 10:30 am

Cartoons always are something of a Rorschach test, I suppose.
It’s safe to say that there’s a school of people who see the intent of the cartoon as lampooning Hillary for blithering on about the “dangers” of “climate change”, for which the evidence is shaky and the supposed catastrophic effects include a hilariously absurd spectrum of horrors, while completely ignoring the very harsh reality that a bunch of savages have captured sophisticated weapons and have clearly said that their goal is to kill all non-Muslims. They have the motive, they have the means, and with our completely porous southern border, they will soon have the opportunity to inflict death and destruction on innocent people.
I think even Thermogeddonites might recognize that “climate change” will take a very distant back seat in the wake of a major terrorist attack. But, of course, the objective of many Thermogeddonites overlaps with the objectives of ISIS: to destroy America, and perhaps all of Western civilization, so it’s little surprise that they are out in force trying to muddy the waters about what real threats confront us.

Reply to  harkin
September 8, 2014 1:14 pm

> … anyone who disagrees with Hillary’s alarmism as a murderous fanatic.
Red herring.
Anyone, including a murderous fanatic, is entitled to disagree with Hillary. But that does not mean that anyone who disagrees with Hillary is a murderous fanatic.
You should hope that only a very small percentage of the Hillary-disagreers are murderous fanatics. Otherwise, “it’s worse than we thought!”.

September 8, 2014 3:37 pm

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see:

September 9, 2014 8:44 am

“Red herring”
A red herring is something placed to mislead from a key point to confuse and obfuscate.
I seriously think this cartoon is not as near as brilliant as most here do. Sorry you also misunderstood my intent.
also: “You should hope that only a very small percentage of the Hillary-disagreers are murderous fanatics”.
not sure of your intent so I won’t comment other than the absurdity value is top level.

Reply to  harkin
September 9, 2014 10:52 am

Brilliant might be overstating it. Let’s stick with “amusing” and “apt”.

September 9, 2014 10:44 am

The absurdity is your original claim that the cartoon paints _anyone_ who disagrees with Hillary as a terrorist.
I view that as an inference falsely derived from the cartoon which misleads those who might read your comment. Perhaps there is a more precise term for that kind of fallacy, but red herring seems to fit, IMHO.
Since you and Brad Rich both seem to be unable to see the humor in the cartoon, you apparently are looking at this with the same mindset. I’m guessing that you both have liberal viewpoints, i.e. are Democrats, admire Hillary, dislike climate skeptics etc. Am I right?
If so, is it possible that this mindset makes it impossible to see the irony portrayed in the cartoon: liberal epithet thrower becoming the epithet throwee?
Perhaps a government grant to study this disorder is in order.

September 9, 2014 11:48 am

Perhaps this will help establish the complete context for understanding the cartoon: After Hillary uttered those words above in the cartoon at Las Vegas on Sept 4, the very next words out of her mouth were: “No matter what deniers say”
So if you see no indignity in this usage of the D-word, then yes, you might not understand the cartoon.
As Mrs. Clinton would undoubtedly say “It’s just a word, what difference does it make?”

%d bloggers like this: