VOX whining about ignoring Climate Change – at the Democrat Debate!

First Presidential Debate 1960, public domain image, source Wikimedia.
First Presidential Debate 1960, public domain image, source Wikimedia.

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

VOX has published a gem of an article, complaining that even CNN, the sympathetic TV station which covered the recent Democrat Presidential Candidate Debate, thinks Climate Alarmism is a special interest movement for fringe hippies.

According to VOX;

In 2012, CNN’s Candy Crowley moderated the second presidential debate between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. Afterward, she explained why climate change never came up.

… had that question for all of you climate change people. We just, you know, again, we knew that the economy was still the main thing so you knew you kind of wanted to go with the economy. …

This moment became something of a legend among, uh, “climate change people,” as it showed so clearly the way CNN understands the issue: as a boutique concern of one faction of the left, namely environmentalists. It’s not a “main thing” like the economy, and certainly not part of the discussion of the economy.

Public awareness of climate change has come a long way since then, and so has the Democratic Party. CNN, it seems, has not.

CNN shows it still doesn’t understand climate change or take it seriously

Read more: http://www.vox.com/2015/10/14/9530973/debate-cnn-climate-change

The problem with this nonsensical assertion, that climate change is of overwhelming interest to the public, is that it is simply untrue. Hardly anyone thinks climate change is a priority anymore. Even the climate obsessed bureaucrats at the UN can’t produce a survey which suggests people think climate change is an important issue.

Politicians and pundits who think persist in flogging the dead climate horse, who think worrying about future anthropogenic climate change is a motivating factor in most people’s lives, are simply ignoring the facts. Decades of failed apocalyptic predictions, and of course the Climategate Scandal, have taken the heat out of the issue.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
October 14, 2015 2:25 pm

I took notes during the debate. Everyone of the 5 Democrats mentioned “climate change” in their opening remarks…

Lance Wallace
Reply to  J. Philip Peterson
October 14, 2015 2:28 pm

I’m not sure that Jim Webb mentioned it in his opening remarks, but later he declined to jump on the wagon, pointing out that China and other countries will have more to do with CO2 emissions and therefore a national approach won’t cut it.

Reply to  Lance Wallace
October 14, 2015 5:53 pm

Jim Webb seemed to have the only reasonable answer when it came to climate…..something even I coulld buy into

October 14, 2015 2:25 pm

Well I certainly care about climate change. The next major change will pile a mile of glacial ice over my house.

Reply to  H.R.
October 14, 2015 3:17 pm

I love that! You may have to become a climate refugee, and head for the equator!

Reply to  Derek Wood
October 14, 2015 5:04 pm

Or at least go as far as Phoenix, like all those Canucks do

Reply to  H.R.
October 14, 2015 4:57 pm

Winter is coming and I applied for refugee status to Hawaii, but so far it has been rejected.

Reply to  alexwade
October 14, 2015 9:43 pm

As a Canadian you’ve just given me an idea for winter.

Reply to  alexwade
October 15, 2015 5:07 am

Winter in Canada must surely qualify as a threat to one’s life. 40 below on the Prairies is true Climate Change

Ernest Bush
Reply to  alexwade
October 15, 2015 7:26 am

Many come to Yuma, AZ, to be close to Mexican doctors and dentists. They can get procedures done without destroying their budgets and they can’t get them done in days instead of months. The little town of Algodones is mostly dentist and doctor offices, with tax-free booze available next door. Pharmaceutical prices are great, also. No, I don’t go to Algodones, myself. I have medicare and supplemental insurance.

Lance Wallace
October 14, 2015 2:26 pm

I noticed in the debates that a few times when climate change came up, there were only a few half-hearted claps, nothing like the thunderous ovations that came up for economic inequality. One hopes that the advisors for the candidates are taking note of what works and what doesn’t.

Doug S
Reply to  Lance Wallace
October 14, 2015 8:48 pm

+ 1

October 14, 2015 2:45 pm

Funny, I understand man-made climate change very well, and I also don’t take it seriously. So if those who don’t understand it are not taking it seriously and those that do understand it are not taking it seriously, who is taking it seriously? Oh, that’s right…the ones who get paid to take it seriously.

Reply to  jclarke341
October 14, 2015 3:37 pm

The ones who are getting ripped off by governments and regulators and are seeing their private property being pulled from beneath them are beginning to take climate change and “sustainability” very seriously indeed!
I say watch very carefully who you elect into office!
See my blog http://www.thedemiseofchristchurch.com

October 14, 2015 2:47 pm

Ummm ahhh.
Looks like they got what they needed.
1. No enforceable world wide carbon tax, but they did establish a multi billion dollar fund.
2. CO2 remains a codified pollutant in the US.
3. Social justice agendas are teaming up with cagwistas on local levels. Human rights cases seeking disparate impact are a comin.
4. Uptrend in permission to stand aside and let the fringe play (that pew poll I sent).
There’s more behind the scenes in terms of who gets what … brics, transport rights (rr’s/shipping), 3rd world resource development but I wanted to keep the bullets simple.
So let’s play it out 10 years. They lock down 1T (wag) over 10 years and get to pursue local class action lawsuits using CO2 burdens.
Let’s say it gets colder and da peoples start saying ‘hey, u robbin us’. Cagwistas and social justice warriors are gonna say ‘but the scientists were wrong, not us, we were duped too’.
One of the better ways to get ahead of the coming damage is to repeal the CO2 pollutant status.

Reply to  Knute
October 14, 2015 4:49 pm

Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Whackamole!
I did note that Bernie was called out as a former supporter of the Sandinistas.

Reply to  Menicholas
October 14, 2015 5:07 pm

Bernie is the kind of guy flawed candidates want because he’s still considered a fringe dude in the US. He’s associated with socialism which is raw meat for a good chunk of the populace. He’s the mark. The scapegoat. Clinton has loads of credibility trouble so having Bernie is kind of a blessing. He’s a distraction (scapegoat) from her.
I highly recommend a book called Machevellian Intelligence by Dario Maestripieri. 200 pages easy read, no pictures for the busy folk. Rhesus monkey researcher who did a marvelous job showing how the rhesus does many of things humans do in the social sphere. The rhesus is also a big fan of scapegoating. It’s a good book because we as humans are going to be biased in evaluating ourselves anyway. The rhesus approach, while not perfect, allows us to see how the behavoir plays out.

October 14, 2015 2:54 pm

Decades of failed apocalyptic predictions, and of course the Climategate Scandal, have taken the heat out of the issue.

I have the sense that Climategate changed the political climate more than we all appreciate. Its effects include contributing to the failure of the Copenhagen COP, though the Saudis, Chinese, and Indians had a bigger impact. It also changed the readership of WUWT in ways that are still visible today. Thank you for mentioning it here.
The weather impacts for that COP contributed in their own way, both at Copenhagen and convincing President Obama to leave a day early to get home before the blizzard moving into Washington got too bad. The image of Air Force I landing at Andrews AFB in the snow was one of my favorites.

Reply to  Ric Werme
October 14, 2015 8:04 pm

Perfect, Ric. That’s a keeper! ☺

Reply to  Ric Werme
October 15, 2015 1:10 am

If you look carefully that monster “green” 4X4 I believe had chains on the tires

October 14, 2015 3:05 pm

Moderators herein and Anthony etal:
Just saw this on Drudge from a story in
Story by Henry Samuel dated Oct. 14, 2115 at 5:45
Re: French Govt. TV channel 2 weather guy Philip Verdier getting sacked (Letter , No Not Come Back to Word).
He released a book he wrote that goes after the data base of the Climate Change cult’s fraud.
He says he could no longer do his job due to the problem’s he sees in the data.
So they canned him.
Not a little deal some would think.

Reply to  fobdangerclose
October 14, 2015 9:51 pm

This appears to be blowing up in the faces of prominent but ignorant alarmists:
“How a former minister, vice-president of one of the most influential parties in the country, having recently claimed to become mayor of Paris, can have quite casually, contempt and immaturity to denigrate a book which she admits herself do not know the content?”
Yes, that just about sums up most criticism of skeptical positions.
Do people understand that almost nobody denies the slight warming trend, shown by RSS, UAH and Balloons?
Do people grasp, that the “models” predicted an increased RATE of warming with increasing CO2 emissions.
Are they aware that the rate of warming has decreased since 1997/98 whilst CO2 emissions have increased.
Hence the models are not just a little wrong – they are completely wrong – so far.
And so the only way to maintain ignorance is to not read anything published by genuine skeptics.
Not reading skeptical material is now the preferred choice of policy makers.
Reading skeptical material could quite easily ruin a person’s career.
Who the hell would want to ruin their own career by investigating actual facts.
I haven’t read Verdier’s book – YET – but I and many others will.
At least I will read it if an English translation is produced.
Hurrah for Verdier – I hope that he has got his facts right.
We have to be beyond reproach. Whilst they seem to be able to be consistently wrong, and still get the alarmist headlines.
Read this article just for the brilliant “beat poetry” style of the google translation:

Reply to  fobdangerclose
October 15, 2015 2:19 am

Thanks for the link, a great story. Even though the MSM is rubbishing his views at least they ARE getting aired and may, ujst may, make some people start to think. Especially as he is such a well known figure in France..

October 14, 2015 3:09 pm


Reply to  fobdangerclose
October 15, 2015 4:23 am

You pass.

October 14, 2015 3:15 pm

Try one more time:
Moderators , Anthony etal:
Just saw this on http://www.drudgereport.com/
Over on the right hand side about 8 things down.
French Govt. TV channel 2 has let go Philip Verdier their weather guy on there weather reports in France.
Seems he wrote a book critical of the base data on this Climate Change fraud and said so on the air.
He then got a letter, (Do Not Come Back to Work) sacked.
Story linked by Drudge from The Telegraph http://www.thetelegraph.co.uk/
Story written by Henry Samuel dated Oct. 14th at 5:45.
Not unimportant some would think.

Reply to  fobdangerclose
October 14, 2015 3:23 pm

sorry for the double

Reply to  fobdangerclose
October 14, 2015 4:57 pm

In Australia, you have to agree to CAGW to advance in your career, according to one of the Bureau of Meteorology staff. It is notable that disparities between raw data and massaged data at BoM were to be investigated but the new Prime Minister blocked it. He is on the record as saying he refused to listen to anything sceptical of CAGW.
In a previous career he worked for Goldman Sachs.

Reply to  Jack
October 14, 2015 5:13 pm

Thanks for the GS — Minister connection. That’s pretty sad. Every scientist should have a backup trade these days.

October 14, 2015 3:17 pm

>>Hardly anyone thinks climate change is a priority anymore.
Especially after several harsh US winters. You have to understand that it is very difficult for Jo Public to put Global Warming at the top oh his or her priority list, while they are trying to dig their car out of the snow….

Reply to  ralfellis
October 14, 2015 5:29 pm

“Especially after several harsh US winters.”….
Tell me of another kind ??

Reply to  u.k.(us)
October 18, 2015 2:24 am

The US might get a slight reprieve this year. In the winter of 2014/2015, there was recorded a “greatest ever” icing over of the Great Lakes.
Of course, the “greatest ever” was during the only recent years of satellite coverage. Apparently the headline writers forgot to consider that the Great Lakes were created by mile plus high glaciations. Sorry, multiple mile plus high glaciations.
Warm is good. Cold is bad.

Reply to  ralfellis
October 14, 2015 5:30 pm

CAGW will be back at this year. Thanks to El Nino, they will complain about the record rainfall, the record heat and how abnormal the weather is, I predict. Why do I feel a sense of relief, a warmer winter over the last few and rainfall in california where most of the food is grown. ?

Reply to  rishrac
October 15, 2015 5:30 am

The east coast will get buried worse than ever in snow this winter. This will be reported as “climate change” caused by humans.
Even with a mile of ice over their heads, the climate profiteers would still be claiming that CO2 was the cause.

October 14, 2015 3:26 pm

Crowley didn’t bring it up because it would have cost Obama the election to say anything about it. The Democrats wanted that issue to slide under the election radar.
Why Romney and the Republicans didn’t bring up a “dead” issue is another matter. Were they that asleep at the switch? Or were they fine with the under the radar strategy, too?

October 14, 2015 3:26 pm

You simply can’t keep telling people each whatever month is the warmest in the record, while their senses are telling them that it’s freaking cold outside, spring is coming later and fall is coming earlier. When people start to realize that they don’t have to drive north for two hour to ride the snowmobiles like they did 5 years ago, the just stop buying into the religion of Apocalyptic Global Warming.

Reply to  Paul Jackson
October 14, 2015 3:40 pm

..or when it’s 1/1000th of a degree warmer

Reply to  Latitude
October 14, 2015 7:22 pm

Good point, it’s cyclical or just depends when you bought the sled.
Lesson learned during the dry 90’s into the 2000’s in the Midwest.
I’m sure there are bar/resort owners in northern Wisconsin/Michigan that can give you detailed records of snowfall/trail conditions and traffic thru their particular establishment.
It’s their livelihood.

Just Steve
October 14, 2015 3:38 pm

It’s Vox….Ezra Klein’s gaffe a minute interweb machine. National Lampoon, if still alive, would be a better source…for anything.

john robertson
October 14, 2015 3:47 pm

Crying wolf is a short term gain strategy.
Doom due to specific causes, which morph over time, tend to get old fast.
Now If I was feeling particularly cruel I could tie the Memes of the Cult of Calamitous Climate, in with the obvious historical observation of more CO2 equates to more plants,( more plants, more animals, more Co2 sequestered, repeat.)
1 CAGW is a phoney alarm which has harmed society world wide..
2 Society will seek retribution.
3 More CO2 is beneficial to most earth plants.
So tying together.
Burn the witch.
Some things never change.
Course deciding who the witch is has always been the ethical difficulty.

Reply to  john robertson
October 15, 2015 1:27 am

Like the old sandwich-board men, bearing messages that ‘The End is Nigh’. It can only scare you for a week or two, even if you have very little knowledge or sense.

Reply to  john robertson
October 15, 2015 1:44 am

A climate ‘scientist’ surveys the data, crunches the numbers, and comes to a ‘rational’ conclusion….

Gunga Din
October 14, 2015 3:52 pm

For awhile, caGW was at the forefront of the excuses for the need to control this or that for what are really political reasons. It played well with the public then. No fingers were pointed at an identifiable group of people (other than the ever nebulously defined but always villified “rich”). The public is beginning to notice what they see outside their windows isn’t what “the excuse” said it would be. Those who promoted “the excuse” will consolidate and solidify the controls they have put in place. Until a new excuse is invented for even more control, they will keep playing the same tune.
The next excuse may have nothing to do with “Climate”. It may just be the need to control those who disagree with or believe in __________________. (Fill in the blank.)

October 14, 2015 3:54 pm

New movie coming out: “Night of the Living Climate Change People.”

October 14, 2015 3:58 pm

AGW has been overplayed and everyone knows it and is tired of it. For the POTUS to continually harp on AGW as “the biggest threat to mankind today” while wars are raging with religious terrorism spreading causing mass migration and the world economy teetering is only making intelligent people mad. I also see the world tiring of the bullying by the US to succumb to AGW fears. Politics in the US is over AGW…..except for the Administration that is still acting like a paid shill.

Leonard Lane
Reply to  markl
October 14, 2015 10:16 pm

Easier for Obama to fight global warming than Russian and Chinese expansion and military prowess.

Reply to  Leonard Lane
October 15, 2015 2:46 pm

Our President needs easy problems. He has repeatedly proven he can’t handle any other kind.

Reply to  Leonard Lane
October 15, 2015 11:48 pm

He said fighting ISIS is trivial – it takes REAL leadership to blag on about climate change.
OK, how’s that real leadership going? U.S. has no cap and trade (except a state scheme in the People’s Republic of California, and that’s only so like Greece they can collect credits as factories close down and move to Texas). They have no carbon tax / price. No emission targets. They have increased production of gas, and have minimal wind energy by Euroweenie standards. They refuse to pay carbon reparations to the 3rd world. And they are one of the few countries never to sign Kyoto.
Oh, and he signed a deal with China that positively encourages them to boost emissions by 150%. While allowing deforestation to feed Vermont wood into Drax.
Judged on his own standards, his leadership has been as bad on AGW as it has on, well, everything.

Reply to  Andrew
October 16, 2015 6:55 am

Your underestimate what has been setup.
CO2 is now a pollutant.
Mr Homewood just showed you a data visualization NGO. They and others already have the database to start identifying who gets a check due to disparate impact.
NGOS are aware of this and plotting.
The Supreme Court of the US just validated disparate impact.
Maintain the political power base by giving people stuff. Not new, just done better. Not so in your face. You wouldn’t tolerate that.

Bruce Cobb
October 14, 2015 4:02 pm

Poor “Climate Change”. It’s become the Rodney Dangerfield of political issues.
It don’t get no respect.

Svend Ferdinandsen
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
October 14, 2015 4:52 pm

Did any one care to define what they ment by “climate change”?

Reply to  Svend Ferdinandsen
October 15, 2015 5:40 am

“climate change” means someone is doing something wrong that needs to be changed. in this case, burning fossil fuels. mostly coal, which is bad, because it is cheaper than oil. which hurts the oil business.
so “climate change” means “stop burning coal”.
‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’
‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’
‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.’

Reply to  Svend Ferdinandsen
October 15, 2015 2:49 pm

I’m still waiting for the definition of “carbon pollution”.
Considering that many of the [folks] who lie to use it so often are also believers in the concept of a [planetary] carrying capacity, I have to wonder if they believe the term extends carbon based life forms of the two legged [variety].

October 14, 2015 4:20 pm

Something so stupid it’s #Voxworthy

October 14, 2015 4:33 pm

Also, there was a petition for CNN to have a “liberal’ moderator instead of Anderson Cooper and Don Lemon! I LOLed at that.

October 14, 2015 5:07 pm

It is so depressing to learn that the science that I once believed in as a child has become the ” Monster under the Bed” !!!

Mark from the Midwest
October 14, 2015 5:35 pm

In the words of Bill Murray: … Man made climate change … ” It just doesn’t matter, it just doesn’t matter, it just doesn’t matter!”

October 14, 2015 5:35 pm

I think one area of political blowback is the recent RICO scheme. That showed a lot of politicians that a huge amount of money they control is going to alarmism but not showing up in campaign donations. It’s not supposed to work that way and they’re pretty hacked off about it. Some sacrificial alarmist lamb will feel the burn and the rest will quickly get on board.

Reply to  dp
October 14, 2015 6:14 pm

That’s a particular pet subject of mine. Sorry I’m being a dolt but can you walk me thru your analysis just a little better. I don’t need cites just a little better walkthru.
It would help

Reply to  Knute
October 15, 2015 11:12 am

It isn’t rocket surgery. Say you are Senator Huffenpuf from the great state of Confusion and one of your constituents has asked for and received thanks to your personal interest in the matter, a sum of $4M. Later you find all $4M has been rolled into your constituent’s personal business, and excesses have been invested until they’re needed. You drag your crooked finger down your ledger of donors and don’t find your grantee’s name or company nor any of their representatives (employees) on your list. Quite by accident you leave a scribbled note on a table on the floor of congress, in plain sight, unsigned, advising congressional aides to explore the appearance of impropriety by your named constituent. The investigation will be highly publicized as a warning to other grantees to toe the line or …

Reply to  dp
October 15, 2015 11:31 am

Huffenpuff is upset that he didn’t get his slice so he seeks retribution ?

October 14, 2015 5:51 pm

I guess Vox missed this part in the transcript of the debate
COOPER: we’ve got — we — a lot of questions we’ve got about climate change, and we’re gonna go to Don Lemon. Don?
LEMON: All right. This one is for Martin O’Malley. Anderson, Governor O’Malley, this is from Anna Bettis from Tempe, Arizona. Here it is.
QUESTION: As a young person, I’m very concerned about climate change and how it will affect my future. As a presidential candidate, what will you do to address climate change?
The word climate was mentioned 22 times during the debate. All yammered about it. And offered virtually nothing concrete, just platitudes. Someone should have asked them if they were going to leave Vegas on bicycles, or fossil fueled private jets.

October 14, 2015 6:05 pm
Reply to  Marcus
October 15, 2015 10:27 am

A pretty good explanation is right there in the link name “Obama-too-wrong-side-on-climate-change-says-physicist-freeman-dyson”.

October 14, 2015 6:22 pm

Dead Horse flogged to death by dead dogma.
Down in New Zealand, most media types, and many politicians, inject climate change into just about anything, especially anything to do with coastal real estate.
Its gotten so bad we have to step over piles of dead, flogged horses in the street, in our capital, they’re piled up neck high. Rodents should be having a field day on the corpse mountain, but even they won’t touch that carrion.
We have an emissions trading scheme (enforced by a Cuckservative Right wed to a Multi-Culti-Marxist wife), adding an overhead of misery to all Human activity, so businesses suffer, and they pass the suffering on to us.
The cost of living has spiraled upwards like Dorothy’s house in the Wizard of Oz, the former Wizard of OZ, Tony Abbot, got rolled by a Klymate Tru-Fan, and they’ll be adding horse meat to their political menu soon too.
But with the Paris climate cult-fest 2015 coming up, and knowing the French predilection for devouring Equine cuisine, we should see well stuffed reps waddling to back Charles De Gaulle après le banquet sans regret.

October 14, 2015 6:53 pm

I admit to being a climate activist, I just put another log on the fire closed the door.

Reply to  jimheath
October 14, 2015 7:22 pm

In the past where I live, those of us who lived out in the country could burn our burnables in a burn barrel; however that has long since been verboten. But I do have inside my house a pot-bellied stove which burns my burnables, keeps me warm, and produces more CO2 for my garden. I think I’m quite green – don’t you?

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  noaaprogrammer
October 14, 2015 10:46 pm

When we bought our current house there were 2 barrels in the back. They had been used as “burn barrels” but were not fixed as such or used as such. They were both filled to the top with stuff – some of that was ash. Most of it was junk – bottles, food & beverage cans, busted light fixtures and old wire, bolts/screws/metal pieces – and more. The weight was such that I could not pick them up, so had to push them over and rake through the mess and repackage (in boxes) most of it for the landfill. At his new location, the previous owner, using another outlawed barrel, nearly set the county on fire. The fire-fighters were not amused. Common sense is not common.
This past month the state’s Department of Ecology paid about 80 county residents $250 each for old wood stoves. Ours was a 1980s model. Our new one was installed yesterday. The installer would have charged $100 to cart that old one away.
[Truth: The house is all-electric via hydro power. We actually do need a backup for winter if the lines go down.]

October 14, 2015 7:37 pm

Global Warming is the “secular Apocalypse”

Reply to  Neo
October 15, 2015 6:04 am

Yeah, it must be hard to get funding for Zombie Research.

October 14, 2015 7:54 pm

Climate Change is too big to fail.
Ha ha

Louis Hunt
October 14, 2015 8:05 pm

I searched the debate transcript for “Climate Change” and found it was mentioned 23 times. The word ‘tax’ in all its forms was also mentioned 23 times. We all know how much Democrats love taxes and taxing the rich. So why is VOX complaining? Did they want the entire debate to be about nothing but climate change?
Here’s what Hillary said about climate change during the debate, followed by what is said on her website:

“I’ve traveled across our country over the last months listening and learning, and I’ve put forward specific plans about how we’re going to create more good-paying jobs: by investing in infrastructure and clean energy, by making it possible once again to invest in science and research, and taking the opportunity posed by climate change to grow our economy.” –Hillary Clinton, CNN Democratic Debates, Oct 13, 2015
In the coming months, Hillary will lay out a comprehensive energy and climate agenda to help America transition to a clean energy economy and meet the global climate crisis.”
–www.hillaryclinton.com, Oct 14, 2015

Apparently, the “specific plans” Hillary has already put forward have yet to be laid out. I guess she wants to take credit now for what she plans to do in the future. I also found it interesting that it is currently not possible to invest in science and research. A Hillary presidency, however, is going to make such investments possible once again. She is also planning to use the “broken window fallacy” to grow our economy by shutting down perfectly good power plants and replacing them with unreliable ‘clean’ energy from solar panels and wind turbines. And yes, she plans to use government subsidies to make it possible. It sure sounds to me like our economy is going to suffer if she becomes President, but big energy donors and cronies are going to make out like bandits.

Reply to  Louis Hunt
October 14, 2015 9:39 pm

Pay attention to Ms Clinton’s choice in running mate. Ms Burwell is the Health and Human Services (HHS). Powerful arm of the government that is likely to be the administrator of making sure CO2 impacts are properly distributed (disparate impact).
If she is selected as the VP, it will be because she is the transition piece between this administration and the next concerning CAGW.

Reply to  Knute
October 14, 2015 9:40 pm

Meant to say HHS Secretary.

Reply to  Louis Hunt
October 15, 2015 12:27 am

Notice how she and others like her uses the incorrect phrase “good-paying jobs”; it’s a clumsy and transparent attempt to be buddies with the bubbas.

Reply to  rogerknights
October 15, 2015 12:29 am

Here’s a better version:
Notice how she and others like her uses the incorrect phrase “good-paying jobs”; it’s a clumsy and transparent attempt to buddy-up with the bubbas.

John Endicott
Reply to  Louis Hunt
October 15, 2015 9:37 am

Louis Hunt says: October 14, 2015 at 8:05 pm
Apparently, the “specific plans” Hillary has already put forward have yet to be laid out. I guess she wants to take credit now for what she plans to do in the future.
Why not, Obama got a Nobel as credit for future actions.

Walt D.
October 14, 2015 8:18 pm

Nixon could claim that he lost the debate because climate change made him sweat profusely on TV.

Reply to  Walt D.
October 14, 2015 10:24 pm

It didn’t help his 4 o’clock shadow either.

October 14, 2015 8:24 pm

It isn’t what candidates say before elections it’s what they will do after they are elected. Watch who the parties are that are backing a candidate.
Obama got elected on change but people didn’t know what he meant by change. These changes haven’t hurt people much yet but they will.

October 14, 2015 8:44 pm

Seems a high ranking Cardinal at the Vatican is in open revolt about the Popes “learch to the left”. Says the lord has issued no mandate to pronounce on scientific matters and “we believe in the autonomy of science”

Reply to  GTL
October 14, 2015 10:02 pm

They may not grasp the principles of evolution. But they have created an ecosystem in which only the gullible and submissive can survive. Pell has made the mistake of leaving his critical faculties switched on.
I cannot see that there is a place for him in the RC church.
Perhaps he needs to establish a breakaway Australian Church in which people are allowed to think.
I was wondering how long Pell would keep his mouth zipped on this topic.
No long it seems. Well done him.

Reply to  indefatigablefrog
October 14, 2015 10:16 pm

The RCC is not 1B people moving in unison.
The Jesuits will be busy figuring out how to spin the cardinal for the Pope. It’s their job.
It’s very unusual for a modern day Pope to come out so strongly on a “science” issue.
I wonder what went down.
On another note, he was an excellent PR choice. Do you have an opinion on who the cagwistas whip out next ?

Reply to  indefatigablefrog
October 15, 2015 6:10 am

of course people forget, the current Pope came to power only as a result of the resignation of the previous Pope. the obvious question is this, what pressure was applied to Pope Benedict to make him resign? will the “climate change” Pope be the one that finally brings down the RC church?

Reply to  indefatigablefrog
October 15, 2015 7:54 am

Pell is known to be a climate skeptic and I am certain he is concerned about damage to the church that can result from taking a stand based on Climate pseudo-science that will be proven wrong over time. I think he wants to avoid a breakaway caused by Francis’s non traditional leanings.

Reply to  GTL
October 15, 2015 6:05 am

this would explain the public apology the Pope made.

Paul Nevins
October 14, 2015 11:56 pm

It is very evident that the large environmental organizations have absolutely no belief in their own catastrophic climate scenarios. If they did they could have dropped their bs propaganda campaigns against nuclear and geothermal power 20 years ago and we could have cut emissions 40-50% and have lower electric prices to boot.
But an actual solution is the last thing they would want.

Reply to  Paul Nevins
October 15, 2015 7:59 am

You can’t place a CO2 tax on nuclear energy.

October 15, 2015 12:05 am

Not sure about where all this catastrophic anthropogenic global warming is going but one thing’s for sure, the weather out there is sure changing fast-

Reply to  observa
October 15, 2015 1:58 am

As one commenter on JN said:
Je Sius Phillipe
With no disrespect intended or implied to the fallen, because it is all a part of the same struggle for truth and freedom. When Climate Alarmists blow up school children, and splatter their body parts all over the classroom, they are only one step behind those who spread fear for the other protection racket. The intent is there, in the forefront of their minds, even if they have not followed it through as yet. Beware the fervent idealist….

October 15, 2015 6:47 am

The only debate most politicians have is which methods are best at sucking from the public trough.

Joel Snider
October 15, 2015 8:16 am

Isn’t VOX’ Ezra Klein – at WAPO at the time? – the one who was at the center of the media coordination scandal?

October 15, 2015 9:15 am

Americans are not afraid of global warming / climate change. So, why debate it?
Chapman University’s second annual Survey of American Fears released (No mention of GW / CC)
What Americans fear most in 2015

October 16, 2015 11:30 am

Would be nice if the article sais what or who a VOX might be…

Verified by MonsterInsights