Elizabeth and Sheldon Torquemada

Pursuing an agenda of intolerance and retribution against critics of their ultra-liberal policies


Guest opinion by Paul Driessen

As Grand Inquisitor of the Spanish Inquisition for 15 years, Tomas de Torquemada presided over the interrogation, torture, imprisonment and execution of thousands, for the “crimes” of religious heresy and pretended conversion to Christianity. Historian Sebastián de Olmedo titled him “the hammer of heretics.”

Today Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) are pursuing their own inquisition against perceived “heretics.” Thankfully, they don’t have Friar Torquemada’s torture devices or sentencing options. But they are vindictive and effective nonetheless – abusing their congressional powers to silence critics of their policy agendas, often with the help of media, White House, Justice Department, Internal Revenue Service and Big Green allies.

Warren’s latest coup was sacking economist Robert Litan from his position as a scholar with the liberal Brookings Institution, for having the temerity to criticize financial rules she was championing. The fact that Litan is a “progressive” Democrat and former Clinton administration official was irrelevant.

Whitehouse wants the Justice Department to use the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) to investigate and prosecute organizations and individuals who challenge his view that mankind’s use of oil, natural gas and coal is causing climate catastrophes. He has targeted “skeptical” organizations and scientists, while alarmists like Michael Mann and Jagadish Shukla have their own enemies lists.

Their attitudes and actions epitomize today’s liberals, who cannot stomach anyone who disagrees with their views or policies. These modern “hammers of heretics” refuse to debate and instead do all they can to silence critics and destroy their careers. As Fox News commentator Kirsten Powers observes, too many liberals support tolerance only for themselves and only to advance their intolerant agendas.

More than ever before, says political analyst George Will, they are “aggressively and dangerously … attacking the theory of free speech, the desirability of free speech, the very possibility of free speech.”

They compound the outrage with double standards. Senator Whitehouse rages about climate skeptics – but utters not a peep about biased government-funded science, models and propaganda; not a word about EPA’s far-fetched “social cost of carbon” estimates and refusal to even mention how its regulations kill jobs and reduce living standards, health and welfare. Senator Barbara Boxer disgraced Congress when she excoriated physician, medical researcher and author Michael Crichton, for daring to suggest that “double blind” studies be required for climate research, just as FDA does for medical research.

Senator Warren’s intolerance and double standards make her colleagues look like pikers.

Former Brookings VP and economic studies director Robert Litan is highly regarded as an expert on the unintended effects of regulations on businesses, workers and families. But when he testified before Congress last July, saying a proposed regulation would deprive poor and middle class investors of valuable financial advisors and advice, Ms. Warren was livid. She had vigorously supported the Labor Department rule, even though many Democrats and virtually all Republicans in Congress oppose it.

In September, Senator Warren suddenly discovered that the Litan study behind his testimony had been funded in part by the Capital Group, a major investment management company whose business would likely be affected by the regulation. Both the study and testimony made the arrangement crystal clear.

But Senator Warren saw her chance to pound the heretic. Instead of trying to rebut his testimony, Wall Street Journal columnist Gordon Crovitz observed, she decided to punish the witness. At 8:30 am September 29, the Washington Post posted her letter to Brookings criticizing Litan and claiming his funding disclosure was somehow “vague.” An hour later, spineless Brookings president Strobe Talbott threw Litan under the bus, despite his loyal and productive decades of service to the institution.

The senator is on a roll. She has also prevented economist Antonio Weiss from getting a senior Treasury position, and former Harvard president and Clinton and Obama official Larry Summers from becoming Federal Reserve chairman, because their views on certain issues offended her ultra-liberal sensibilities.

She is fortunate that the lofty, inflexible standards she inflicts on others are not applied to her.

OpenSecrets.org reveals that Warren has accepted over $600,000 from securities and investment firms, including some $6,000 from Capital Group executives! Law firms that stand to benefit from her legislation, advocacy and policy interventions have lavished $2.2 million on her campaigns – and the education industry that benefits from her constant promotion of increased education subsidies has given her a hefty $1.4 million, the Wall Street Journal reports.

Even more outrageous is the BFF relationship Ms. Warren has with Better Markets. This tax-exempt 501(c)3 “educational” organization in Washington, DC is funded almost entirely by multi-millionaire hedge-fund manager Michael Masters, via some $3 million a year that flows from him or his Marlin Fund to his Spring Foundation charity to Better Markets – which testifies and lobbies persistently, consistently and quite successfully for legislation and regulations advocated by the progressives’ favorite senator.

As political reporter Brendan Bordelon observes in the National Review, “By failing to adequately disclose its relationship with Masters to lawmakers, observers say Better Markets is doing exactly what Warren accused Brookings of doing – covertly taking money from a finance-industry player to influence regulators with the power to approve policies from which that player can earn huge profits.”

Former Obama appointee to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission Jill Sommers calls it a “huge” and “unprecedented” conflict of interest. It’s “outrageous,” says a former SEC counsel.

Masters uses market “triggers” to identify stocks whose prices may rise or fall in response to investor anxiety over political events such as proposed financial rules, Bordelon says. In spring 2015, The Marlin Fund held “call options” worth hundreds of millions of dollars in MetLife, CitiGroup and Prudential. A proposed regulation, reclassifying them as “systematically important financial institutions,” would have increased federal controls and driven their share prices downward – giving Marlin and Masters big profits from “short selling” shares, and using their call options as a hedge against unexpected price increases.

Better Markets president Dennis Kelleher testified before Warren’s Senate Banking Committee and filed an amicus brief supporting the rule change. But they never disclosed their obvious self-interest in the change: their sole source of income (Marlin and Masters) stood to profit enormously from the change.

Warren would have gone ballistic if an opponent of the rule had such an arrangement. But she has said nothing about this classic conflict of interest. That’s hardly surprising.

She was a keynote speaker at a 2013 Better Markets meeting, wrote a laudatory testimonial for its website, and works closely with Kelleher and his group to ensure support for her legislative, regulatory and political crusades, Bordelon notes. Campaign contributions may create more ties that bind.

Meanwhile, Kelleher has testified at numerous Dodd-Frank and other Capitol Hill hearings, and is the go-to guy for many journalists who want insights on the finance industry or Senator Warren’s viewpoints.

Ms. Torquemada is clearly not content to have or win debates on policy issues. She intends to prevent debates, penalize anyone who challenges her, intimidate and silence would-be critics, and impose her agenda – regardless of its impacts on the “poor and helpless” she professes to care so much about.

So much for the Senate as “the world’s greatest deliberative body,” or the notion that, despite disagreeing with what you say, liberals would “defend to the death your right to say it.” Torquemada’s reincarnation must not become the new reality for constitutional rights, robust debate, and informed decision-making.

Paul Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org), author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power – Black death, and coauthor of Cracking Big Green: Saving the world from the Save-the-Earth money machine.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
October 18, 2015 4:42 pm

My favorite Kirsten Powers line is ” The intolerance of the “tolerant left” is mind boggling ” ……and she’s a liberal !!!

October 18, 2015 4:48 pm

Now I understand why E. Warren didn’t want to run for president….too many dark secrets she wanted to keep dark !! Thanks…

Reply to  Marcus
October 18, 2015 9:33 pm

Let’s not forget she got a position at Harvard by claiming to be part American-Indian. Later when it came out that was false she defended herself by saying she had high cheek bones and that her grandmother said there was American-Indian blood in the family.
She is not called Fauxcahontas for nothing.

Reply to  Vuil
October 19, 2015 2:53 am

Indeed, the whole of the “Laquota Sue” nation was saddened by Elizabeth’s exposure. Thankfully, Ward Churchill remains a member in good standing of the tribe.

Reply to  Vuil
October 19, 2015 4:00 am

Add to that the “Cherokee” recipes she contributed to the Pow Wow Chow cookbook which were plagiarized from Pierre Franey of the New York Times News Service.

Taylor Pohlman
Reply to  Vuil
October 19, 2015 7:09 am

Don’t forget Lieawatha, my personal favorite.

Reply to  Vuil
October 19, 2015 11:03 am

Mike…That’s “Sioux” Nation. But if you’re talking ’bout Thee “Laquota Sue”, she’s a fine gal.

Chip Javert
Reply to  Vuil
October 19, 2015 12:31 pm

You’re being harsh.
When she was asked to submit her favorite recipes for the Pow Wow Chow cookbook to have been passed down through generations of Oklahoma Native American members of the Cherokee tribe, then Harvard professor Warren plagiarized two crab meat recipes (Cold Omelets with Crab Meat” and “Crab with Tomato Mayonnaise Dressing) originating at Le Pavilion, a fabulously expensive French restaurant in Manhattan. The dishes were said to be particular favorites of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor and Cole Porter.
Elizabeth cared enough to plagiarize the very best. Until her submission, Oklahoma indian tribes had absolutely no idea what to do with mounds of fresh crab meat.

Reply to  Vuil
October 19, 2015 12:49 pm

Yr: “That’s ‘Sioux” nation.”
Though it apparently fell flat, I was striving for a bit of a pun with my “Laquota Sue” The “Lakota (with a “k”) Sioux” are, of course, the storied Indian Nation of the Dakotas, while the “Laquota (with a “q”) Sue” Nation is the litigious tribe, to which certain pale-faces, pretending to be Native Americans belong. The “quota” part of my wannabe pun, in turn, alludes to…to… well…you know…like…let’s just say that Harvard’s government-mandated, diversity reports had Elizabeth down as a “Native American”–but that, of course, had nothing to do with her breezy success in academia, even though Harvard was under “intense pressure” to increase the diversity of its Law School, at that time she was hired. Just ask her, if you don’t believe me!–know what I mean, Dahlquist?
Google two Boston Globe stories on the subject, for the full monty: “may 31, 2012 warren says she told schools of heritage” and “may 25, 2012 filings add to questions on warren’s ethnic claims”. You’ll enjoy Harvard’s Gruber-esque, we-here-at-Harvard-depend-on-the-stupidity-of-the-American-people, razzle-dazzle assurances and “proofs” that Elizabeth Warren’s hiring had nothing to do with her minority status claims.

Reply to  Vuil
October 19, 2015 8:30 pm


October 18, 2015 5:00 pm

These are not to be taken lightly, and are reminiscent of the sort of abuses we saw enacted almost 100 years ago under the espionage and sedition acts. Even without an act being passed, the intimidation is the kind of thing we see on college campuses as well. The fact that these folks see the need to do this is a good indication that they know full well the weakness of the rationale supporting their arguments for more stringent anti-carbon policies. As their case becomes weaker, the calls for abuse become more shrill.

Reply to  Michael Selden
October 18, 2015 8:17 pm

By Lord Macaulay’s 1843 definition, contemporary liberalism is well on its way to becoming the very definition of bigotry:
“The doctrine which, from the very first origin of religious dissensions, has been held by bigots of all sects, when condensed into a few words and stripped of rhetorical disguise, is simply this: I am in the right, and you are in the wrong. When you are the stronger, you ought to tolerate me; for it is your duty to tolerate truth. But when I am the stronger I shall persecute you; for it is my duty to persecute error.”

October 18, 2015 5:04 pm

If Senator Warren truly is the reason that Larry Summers is not Federal Reserve Chairman, then I suppose she can’t be all bad.

October 18, 2015 5:11 pm

The question that must be asked, as with every claim made in the name of climate science: Is this unprecedented? Was there only a flat, even, steady “hockey handle” of political stability and equilibrium until a Warren/Whitehouse induced “handle” drove political machinations upwards?
This sounds like US politics as usual.

October 18, 2015 5:12 pm

Michael Selden commented: “These are not to be taken lightly………….. As their case becomes weaker, the calls for abuse become more shrill.”
+1 Exercise your right to vote.

Eustace Cranch
Reply to  markl
October 19, 2015 8:01 am

Voting accomplishes very little these days. Government accountability to the governed is rapidly fading away.
Real change, unfortunately, may require something uglier.

Reply to  Eustace Cranch
October 19, 2015 1:11 pm

Think what you like but, the reps elected by the T.E.A. party groups are shaking things up in congress.
They could use more help if we want them to move DC in a better direction.

Paul Westhaver
October 18, 2015 5:19 pm

OM Gosh…
“execution of thousands”… NOT by this guy!
For cripes sake can’t you make a single argument without repeating anti-catholic folklore?
Really, it is anti-intellectual and anti-history and anti-fact to invest such utter nonsense as a metaphor to strengthen your arguments. You only server to publicly betray your either, irrational hostility OR ignorance
Jeepers. Read a book for once.
Over 300 years of the inquisition, between 3000 to 4000 people were put to death largely by secular authorities. ~11 per year.

Reply to  Paul Westhaver
October 18, 2015 5:58 pm

A quick search found this comment in Wikipedia:

There is some disagreement as to the number of victims of the Spanish Inquisition during Torquemada’s reign as Grand Inquisitor. Some scholars believe that he was responsible for the death of 2,000 people. Hernando del Pulgar, Queen Isabella’s secretary, wrote that 2,000 executions took place throughout the entirety of her reign, which extended well beyond Torquemada’s death.

So while there is a question about exactly how many executions Torquemada oversaw, Paul’s claim doesn’t seem to be entirely outside the realm of possibilities. Then you have to consider how many people died when Torquemada expelled 200,000 Jews from Spain in 1492. I don’t think you can make him out to be an innocent bystander.

Reply to  Louis
October 19, 2015 4:00 am

Torquemada didn’t expel anybody. He didn’t have such power. The expulsion was the decision of the King and Queen, although a driving force behind the decision to expel Muslims as well as Jews was Cardinal Cisneros..
As for torture (another favourite of the black propaganda of the Protestants and atheists), Fernando Cervantes, Senior Lecturer in History at the University of Bristol has written, “Indeed, the most infamous and maligned of all Grand Inquisitors, Tomas de Toquemada himself, produced an elaborate system of jurisprudence that was, in fact, far in advance of any other in contemporary Europe. His improvement of the quality of Inquisitorial prisons and prison food was so successfully carried out that it soon became a recurring practice for prisoners of civil jails throughout the Hispanic world to blaspheme or pretend to be heretics so that they might be transferred to Inquisitorial quarters and be judged by Inquisitors rather than civil officers. So, too, Torquemada’s Ordenanzas of 1484 were carefully planned to check the fanaticism and overzealousness that had rightly alarmed Pope Sixtus IV after the first few years of Inquisitorial activity in Spain.” (The Inquisition) Meanwhile nobody seems to have heard of Diego Rodriguez de Lucero.
What hope do we have of convincing the climate alarmists they are wrong if we seem to rely on such works of fiction as The Pit and The Pendulum to inform our knowledge of history? It’s a pity that there a few contributors to WUWT who seem to be obsessed by the Inquisition and seem to think that constantly referring to it somehow increases the validity of whatever else they have to say. It would not be so bad if they were actually decently aware of the facts of the Inquisition. But like the never-ending doomsaying of the climate alarmists, the purveying of an old and discredited version of the Inquisition seems to be hard to put to bed.

Reply to  Louis
October 20, 2015 7:08 am

As a recent arguably incompetent Secretary of State said: “At this point, what difference does it make?”

Reply to  Louis
October 21, 2015 5:00 am

Re: “Fernando Cervantes, Senior Lecturer in History at the University of Bristol has written”.
There was a time when the name University of Bristol was associated with high academic standards.
Not anymore. Not in my mind. The association now discredits an individual in my view. Along with any association with UWA, or Penn State.
For reasons which do not need explaining. Not here, anyway.

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  Paul Westhaver
October 18, 2015 6:09 pm

Paul Westhaver October 18, 2015 at 5:19 pm
It’s a quiet night, a couple weeks from All Hallow’s Eve, so maybe a few monsters to scare the meek at heart. Of course its also Missiles of October time. What was known then versus what is known now.
And yes I tend to agree with you. Torquemada is no longer a man but rather a myth a legend, the truth buried under centuries of exaggerations and embellishments.

Paul Westhaver
Reply to  Mike the Morlock
October 22, 2015 5:35 pm

Paul Driessen has done this several times. I am assembling a bibliography. He wants to make a point and like a Tourretts syndrome twitch, he devolves into the irrational catholic hate behavior, by repeating rhetoric invented by 500 year old protestant catholic haters. …WTF??? It is 2015 after all.
You see, 600-700 years ago, all the non- Catholics were “civilized” refined, erudite, philosophers and holy beings that hovered 12″ above the earth. I am happy to equate Paul Driessen’s repeated reflex to bash catholics to his inability to to fairly represent proper skeptical science opposing CAGW. In so doing he discredits himself as an old b1got who repeats long repudiated hate propaganda.

Reply to  Paul Westhaver
October 18, 2015 6:23 pm

Well Paul, only the secular authorities had the power to execute heretics. That was never the role of the Church. However, let us not forget the butcher of 15,000 to 20,000 Cathars and Catholics, men women and children, in 1209 at Beziers by Crusaders for their alleged heresy. Please don’t minimize the impact of the Inquisition which lasted for far more than just three centuries.

Reply to  JimS
October 18, 2015 9:02 pm

A little more to the story.. from Christianity.com
The pope offered wicked men pardon for their sins if they would undertake a crusade against the heretics. The prospect of loot excited many to join the army. The crusaders swept down upon Beziers, arriving July 21, 1209. The city was well-provisioned for a fight. Catholic and heretic alike joined to defend it against the crusaders. That Beziers did not give the invaders a real fight was owing to a mistake. On this day, July 22, 1209, a group of defenders rode out with white pennants shooting arrows at the crusaders. They killed one. Furious, a bunch of rag-tag camp followers, without proper weapons, rushed the walls. Beziers had not expected an attack so soon; the walls were not properly manned. Defenders fled. Within three hours, the crusaders had taken a city that they had thought they would have to beseige for several months.

Reply to  Paul Westhaver
October 18, 2015 7:42 pm

You are correct. James Reston’s appallingly ill-informed book, the Dogs of God, is a recent example of this gross mis-representation of history. Better to read Henry Kamen or Charles Lea. The latter came up with convincingly detailed estimates from primary sources that are orders of magnitude lower for the entire Inquisition period in Iberia. On the other hand, the forced migration of Jews from Iberia was indeed an enormous tragedy and one of many crimes against humanity in the name of religion.

Reply to  bernie1815
October 19, 2015 1:59 am

Forced emigration was certainly a crime but do you really think that it was worse than death? If the people sentenced to death by the Inquisition had been offered the choice of death or emigration what do you think they would have chosen?

Reply to  bernie1815
October 19, 2015 6:04 am

This thread isnt about the inquisition, its about intolerance. The analogy therefore is entirely reasonable as the reputation of Torquemada is entirely similar to the reputation of Whitehouse and Warren without the deaths. The actual figures involved are irrelevant to the argument. I assume that so long as Warren or Whitehouse keep the body count to below 11 per annum that will be ok then

Alan Robertson
Reply to  Paul Westhaver
October 18, 2015 9:08 pm

Were 3000- 4000 deaths inquisition acceptable because of the longer time frame? How does mention of those deaths and the most famous inquisitor constitute “anti- Catholic propaganda”? How many deaths would have been “too many”?
More to the point (and overlooking your attempted thread derailment,) how are the actions and rhetoric of the above mentioned Senators in any way acceptable in this nation?

Keith Willshaw
Reply to  Paul Westhaver
October 19, 2015 2:45 am

You cannot simply average it out over the 300 year time period or ignore the effect of wars waged against those who opposed the inquisition. The early efforts of the inquisition were mainly aimed at a small number of heretics within the church and rarely produced imprisonment and execution, However the effects of the Albigensian crusade launched after the murder of the papal legate assigned to lead the investigation of the Cathars lead to the desolation of Languedoc and the deaths of around 200,000. Of course they were not directly killed by the office of the inquisition but it was their resistance to that organisation that brought about their deaths at the hands of mercenaries such as Simon de Montfort acting on the authority of the Catholic church.
The expulsion of Jewish population in Spain into a hostile environment inevitably caused tens of thousands of deaths. There were no refugee aid organizations in those days and most who did survive were in fact aided by the Muslim inhabitants of North Africa and Turkey

Reply to  Keith Willshaw
October 19, 2015 4:09 am

An ugly structural fault was that judges were paid from the property of the victims.

October 18, 2015 5:25 pm

If you follow Strobe’s connections, it’s not so difficult to understand why Elizabeth could banish him so quickly?

Reply to  Barbara
October 18, 2015 6:39 pm

The International Economic Forum Of the Americas, Montreal
Governors include:
Christine Lagarde, IMF
Strobe Talbott, Brookings Institute
+ others
Webpage has short biographies of the Governors.

Reply to  Barbara
October 18, 2015 7:37 pm

Deutsche Welle, Oct.8, 2015
“Global warming will have us ‘roasted and toasted,’ says IMF Chief Lagarde”
Not everything takes place in Washington.

Reply to  Barbara
October 18, 2015 8:18 pm

Brookings Board of Trustees include:
Strobe Talbott
Dominic Barton
Paul Desmarais, Jr.
Glenn Hutchins
All of the above are also on the Board of Governors of The International Economic Forum Of The Americas, Montreal.

Reply to  Barbara
October 19, 2015 10:17 am

European Climate Foundation, Netherlands
Board includes:
John MacBain, Founder and Chair.
Charlotte Pera, Pres. and CEO of ClimateWorks Foundation
John MacBain, ex-brother-in-law of Helene Desmarais & w/o of Paul Desmarais,Jr.,is also on the Advisory Board of the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy and Board Chair of the Trudeau Foundation, Canada.
Helene Desmarais is also on the Board of the International Economic Forum Of the Americas, Montreal.

Reply to  Barbara
October 19, 2015 12:37 pm

ClimateWorks Foundation, San Francisco, CA
Board includes:
Charlotte Pera
John D. Podesta, Currently Chair. of “Hillary for America Campaign Committee”.

Reply to  Barbara
October 19, 2015 3:54 pm

The Cement Industry
Reuters, July 21, 2015
LafargeHolcim shareholder disclosure according to the Swiss Stock Exchange Act.
Group Bruxelles Lambert including Desmarais family members, 9.84% of the voting rights as of July 15, 2015
Cement industry big emitters of CO2.
Paul Desmarais,Jr. is on the Board of LafargeHolcim.

Reply to  Barbara
October 21, 2015 3:45 pm

CTV News, Canada, Dec.5, 2011
‘Canada and the Kyoto Protocol – A Timeline’
Kyoto Protocol ratified, Dec.16,2002. Signed by Jean Chretien, Prime Minister.
Jean Chretien’s daughter is married to Andre Desmarais brother of Paul Desmarais, Jr.

October 18, 2015 5:29 pm

Some strategies when dealing with fundamentalist liberals (if you must):
– Don’t bother explaining what falsifiability is – what it has to do with science. This totally does not work. Liberals like the idea of never being proved wrong.
– Don’t try to mock them. A lot of them think of themselves as freaks in a world which has no normal, so this has little effect.
– Instead, call them gullible whenever you have the goods to back it up. They hate that. They fear people thinking they are stupid.
Just my opinion. And only in general. There are a lot of exceptions.

Reply to  TobiasN
October 21, 2015 5:26 am

Re: “Don’t bother explaining what falsifiability is – what it has to do with science.”
In my experience extreme liberals are beset by some background of brainwashing into the “subversive” concept that all truths are relative. They resort to this philosophy of relativism when their assumptions are questioned.
They have often been heavily schooled in this kind of anti-logic and anti-science philosophy.
In the worst cases, they will argue against the existence of any specific scientific “truth”, by proposing that all science is a “cultural product”. And in their mind, this shows that modern science is no more true or valid than ancient superstitions. Or some such crap.
One way or another, these techniques of subversion will successfully derail the conversation.
Hence, debate will be obstructed. And whilst not showing that they are correct, they will have successfully have prevented themselves from learning anything about the real world. Again.
Inexperienced but intelligent and rational people are likely to walk away from such a conversation wondering what the hell just happened to 4 hours of their time.
Eventually you figure it out and give up engaging with the specific assholes responsible.

October 18, 2015 5:29 pm

This is a dark turn for WUWT. The depths of corruption within the financial world are very deep and twisted. I find this attempt to directly conflate the climate debate with one superficially covered example in finance legislation and oversight troubling. If we are to see many more of these posts you will likely lose my attention quickly.
*Please* keep WUWT focused on climate.

Reply to  jabre
October 18, 2015 5:49 pm

She may be the US next Vice President – especially if Biden runs.
If you want to relate this to climate, here is one thing (I’m sure there are others):

Reply to  J. Philip Peterson
October 19, 2015 3:56 am

I could watch only 39 seconds of that. “We are in the throes of a climate crisis. . .” was enough—just reciting the litany according to the Goracle and the Mannical.
/Mr Lynn

Reply to  jabre
October 18, 2015 6:05 pm

Whitehouse wants the Justice Department to use the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) to investigate and prosecute organizations and individuals who challenge his view that mankind’s use of oil, natural gas and coal is causing climate catastrophes. He has targeted “skeptical” organizations and scientists, while alarmists like Michael Mann and Jagadish Shukla have their own enemies lists.
That paragraph highlights the attack by the “RICO Twenty” to curb and even prosecute skeptics. And for that reason alone this article is warranted. It is called free speech and directly related to this website.

Reply to  jabre
October 18, 2015 7:27 pm

I tend to agree with jabre. Although there was a picture of Whitehouse, the article was mostly about Warren. It looked like “bait and switch” to me. Even though faux Amerindian Warren is a supporter of the warmist agenda, hardly anything was mentioned about her activities in that regard.
If those shortcomings had been addressed before publication, this could have been a more appropriate article for WUWT.

Reply to  jabre
October 19, 2015 11:51 am

This article is referring to one of the most important aspects of “climate change”. It is about the power of powerful people to shut down any opposing views concerning climate change and the promotion of their views and only their views, about radically changing society at a huge cost to the many, without a real scientific basis for it at this time. It is about these few in power who intimidate and destroy peoples lives who oppose their views on climate change by simply trying to engage a debate about it or state their views on it…Exercising their right to free speech, but having their lives ruined in an attempt to do so.
So, if you cannot see a connection here and see how extremely relevant to climate change this article is, your attention is failing you…already.

Reply to  Dahlquist
October 19, 2015 1:31 pm

Plus quite a lot.

Mike the Morlock
October 18, 2015 5:44 pm

A dark place deep in my heart muses, that would it not be nice if Senators Warren & Whitehouse were to granted the reward for their graven efforts, of spending some quality time in Saint Torquemada’s offices?

October 18, 2015 5:50 pm

I must agree with the comment by Paul Westhaver above.
Paul Driessen displays a level of ignorance of history that make the rest of his post pointless.

October 18, 2015 6:10 pm

October 18, 2015 at 5:50 pm
I must agree with the comment by Paul Westhaver above.
Paul Driessen displays a level of ignorance of history that make the rest of his post pointless.
Hmm, from this link:
we get:
“The number of burnings at the stake during Torquemada’s tenure has been estimated at about 2,000.”
From here: http://www.eyeonspain.com/spain-magazine/tomas-de-torquemada.aspx
”Historians believe that about 2000 people were burned by the Inquisition between 1480and 1530.
The abuses of the Inquisition made Tomas so unpopular than an armed guard of 250 footmen and 50 mounted men had to be provided for his security. The abuses included arbitrary detentions, torture, and reliance on anonymous denunciation. Wealthy Moors and Jews were often targeted for judicial murder and their wealth appropriated. Anyone who spoke against the Inquisition could be arrested on contrived charges of heresy.”
He sounds like a charming guy! 🙂

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  tobyglyn
October 18, 2015 6:38 pm

tobyglyn October 18, 2015 at 6:10 pm
Ah, but now much of deaths were due to Torquemada, and how much to the settling of accounts during and after the Reconquista? The wars with Islam were horrible affairs with no quarter asked or given by either side. Many had scores to settle with those who were Moors and those who sided with them. Their war, not ours.
Spain and America: From Reconquest to Conquest
In 1491, no European knew that North and South America existed. By 1550, Spain — a small kingdom that had not even existed a century earlier — controlled the better part of two continents and had become the most powerful nation in Europe. In half a century of brave exploration and brutal conquest, both Europe and America were changed forever.
The Reconquista and the origins of Spain
Map of Iberian Peninsula, 1270-1492, showing the kingdoms of Portugal, Castile, Navarre, Granada, Aragon, and Majorca.
This map of the kingdoms of the Iberian Peninsula from 1270 to 1492 shows the kingdoms of Castile, Aragon, and Portugal. Adapted from Muir’s Historical Atlas, 1911. From the Internet Medieval Sourcebook. About the map
In the 1400s, “Spain” as we think of it today did not exist. The Iberian peninsula, the piece of land that juts out of southwestern Europe into the Atlantic Ocean, included three kingdoms: Aragon, a small kingdom bordering France on the Mediterranean Sea and focused on trade with Italy and Africa; Portugal on the Atlantic coast; and Castile, a large rural kingdom in the middle. The southern part of Iberia, meanwhile, was under Muslim rule, as it had been for centuries.
In the early 700s, Berber Muslims from North Africa, often called Moors, had conquered nearly all of the Iberian Peninsula. Over the following seven and a half centuries, the Christian kingdoms to the north gradually retook control of the peninsula, and by 1300, Muslims controlled only Granada, a small region in the south of present-day Spain. But the Reconquista, or Reconquest, was not complete until 1492. In 1479, King Ferdinand II of Aragon and Queen Isabella of Castile married, uniting their kingdoms, and thirteen years later their armies expelled the Muslims from Granada.
The Reconquista was a brutal conflict fueled in part by devotion to Christianity — not just a war between kingdoms but a crusade against infidels. In al-Andalus — the Arabic name for Muslim-controlled Iberia — Christians and Jews had significant religious freedom. The Christian rulers to the north did not return the favor. The rulers of Spain’s kingdoms found that their shared Christianity could unite them and set them apart from the Muslims to the south. The men who fought in the Reconquista were convinced of their superiority to their enemies who had rejected Christianity, and they developed rules of war based on that superiority — including the right to enslave the people they conquered. Once Spain was reconquered, Muslims and Jews were forced to convert to Christianity or be expelled from Spain.
Painting depicting Isabella I of Castile, Queen of Castile and Leon, with her husband Ferdinand II of Aragon.
King Ferdinand II of Aragon, and Queen Isabella of Castile. Image source. About the painting
The long Reconquista tended to make the Spanish, and especially Castilians, not only strongly devoted to Christianity but militaristic and romantic. Castile was an agricultural society based on personal relationships, in which a person’s reputation and honor were tremendously important. One historian writes that Castilian men were tough, arrogant, quick to take offense, undaunted by danger and hardship, and extravagant in their actions. They would suffer hunger, hardship, extremes of climate, and still fight savagely against great odds.…Sixteenth-century Spaniards were fascinated with heroic stories, the adventures of perfect knights, ceremonious and courtly behavior, and strange and magical happenings.1
Finally, the Reconquista was driven by a desire for land and profit. Because kings in the Middle Ages were not as strong or as wealthy as they would later become, most military actions against the Moors were privately financed. Leaders of armies, since they had risked their own money, won rights to conquered land and a share of conquered peoples’ wealth.
The reconquerers, in short, were the perfect men to cross a dangerous ocean and conquer a “New World” of dense uncharted forests, tropical diseases, and hostile heathens. They were devoted to God, king, and queen; they were tough; and they were eager for wealth and glory. And after 1492, with the Reconquista complete, they were in the market for a new crusade. Conveniently enough, Christopher Columbus gave them one.
The a above is but drop of rain in a Hurricane.

Reply to  Mike the Morlock
October 19, 2015 3:44 am

Nit pick:
“In 1491 no European knew that … America existed”.
In his trade as a seaman Columbus had been to Denmark, had talked to other seamen who had been to Iceland and had read the Icelandic sagas and he knew perfectly well that there was a land mass to the west of Europe.
He didn’t know what it was but he and lots of others knew it was there.

Reply to  Mike the Morlock
October 19, 2015 4:20 am

This thread has droned on about Catholic/ Spanish history simply because Paul used an unnecessary analogy to support an argument that stood by itself. I my experience such analogies invariably contain a weaknes which simply invites those that disagree with the core argument to attack it via the analogy or, as in this case, divert an interesting thread up a blind alley.

Nigel S
Reply to  Mike the Morlock
October 19, 2015 7:19 am

Don’t forget St Brendan (c. 489–583).

Soren F
Reply to  Mike the Morlock
October 19, 2015 8:41 am

The sagas were not unknown, but if anything, that western land was considered, not some new continent, but an eastermost part of the old world landmass, much like most other contemporaries including Columbus believed too.

Reply to  Mike the Morlock
October 19, 2015 1:40 pm

America,of course, is named after John Ameryk – a Bristol, England, Customs Officer, who was able to tax (lightly), whilst concealing the origin of the riches of the Bristol Grand Banks cod fishermen.
Vespuccia doesn’t quite have the same ring, does it?
That’s not to mention Vinland – a Viking settlement, probably in the lower 48.
Nor the hypothesised Chinese junk fleet of 1420/1421,whose maps are suggested to have ‘inspired’ Columbus.
I suggest quite a bit was known in Europe of the Americas in 1491, and perhaps quite a bit earlier (c.1000 for Vinland, for example).
Much of this is subject to claims of varying veracity.
Yet there seems a pretty good substrate . . . .

Reply to  tobyglyn
October 19, 2015 7:04 am

This thread is not about the inquisition it is about the intolerance of CAGW believers, the analogy with Torquemada is entierley relevant even if it is the perceived draconian effect of his administration. The fact that it is being twisted and manipulated to sound like an attack on Catholics, thoroughly emphasises and reinforces the analogy

Joel O’Bryan
October 18, 2015 6:51 pm

Any essay depicting the dishonesty and hypocrisy of Climate Scam Congressional members is not complete without mentioning the recent attempted chicanery and buffoonery of Congressman Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) on his letter to investigate academic researchers.
Grijalva is real tool. He sells himself to union bosses and liberal econut groups for campaign cash, and asks for academics doing research be investigated for conflicts of interest. TOOL.

Dick F.
October 18, 2015 7:21 pm

We’ve seen this type before. Just put brown shirts and swastika armbands on Fauxahontas [Warren] and Whitehouse and you’ll recognize them immediately.

October 18, 2015 8:15 pm

Seems to me RICO is fair. If Exxon Mobile is innocent, it will come out.
Based on what is already out there, prob’ly NOT.

Reply to  trafamadore
October 19, 2015 10:05 am

Let me get this straight. In your opinion, anyone who is accused of anything should be put on trail. After all, if they are innocent, it will come out in the trial?
Who cares about all the money the defendants have to spend?
Who cares about the damage merely being charged does to a person’s or company’s reputation.
Let’s just throw em all into the docks, and see who survives.

October 18, 2015 8:53 pm

The great thing about being a mod here at Watts is that you know what cowards you are in not letting a full concourse of ideas here at watts.
Yes. But I know. As do you.

Reply to  trafamadore
October 18, 2015 9:11 pm

Got a question for you: how many have you slammed down tonight?
Because you’re not making any sense to sober readers.

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  dbstealey
October 18, 2015 9:43 pm

dbstealey , what the heck is trafamadore going on about?

Reply to  dbstealey
October 18, 2015 10:53 pm

I don’t know, but whatever he’s on, he ought to share. ☺

Chip Javert
Reply to  trafamadore
October 19, 2015 12:51 pm

Ok. That’s it. Trafamadore wins & retires the trophy for (almost) being able to type after a six-pac of vodka (or something equally “motivating”).

October 18, 2015 9:10 pm

So now WUWT has some apologists for the Spanish Inquisition. In other words Torquemada or any other inquisitor (because they existed in Italy and other places too) wasn’t really a bad guy. Just think for a moment what being burned at the stake actually means in terms of suffering, infliction of pain, and the effect on family and supporters over and above that of the victim.
Many a book has been read on the inquisition, the expulsion of the jews from Catholic Spain, and the reprisals on the muslims.
The corruption involved, and the trumped up charges of the Inquisition seem like a perfect analogy for the desire to use RICO to silence people with a different opinion.

Reply to  Keith
October 19, 2015 3:29 am

Terrorism works best when you don’t have to kill or torture a majority of the subject population. Apologists have often claimed that various episodes in human history weren’t as bad as most have been taught because the corpses didn’t stack high enough. (see: Buchanan, Pat)
But that’s because they didn’t personally suffer through a real-life example, such as the century long period of lynchings in America. You make a public example of your victims to instill fear in the survivors. That’s the whole point of burning people at the stake.
That said, comparing RICO to the Inquisition is just politically expedient exaggeration, IMO. If you really need an analogy, it’s much closer to something done by Nixon than something done by Torquemada.

Nigel S
Reply to  Keith
October 19, 2015 7:27 am

Gallileo for instance?
And if I know any heretic, or one suspected of heresy, I will denounce him to this Holy Office, or to the Inquisitor or Ordinary of the place in which I may be.” – Galileo Galilei (recanting his scientific beliefs before the Inquistion,1633)

Reply to  Keith
October 19, 2015 10:06 am

Pointing out the exaggerations of history makes one an apologist?
I suppose you are in favor of letting lies continue, so long as you don’t like the person being lied about?

October 18, 2015 10:42 pm

Is this a warning that the Orothodoxy of the Consensus’s climate inquisition has begun? Ooh – popcorn!

Barry Sheridan
October 19, 2015 12:29 am

The desire amongst humans to exercise unchecked power is found in every generation, the tools of this aim being variously religion, economic riches or as the modern liberal mind sees it, moral superiority. The end result of these various creeds is always the same, a growing death toll. We have had communism with its 100 million headstones, just as we have experienced the overt nationalistic sentiments that set up the machinery of industrial killing. I leave unspoken the bloodletting of the modern day in favour of noting that it is the distorted liberal mind that will bring about the greatest of human catastrophes. Via policies peddled as saving us all they will reduce the world to mass poverty, creating in its wake the deaths of more than just millions. These people are not just deluded, they are dangerous beyond comprehension as they prepare to sacrifice everything that mankind has achieved over the centuries. How anyone can become so warped is beyond my understanding.

James Francisco
Reply to  Barry Sheridan
October 20, 2015 6:04 pm

I’m with you Barry. It just has me flummoxed.

Peter Miller
October 19, 2015 1:12 am

Over the past 30 years the meanings of the words “liberal” and “gay” have changed beyond all previous recognition.
The word “liberal” has come to mean intolerant, censoring, socialist and unscientific, which makes me proud to state that I detest and condemn all that the liberal establishment has done to undermine traditional western values, but more important what it is still trying to achieve, especially in regards to supposed man made global warming.

October 19, 2015 1:18 am

Daily Express headline today:
SHOCK CLAIM: World is on brink of 50 year ICE AGE.
BRITAIN faces DECADES of savage winters driven by freak changes in global ocean conditions and a weakening of the sun.
Ok, so the Daily Express is a bit of a scandal-tabloid paper, and its ‘science’ is from the kindergarten, but this is where many people get their news from. Their source is AccuWeather.
It has to be another nail in the coffin of AGW. Many people are fed up with missed predictions and too many cries of ‘Wolf’, and now prediction of an Ice Age? Not going to be good for the Paris love-in.

Reply to  ralfellis
October 19, 2015 1:26 am

Sorry, wrong thread. Not sure what my computer is doing nowadays, it often puts posts into the previous thread I was reading.

Reply to  ralfellis
October 19, 2015 1:31 am

Could it be an interface problem between the keyboard and the chair? (Joke, ok?).

Reply to  ralfellis
October 19, 2015 11:40 am

Off topic,
Patrick, Once long ago, a few days before the computer guy was scheduled to come into the office to make some changes I told a co-worker that his computer had an I-D-10-t operations problem and asked if he would write such on a yellow sticky to remind the I.T. guy. The note on the edge of the computer screen said “My computer has a ID10T operator problem ….”; it stayed on the screen for about a week.
Having to explain that it was a joke (and removing the sticky note after a week) showed me that there was too much truth in the whole thing. That there may be a little tiny shred of truth in the joke is what makes it funny; too much truth takes away from the funny. Yours was funny.

Peter Miller
Reply to  ralfellis
October 19, 2015 1:50 am

Alarmists cry, “Unicorn!!! Unicorn!!!”. By saying ‘Cry wolf!’, that implies the wolf will eventually come after everyone gives up on listening to the warnings.

October 19, 2015 1:39 am

When socialism finally collapsed all around the world in the late ‘80s/early ‘90s the academic Marxists did not just throw in the towel and face reality. Indeed, not one of them has ever apologized for providing intellectual support for some of the worst mass murderers in world history – Stalin, Mao, Castro, and the rest of the communist/socialist gangsters. Instead, they reinvented themselves in several different ways, including posing as “environmentalists,” and as “cultural Marxists.” ~~ Thomas DiLorenzo

The socialists will hold their world conference this December in Paris I hear.

Ed Zuiderwijk
October 19, 2015 2:19 am

Witchfinder General. Watch the movie and see how it ends.

October 19, 2015 4:00 am

And Warren is more than likely to be the democrat party nominee for VP. Whitehouse is a typical reactionary, but Warren is much more pernicious.
It is good to bring her bigotry and hate mongering to the public eye early. Whitehouse is such a blowhard he is unlikely to do much actual damage. Warren is already hurting people and has big plans for so much more. Her life of lies, from ethnic background to her super rich elitist reality as she poses as the warrior goddess of the “middle class” makes her fury at those she disapproves (nearly everyone) more dangerous.

October 19, 2015 5:08 am

Reblogged this on gottadobetterthanthis and commented:

Speak up and protect freedom.

Bruce Cobb
October 19, 2015 7:15 am

Often, their intolerance is in the poorly-disguised form of humor, as in this missive in the New Yorker by AndyBorowitz;

“Our research is very preliminary, but it’s possible that they will become more receptive to facts once they are in an environment without food, water, or oxygen,” he said.

Now isn’t that a hoot?

Billy Liar
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
October 19, 2015 4:46 pm

Borowitz is talking about wamists.

Billy Liar
Reply to  Billy Liar
October 19, 2015 4:47 pm


Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Billy Liar
October 20, 2015 6:07 am

It is a good example of psychological projection. With the exception of this phrase “threatening the ability of Earth to sustain life”, his “description” is an accurate one of his own tribe.

October 19, 2015 9:36 am

I’ve heard my friends who are union labor saying that there may be a big turnout of labor at the polls to vote in the republican primary this time around. That would be a first for most of them.
IMO,the dems have lost most of their common sense swing voters.

Reply to  Dawtgtomis
October 19, 2015 10:16 am

Democrats have pushed the non-college educated white man away with both hands. These are the folks that used to be referred to as the “Reagan Democrats”. I read that Trump is very popular with them…perhaps it’s a macho thing. But Biden has always done well with that group.

Chip Javert
Reply to  katherine009
October 19, 2015 1:01 pm

“But Biden has always done well with that group”
How can you tell? Biden’s only been elected from Delaware. The 1st time he ran for president, he was caught plagiarizing a speech and dropped out; the 2nd time he got 0.9% of Iowa votes…

Reply to  Chip Javert
October 19, 2015 8:06 pm

Ah, well you raise a good point. However, he seems quite popular in the Detroit area (with union members), which concerns me, because I think Hillary is quite vulnerable here, but I think Biden could take Michigan.
I have a theory (which may border on a conspiracy theory) that Biden is waiting to see if the FBI has the goods on Hillary. If they do, he’s in, and then the he Justice department drops the hammer on Hillary.
Personally, I think if it takes you this long to make up your mind, you don’t really want it. And if it takes you this long to make up your mind, we don’t really want you.

October 19, 2015 9:53 am

Leftists know for a fact that they are incorruptible. Therefore the rules that apply to others are just a hindrance when applied to themselves.

October 19, 2015 4:07 pm

Thanks, Paul Driessen.
I suffer when I see the misappropriation of the word “liberal” by the most illiberal thinkers.
Regarding Torquemada, I know a bit, because instead of my original last name, I have the name of city in Spain, Valencia, where the inquisition was extremely effective.

Gary Pearse
October 19, 2015 6:03 pm

As with many egregious actions by those in power, I tend to get a different angle on such reports. When I read of such things by government officials, heads of scientific agencies, university professors, etc I am more amazed at how helpless Americans appear to be to do something about it. I would have thought that there were swift remedies for violating Constitutional amendments, conflict of interest rules, ethical guidelines and anisotropy in application of laws, regulations, rules and the like (think of IRS selectively acting with impunity against Republican non profit corporations, etc.).
Has this giant economic and democratic machine called the USA, which has been an inspiration and a template to the world operated all these years simply on the good faith of the people in power. Did they discipline themselves to act fairly and non partisan in application of such laws, rules, guidlines and regulations. When I hear of checks and balances, I think of apparatus, coded sanctions for violations, and other consequences of straying away from the acceptable righteous courses. Even an engineer can see that a new government wishing to correct these things will have to create the very things I thought were already in place.
I’ve raised this before and asked for legal, constitutional experts or others knowledgeable in this sphere to enlighten me. Can all these public servants just act with impunity? These articles are somewhat pathetic in the helpless tone they convey.

Reply to  Gary Pearse
October 19, 2015 8:26 pm

Gary Pearse commented : “…As with many egregious actions by those in power, ….These articles are somewhat pathetic in the helpless tone they convey.”
Read “And Not A Shot Is Fired” by Kozak to see how it was done in Hungary. Accusations of “conspiracy theory” will inundate anyone drawing a parallel but it’s just one of several examples that the MSM refuses to tell the public. Executive actions are the new norm when the administration wants something and the framework of the Constitution won’t allow it. It’s a slippery slope that unless stopped will lead to a complete breakdown of democracy. And that’s the goal.

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Gary Pearse
October 20, 2015 8:41 am

The “machine” has, I believe gotten cumbersome, and perhaps out of whack a bit. And no, nothing about it could aptly be described as “swift”. The ultimate arbiter, of course, would be the Supreme Court, but even that is an imperfect solution. One thing that has happened over time, I believe, is that the office of the President has gained power that it shouldn’t have, and certain branches, such as the EPA have gained powers which subvert the Constitution. These are things that need to be corrected.
In the end, freedom can never be guaranteed, but has to be continually guarded and fought for, since there are always those seeking to subvert it in the quest for power themselves.

October 20, 2015 9:23 am

The inquisition was set up to PROTECT people charged of crimes. It is an example of early attempts at DUE PROCESS. Before that, you could claim you saw someone flying on a broom, then the townspeople would grab her and burn her at the stake. Poor history in this article. Put it this way, think about the name “Inquisition” as in “Inquiry”.

Reply to  JamesD
October 20, 2015 6:42 pm

oh, man, the revisionist is strong in this one.
the inquisition was the narrative used to justify wholesale expropriation of property.
it was not even close to the ambition of the agw looters.
not only is your historical comprehension impaired, but so is your logic.
‘protect people charged with crimes’, jamesd, when the crimes are ‘witchcraft’ and ‘heresy’?
that’s a protection racket, jamesd.
why do you think those crimes were established in the first place?
oh, sorry- that was a loaded question…lol

Leonard Lane
October 20, 2015 10:35 pm

Well the chickens of the Republican establishment, Chamber of Commerce, and greedy high tech firms are coming home to roost. For at least 20 years conservatives knew that unchecked illegal immigration and overuse of H1B visas were dooming America. How?
Well illegal aliens will vote for the political party that gives them amnesty and welfare largess. Foreign high tech workers will also vote of the political party that gave them visas and let them stay in the country indefinitely.
The leftist Democrats did it to gain more dependents on their plantation knowing that the vast majority of illegal and temporary legal immigrants that stay here forever would vote almost entirely for Democrat candidates.
Even worse, the establishment Republicans knew this too, but opted for short term lower wages and thus more short term profits. Thereby, these traitors sold out their country.
The establishment Republican leaders of the House and Senate did all they could to promote illegal aliens, amnesty, and alien high tech workers knowing the result would be a one party state ruled by the Democrats.
Now the chickens are coming home to roost. Barring a miracle the republic will be lost in the next national election or two. Will these tratitors enjoy living in a leftist tyranny?

Reply to  Leonard Lane
October 21, 2015 10:11 am

Suggest you check your History.
In 2006 Bush signed a bill to build a 700 mile fence at the southern border.
Even many Democrats voted for it!!
One of Obama’s first acts was to cancel the fence saying it would not work.
Wonder what the money was spent on?
“The Senate gave final approval last night to legislation authorizing the construction of 700 miles of double-layered fencing on the U.S.-Mexico border, shelving President Bush’s vision of a comprehensive overhaul of U.S. immigration laws in favor of a vast barrier.
The measure was pushed hard by House Republican leaders, who badly wanted to pass a piece of legislation that would make good on their promises to get tough on illegal immigrants, despite warnings from critics that a multibillion-dollar fence would do little to address the underlying economic, social and law enforcement problems, or to prevent others from slipping across the border. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) surprised many advocates of a more comprehensive approach to immigration problems when he took up the House bill last week.
But in Congress’s rush to recess last night for the fall political campaigns, the fence bill passed easily, 80 to 19, with 26 Democrats joining 54 Republicans in support. One Republican, Sen. Lincoln D. Chafee (R.I.); one independent, Sen. James M. Jeffords (Vt.); and 17 Democrats opposed the bill. The president has indicated that he will sign it.
Mexico’s foreign affairs secretary, Luis Ernesto Derbez, told reporters in Mexico City yesterday that his country plans to send a letter strongly condemning the measure in an effort to dissuade Bush from signing the bill.
If fully constructed, the fence would span a distance equivalent to the distance between Washington and Jacksonville, Fla.
The Secure Fence Act authorizes the construction of at least two layers of reinforced fencing around the border town of Tecate, Calif., and a huge expanse stretching from Calexico, Calif., to Douglas, Ariz. — virtually the entire length of Arizona’s border with Mexico. Another expanse would stretch over much of the southern border of New Mexico, with another section winding through Texas, from Del Rio to Eagle Pass, and from Laredo to Brownsville.
The Department of Homeland Security would be required to install an intricate network of surveillance cameras on the Arizona border by May 30, 2007, with the entire fence set for completion by the end of 2008.
Under the measure, the secretary of homeland security would have 18 months to achieve “operational control” of the U.S. frontier, using unmanned aerial vehicles, ground-based sensors, satellites, radar and cameras to prevent all unlawful U.S. entries. Fortifying those requirements, Congress approved $1.2 billion in a separate homeland security spending bill to bankroll the fence.’

Michael Maddocks
October 21, 2015 5:15 am

We really need to stop using the word ‘Liberal’, which originated from the word ‘Liberty’, to describe authoritarians…

Michael J. Dunn
October 21, 2015 12:44 pm

I always think of Liberal as “liberal with other people’s money.”

October 27, 2015 8:25 am

A liberal is someone who may disagree with you, but will defend to the death your right to do so.
A progressive is someone who may agree with you, but will defend putting you to death for doing so.

%d bloggers like this: