Republican Bob Inglis Reassures Greens That President Trump Will Backflip on Climate Change

Bob Inglis

Bob Inglis

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Bob Inglis (Former R-SC), who was unseated by a landslide primary (71:29%) in 2010 by Tea Party Member Trey Gowdy (R-SC), has been touring Australia, reassuring worried greens that President Trump will soon be brought under control by the climate movement.

Australian coal ‘risks being caught out’ by Trump climate U-turn

The president could spring a surprise with a carbon price, making renewables cheaper, US Republican warns.

Fossil fuel industries in Australia could be left behind by improvements in renewables and the possibility Donald Trump changes tack on a carbon tax, a former US Republican congressman has warned.

In a speech to the [Australian] National Press Club on Wednesday, Bob Inglis, a conservative advocate for private sector action on climate change, called for the United States to take unilateral action by imposing a carbon tax with an import levy on goods made in countries without a carbon price.

Inglis, a congressman for 12 years who lost Republican preselection over his advocacy of a carbon price, argued that conservatives could be persuaded to join a coalition to fight climate change by appeals to the free market or to faith.

Inglis was surprisingly upbeat about the prospect of Trump taking action on climate change. He claimed Trump was “channeling the fears of a fearful people” when he dismissed climate change as a “Chinese hoax” but could not possibly believe that.

“There is some chance that President Trump, may respond to his daughter Ivanka’s interest in climate change.

“There is a chance he may listen to secretary of state Rex Tillerson who, as recently as October was advocating for the same revenue neutral carbon tax we are proposing at [eco-right website] republicEN.org.”

He predicted reality would force Trump to shift, as gas prices increase, coal mining jobs do not return and new technologies will be needed to create jobs.

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/feb/22/australian-coal-risks-being-caught-out-by-trump-climate-u-turn

Bob Inglis seems to think a carbon tax will have more of a stimulus effect on the US economy than cheap energy.

The following is a video of Bob Inglis’ presentation to the National Press Club of Australia;

Advertisements

240 thoughts on “Republican Bob Inglis Reassures Greens That President Trump Will Backflip on Climate Change

    • “Reassuring worried greens that President Trump will soon be brought under control by the climate movement.” Read envirosocialists(cultural Marxism) not climate movement? Me think people will bring this cultural Marxism with its “domination of Nature idea” under control instead?

      • “President Trump will soon be brought under control by the climate movement.”
        No chance.
        but there is an alternative on the horizon;
        “Exclusive: United States could become an ‘associate member’ of the Commonwealth
        The Royal Commonwealth Society is making plans to open a branch in the United States, with a view to one day bringing America into the fold as an ‘associate member’.
        The project, which is said to be backed by the Queen, has come about in part as a result of Donald Trump’s fondness for Britain and the Royal Family.”
        says today’s telegraph; why just associate, common Yanks go all the way, with Prince C as the head of the state, eventually. /sarc

      • “Exclusive: United States could become an ‘associate member’ of the Commonwealth
        The Royal Commonwealth Society is making plans to open a branch in the United States, with a view to one day bringing America into the fold as an ‘associate member.”

        Or… The Commonwealth will be brought into the “fold” as a Protectorate of the United States of America. And Price C can go back to his crayons and nappy nap time.

      • amirlach February 25, 2017 at 11:43 am
        “Exclusive: United States could become an ‘associate member’ of the Commonwealth
        The Royal Commonwealth Society is making plans to open a branch in the United States, with a view to one day bringing America into the fold as an ‘associate member.”

        Very good catch by amirlach.

        Except the Trump Administration has already said that it would make bilateral trade deals with other nations. Also, the Commonwealth Countries are committed to sustainable development. This, in my view, disqualifies them to be members of the Commonwealth, because a Commonwealth Country must have majority rule. And the citizens of a country under tight international restrictions and regulation of its energy, agriculture and natural resource use is not under self-rule.

      • Inglis doesn’t even sound like a RINO. He sounds like a Progressive, which is probably why he got booted out by the voters. He’s doubly a liar in that he falsely ran as a Republican to start with. Anybody stupid enough to listen to him in Australia deserves the results of their delusion.

        All of these people forget they are dealing with a decisive business man who tries to keep his promises. He’s like President Taft, who came after Wilson. My own belief is he is a father and grandfather who suddenly woke up and realized if he didn’t step up to derail the coming socialist globalism, he would watch as all opportunities to accumulate wealth were taken away from them

      • Who cares? The Repubs haven’t done anything meaningful in 40 years. Trump is the first real change in a different direction than to the left.

      • In Bob Inglis situation, YES! The man is a grade A moron, and I can’t believe that the climate movement dug him up and are trotting him around Australia giving speeches of this kind.

        The man started his career as a supposed “hard line” conservative and “devout” evangelical; but while he was in Congress, he moved more and more to the left (the typical “Washington Disease) and when Obama won the 2008 elections, he became one of Obama’s few reliable Republican supporters. When the Tea Party became a thing in 2010, he attacked and ridiculed it (as the Obama administration asked him to do) and he was rewarded by being thrown out of office by his voters, in a landslide.

        After that repudiation he decided that he could ride the Climate Change gravy train back into power, and in 2012 he set up some foundation to that effect. The funding for this foundation is rather murky; but this has been the only employment he’s been able to find for the last 7 years.

        2 items that say all that needs to be said about Bob Inglis:

        “Inglis was the recipient of the 2015 Profile in Courage Award from the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation “for the courage he demonstrated when reversing his position on climate change .”

        “In October 2016, Inglis was one of thirty GOP ex-lawmakers to sign a public letter condemning Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump. He had previously stated, in a May 2016 interview with Chris Hayes, that “under no circumstances” could he vote for Trump.”

      • when he dismissed climate change as a “Chinese hoax” but could not possibly believe that.

        Well he does not currently believe that so why talk about it as though he does.

        Funny how the left are locked on one tweet Trump made in 2012. Hell, that was more that a full presidential term ago when he was not even a candidate. Hardly a reflection of his current statements about climate science corruption. He now has a much clearer grasp of the relevant points.

        That they have to latch onto fake representations of what Trump/s current position is means they either don’t even know what his position is or are unable to make a relevant comment about it.

      • “Funny how the left are locked on one tweet Trump made in 2012.”

        He said it at a campaign rally sometime last year, I believe.

      • Er, yes. More than one tweet. In 2009 he signed a letter calling for action on climate. By2010 he had changed his mind, calling for the Nobel committee to take back AL Gores prize. He wrongly said that scientists admitted it was a con. In 2012 he said it was created by the Chinese. In 2013 he declared it a hoax, apparently because it as cold outside. In 2014 he repeated that it was a hoax in at least 5 tweets. In 2015 “Trump appeared on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show, where he said he was “not a believer in man-made” warming.” In 2015 he repeated that he was not a believer in man made global warming, said it was ridiculous to worry about it. He said “So Obama’s talking about all of this with the global warming and the—a lot of it’s a hoax, it’s a hoax. I mean, it’s a money-making industry, okay? It’s a hoax, a lot of it”

        In 2016 he said that his China comment was a joke in the same sentence that he repeated the claim “A lot of people are making a lot of money…And I often joke that this is done for the benefit of China. Obviously, I joke. But this is done for the benefit of China…”. He promised to “stop all payments of US tax dollars to UN global warming programs.”

        In 2016 he denied saying climate change was a Chinese hoax, despite the plain fact that we can all read his tweet.

        So more than one tweet.

      • Trump only made the comment about this being a Chinese hoax once in a tweet, which he later clarified as joking. He was being sarcastic because China never has to reduce emissions and the US does, thus allowing China to steal all our manufacturing jobs. while we sit here paying billions for goods we could have made here if we didn’t buy into the global warming nonsense.

        He does continue to refer to climate change (global warming) as a hoax, which seems quite accurate.

      • seaice1 February 23, 2017 at 8:44 am

        He wrongly said that scientists admitted it was a con.

        He has referenced the “climategate E-mails” after reading some of them its clear they were “”admitting it was a con”.

        As for intelligent people changing their minds upon learning new information that is normal and can be expected of people who can think for themselves. I mean after you, seaice1 read through the climategate E-mails it was crystal clear to you that it was a “con job”.
        How you act after word merely define your ethics and personal loyalties.

        michael

      • He seems a nice, well-meaning, poorly informed idiot to me. Trey Gowdy is triple the man he is and I am hoping Gowdy will be the next president after Trump shuffles off the stage. Have a look at some of his video’s on utube, here he is talking about law and his respect for it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzZT9gW5gp8

      • “Funny how the left are locked on one tweet Trump made in 2012.”

        He said it at a campaign rally sometime last year, I believe.———————————————————————————————————————————————–

        No Jeff…. You were told that he did. They were quoting the 2012 remarks and attributing them to recent speeches….

        Trump, during his campaign speeches, was pointing out the fact that Chinese business and Chinese Government were building huge numbers of coal fired power stations and that they would be loving the fact America and American industry was hogtied by Climate Change regulations….. The media tried to create a narrative that Trump thought Climate Change was a “Chinese Plot” during his election campaign because of the 2012 tweet.

        Fake News in action.

    • This gentleman is irrelevant, but desperately seeking for a seat somewhere at the table – even if it means the kid’s table.

    • RINO is on the money. I live in Inglis’ former congressional district and voted for him when he first ran on the campaign “Take back Congress” or something like that. I believe he was conservative back then, but got eaten up with the D.C. glamour, illusion of self-importance, feeding at the public trough, etc. and became the RINO that got him run out of town in his last election. I ride past his “farm” in Travelers Rest, SC frequently, and I wish someone in Australia would ask him what he raises on his “farm.” It looks like ordinary forest and a sort of two-acre equestrian course to me. I doubt that he spends much time there any more. I went to a couple of his town-hall meetings here in Greenville during his second swing in Congress, and his green bias and lack of knowledge about climate and energy issues was obvious. The Australia National Press Club is wasting its money. But that’s about what you can expect from a press club.

    • President Trump has sufficient experience with people like Bobby: “You’re FIRED!…AGAIN” is the only appropriate response.

      (The Greens are really getting desperate when they have to dredge up a guy that was destroyed by Trey “The Bulldog” Gowdy.)

      • Being fired by your constituents would send any politician to far-off places where they can muster some self-esteem and a “following” again. Maybe the progressives can get him a birth certificate and a job down under?

  1. What a maroon !!

    Australia sells most of its coal to Japan, India and China. none of which will be affected by what the US does on coal.

    And if he really thinks that DTrump will be changing his mind on coal he is living a fantasy land, like basically all AGW cultists.

    There are very good reasons he got dumped .. and he still hasn’t realised it. DUMB !!

    • Agree 100℅.
      This jackass is delusional, engaging in wishful thinking, is not a Republican, has zero clout or influence, and just plain does not know what the hell he is talking about.
      That said…Let him keep on reassuring the warmistas everything will be fine and the end of the world is proceeding right on schedule.

    • What are you talking about? He’s a genius. Think about it. He’s getting paid… to go to Australia… and tell them exactly what they want to hear. If I could get a stand-up gig like that, I’d take it in a heart beat.

      • By that logic, the entire AGW scare is genius. An Emperor’s clothes Pardoner’s tax that requires the production of nothing, no results, and to charge citizens for the air they breath and to convince them to pay more for less.
        It’s genius, alright – albeit of the Lex Luthor variety.

    • China would gladly buy clean, high-BTU-content coal from the US if we were allowed to sell it to them.

      Oregon won’t let coal from WY and MT be shipped to the Columbia River for loading on slow boats to China because “death trains”.

      • “Gloateus Maximus February 23, 2017 at 12:22 pm

        China would gladly buy clean, high-BTU-content coal from the US if we were allowed to sell it to them.”

        That’s why they are exploring in Africa, Ethiopia in particular. I was in Addis Ababa in 2007, and the hotel I was in was full of geologists.

    • Probably the government funded Australian Broadcasting Corporation. It’s an unaccountable GreenLeft Marxist collective dedicated to the destruction of Western Civillization.

    • Hello Forrest and Jannie.
      He was brought to Australia by The Australia Institute and The US Studies Centre situated at Sydney University.
      The Australia Institute is a Left/Green Think Tank with well known luvvies here such as Ben Oquist, Clive Hamilton and Richard Denniss.
      I think Forrest would be acquainted with them as Denniss was a former director and, formerly also, senior advisor to Greens Leader Bob Brown. It is your everyday hack Luvvie activists organisation masquerading as an independent body.
      First port of call was to The Press Club then Mr Irrelevant, as Pat above described him, did the rounds of the ABC News Current Affairs/ShowBiz Circuit to preach to the converted on a 2 week tour. Pro Climate and Anti Trump.
      The US Studies centre set up at Sydney Uni also purports to be an independent body but mostly takes an anti conservative position and made a complete goose of itself before, during and after the USA election as it got nothing right whatsoever about the election.
      In accord with all of such ‘Hillary For Queen of the Republic’ organisations.

      • Much obliged Robert. I don’t know Mr Denniss, but back in the day I had several opportunities to talk with Bob Brown. I held his advocacy on natural habitats in high regard. His supporters, however, were completely unhinged.

    • agree re helmet laws
      i sold my bike n wont ride again while that laws in place
      all my childhood on pushbike and very few spills and never any harm bar feet and ankles on chain damages.
      oh and remember the days of culottes any women out there?
      NOT wise to ride wearing those:-)

      • Really?

        Using the same logic, you should give up driving until the repeal tge law about wearing a seat belt if you’ve never had a serious car accident. The fact is that almost all cyclists’ deaths are due to head injuries.

    • I spent a month in Holland last summer where the bicycle is king. Less than 1% ware Helmets and never saw a high viz vest once.
      Truly liberal!!

    • He must have taken something, else he could not text that soul-ridden this hahnebüchenen nonsense into the camera while even the ABC moderator poses quite critical questions!

    • I wonder if the Aussies are really dumb enough (apparently the greenies think so) to not figure out that he was thrashed in the primary for a very good reason – his judgement is seriously flawed! Everything he says should therefore be put through that filter.

  2. This is a guy without a political party. His Republican Party rejected him. (And Trey Gowdy is more popular now than when he drubbed him in 2010).

    As a white male (and I assume a heterosexual), Inglis has no place in the Democratic Party either.

    He is desparate to be part of something. So he grasps at straws to tell other disillusioned Rinos-democrats feel good stories. My suggestion is he get some good weed, and chill out and check-out and enjoy his congressional pension. No one wants his message.

    • figures!! good ol aunty
      never miss a chance do they?
      newscorp also running it misleadingly as more factual than fictional dreaming too for last 2 days.
      comments on their page were pretty amusing
      people are well awake now;-)

  3. Well even I think he’s wrong…

    Australia’s coal mines and coal power plants are all heading for stranded asset status whatever the US does though…

    • The only way Oz’s coal gets stranded will be if The Donald successfully unleashes our coal industry and we steal Oz’s markets.

      • Gotta agree with you there, David! Since we have some of the world’s best coal for making steel here in Queensland, we are probably safe for a while :)

      • The lower transport costs to move Aussie coal to China and India makes US mined coal uncompetitive for those markets. China has built so many new coal-powered generation plants their is little chance of China (or India ) demand slackening to the point Aussie miners have to worry.

        And the way carbon emissions are scored-accounted, it’s not the coal producing country that must account under the Paris Agreement but the consumer country of that coal that the emissions go under. And China has a free pass to 2030.

    • This ‘stranded asset’ idea popped up a lot at the Guardian recently.
      The idea is that fossil fuels will become so expensive relative to alternatives (renewables) that they won’t be economical to extract.

      Sounds familiar? It’s actually the old Peak Oil fallacy repackaged.

      The cost of fossil fuels is expected to rise for two reasons:
      1) They will become scarce as they are consumed
      2) The costs of Global warming will be transferred on to the “polluter” making them cost more.

      Point 1 is just the classic Peak Oil mistake. It takes no account of innovation.

      Point 2 is wrong for different reasons, ignoring the fact that the costs of Global Warming are actually unknown. Primarily the flaw in point 2 is that people need energy. And if the world is suffering they need cheap energy all the more. No country is going to hamstring itself with silly regressive taxes to pay for any costs of global warming. They will go for cheapest energy possible to stimulate the economy. Tidal barriers and air conditioning cost money.

      Also, if fossil fuel companies are sued for future negative externalities then they could counter-sue for past positive externalities. So far warming has been beneficial and is expected to be for the next 0.5°C at least. That means there is a very long time before any fossil fuel becomes a ‘stranded asset’.

      • The “stranded asset” meme is a very clever tactic by the Left to appeal to the rational business instincts of resource trading countries like Australia to comply with their CAGW tax demands. If we were forced by big players such as the USA and the EUSSR to comply or be cut out, we would naturally comply. We can only hope that Pres Trump is as good as his word, and put an end to this insidious blackmail.

      • “No country is going to hamstring itself with silly regressive taxes to pay for any costs of global warming.”

        The problem with that is there are still enough politicians out there dumb enough to do just that, because of their insatiable need to be seen to take the moral high ground (as they see it). Most western countries have already partly gone down this road. Hopefully Trump’s election will initiate the onset of good sense elsewhere, but it’ll take a while (and will require a lot of politicians to either commit major U-turns or be voted out).

      • Now the probability is that the USA is going to kick the whole crackpot Green scheme into touch, the remainder will follow like a rat up a drain.

        They’re just waiting for an influential administration to break ranks, and they’ll use the “if the USA aren’t wasting their money, we won’t either” argument.

        President Trump has killed the whole foul scam stone dead.

      • @ Dave S
        You said:
        “No country is going to hamstring itself with silly regressive taxes”
        Perhaps, perhaps not.
        But a state like California most certainly will.

      • if fossil fuel companies are sued for future negative externalities then they could counter-sue for past positive externalities

        Interesting… How many people have not died due to the use of fossil fuels? I suppose the absurdist’s response to this could be deaths during war caused by fossil fuel-powered planes, tanks, etc. You just know some “activist” would bring this up and it’d be elevated to “serious discussion” by the media.

      • And there is a lot of noise in the MSM claiming how solar is now cheaper than coal.. Except that coal can guarantee supply and solar cost per kWH is not strictly comparable because you can only generate rated capacity for about 1/3 of the day, if the weather is good. Way less if not. And solar is only cheap because of the crazy subsidies that led to the growth of the installation and supply industry. So yeah, solar is cheaper if you have taxpayer money to bankroll it and you’ve coal and gas to feed your network – without that not only is it expensive, it’s also unreliable.
        Expensive, batteries fix all that of course – it’s just we haven’t got them yet. But don’t apply that argument to clean coal please because it’s awful inconvenient. (yes that was sarc).

        When on earth are people going to wake up? Does it take more grid failures? And although I’m in Perth, I’m not so confident about the future of our grid. Electricity and water are two essentials to modern civilisation that government should own and run – properly skilled and resourced of course, if you want to opt out, collect rainwater and go off grid you should be able to do it – at your own cost. Having said that, I’m happy to listen to anyone’s success stories of electricity privatisation. Success = lower prices for consumers that it, not more money to sharehodlers. I have no doubt of the ability of privatisation to supply the latter!

      • If the price goes up, it means people find it valuable enough to pay the higher price. This then stimulates increased production.

        This is typical of the muddle headed thinking of the greens. A low price would lead to stranded assets, not a high price.

    • Hello Griffy,
      I will make one of my famous predictions for you.
      Next month, the Heywood power plant in Victoria shuts down. As SA is critically dependent on the Heywood Interconnector, their power situation will be critical. They will go from “blackout-a-month” to grid collapse. The economic consequences will be devastating. Meanwhile, back in Victoria, without the Heywood plant, Victoria joins the “blackout-a-month” club. (Is Hazelwood, Vic. still on for shutdown in April?)
      When the populace finally is forced to take full measure of “Green Power”, that will be the end of it.
      Both states will build new coal fired plants as fast as they possibly can, just to keep the lights on.
      Exactly as happened in Germany.
      The coal mines will do just fine.

      • An advantage of living in Western Australia is that there is that huge Nullarbor Plain between us and the Eastern States ie it’s way too far to build an interconnector to the eastern states power systems.
        We have our own deluded green power activists here but we have not gone as far down that road as some other states. We can see what is happening in other states and back away slowly while our power system still works.

      • The Victorian grid damned near collapsed earlier this month when we had an exceptionally warm few days all along the east coast and in SA.
        The inter-connectors to SA and QLD were both well into overload status.
        Partly due to starting problems with some gas powered generators (low supply gas pressure)
        And partly with line failures.
        Now imagine what happens when we remove a major supply like Haywood and the same situation happens again.

      • “Both states will build new coal fired plants as fast as they possibly can”

        I understand that modern ultrasupercritical coal plant is already in the planning stage.

        One thing the Greenies like Griff consistently underestimate is human ingenuity – probably because Lefties entirely lack such talent themselves – so never allow for engineering advances such as that allowing us access to ‘tight’ oil and gas that killed the ‘Peak Oil’ paranoia stone dead.

        They’re doing the same to coal too, modern technology increases the efficiency of coal plant and will cause a renaissance in its construction.

    • Griffipoo,

      What will become literally stranded assets are all the Chinese windmillls polluting my area of operation, once subsidies are scrapped. They will be expensive to remove scrap.

    • The biosphere approves of coal mines 100%, Griff.

      Have you eaten your coal-riven CO2 enhanced veggies today?

      • Yeah, and in the UK, we’re now ‘advised’ to eat ten (10) [not 5-a-day] a day of fruit and veg.
        Good varied diet and all that.
        Lower stroke and heart attack risk it is stated.

        But won’t that increase methane emissions??

        Auto

    • @ Griff
      February 23, 2017 at 2:58 am : So, our girl griff is trying to devalue Oz coal. Obviously helpful for Barclays in picking those assets up cheap. Fr@ud.

      • Yes and don’t forget all our other customers – Thailand, Hong Kong, Korea etc. all building more coal fired power stations.

      • Fat chance.
        Only Norway sits on a coal deposit that at current global consumption levels would last 3000 years.

        We will never be out of coal.
        The same goes for oil and gas.

        We’re living on a carbon planet you know.

        Peak oil and peak coal just another Fake News message from green propagandists, opportunists, snake oil sales men, and those who hate human kind, human civilization and prosperity.

    • “Griff February 23, 2017 at 2:58 am

      Australia’s coal mines and coal power plants are all heading for stranded asset status whatever the US does though…”

      Yeah right Griif, you still don’t have a clue what happens in Australian mining. Did you get that tid bit from The Guardian? Australia exports almost all the coal it extracts and we have ~500 years of known reserves at currant extraction rates, and that is not diminishing any time soon. South Australia is a basket case and a shining example to the rest of the country and world how rediculous re-newables are. Our politicians better beware the growing anger within Australia at feel good green policies, but most Aussie won’t take any action until the footy goes off TV and warm beer, then there will be rioting on the streets.

      • “Did you get that tid bit from The Guardian?”

        Grifter gets all his knowledge about science and energy from thr Guardian.

        Well, that or the usual crackpot alarmist blogs such as smugblog and unrealscience, anyway.

    • BP (you know who they are, right?) don’t believe in stranded assets, skanky.

      Seems like by 2035, coal will be a lower percentage of energy, but still used in greater volume than now.

      http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/bp-magazine/conversations/chief-economist-on-energy-outlook.html

      Now, how to believe, “BP Global Energy trends: what’s the outlook for 2035?” or a mendacious little wind-up creep trying to get a rise out of people on a blog…

      Funny thing, that piece doesn’t seem particularly optimistic as to ‘Unreliables’ either, increasing from 4% to 5% by 2035…

    • I would suggest that Trump has shown no real weakening from the backlash so far to his policies. He is also a person who understands that the economics must work for it to be sustainable and effective. A carbon tax is neither sustainable or effective. Also, AGW is not on anyones priority list and his EPA administrator is not going to fall for thetripe as well. But, of course all can change, but I highly (hopefully) doubt it

      • Institute a legally binding Carbon Tax that is also permanently frozen and at $.01 (a penny) per gigaton. Any attempt to modify the tax causes its demise and forever restricts/eliminates any further attempts to create a replacement tax
        Carbon Tax exists…No one notices

      • Bryan – I doubt it is possible to craft such a piece of legislation. Our government in Aus introduced a “renewable energy target” in 2007 at the time I think it was about 2%. Now it is been ratcheted up to 26% and one party wants 50%.

      • One agency? He has already mooted the end of the Drug Czar position. The DEA may be on the chopping block. The reason? There is no Federal Drug Prohibition Amendment. The Federales are not acting in accord with the Constitution.

    • “Trump is under severe pressure from the ‘deep state’ elite USA faction on almost all his policies including so called global warming.

      John McCain is probably Trumps most bitter opponent.

      It’s not at all clear that Trump will be able so resist the political and media pressure.”

      The president has a lot of power and a lot of options. Plus, Trump has the majority of the Republicans in Congress on his side. Plus, Trump has 62 million+ supporters pulling for him. Plus, Trump is Trump.

      McCain, and these other RINO’s can give Trump a lot of trouble politically by siding with the MSM against him and lending their stature to the MSM lies, but they can’t do much to stop Trump’s agenda. McCain is a side-show. For his biggest interest, national security, he will have no argument with Trump because Trump is going to make McCain very happy with how he handles U.S. national defense. You won’t hear many complaints out of McCain. Even McCain praised Trump’s new appointment for his national security advisor.

      The RINO’s are making themselves known early. That will give us a good head start on replacing them in the next election.

      Let’s see, the list starts with Murkowski, Collins, McCain (he probably won’t run again), possibly Lindsay Graham, possibly Rubio, maybe Ben Sasse. Depending on how obstructionist they decide to be.

      Love that Murkowski and Collins put their Teacher’s Union donations ahead of the education of American children. They lost my vote and support right there.

      • “McCain, and these other RINO’s can give Trump a lot of trouble politically by siding with the MSM against him and lending their stature to the MSM lies, but they can’t do much to stop Trump’s agenda.”

        The Dinosaur Media is about the only thing Americans trust less than politicians like McCain.

      • McCain has always been the medias favorite Republican. One who can be counted on to denounce any Republican in power on a moments notice.
        McCain actually believed that this media love affair with him would translate into an easy path to the White House. Like many before him, he discovered that when given the choice between a fake Republican and a real Democrat, the media would always chose the Democrat.
        Since losing, he has redoubled his efforts to punish those conservatives who failed to back him sufficiently when he needed them. (Not that McCain has ever supported conservatives when it mattered.)

      • McCain has gotten a lot of mileage out of being a war hero, getting himself beaten up in an NVA prison when he could have been released and contributed his knowledge of the POW situation to help the war effort.

        We’ve since seen how vindictive and petty he can be, and how he can be bought for a puff piece in the Washington Post.

      • McCain is ready to back any anti-Trump policy and doesnt care whose company he has to keep.
        He can be relied on by the media to denounce Trump at every opportunity
        On foreign policy he represents the faction supporting continued regime change and pointless wars around the world.
        Look at his record on Iraq, Libya and Syria where he would have bombed Assad .
        He doesn’t seem to mind that this policy would risk a nuclear war
        He is too stupid to see that net result of all these policies has been to strengthen Iran in the longer term.
        General Michael Flynn has been forced to resign as Donald Trump’s national security adviser.
        The pressure on Trump is immense.
        Once McCain and others force Trump into changing direction on foreign policy other Trump election promises will come under the same pressure.

      • “McCain has gotten a lot of mileage out of being a war hero, getting himself beaten up in an NVA prison when he could have been released and contributed his knowledge of the POW situation to help the war effort.”

        I have been a big critic of McCain on some occasions, but you can’t fault him for his behavior as a Prisoner of War. McCain didn’t chose to get himself “beat up”, the North Vietnamese started beating on him as soon as they pulled him from the crashed aircraft. When they got McCain to the prison camp, they hung him by his broken arms from the rafters in the ceiling. Try that sometime.

        McCain was beaten severely for a long time before he was offered his chance at freedom. But he honorably, and smartly, refused, saying that if anyone was released, it had to be the most senior man at the prison camp. The North Vietnamese were hoping for a big propaganda victory (McCain’s father was the U.S. Admiral in charge in Vietnam at the time), but McCain didn’t give them what they wanted.

        McCain may have some issues today with his political thinking, but he is definitely a war hero in every sense of the word. You have to give him that. Although that’s certainly not a reason to refrain from criticizing him now for his current political positions. So, carry on.

      • Mike McMillan

        Whatever you think about John McCain as a politician (my opinion: not conservative enough; definitely not presidential caliber; attacks Trump on issues he gave passes to Obama & bitter about his presidential run), your comments about his Vietnam war hero status are seriously out of line.

        Yea, he was offered early release by the Vietnamese, but he was the son of a USN admiral and was courageous enough not to accept it. For his 5 years as a POW he was awarded the silver star, three bronze stars, the legion of merit, and a purple heart.

        I’m pretty certain he has you solidly outclassed in the war hero department.

        Please give a credible example of when you thought he inappropriately used his POW status.

      • One thing we learned about hostage situations (prior to 9/11) was that if you have a chance to get away, get away. You’re one fewer hostage for your side to worry about, one fewer bargaining chip for the bad guys.

        The U.S. invests a lot of money and resources in its pilots. McCain couldn’t have taught anyone anything about flying, but he had valuable information about the prison system. Wasted while he sat in it.

        McCain coming home when they offered to release him would have been a great propaganda victory. Wow, we might have actually lost the war had that happened.

        McCain pulls the same stunt as our Senator Cornyn, Goldwater conservative for the primary and general, then RINO sellout once he gets back with his ruling class buddies in D.C. The slander and double-dealing McCain pulled against J.D. Hayworth in the 2010 primary should have convinced everyone of his narrow view of honor. Same underhanded stuff against Romney, et al. in the 2008 Presidential primary. He gets the nomination, then suddenly he’s too “honorable” to go all out against the least experienced man to ever run.

        As far as being outclassed in the war hero department, I have the standard complement of ribbons and stories. I didn’t go over there to be a hero. The only guy I know who did was Lurch, who wrote himself up for 3 Purple Hearts when he found out they were putting him on cardboard PT river boat instead of a big steel offshore cruise ship.

        McCain is a good argument for term limits.

      • “McCain coming home when they offered to release him would have been a great propaganda victory. Wow, we might have actually lost the war had that happened.”

        We actually did lose the war because of propaganda. General Giap, the North Vietnamese Supreme Commander, and the architect of the Vietnam war, said that American troops won every battle in Vietnam, but it didn’t matter because North Vietnam had the U.S. news media and the U.S. anti-war movement on their side, and *that* was why North Vietnam won the war. And he was right. The U.S. radical anti-war Left gave South Vietnam away to the enemy after the U.S. military had won the war, just like in Iraq. The U.S. military wins a war, and the U.S. radical Left washes their hands of it as soon as possible, throwing our allies and the people we were defending to the wolves in the process. The radical Left is unfit to defend the United States and its interests. They have proven so time after time. If they are in charge, look out!

        No, John McCain accepting release wouldn’t have caused enough propaganda to lose the war, there was already enough of that to accomplish that mission, but can you imagine the uproar and fieldday the MSM and the anti-war Left would have had, had the son of the Admiral in charge of U.S. naval forces in Vietnam been released while leaving other Americans behind.

        The anti-war atmosphere back at that time is similar to the hatred and vitriol going on today from the MSM and the radical Left about Donald Trump. Lots of fake news. Lots of lies. Over and over and over, again.

  4. I’m just glad that I wasn’t chugging a beer when I read that Inglis was unseated
    by none other than Trey Gowdy.

      • My favorites are those in which Gowdy simply destroys Hillary Clinton on a number of issues.

        From her smirks and lame attempts at re-direction, you can tell she’s not accustomed to the heat of honest interrogation.

      • i was sort of expecting gowdy to get on the trump ticket as vp.
        he’s got these special boots for stomping Huma’s Hairballs.

  5. It’s possible that the Australian Greens wrote the script fir him, to support their agenda. In Oz we have come to accept as normal politicians lying and backstabbing, and doing the opposite of what they promise before elected. It’s rare for them to do otherwize. So many of us would probably believe him.

  6. We’ve already forgotten Bob Inglis here in South Carolina and we don’t want to end up like South Australia

  7. “He predicted reality would force Trump to shift,”

    Why would he think that? Reality has done nothing to change warmists minds for the last 20 years.

    • Indeed, Rinos like Inglis and the climate alarmists have proven impervious to reailty, and are certainly in no position to say what reality will do to anyone, because they wouldn’t know reality if it bit them in the ass.

      • Look at Griff. Weekly he pops up to tell us how successful and economical wind and solar are. According to him, all we need are enough batteries and we can scrap all other forms of power.

  8. Inglis personifies the typical swamp dweller.
    Trey would have still beaten this idiot with his hands tied and blindfolded.

    • Hard to pick a best comment from all these, my sentiments many times. He’s the epitome of a cretinous little molester of the nation he took money and a vow to keep UNmolested, in some over-arching sense

  9. Why would a former US politician go to Australia to warn about coal? Why not bring that message to nearby Virginia?

  10. Good Lord. This mans private spiritual journey is going to cost us how much. To our many Aussie friends let me assure them that his replacement Trey Gowdy is a far superior representative of the people.

    The bit about his conversion by his 18 year old son is reminiscent of Jimmy Carter’s deep discussions of nuclear proliferation with his 12 year old daughter. Touching but meaningless.

  11. It is always a bit jarring to see an example of someone who is so divorced from reality. It is one thing to see Looney-Tunes college brats, quite another to see it in people seeking political power.

    • Those old loonies started off in colleges, so you can see what value you should hold for those colleges.

    • This loon got his hare-brained scheme from his brainwashed infantile son. Or maybe he doesn’t really believe the garbage he peddles, but likes getting paid to spread nonsense.

  12. From the article: “In a speech to the [Australian] National Press Club on Wednesday, Bob Inglis, a conservative advocate for private sector action on climate change, called for the United States to take unilateral action by imposing a carbon tax with an import levy on goods made in countries without a carbon price.”

    That doesn’t sound very conservative to me. Sounds like something Barack Obama would say.

    Not to worry, Trump says he does not support a carbon tax. Even if he did, the Republican Congress does not support a carbon tax, so a carbon tax is not going to happen in the United States. Period.

    • Trump is open to a border adjustment tax, which would make export income tax-free. And Interior Secretary Zinke is committed to expanding coal export terminals on the west coast. Combine those two things with zapping the Clean Power Plan and US coal exports could skyrocket.

  13. SC voters wisely rejected this dweeb tool for the prosecutorial Gowdy, despite the latter’s funny hair.

    Now if they’d just primary Senator Graham…

  14. A Rebublican who lost to another Republican would be hard pressed to collect speaking and lobbying fees unless he/she is willing to sell assets to the devil. IMO this man has put his own greed above the good of the people he is supposed to still hold precious.

  15. Pigs could fly too, especially when vacationing in Australia and providing the necessary biased comments for the biased press. Al Gore already did it.

  16. Lol, dear Eric Worrall, now you have exaggerated. I am not surprised if the special Bob English here was shoved from the political tomb by the climate professionals and alarmists and is now putting on a Kafka PR tour. “Oh, he was invited by Australian Native Americans who feared that the Ayers Rock might be flooded in the future, how pretty, he was a former Republican deputy, even prettier” No, I think the faithful to the AGW-Wonderland are in General in Trumps Cabinet in the Poor Minority. It looks as if Vice Mike Pence has been a climate skeptic far and far deeper than Donald Trump himself. The others also have nothing to do with “climate-friendly” scenarios, so that even Rex Tillerson’s moderate attitude is nothing but the attitude of a Lukewarmer. He was just a smooth CEO, because one sometimes conceals his true views. Either way, Trump is not alone in his team, and it would be a political suicide for Trump to move off his agenda now. The US-American will judge this agenda in 4 years, but Trump does not commit on Day 33 Harakiri. Why? Because of the greens in Australia or the fake smile of Bob Englis, who had showed since long years, he is a member of the green Movement?

  17. Government types are always convinced that if give everything to them and let them control it as they see fit, it will perfect the world.

  18. Isn’t this scraping the bottom of the talking head barrel? I suppose they could find some former city council members at the airport with sufficient bias creds.

    • I have to agree with him 200%! The only fruit one should ever find on a pizza is tomato.

      Just to incite further debate, I firmly believe in beetroot on burgers, however :)

  19. “Bob Inglis (Former R-SC), who was unseated by a landslide primary (71:29%) in 2010 by Tea Party Member Trey Gowdy (R-SC)”
    The voters of Inglis’ district demonstrated just what they think of him.

  20. And team Trump just keeps rolling along implementing the agenda he ran on and doing their best to fulfil his promises to do that which his supporters elected him to do despite the total and complete opposition and resistance of the democrats, the deep state, and their press. I really can’t find a parallel to what is happening now in American history. Sure there are similarities here and there at different times but nothing in our history that I can identify that comes close to the whole package of what we see transpiring. It really is something to behold.

    And I take this Bob Inglis characters address to the Australian press, which BTW is pretty much every bit as biased as our own, to be a sign of the weakness of the opposition. This is the best the opposition can bring forth to bolster opposition to Team Trumps agenda? A failed RINO politician? It is as laughable as the Hollywood types thinking they really can effect the vote and the opinions of the US electorate.

  21. Not mentioned in the above is the concept of demand. I might have missed it.
    Soo — The Stone Age did not end because the need for tools declined.
    — Horses did not disappear from city streets because transport was no longer needed.
    And so on.
    When a better source of energy for electricity is found, coal will be replaced for that purpose. (Note, in parts of the USA that better source is gas.

  22. Weak, weepy, obviously ingratiating, etc.etc. etc.. this self described conservative republican is the poster boy for Trump winning the primary. Guess this gig beats working for a living.

  23. Trump hung the portrait if Andrew Jackson in the oval office. That and FDR would be close to what we are experiencing. Wonder if the will still take Jackson off the money.

      • Yeah, how dare a US President remove a bust of Churchill that was loaned to George W Bush and not him! Oh, and the UK has zero busts of US Presidents at #10 Downing Street.

      • A grand total of nobody has claimed that Obama had no right to move the bust.
        The point is the message that moving the bust sends.

      • “Yeah, how dare a US President remove a bust of Churchill that was loaned to George W Bush and not him! Oh, and the UK has zero busts of US Presidents at #10 Downing Street”

        I don’t get your point?

        Obama didn’t want Churchill because he saw him as a defender of imperialism, which he most certainly was. But he was also the greatest British ally the US ever had and one of the greatest wartime statesmen and leaders in world history. BTW, he was also the son of a American mother.

        Being a Conservative I detest FDRs “New Deal” and believe it to be a key element of the socialist rot which has taken us so far from what was intended in the Constitution. But I would never be such a myopic ass as to ignore or deny FDRs effective leadership of the US during WW II despite his misguided and damaging policies before the war.

      • Obama hates the British because during the Kenyan war of independance (a typically bloody affair with white farmers, their families and black workers being butchered in the manner that only Africans can achieve – and what they did to captured British soldiers is unmentionable) the British army fought against the Mau Mau terrorists and one of his relatives (uncle?) was a member of the Mau Mau and was inept enough to be captured by the British army who, unsurprisingly, were somewhat less than polite to him.

        Obama has never forgiven the British for that.

  24. “…The president could spring a surprise with a carbon price, making renewables cheaper, US Republican warns….”

    Pricing carbon in the manner that this ninny imagines has nothing to do with markets–it is command and control, dirigiste economics. It does not actually make renewables cheaper, but rather makes all energy more expensive and distorts all economic thinking. I wish it were possible to explain economics to such people.

    • bingo…and it lines the pockets of as many advocates as possible at the expense of the true cost leaders

  25. Why wouldn’t China push the catastrophic man made climate hoax. They get to flood north America with solar panels while building coal fired generators hand over fist. And they don’t have to worry about changing their image till 2030.

    • And, when 2030 comes along, wanna bet China will point to the failed predictions of the climate alarmists and decide they don’t need to change their image after all. China knows how to play the game for all it’s worth.

  26. What an example of a cynical banal man. His constituents were wise to toss him out of office. I hope he charged those climate kooks a lot of money for speaking.

  27. One of the swamp critters who was fortunately flushed down the drain even before President Trump started draining the swamp.

  28. An above post mentions some risk in bike riding. I’ll add to it. We all had metal “pant clips to” tuck the pant cuff in. Prevented it getting caught in the chain. There is a painful memory. When not in use, guys all carried them in the back pocket. OK-until you went ice-skating and fell on your butt.

  29. His primary loss was the largest by an unindicted member of congress in the history of this nation. In the following (2010) election, cap-and-trade was the reason that the Repos took over the house, when 64 seats changed hands.

    Think every elected person in DC isn’t aware of this?

  30. Trump will have to address the environmentalist’s lobbies, green industry patrons, special and peculiar interests (e.g. climate scientists), and the overlapping and convergent interests in his own Party.

  31. Converts to new religions are often the most fanatical. Fortunately for sceptics when conversions are involved in the climate debate most are going the other way. In fact how anyone who studies the subject can go from sceptic to warmist shows a person who is detached from reality and probably needs psychiatric help.

  32. / obviously this needs the sarc

    when not one of that true environmental gooddoers miss a bycycle when sporting his SUV to not spoil his Tuxedo for symposing. /

    Bob Inglis seems to think a carbon tax will have more of a stimulus effect on the US economy than cheap energy.

    The following is a video of Bob Inglis’ presentation to the National Press Club of Australia;

    that all visitors reached by bycicle : “Unsurprisingly, compulsory helmets have also discouraged cycling.”

    http://ipa.org.au/publications/2019/australia's-helmet-law-disaster

  33. Wall Street Journal Columnist, Holman Jenkins thinks that the carbon tax could come back to life. I think his argument is very interesting.

    “What’s Behind the Border Tax Kabuki?: And as negotiations proceed, could a carbon tax get a miraculous resurrection?” By Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. on Feb. 17, 2017

    When it comes to the politics of tax reform, a vital principle is always to inject a big disruptive element into the mix. That way members of the House and Senate tax-writing committees can be assured a fundraising bonanza from threatened business and taxpayer groups. …

    Which brings us to 2017’s big disruptive idea from the House GOP, the border-adjustable corporate tax. For the first time in 30 years, the tax-reform opportunity is upon us here in the U.S. But first House Ways and Means members must be allowed a good, long shake of the money tree. And border adjustability is tailor-made for this purpose.

    Big exporters like Boeing and GE are guaranteed to speak up in its favor—and speaking up usually means writing a check.
    Even more deep-pocketed and numerous are the idea’s opponents, since imports would no longer be deductible under the new corporate tax rate. … OK, with enemies like these, border adjustability was perhaps never a real threat to make it through the congressional sausage factory. But, oh, the fundraising gusher in the meantime from those who have something big to lose.

    I am in favor of border adjustment, because I think it will reduce the trade deficit and make manufacturing in the US more attractive. But, Jenkins’ cynical take may be the far better reading of Washington’s ways. You cannot be too rich, too thin, or too cynical. Jenkins proceeds to make Inglis look prophetic:

    But where can revenue scorers get the $1 trillion over 10 years the border tax was supposed to raise? Well, ahem, a carbon tax is also a consumption tax. To make it acceptable to free marketers, it would have to come with a full stop to all climate-related mandates and subsidies including fuel-mileage rules. It would also have to be clear that all carbon-tax proceeds are being used to cut payroll or income taxes. …

    How much would be needed if the goal were to offset a 20% import tax? The equivalent of 13 cents per gallon of gasoline.

    As a bonus, such a proposal would be a test of sincerity for those liberals who say they care about the climate but perhaps only care about green pork barrel for their heavily subsidized alternative-energy cronies.

    I could only support the carbon tax if the repeal of mandates included an amendment to the Clean Air act that said that CO2 is not a pollutant, and a revocation of the Paris agreement. If we could do that I would favor adding a couple of more cents to the tax to finance a big infrastructure push, although that must be accompanied by limitations on the ability of judges to block infrastructure projects.

  34. Why Bob Inglis (Former R-SC) has not visited AQUASURE? It’s an absolutely green project, cost $18 billion.

    CURRENT PLANT PRODUCTION:

    The Victorian Desalination Plant has not produced any water since 18 December 2012 (the day it was completed).

    The Government has placed a 50Gl water order for the supply period ending June 2017. Costs $27 million, when the state’s dams were more than 60% full and the Bureau of Meteorology was predicting above average rainfall. Makes sense.

    Capacity: 150b L/year

    So. If it is run at full capacity all the time from now on and there are neither expenses nor interests on loan, annual income would be $81 million, which makes $18 billion in 222 years. At the same time some components of the plant may last for as long as a century. Australian greens are clever, Bob Inglis has much to learn there.

  35. Wall Street Journal Columnist, Holman Jenkins thinks that the carbon tax could come back to life. I think his argument is very interesting.

    “What’s Behind the Border Tax Kabuki?: And as negotiations proceed, could a carbon tax get a miraculous resurrection?” By Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. on Feb. 17, 2017

    “When it comes to the politics of tax reform, a vital principle is always to inject a big disruptive element into the mix. That way members of the House and Senate tax-writing committees can be assured a fundraising bonanza from threatened business and taxpayer groups. … ”

    “Which brings us to 2017’s big disruptive idea from the House GOP, the border-adjustable corporate tax. For the first time in 30 years, the tax-reform opportunity is upon us here in the U.S. But first House Ways and Means members must be allowed a good, long shake of the money tree. And border adjustability is tailor-made for this purpose.”

    “Big exporters like Boeing and GE are guaranteed to speak up in its favor—and speaking up usually means writing a check.
    Even more deep-pocketed and numerous are the idea’s opponents, since imports would no longer be deductible under the new corporate tax rate. … OK, with enemies like these, border adjustability was perhaps never a real threat to make it through the congressional sausage factory. But, oh, the fundraising gusher in the meantime from those who have something big to lose.”

    I am in favor of border adjustment, because I think it will reduce the trade deficit and make manufacturing in the US more attractive. But, Jenkins’ cynical take may be the far better reading of Washington’s ways. You cannot be too rich, too thin, or too cynical. Jenkins proceeds to make Inglis look prophetic:

    “But where can revenue scorers get the $1 trillion over 10 years the border tax was supposed to raise? Well, ahem, a carbon tax is also a consumption tax. To make it acceptable to free marketers, it would have to come with a full stop to all climate-related mandates and subsidies including fuel-mileage rules. It would also have to be clear that all carbon-tax proceeds are being used to cut payroll or income taxes. … ”

    “How much would be needed if the goal were to offset a 20% import tax? The equivalent of 13 cents per gallon of gasoline.”

    As a bonus, such a proposal would be a test of sincerity for those liberals who say they care about the climate but perhaps only care about green pork barrel for their heavily subsidized alternative-energy cronies.”
    I could only support the carbon tax if the repeal of mandates included an amendment to the Clean Air act that said that CO2 is not a pollutant, and a revocation of the Paris agreement. If we could do that I would favor adding a couple of more cents to the tax to finance a big infrastructure push, although that must be accompanied by limitations on the ability of judges to block infrastructure projects.

  36. private sector action on climate change, called for the United States to take unilateral action by imposing a carbon tax with an import levy on goods made in countries without a carbon price.”

    Anyone else but me see the conflict in the above sentence?

    Cheers

    Roger

    http://www.thedemiseofchristchurch.com

  37. “Inglis, a congressman for 12 years who lost Republican preselection over his advocacy of a carbon price…”

    Inglis clearly learned nothing from his loss. He reminds me of another progressive Republican, John McCain. In a close election years ago, he claimed to have learned his lesson about putting border security first. “Build the dang fence,” he promised. But as soon as he won, he turned his back on his campaign promise to voters. At least he recognized what voters wanted even if only until the election was over. Inglis still doesn’t recognize what voters want. It’s easy to remain in denial when you live in a climate-change fantasy land where your paychecks for speeches depend on how well you advocate for lunacy.

  38. I sure hope people take a second to think of what a carbon tax is and what the free market is in relation to that, because those dots won’t connect………it’s equivalent to a soda tax, and that’s working so well in Pennsylvania right now. It hurts the free market. ugh, what an idiot.

    • It depends what sort of market you want. If you define a free market as one without government interference, then of course any tax interferes with a free market.

      However, if there are externalities the free market will not produce the economically efficient outcome and a tax may in principle restore the economically efficient outcome that the market is supposed to provide.

  39. His agenda would not have ruffled any feathers at the Press Club. They are a delicate bunch with an agenda anyway and choose suitable speakers that care for their feelings :)

  40. I’d hazard a guess that many who voted for Trump haven’t bothered going to the polls since Reagan ran. Why? Because Reagan campaigned against Big Government. Those that don’t want Big Government aren’t likely to “join” something.
    They just want Government to be big enough to ensure that they are left alone. (Bill of Rights, as intended, kind of stuff)
    Things have to get really bad before they are willing to band together. Things were really bad when “The Tea Party” arose (those that in the past were labeled “The Silent Majority”), before they (loosely) joined together.
    They kicked Inglis out of office.
    McCain? The best description I ever heard of him was, during a primary, someone said something along the lines of, “McCain isn’t against Big Government. He just thinks that Republicans can run your lives better than the Democrats.”

    All “sides” that desire to control are pressing on the CAGW lever.
    When it fizzles out, no longer “sticks to the wall”, they’ll try another.

    Why has “GAGW” stuck to the wall so long? Genuine science is an honest evaluation of observable facts.
    “Climate science” has become a politically twisted evaluation of modeled facts.

  41. old timers in my youth used to laugh about taxing the air, when they were opposing the new sales tax……they laughed because of the utter absurdity of the concept of taxing the AIR…….a carbon tax is a tax on BREATHING.

    • That’s the appeal of it to a Party that is addicted to power and is always in need of more money to buy votes. Right Nancy and Chuck?

    • Bill Taylor. That is wrong because the tax is only on fossil carbon and the carbon in the air that you breathe has recently been extracted from the air by plants. The carbon tax is categorically not a tax on breathing.

  42. Ask not what you can do for your family and fact checking, but what you can do for the elitists and their alt agendas based on biased models and no fact checking.

  43. Carbon tax as a stimulus. Why not a renewables tax as well. We could stimulate the sh*t out this bad boy. Idiot.

    • The carbon tax as a stimulus relies on reducing other taxes. It is possible to produce a stimulus according to economic models, but only if all the tax cuts are on capital taxes – that is corporate tax and tax on interest. Politically this is not going to happen, so the idea of a stimulus is a bit of a fantasy.

  44. Carbon Tax. Two words that represent everything that Trump ran against. Easy to see why this clown lost to Trey Gowdy.

  45. Really. why would anyone who is so far out of the loop of reality engage with this former congressional member who was and is a nobody. Who would believe anything he says.
    The best thing he ever did was to be so bad the door was opened and we fortunately got a superb, honest person in office . Trey Gowdy one of my very favorites and is most eloquent .

  46. The Democrats and the American “Deep State” are sending off their minions to maintain ties with other Global Socialists within the social and political elite of most Western Nations now that they are out of office…. Part of Obama’s “Shadow White House”.

    Australia is a particular favorite with the Democrats because Australia’s Socialist political elite used Australian tax payer’s money to fund Hillary Clinton’s election and the Clinton foundation to the tune of half a Billion dollars.

    An excerpt from an article by the Quadrant magazine: “…Australian governments, both Labor and Coalition, have thrown more than half a billion dollars in foreign aid over the past few years at a pair of “charities” associated with US Democrat powerbrokers and acolytes.”

    https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2016/07/gillard/

    Remember….. These people think they are saving the world and saving humanity. They do anything and use anyone’s money to attempt it.

  47. Yeah, he has demonstrated the back flipping by appointing Myron to look after the EPA and then Pruitt to finish them off!! HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA :)

    These morons are tone deaf! They cannot rationalise how they lost the election to Trump (because they have lost touch with the common man!

    Mailman

  48. Bob Inglis is NO Republican! He’s not even a RepublicanInNameOnly! He lied about his agenda when he was first elected in SC and we got rid of him the moment we discovered his True Blue Stripes. Like some other SC Congressional members, his intelligence level is suspect, his Legislative ability is ZERO.

  49. “Inglis, a congressman for 12 years who lost Republican preselection over his advocacy of a carbon price, argued that conservatives could be persuaded to join a coalition to fight climate change by appeals to the free market or to faith.”

    All of the attempts to do this through Congress failed. And it will continue to fail spectacularly, because the effects of renewables &c on Spain, the UK, and Australia are so clearly visible. When McCain was running for president on Cap and Tax, we the people did not have as much experience as we do now.

    All the administration has to do is point out that the environmental treaty, signed by Obama in Beijing, restricts US emissions from coal and oil, and China is not obligated. That is a very bad deal. I think you could say that was counterproductive for our country. He will give attention to this treaty eventually.

    Also, China is not only building coal plants but is also constructing massive dams for power, water reservoirs, and navigation.
    http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20151014-the-chinese-are-obsessed-with-building-giant-dams

  50. “…conservatives could be persuaded to join a coalition to fight climate change by appeals to the free market or to faith.”

    The people who believe religion is just a tool used by elites to keep the common people in bonds…
    are suggesting religion be used as a tool by globalists to keep the common people in bonds.

    Is this a surprise? Is this historical paradigm actually a statement of intention?

      • Resource guy says, “It did work with the Pope.”

        Well, who shall we give the credit to for converting the pope to the idea of the need for one world government, and centralised environmental regulatory science, to supplant free republics?

        “One authoritative source of oversight and coordination is the law, which lays down rules for admissible conduct in the light of the common good …Here, continuity is essential, because policies related to climate change and environmental protection cannot be altered with every change of government.” JBergoglio

        But that is quite an accomplishment, converting the Roman pope — and a Jesuit no less. Historically, those groups have been notoriously hard to reach. /sarc

  51. I know Bob Inglis personally. He is not a RINO. He is a complete IDIOT! The reason he got defeated was that he caught Potomac fever and publicly announced that he didn’t give a damn what his constituents thought that he was going to do what he wanted. Pissed everybody off bigtime. Regarding his bonafides regarding Global Warming, he has no scientific training whatsoever. He is a freaking Lawyer, and in my view a crooked one at that.

  52. Riddle: What is the difference between a lawyer and a snake as road kill?
    Answer: There are no skid marks associated with the lawyer.

  53. One of the most common delusions on the political scene is the delusion that any one person ‘knows’ what another person believes, thinks, or will do in any given circumstance.

    • There was an article on the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) website, in Australia, the other day that claimed politicians were unqualified to do their jobs? I mean, really?

      I don’t have a link ‘coz the SMH now demands an AU$0.50c per day tax on 30 or more articles you’ve read in a month.

Comments are closed.