Did HuffPost Just Accuse the Democrats of Selling Out to Big Oil?

Democrat Big Oil
Original images: Oil Pipeline Pumping Station in rural Nebraska. By shannonpatrick17 from Swanton, Nebraska, U.S.A. (Trans Canada Keystone Oil Pipeline) [CC BY 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons. Democrat Logo By Steven Braeger – A friend, requesting that I upload it as they don’t have an account, CC0, Link

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Green conspiracy theories to explain the failure of Democrats to mention Climate Change in their responses to President Trump’s Climate Free State of the Union speech.

Democrats Lack A Bold National Climate Change Plan In The Trump Era, And It Shows

The party’s rebuttal this week to the president’s State of the Union address ignored what should be a progressive core issue for the party.

By Alexander C. Kaufman

When Republicans began crusading last year to dismantle the Affordable Care Act, progressive Democrats ― and centrists with 2020 presidential ambitions ― countered with a push for Medicare for all. The proposal, though unattainable in this political moment, outlined a clear vision for the party and offered voters a sweeping sense of what is possible.

If you think the partisan divide over health care is intense, it’s even worse when it comes to climate change. Republicans are the only major political party in the developed world to question the scientific realities of manmade global warming as a platform issue. Yet Democrats, at least on a national level, remain scattered, without a strategy to deal with what they regularly call the most pressing issue of a lifetime.

At no point was this more clear than on Tuesday. In the first of two back-to-back snubs, Democrats on the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works spent comparatively little time grilling Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt on climate change during his first appearance before the panel since his confirmation nearly a year ago. They chose instead to focus on local pollution issues.

Later that night, four out of five rebuttals to President Donald Trump’s first State of the Union address ignored climate change. Only an aghast Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) inveighed: “How can a president of the United States give a State of the Union speech and not mention climate change?”

Democrats’ kids-gloves approach to climate change is baffling in 2018. Last year was the second-hottest on record. Hurricanes and wildfires devastated densely populated coastal areas and huge swaths of the West, causing a record $306 billion in damages. And a historically unpopular president spearheaded an all-out assault on climate science, instigating witch hunts and censorship in agency ranks, showering polluters with taxpayer money and vowing to withdraw from a global emissions deal signed by every other nation on Earth, even Syria and North Korea.

One obstacle could be Democrats’ acceptance of fossil fuel donations. Exxon Mobil Corp. doled out less than 9 percent of its $2.1 million 2016 election spending to Democrats. The American Petroleum Institute, the industry’s main lobby, spent $748,100 on Democrats in 2016 ― at least 15 times more than any previous election year ― yet the contributions still paled before the $3.1 million Republicans received. But those donations helped secure dependable allies in Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.).

On Wednesday, 350.org hosted a Climate State of the Union, where Sanders became the first senator to sign the group’s new pledge to reject all fossil fuel donations.

When Democratic politicians stop taking oil money and they start realizing the oil money is just poisonous, that will be a big help,” said RL Miller, president of Climate Hawks Vote, a super PAC. “As long as they are taking money from the oil industry, it’s very hard for them to get out in front of bills that may have a negative impact on the oil industry’s bottom line.

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/democrats-climate-change_us_5a738c19e4b0905433b2834d

This has been an interesting week for the climate movement.

Leading Democrats and Republicans ignored climate change in key speeches. Greens turned on Bill Nye, one of America’s most consistent high profile climate advocates, because he attended the State of the Union as a guest of NASA administrator nominee Jim Bridenstine. Exxon Mobil released a report which concluded that climate action will have negligible impact on their business.

In past years people have consistently ranked climate at the bottom of their list of priorities. If even the Democrats can’t be bothered anymore with flogging the climate dead horse, I suggest climate change may have just dropped off the bottom of the list.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
February 3, 2018 5:31 pm

About time. For just how long should one keep on flogging a dead horse?

Reply to  AndyE
February 3, 2018 8:04 pm

The horse has been dead for some time, but I think the jockey became deceased on Friday – killed by a flying memo.

Reply to  toorightmate
February 3, 2018 9:42 pm

…and that memo is just 10% of what’s coming in the near future.
By the time the MSM has been pummeled with memo after memo, they might figure out their Russian Collusion story is a lie.

Reply to  toorightmate
February 4, 2018 6:18 am

That’s why they unionized at HuffPo and will go that way at LAT. Pushing dead horses is hard labor that needs representation.

Reply to  toorightmate
February 4, 2018 7:18 am

Dead Horse Beaters Union 113

Reply to  schitzree
February 4, 2018 8:13 am

I would point out that “Beating a Dead Horse” is good exorcise, if all you want is exercise to reduce your own waist and feel good about claiming to remove invisible demons.
If you want the horse to move, it is a waste of good energy.
If you want to employ dead horse beaters, beating a dead horse is useful too.
But it still doesn’t move the horse, nor the load. But the dead horse beaters love you.
And the demons don’t care. And probably don’t move either.

Reply to  AndyE
February 4, 2018 12:39 am

The “Free” main stream press (excluding Fox) were in on a senior government lead coup. They not only aided and abetted, but directed, in some cases, how this coup was going to topple a US President.
This was all done with the approval and/or direction of the FBI, the DoJ, Hilary Clinton and the President of the United States when in office and continued when a new President was elected, to depose an elected President, by false testimony, to a secret court (FISA).
This was not about Donald Trump. Can anyone say that if another Republican were elected this behaviour would have been different?
Was this an attempted coup by senior Government to retain power to avoid information leaking out about something worse?
Has the Democrat Party lined their election campaign for the presidency and mid-term with funds from the Clinton Foundation?
Is Australia implicated? (Australia gave the Clinton Foundation over US$100M).
What other western countries are implicated?
Did China give the Clinton Foundation money?
Did Russia give the Clinton Foundation money?
Did Iran give the Clinton Foundation money?

Reply to  Geoff
February 4, 2018 5:42 am

If any other Republican running for office in 2016 had gotten the nomination, ran, somehow pulled off the upset, and gotten to this point, they’d be a weeping puddle at the bottom of some staircase. The amount of flack and resistance President Trump is fighting is amazing. Soros is saying Trump won’t last out his current term, let alone the next cycle, so don’t expect the pressure to let up.

Reply to  AndyE
February 4, 2018 7:33 am

I guess that “cold caused by global warming” meme was not getting traction after all.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  AndyE
February 4, 2018 10:17 am

I think it’s because Dems know they’re not going to get any traction from Trump fence-sitters if they go on and on about “climate change”. I could be wrong. Maybe they’re not that smart.

Krudd Gillard of the Commondebt of Australia
Reply to  AndyE
February 4, 2018 5:42 pm

Until it agrees to become a communist.

Reply to  AndyE
February 5, 2018 4:42 pm

People have noticed that the constant “the sky is falling” climate predictions have never panned out over the last 40+ years. They have seen the light that the whole climate movement is nothing more than a plot to control social life and economies on a global scale. The horse is dead – dead.

Craig Moore
February 3, 2018 5:34 pm

I guess the have acquired a taste for eating their own tartare.

February 3, 2018 5:37 pm

As proven by poll after poll “Climate Change” is not concern of the people. World wide. When asked everyone says they want to save the world because it’s the PC thing to say but few except the activists …. a small minority of the people ….. really care and I believe it’s because they are tired of having it shoved down their throats by the MSM and politicians without any discernible effects beyond what has been experienced before and failed bogeyman claims. The Dems/Progressives are dropping it because it’s a lame duck that isn’t helping their failing image.

P Walker
Reply to  markl
February 3, 2018 6:05 pm

It’s about time, but don’t count on Progessives dropping it any time soon.

February 3, 2018 5:53 pm

The Alarmists have cried wolf too many times.

Reply to  TA
February 4, 2018 6:12 am

yeah, about 2 million too many

February 3, 2018 6:01 pm

I think the only people who consider it a pressing issue are those who want to profit from it and those with mental issues.

Hador NYC
Reply to  icisil
February 3, 2018 7:10 pm

you should avoid the circles I am in. sadly for me, i work with, and am connnected via family and friends to true believers that are common folks. my beliefs which are in line with most of the commenters of this site, are heretical. it’s nuts. I know a guy who tells me that he’s very worried about sea level rise, and then buys a home that is 1ft above sea level, and a house that was damaged by the storm surge durning Hurricane Sandy.

Reply to  Hador NYC
February 3, 2018 7:16 pm

” I know a guy who tells me that he’s very worried about sea level rise, and then buys a home that is 1ft above sea level, and a house that was damaged by the storm surge durning Hurricane Sandy. ”
See, I told you – mental issues 😉

Reply to  Hador NYC
February 3, 2018 7:36 pm

Suggestion to H NYC: Just ask your family, friends, and coworkers [calmly, dispassionately]
Why do you continue to heat your home with natural gas/fuel oil/coal-sourced electricity?
Why do you continue to drive a gasoline/diesel automobile?
Why do you travel by air?
Problem solved.

Reply to  Hador NYC
February 3, 2018 9:46 pm

It just proves that such people believe their news is Fake News, too.
Why else would they react in a manner that is completely opposite to the “news” they listen to?

Reply to  Hador NYC
February 4, 2018 1:20 am

Yes, you are noticing something which is universal in climate issues: everyone claims to believe, and they all then take action which is the opposite of what they would take if they really did believe.
You have to deconstruct it. Wonderful term, that. Deconstructed, you realize that to express belief in the importance of the climate issue is not about what you want to do, or about what you really believe. Its about signalling you are part of the tribe of the righteous.
Its like saying you thought Hiss was innocent. You said it, whether you believed it or not. Its like saying Katyn massacre was done by the Germans. Who cared if it was true, you could tell by who agreed whether they were on board. Its the same with renewables. You will say that we should subsidize and invest in them, but you have no real idea if this will lower emissions, but you don’t care. Advocating renewables, recycling and so on shows you are of the righteous.
So your friend is no more a believer in sea level rise than he think the moon is made of blue cheese. He is just telegraphing his tribal membership. And that has nothing to do with where he chooses to buy a house.

Reply to  Hador NYC
February 4, 2018 7:39 am

There was a time when the same age and family splits developed from Pepsi marketing against Coke. It was “hey get with the Pepsi generation.” Then the market moved on to water and other flavored drinks and we don’t talk that way anymore. Respect the power of marketing to explain behaviors, at least for short-term behavior. I think the Dems are into new market research right now.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Hador NYC
February 4, 2018 10:25 am

“So your friend is no more a believer in sea level rise than he think the moon is made of blue cheese. He is just telegraphing his tribal membership. And that has nothing to do with where he chooses to buy a house.”
You’re being REALLY ridiculous. Everyone knows it Swiss cheese.

Reply to  Hador NYC
February 4, 2018 2:20 pm

I recall Obama alluded to skeptics as people who don’t believe we landed on the moon and the moon is made of cheese.
Yet theadoring and compliant MSM didn’t bother to point out that 2 skeptics (Aldrin and Schmidt) landed on and walked on that cheese

Michael Jankowski
February 3, 2018 6:08 pm

I get that some people honestly believe it is a pressing and critical issue that needs to be addressed immediately. But they are a small minority of people according to poll after poll.
If Trump and the GOP came-out and said they wanted to take serious action on GHG emissions, it would cease to be a political issue, and the Dems would quickly become silent on it. Either that, or the Dems would come out and say that even more serious action is necessary…because they need their political bogeyman/boogeyman to try and attract younger voters. There would be no hand-holding and unification.

Reply to  Michael Jankowski
February 3, 2018 11:08 pm

This whole propaganda exercise is based on fear because intense emotions neutralize intellectual concerns. Negative emotions like fear actually tend to inhibit level-headedness and can produce a mental fog. But it must be acted on quickly before the fear fades with time and hence the forceful calls to action: “We need a wartime effort right now” “Only X months/years left to act”.
The predicted apocalypse failed to appear, the emotion has faded and interest is declining in those who have been around long enough to follow the fallacy.

February 3, 2018 6:09 pm

I read Democrat donations are dropping off like a cliffside. Snubbing oil and gas, coal, etc is just going to further deplete their monetary reserves (if they have any). Nothing like committing political suicide to prove just how “moral and superior” you are….

Reply to  Sheri
February 3, 2018 6:48 pm

It’s bad. link They can’t get their act together. They betrayed working people who then turned around and elected The Donald. The Millennials are too weird for words. link It could be that the Democrats don’t have much of a base anymore.

Reply to  commieBob
February 3, 2018 7:11 pm

They’re trying to hold together all of these disparate identity groups with conflicting values that start banging up against each. Eventually it starts falling apart. The most recent example that I am aware of is their embrace of the misogynous hijab.

Joel O’Bryan
Reply to  commieBob
February 3, 2018 7:28 pm

I’m sure Harvey Weinstein was big supporter of hijabs and burkas for his harem of starletts.

Reply to  commieBob
February 4, 2018 8:33 am

That article about the Resource Generation nonprofit strongly reminds me of stories of how the Scientologists and other cults con people into handing over all their money.

Extreme Hiatus
February 3, 2018 6:10 pm

Meanwhile, back in Delusionville:
“We’re bringing forth the message that the climate resistance is real,” Yearwood told HuffPost. “We’re bringing forth the message that the front-line communities, indigenous communities and communities of color, can lead on this fight.”
Climate resistance! That’ll do it!
I found this while looking for a link to the comments by Tom Steyer, the billionaire who funded a bunch of Dem ‘climate fighters’ with money he made from coal, who recently explained that in the next election round he was not going to talk about climate this time because it didn’t work (most of his candidates lost).
If anyone has a link to that please post it as it says a lot.

Reply to  Extreme Hiatus
February 3, 2018 6:35 pm

I would ask any climate activist the following question: if we were to adopt the Paris agreement 100 percent and do everything in our power to eliminate the production of CO2, would the climate stop changing?

Extreme Hiatus
Reply to  Trebla
February 3, 2018 6:42 pm

I would expect their answer would be: No, but it would be good climate change. They might also add that it would be inclusive, equitable, just, un-phobic, gender-neutral, etc. and bring free stuff.

Reply to  Extreme Hiatus
February 3, 2018 8:21 pm

I do not understand why it is acceptable to use the phrase “of color”, when “colored” is considered pejorative. IT IS THE EXACT SAME THING. It is also completely illogical, since there is no such thing as a physically colorless person. Perhaps I am being too literal, but it still irks me.
What the heck is a “front-line community”???
Finally, there are actual problems facing people of all ethnicities (socio-economic status trumps appearance any day): unemployment, drug abuse, substandard schools…the list unfortunately goes on. These problems are immediate and real. It is appalling that there are people in this world who are telling communities that they should spend time campaigning for expensive energy or whatever, rather than doing something with the potential to improve their immediate circumstances.
This goes beyond insult and injury. It is borderline evil.

Krudd Gillard of the Commondebt of Australia
Reply to  AllyKat
February 4, 2018 5:52 pm

Excellent observation.

Reply to  AllyKat
February 5, 2018 9:14 am

Substandard schools aren’t a problem, they were the goal all along.

February 3, 2018 6:28 pm

Don’t fool your self. If the Dims were ever to get their hands on power again they’d be right back attacking the energy industry and destroying the economy.

Reply to  Rob
February 4, 2018 12:56 am

You can trace it wa-ay back to Plato, philosopher king,
that Utopian top-down syndrome, ‘I’ ‘WE’ (collective)
can envisage an ideal society that solves all problems,
‘so shut up, listen and obey!’
H’t:: Plato /Hegel /Marx / H*tl*r / Stalin, Mao / Club of
Rome/ M Mann / Hillary / Naomi / et (big) Al … …

Joel O’Bryan
February 3, 2018 6:39 pm

What the Greens don’t realize are that the Dims are busy building Newer Trojan Horses in which to package their socialism. They are sort of like a jilted lover, dumped because they are getting tiresome and annoying.
Anyone care to guess what the Socialist Dems new Trojan Horse is going to be?
(Hint: starts with “R”)

Extreme Hiatus
Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
February 3, 2018 6:44 pm

Well they’ve already dressed up the donkey as a racehorse.

Joel O’Bryan
Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
February 3, 2018 6:45 pm

Plus, the Dems are not stupid. They can see Americans are in love with their SUVs and their Pickups. Hillary primarily lost because she and the Dems have lost white working class America. The Green-Climate Alarmist war on fossil fuel is one Big reason they lost that important demographic. The War on fossil fuels is a loser for Dems at the polls.

Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
February 3, 2018 7:08 pm

“the Dems are not stupid”
…as proven by their efforts to block the funding of the gov agencies to defend non citizen who came illegally?
The Dems were not always stupid. Now, they seem stuck in a loop, like a computer with a data corruption that forces it to reboot and prevents it from rebooting in a proper state.

Joel O’Bryan
Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
February 3, 2018 7:12 pm

They are not stupid because they are listening to their base supporters. That base is telling them to “Resist at all cost.” Resist means not letting Trump or GOP have any victory, even a compromise, such as where DACA deal gets done in exchange for Border Security funding. The DACA-Dreamers, by definition, are not voters.

Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
February 3, 2018 7:23 pm

The French Parti socialiste “listened to its base” too: the primary selected the un-electable Benoît Hamon, with its promises that looked too “idealistic” to be doable – even for French voters (and even Hamon admitted he had no idea how to implement universal basic income).
Then even the base voted for the other extreme left candidate, Mélenchon! (Both are equally strongly anti-religion in the state which means pro financing Islamic “cultural” centers.)
Those who pushed Roy Moore listened to the Alabamian conservative “base”, too.
The “base” was not very reliable at the polls (no, it wasn’t cheating or voters from other states that changed the game, it was lack of conservative turnout).

Joel O’Bryan
Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
February 3, 2018 7:33 pm

you post highlights that the base for both parties is not sufficient, but it is necessary. Dems have to thread a needle to take back Congress in November. They cannot alienate their very energetic base (who have only Resist on their minds), but they have to appeal to a larger group in the middle who loves big trucks and SUVs, and no one likes higher heating bills in the winter.

Extreme Hiatus
Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
February 3, 2018 8:30 pm

Joel – Looks to me like the Dem’s base is shrinking and they have no hopey-changey or any candidates or compelling causes to stop that, let alone broaden it. I think the manufactured “resistance” will be futile, as it has been. It could get dangerous but that would only strengthen the law-and-order side.
In the meantime, only the shrinking Dem base still swallows the MSM’s non-stop propaganda while back in the real world the new Trump policies will strengthen the economy. When the next big financial crisis hits, I’m guessing Trump will blame the globalists, e.g. the Dems.
After going left since Bush I the pendulum is looks to be swinging the other way. Sort of like a climate cycle with a rapid El Trumpo driven rise from the Obama Minumum.

Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
February 5, 2018 9:18 am

DACA-Dreamers aren’t supposed to be voters.
However the Democrats have opposed any program that could potentially keep them from voting.

michael hart
Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
February 3, 2018 9:13 pm

joelobryan, In BBC-land they spell it differently. Some days it really does seem to be competing seriously with global warming for BBC air time. The European Commission has proposed a wholly new tax (to replenish the coffers after Brexit)
I think the key principle behind any such green Trojan Horse is that it must be something widely used to the point of being almost indispensable in the modern world (and thus almost certainly harmless).

Next on the list will probably be iron and steel: You can easily pick up the waste degradation particles in the environment using a magnet! There is also, very conveniently, a large amount of such particles naturally already present in the soil and dirt under your feet which they can then claim to be of human origin. Demonstrating that such particles are harmful is just one quick little undergraduate study away. In fact you can probably get the BBC to do another of their little citizen-science projects which will then be featured in a BBC mini series starring Saint David of Attenborough.

Mario Lento
Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
February 3, 2018 11:37 pm

Pray tell… what Trojan Horse starts with “R”?

Greg Woods
Reply to  Mario Lento
February 4, 2018 2:33 am


Reply to  Mario Lento
February 4, 2018 5:52 pm

We can’t have traitorous presidents making handshake deals with Russia. That would be abominable…comment image

Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
February 5, 2018 9:17 am

I recently read an article that claims that all of the Democratic candidates to replace Gov. Brown of CA are well to the left of him.
The town of Stockton has recently passed a guaranteed income bill in which everyone in town will be given $500/month, no questions asked. Not sure how they are going to pay it when increased taxes forces all those who actually work for a living to leave town.

Dave O.
February 3, 2018 6:48 pm

The democrats should introduce legislation that would make fossil fuels illegal. That would get everyone in the country on their side and they would be winning every election. Just a suggestion.

February 3, 2018 7:03 pm

“developed world”
Not sure if that’s even a thing. Or whether it’s a racist thing. Usually it’s an excuse to exclude from statistics many countries where people are NOT living in huts.
“Republicans are the only major political party in the developed world”
Well, there is UKIP:

In an interview with The Independent, Mr Helmer dismissed “climate alarmism”, suggested that predicted rises in global temperatures were “grossly exaggerated” by many scientists, and pledged that a Ukip government would scrap legally binding targets to curb carbon emissions.

But then maybe UKIP is not “major political party”. After all, Nigel Farage is just “Briton of the Year” according to The Times: “Nigel Farage is a game-changing politician and The Times Briton of the Year”
There is Alternative for Germany:

“The climate has been changing for as long as the Earth has existed. Climate change politics is based on ineffective IPCC computer models. Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, but an indispensable ingredient of everyday life,” the manifesto’s energy section begins.

Not a major party? Maybe. Yet.
But these are the parties which have a message appropriate for Europeans who see that the migrants “from Syria” (which means from anywhere in Africa) are not “the middle class”.

February 3, 2018 7:08 pm

Don’t mention the elephant in the room!

February 3, 2018 7:13 pm

Here’s an idea, Huffington Puffington Postal … how about SHE stop taking $ hundreds of millions in campaign contributions, er Clinton Foundation Donations from Saudi Arabia ? It’s FAR WORSE than “dirty” American Oil Company donations … SHE took CONFLICT oil money! Dirty, Muslim Terrorist oil $$$. SHE’s the WORST.

Reply to  kenji
February 3, 2018 8:14 pm

Somehow the Saudis count as “realpolitik” which means “ethic is suspended, let’s be ‘realistic’and cozy up with the boss here whatever he does” and that’s supposed to accomplish something. It’s “pragmatic”. And “pragmatic” means precisely “whatever”: whatever I am doing, whatever I feel like doing, is “pragmatic” as long as the babbling class (aka intelligentsia) is with me. Pragmatic is nicer name for improvisation.
With enough support, you can make it look like going with the wind demonstrates high strategical intellect.
On the other hand, Vladimir Putin is just a dictator who crushed opposition (and who crushed the embryo of an Islamic state in Chechnya, those fighters who treated their animals better than their women).
So nobody should treat Putin with about half as much consideration as the prince of whatever in some emirate. Anyone who takes him as a legitimate leader would be examined for suspect Russia friendship.

Arno Arrak
February 3, 2018 7:34 pm

When the Dems saw that Trump ignorewd climate change they did likewise, a goodhabit to follow. But they have not withdrawn one iota of their previous claims. Of these claims, the most absurd is the statement that increasing carbon dioxide causes blobal warming. If so, they should be able to show that temperature goes up when CO2 goes up, Also that it goes down when CO2 goes down and that temperature stays even when CO2 stays even, It is extremely easy ti show that this has not happened since temoerature and CO2 records began in the neteenth cenrury. Using HadCRuT3 and the extended Mauna Loa CO2 record as our guide, we note the following:
(1)From 1862 to 1877 temperature climbed 0.61 degrees, CO2 had only a slight upward trend,
(2From 1877 t0 1910 tenperature declined by rgw same anount, CO2 followed its previous trajectory, slighttly upward.
(3) fron 1910 to 1940, temperature increased by 0.62 degrees. CO@ followed the trajectory of the previoyus two segments, slightly upwaws.
(4) From 1940 t0 to 1955 temperature dropped by 0.3 derreeq. CO@ still followed the slight increase it has followed since since the year 1850.
(6) on my chart, which appears as figure 23 in “What Warming?” the right-hand side starting eith the tear 1980 the temperature graph is falsified. Fot one thing, it shows warming in the eighties and nineties where ther never was any warning. See fig my book. ure 15 in my book which shows the correct temperature in the eightiesa and nibeties. On top of that, theyalso raise the global temperature at the start of the twenty-first century by two tenths of a degree, apparently contemptuoous that the public will not notice. In view of this I recommend discarding all temperatures after 1980 and using only xatellite values beyond that. . And the greenhouse effect? The first four points above demonstrate that temperature goes up and down while carbon dioxide foes not do that. It follows that this persistent temperature zig-zag is nothing to do with carbon dioxide and the greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide issimply a a myth

Reply to  Arno Arrak
February 4, 2018 10:25 am

” In view of this I recommend discarding all temperatures after 1980 and using only xatellite values beyond that.”
I second that motion! 🙂

Hocus Locus
February 3, 2018 7:38 pm

The Curious Case of the Dog That Didn’t Bark about Climate Change
The 101 Dalmatians that Failed to Yip at the Dog That Didn’t Bark
Renewed Outcry Against Climate Privilege
“They changed my Pine Sol!!”

michael hart
February 3, 2018 8:16 pm

Tangentially, why did Jim Bridenstine invite Bill Nye to the State of The Union address anyway? It seems a bit odd. Or perhaps they twigged that the Bill Nyes of this world are their own worst enemies and should be encouraged to make fools of themselves in public at every opportunity.

Extreme Hiatus
Reply to  Eric Worrall
February 3, 2018 8:39 pm

How or why would Bill Nye ever get that job? Were they trying to blow their credibility? Or?

Reply to  Eric Worrall
February 4, 2018 3:27 am

Nye was put into the training department. From my experience that’s where companies send the bright engineers. /sarc

Hocus Locus
Reply to  michael hart
February 4, 2018 3:57 am

Bill Nye is CEO of The Planetary Society.

No calculating fuel ratios or spacecraft orbits, TPS just manages the planets. It’s mostly hands-off. They figured there was a limit to the amount of trouble Nye could cause.

February 3, 2018 8:30 pm

The Democrats know that ‘oil money’ is not ‘poisonous’, it works just as well as any other money. As for the Climate Change Horse, well, the Democrats can see that it is dead and that the jockey has gotten off and is walking off stage. Democrats know very well things that are dead, they have been flogging a Dead Donkey for nearly two hundred years.

Extreme Hiatus
February 3, 2018 9:17 pm

Somewhat OT – Huge news about the Fake News:
“Additionally, Christopher Steele has stated in U.K. court records the person in charge of the Clinton Campaign’s opposition research firm, Glenn Simpson from Fusion GPS, arranged and coordinated for Mr. Steele to talk to several journalists (CNN, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Yahoo News and Mother Jones) while Mr. Steele was also the primary source of information for the FBI investigators (including Strzok and Page)…
So Christopher Steele was meeting with journalists, the journalists were writing articles; the FBI was leaking to media and citing articles as underlying evidence to support their counterintelligence investigations; and all of this was used to validate the investigative documents the FBI was receiving from Christopher Steele; who, along with the leaking FBI officials, was also the source of the media articles.”
And much more! All from FBI or court documents, not ‘sources.’

Reply to  Extreme Hiatus
February 4, 2018 10:30 am

Yes, it looks like the fix was in right from the beginning. The whole Trump/Russia collsion deal was a setup perpetrated by members of the Obama administration and the Clinton Mafia.

Leo Smith
February 3, 2018 10:15 pm

Femocrats aren’t stupid. They realise the meme has lost traction.
The greens will be dumped in favour of some other ‘social justice’ initiative.
PS. I meant to type Democrats, but when I looked again, I realised I had Been Blessed By Freud…

Reply to  Leo Smith
February 4, 2018 1:28 am

Nice one!

February 3, 2018 10:52 pm

How about “The Affordable Climate Act”?

February 3, 2018 11:04 pm

So Huffington’s logic is that the Democrats have sold out to Big Oil as evidenced by the fact that they didn’t get very much money from Big Oil.
Well, in a world where bitter cold is cited as evidence of global warming… I guess that makes sense.

Another Ian
Reply to  davidmhoffer
February 3, 2018 11:33 pm

“So Huffington’s logic is that the Democrats have sold out to Big Oil as evidenced by the fact that they didn’t get very much money from Big Oil.”
That could cause a revolution if more widely applied in the spending of money in government hands!

Eyal Porat
February 3, 2018 11:38 pm

“manmade global warming”… he didn’t get the memo – should read “Climate Change”.

February 4, 2018 2:59 am

Huffpo, the “news” service in which most of the readers are probably Huffpo employees or agents who spend their days clicking on Huffpo stories to push them up in “news” rankings. It’s like the scientologists who used to print, distribute, buy, and redistribute copies of “Dianetics” to keep the book on the best-sellers list.

February 4, 2018 7:03 am

Since global warming was a Party scheme playing off Advocacy bunk to begin with, the public wont’t know the difference when the Party goes silent on the topic. Real issues are more noticeable.

February 4, 2018 7:30 am

Processing, processing….we’ll get back with you on which Party scheme we are pushing this year.

February 4, 2018 8:36 am

Alexander Kaufman does not seem to understand the differrence between climate and weather. He also seems to need to brush up on his economics, specifically inflation.

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
February 4, 2018 8:59 am

When Democratic politicians stop taking oil money and they start realizing the oil money is just poisonous, that will be a big help. As long as they are taking money from the oil industry, it’s very hard for them to get out in front of bills that may have a negative impact on the oil industry’s bottom line.
— RL Miller, president of Climate Hawks Vote (a super PAC).

If you’re going to accuse the Democrats of slavishly doing the bidding of major donors, the more reasonable explanation for their retreat on “climate change” is that trial lawyers don’t care about it. This report from 2011 states that the trial lawyers main front group, the “American Association for Justice” gave $2.7 million — 97 percent (I am not making this up!) to Democrats. In addition, the individual contributions from parters and employees of major plaintiff law firms came to $7.3 million, again 97 percent going to Democrats.
Keep in mind this report was from January, 2011 and the figures cover “the last cycle”, so presumably the figures cover the calendar year 2010. With inflation and the more intense partisan atmosphere, the numbers from 2016 and 2017 are likely higher. In comparison, oil industry contributions to Democrats in 2016 totalled $748,100.
Whatever influence the oil industry is buying with Democrats, it pales next to that purchased by trial lawyers. Climate change must be rather low on their priority list.

February 4, 2018 9:56 am

Everyone here who says climate change is no longer important to the great unwashed is delusional.
Most everyone under the age of 40 (and therefore indoctrinated via socialist education) is still fervently believing in man made climate change.
I’m currently trying to discuss real climate science with a couple of bozos, one American the other an Oz, who simply accuse me of being a denier: their best arguments are “sea levels are rising!”, “the sea is acidic!”, “polar bears are dying out!”, “the Arctic has lost its ice!”, “it’s hot here!”, “97% of scientists are against you!” and so on.
These people are so indoctrinated they can’t think but being leftists they’re happy to use fascist tactics against reason.
These people are, by far, the majority of the western population today: indoctrinated, pig ignorant, unscientific, unable to think for themselves and watermelons.
We’re nowhere near peak alarmism: they’re winning hands down out there in the real world.

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Mardler
February 4, 2018 11:21 am

There are plenty of climate trolls out there still. What they lack in brains and knowledge they make up for in emotion-laden and logic-free arguments. The Alarmists are losing, and they know it.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
February 4, 2018 2:37 pm


February 4, 2018 3:13 pm

I suggest again that you abandon the alarmist preferred talk-talk completely . .
*This has been an interesting week for the climate reaction movement.
Leading Democrats and Republicans ignored climate change in key speeches. Greens turned on Bill Nye, one of America’s most consistent high profile climate alarm advocates, because he attended the State of the Union as a guest of NASA administrator nominee Jim Bridenstine. Exxon Mobil released a report which concluded that climate control efforts will have negligible impact on their business.*

February 5, 2018 7:46 pm

Fork over 20 million in donations and they will talk it up. Throw in a bonus of 5 million more dollars and they read your scripts attacking any American that questions the claims.

%d bloggers like this: