{ americanthinker.com } ~ When pollsters realized the public and elected officials weren’t buying global warming as a concept or policy, in a brilliant political move, they came up with the phrase “climate change.”... This helped sell the theory of man-made global warming. Weather is politicized and computer models are only predictions that have been used as pawns in elections and justifying increased government budgets. The global warming/climate change (GWCC) narrative has made scumbag-Al Gore a rich man peddling unrealized fear. In January 2012, sixteen eminent scientists published an article in the Wall Street Journal, titled, “No Need to Panic About Global Warming. If mankind is causing global warming then how do you explain: “Today’s CO2 concentrations worldwide average about 380 parts per million. This level of CO2 concentration is trivial compared with the concentrations during earlier geologic periods. For example, 460 million years ago, during the Ordovician Period, CO2 concentrations were 4,400 ppm, and temperatures then were about the same as they are today. With such high levels of CO2 the Earth should have been boiling.” It seems more reasonable to be agnostic based upon this fact: “According to the Climate.gov website, the current global average temperature is roughly ‘shy of 60 degrees Fahrenheit. About 55 million years ago – just after the age of the Dinosaurs – the era known as the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM) saw average global temps as high as 73 degrees Fahrenheit.” As humans only showed up about 100,000 years ago how do you account for the PETM era? Supposedly, 97% of scientists agree man is the cause of catastrophic GWCC. When in fact that statement is false. Moreover: “A recent study reported in the peer-reviewed Organization Studies found that just 36 percent of earth scientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a climate change crisis. A majority of the 1,077 respondents in the survey believe that nature is the primary cause of recent GWCC.” What if you believe the 97% scientist debate then why hasn’t this information been widely reported? “The media ignore a petition on the Internet signed by more than 31,000 scientists, including 9,029 PhDs, 7,157 with a master’s of science, and 12, 715 with a bachelor of science degree, all of whom dispute the global warming thesis.”...
Nate Jackson: In the same week that the lid was blown off of a massive $1.2 billion Medicare scam, Sen. commie-Bernie Sanders decided to reintroduce his single-payer-health-insurance bill — the socialist scam called Medicare for All. What could go wrong?
The bill’s 14 cosponsors include Sen. Elizabeth dinky-Warren, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, Sen. scumbag-Cory Booker, and Sen. lowlife-Kamala Harris, all of whom are 2020 presidential contenders. It has quickly become a litmus test for Democrats.
We could talk about the outrageous cost, given that an earlier and slimmer version of commie-Sanders’s bill is estimated to run an eye-popping $32 trillion over 10 years. Or we could evaluate how catastrophic it would be to force 177 million Americans off of their private health insurance and onto the government dole by making it generally “unlawful” to even sell private insurance. (“If you like your health care plan, you can keep it” is so 2008.) And then there’s the abortion-on-demand coverage that would force millions of Americans to fund the slaughter of innocent babies in utero.
But it’s the very premise of Medicare for All that’s deeply wrong.
“I want to end the international embarrassment of the United States of America being the only major country on earth that doesn’t guarantee health care to all people as a right and not a privilege,” commie-Sanders pontificated. That, of course, hearkens back to the Left’s incredibly twisted interpretation of “rights,” which largely consist of services that have to be provided by someone else.
Economist Walter Williams explained this back in 2016 — oddly enough while rebutting Sanders for asserting the same thing about health care as he is now. “In the standard historical usage of the term, a ‘right’ is something that exists simultaneously among people. As such, a right imposes no obligation on another,” Williams explained. However, for the Left, “Those supposed rights do impose obligations upon others. … If one person has a right to something he did not earn, it requires another person’s not having a right to something he did earn.”
The Democrats’ agenda in a nutshell is to offer as many “free” goodies to as many constituents as possible to secure their own power. Calling such redistribution a “right” is merely a way to psychologically persuade those constituents that they deserve it. Trampling the Constitution and actual rights? Never mind that when there are elections to win.
~The Patriot Post
Comments