To suppress opposing voices is fascist in nature, yet the restraint of free speech is a key component in the methodology used by radical leftists to swiftly implement controversial public policy. Open debate prevents such tyranny, yet there never was a debate permitted by Al Gore and the climate alarmists on greenhouse gas and its supposed effect on climate change.

On this issue, more than 19,000 scientists and meteorological experts with valid, data-based, opposing viewpoints have been threatened into silence by powerful, well-funded environmental activists.

Now, with the emergence of new data that cast overwhelming doubt on computerized predictions, spineless politicians with their signatures on regulatory legislation, academics with grants, corporate sponsors and, of course, activists, are all circling the wagons.

There's too much to lose, namely their credibility, to report honestly on the data collected by NASA's Aqua Satellite that directly disputes computerized models of potential global warming. Actual evidence, not sterile data fed into computer models, was collected for years on temperature, cloud formation and water vapor, and it has shown that temperatures are not climbing. The climate is actually compensating, not hurtling toward the precipice of disaster as environmental extremists will claim.

Bottom line, the complex workings of our climate are far beyond the limited comprehension of climate alarmists and their precious global warming hoax-a-thon software.

For climate alarmists, the simple question "What if you're wrong?" is completely off limits. Instead, they plow blindly ahead with economy-crippling carbon tax legislation that will cost taxpayers $1.3 trillion.

This raging-delirium approach to public policy has created negative fallout; not only economically, but also upon the environment that these activists purport to protect. Wherever debate is forbidden, tyranny rules.

While the rest of Western civilization eclipses the U.S. in the area of nuclear energy, the environmental extremists remain in a state of fluid hysteria over the so-called "Three Mile Island" incident. They refuse to report the truth: that it was a stuck valve that caused a shortage of cooling water at the core. In the end, there was no nuclear meltdown. The USSR-based Chernobyl incident was caused by a disastrous decision to cut costs and forgo the installation of a simple concrete containment structure.

France and Japan have markedly advanced the once-"American technology" of nuclear energy. In fact, France produces 80 percent of its electricity through nuclear technology, and the entire inventory of its "nuclear waste" is stored in a single room. Nuclear technology would reduce carbon emissions and decrease our dependence on foreign oil.

Instead, we get a ludicrous government mandate that will force Americans to use light bulbs containing mercury that if broken, will turn your living room into a mini bio-hazard.

On the heels of this insanity is more evidence of Congress' passive submission at the altar of environmental correctness. The Senate Finance Committee has produced an agricultural tax package that provides millions in tax subsidies for ethanol production. This "biofuel" failed at reducing carbon emissions. Instead, ethanol production has resulted in driving up the price of corn, which has had negative global repercussions.

Not only has ethanol production kicked off a worldwide grain shortage, it has had the tragic consequence of dramatically increasing world hunger. This humanitarian crisis has necessitated a substantial increase in tax dollars spent to aid world hunger ... this global crisis is brought to you by the rash actions of fear-mongering environmentalists and spineless politicians.

It's an outright embarrassment that while Japan is the world leader in producing nuclear infrastructure, the crazies in Washington are forcing dangerous light bulbs on us and taxing the very air that we breathe.  Source

Average user rating