Of the many buffoons in today’s media, Tom Friedman is, indeed, a leader. The following is from his article, “I Believe I Can Fly” found in the New York Times:
“…. America’s climate-deniers mounted an effective disinformation campaign that made “climate change” a four-letter word in the Republican Party. This undermined efforts to get a clean energy bill — the sort that might break our addiction to oil and take money away from the people our soldiers are fighting in the Middle East. And all of this happened in 2010, which is on track to be the Earth’s hottest year on record. So here’s the math: 98 climate scientists out of 100 will tell you that man’s continued carbon emissions pose the risk of disruptive climate change this century. Two out of 100 will tell you it doesn’t. And “conservatives” today tell you to bet on the two. If the climate-deniers are right — but we combat climate change anyway — we’ll have slightly higher energy prices but cleaner air, more renewable energy, a stronger dollar, more innovative industries and enemies with less money. If the deniers are wrong and we do nothing, your kids will meet the sudden stop at the end.
Comment: In his first sentence in the above paragraph he uses the Leftwing cliche, “climate deniers” as name calling sliding down his nose and out of his pen to ridicule the Republican to be antediluvian primitives unaware of “climate change”.
Dear reader, let’s review his words “climate deniers” and “climate change” and why Republicans, yes, have treated both with disdain, if not a four letter word.
I do agree with this St. Louis Park, Minnesota lefty, with his inference that Republicans, unlike Friedman’s bedfellows of the Democrat Party left, still are primitive enough to feel restrained from using “four letter words” regarding matters that don’t make sense, especially, but who is a climate denier?
What does this MN graduate mean by the lefty cliche, “climate deniers?” I have never heard of conservatives denying climate. Maybe some RINOs have while passing on gossip from their Democrat colleagues, or quoting Mr. Friedman from one of his columns. Climate happens. Most Americans understand that.
Dear Thomas from St. Louis Park, Minnesota, Climate change also happens. Are you confused thinking that it has just started since Republicans have been around? I live near St. Louis Park, Minnesota. If you had been a bit more domestic, honest and forthright, and had been outdoors from time to time in St. Louis Park, you would also have noticed climate change in your home town since the days you were in diapers. A traveling man going hither and thither to spread the Word of the Left wing Gods, might not have noticed.
Surely, in Friedman’s Leftwing devotions he’s become aware that the use of ”Climate change” cliche has been posed by the Left to replace “Global Warming”, the cliche favored by former Vice President, Democrat Al Gore.
Do you inform your readers why? No…….
Statistics since Goretime , collected especially by those more concerned with global cooling than American leftwing propagandists who write for the New York Times and other American media, and from countries whose futures depend on knowing Climate Truths, forecast the cyclic arrival of another 60 or so year period of cooling, which should alarm your former St. Louis Park neighbors. Lefties believed such statistics enough to change this grievous threat to American democracy from Gore’s ”Global warming” to Friedman’s “Climate change”. And you are right within the propaganda of your article that no one in their right mind can deny that climate changes. You clever old Marxist, you.
Now clean energy is another topic, the St. Louis Park, Minnesota grads turns to……….oh, no…..wait, he has connected that with his cliches, but is sliding on to suggest the tremendous ‘successes’ the president, Mr. Obama has had in coaxing the Russians to help any western coalitions to force Iran to stop its nuclear weapons program. Do read the following Friedman paragraph:
“Many of the same people working against clean energy are working to scuttle Senate ratification of the New Start nuclear arms reduction treaty that Mr. Obama signed with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. This treaty is right in line with the previous three U.S.-Russia arms reduction deals, all negotiated by G.O.P. administrations. It leaves America secure, a world and a Russia with fewer nukes and it promotes better ties with the Kremlin. Scuttling the treaty, just to deny Mr. Obama a success, which is what some Republican senators are up to, will not only ensure that U.S.-Russian relations sour, it will also make it much less likely that the Russians — whose pressure on Iran and willingness to deny it surface-to-air missiles have been critical in slowing Iran’s nuclear program — will continue to cooperate with us on that front. But, hey, who cares about weakening Iran or U.S.-Russian ties if you can weaken your own president? We can fly.”
Comment: It is so good to know that another nuclear deal with the Russians will “leave America secure, a world and a Russia with fewer nukes and it promotes better ties with the Kremlin”.
I wonder how Mr. Friedman ever graduate from high school to be so naive and uneducated on these so important of matters. But, writing ‘stuff’ for the New York Times along side the Paul Krugmans and the Frank Riches, who needs a diploma? Yes, there may be some Republican Senators who might simply want to scuttle the ‘treaty’ with the Russians.
Please read Tom Friedman’s writings. They may be embarrassing, but read them anyway and remember, he was educated in the Twin Cities, that for extra pain.
Filed under: American Culture, Barack Obama, Climate Change, Education, National Politics
