Trickle Down Tyranny (36 page)

In other words, it’s designed to reduce the electricity available to Americans in the name of preventing pollution.

It’s working. Just ask 830,000 Connecticut residents, or the people who were victims of the rolling blackouts in Arizona and California in September 2011.
⁵⁸

In fact, the EPA draft documents contained language that advised the people who run the grid, including regional transmission operators and state regulators, to start planning to construct new power generation facilities, because EPA regulations will soon cause many existing power plants to shut down. This language was edited out of the final draft of the document.

The EPA simply couldn’t let the fact that its new regulations threatened the lives and safety of millions of Americans slip out.
⁵⁹

It’s bad enough that this administration is reducing the electric power available in the name of preventing miniscule amounts of a contaminant to be released into the atmosphere. But it’s even worse that it’s doing even more harm in the name of preventing a benign gas—CO
₂
—from being released into the atmosphere.

When are you going to wake up and realize that Obama’s energy policy has nothing to do with protecting the environment?

When are you going to understand that Obama’s energy policy is nothing more than another part of his multifaceted plan to take down America, to relegate us to second-class status among world powers?

The Myth of Global Warming

I’ve known for a long time that the foundation on which the idea of man-made global warming has been built is a complete fabrication, based on the phony “science” of corrupt researchers.

I’ve explained to you that it has absolutely nothing to do with what might happen if we continue to emit CO
₂
into the atmosphere and everything to do with the redistribution of wealth from richer nations to poorer.

Contrary to the EPA’s claims, CO
₂
is
not
a “greenhouse gas.” Carbon dioxide makes up only about three-tenths of one percent (0.03) of the earth’s atmosphere. It’s statistically insignificant in any calculation that might attempt to identify the causes of man-made global warming. Water vapor, on the other hand, is a “greenhouse” gas, but even so its effects on our climate are dwarfed by changes in the energy from the sun received on earth.
⁶⁰

One of the problems we face is that we shouldn’t be in the position of having to decide “greenhouse gases” need to be regulated in the first place.

That’s because, not only do greenhouse gases, especially CO
₂
,
not
contribute to global warming, there’s no such thing as global warming in the first place.

Let me explain to you the real agenda behind this phony policy.

Ottmar Edenhofer is the co-chair of Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). He helped organize that group’s 2010 UN Climate Change Conference, known as COP-16, held in Cancun, Mexico. In an interview prior to the start of the conference, Edenhofer explained that climate change has nothing at all to do with climate: “[O]ne must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. . . . One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.”
⁶¹

But Edenhofer’s comments have much more than “economic” implications. What he’s really saying is, “Science be damned. We’re going to make sure the data support global warming no matter what, so that we can effect the transfer of wealth that we’re politically committed to.”

When climate science is no longer about the climate but rather about ways to engineer a massive transfer of wealth from developed nations, not to underdeveloped nations but into the pockets of globalists, then it’s no longer science at all but a ruse designed to achieve a specified outcome.

You heard me.

Climate science as it is practiced by the left is nothing but a ruse.

It’s a scam.

It’s designed to make sure that you forfeit any right you have to maintain control over the way you live your life.

Edenhofer’s admission that global warming is nothing more than a political issue totally undermines the “science” invented to justify global warming. The sole reason for the theory that man-made global warming exists at all is to help its proponents gain political and financial power over the money generated by capitalist economies.

But beyond that, the “science” itself is a hoax. As I explained in
Trickle Up Poverty
, the Climategate scandal, where it came out that the “data” that supposedly confirmed that there was such a thing as global warming were fabricated and manipulated, finally put a damper on the lies that charlatans like Al Goreleoni were perpetrating. As Ottmar Edenhofer’s words demonstrate, the people who perpetrated the hoax have admitted as much.

Global warming is indeed a man-made phenomenon. The men who made it were not the people burning coal, oil, and gasoline, though. They were the so-called scientists who concocted and altered temperature data over the past ten years in order to make it appear as if the rest of us were guilty.

The administration claims that there’s a consensus among scientists that global warming is a real and imminent threat to humanity.

That’s a lie.

When I hear the word
consensus
I simply point to the 9,000 scientists with legitimate scientific credentials who were among more than 30,000 people who signed a petition that said there was no such thing as man-made global warming.
⁶²

That’s what I call consensus.

But the evidence doesn’t stop with scientific “consensus.” A project called the CLOUD experiment, in which the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) built a chamber that exactly reproduced the earth’s atmosphere, demonstrated conclusively that cosmic rays from the sun—and not man-made activity—are the primary cause of climate change on earth.
⁶³

Global warming has been debunked as a serious threat to our economic well-being.

What has replaced it is the administration’s continuing insistence on making policy decisions based on the idea that we still somehow need to control carbon emissions into the atmosphere.

Despite what Obama would like us to believe, it’s his own administration’s policies—overseen by leftist haters of capitalism like Lisa Jackson—that are causing the dramatic spike in oil prices, which in turn causes out-of-control increases in the price of gasoline at the pump.

Imposing those policies on the American people follows the leftist playbook. When the fabrication and manipulation of data that was the foundation of the man-made global warming myth was revealed, one of the perpetrators, Phil Jones of the Climate Research Unit in East Anglia, Great Britain, “shaped” the news, lied to the news media, and obstructed requests for the data under the Freedom of Information Act.
⁶⁴

Jones was sticking to the plan outlined in a pamphlet titled
The Rules of the Game
. The pamphlet is nothing less than a collection of leftist talking points that were distributed to radical environmentalists about the energy issue. It explains how to misrepresent and obfuscate the issue of climate change in order to avoid public scrutiny.

Included in the “rules” for maintaining the fabrication that global warming is a man-made phenomenon are these:

“Be cool: Be sexy, mainstream, non-patronizing, brave—stand out!”

“Belong: Join a massive worldwide change, start positive conformity, join a success.”

“Only stories work: Empathy and emotions are powerful, use stories to hold people’s attention.”

“Change is for all: Break stereotypes, use inclusive language and images, push mass ownership.”
⁶⁵

Does this sound like a page from the Marxist playbook?

Something Barack Obama might say in one of his speeches?

That’s exactly what it is.

These “rules” are nothing more than the blueprint for furthering an expansion of control over the people by means of perpetuating the hoax of global warming that dwarfs anything in George Orwell’s
1984.
⁶⁶

The U.S. Congress is an unindicted co-conspirator in the government’s takeover of the energy industry.

Congress v. the EPA

When the Senate decided not to vote on the Waxman-Markey comprehensive climate “cap-and-tax” legislation in 2009, they were aware of the threat that the EPA under Lisa Jackson might go ahead and implement the regulation of greenhouse gases without congressional approval. At the time, the president admitted that the cap-and-tax bill was dead, but at the same time he said that there was “more than one way to skin a cat.”
⁶⁷

That’s exactly what Jackson is preparing to do.

And that’s exactly what the Senate has voted to let her do. In April 2011, the House passed the Energy Tax Prevention Act, which would have denied Jackson and the EPA the ability to regulate carbon emissions, by an overwhelming majority, with 19 Democrats going along with every Republican in approving the measure. When it reached the Senate, however, the bill failed to pass. Senators debated on several proposals for limiting the EPA’s authority, but none was approved.

Although none of the Senate versions of this important bill was able to generate enough votes to pass, in the voting on all four measures taken separately, a total of 64 senators voted to approve at least one of the amendments. There is a majority in the Senate who want to deny the EPA this overreaching and dangerous authority, but the idiots in that chamber can’t find a way to do it.
⁶⁸

The failure cleared the way for another Obama growth-killing policy as Congress declined to step in to stop the Obama administration’s plan to increase the cost of energy in the U.S.

Obama wants to reduce carbon emissions.

The American people want him to reduce gas prices.

You know whose side he’s on.

Now Jackson and the EPA are planning on directly regulating the emission of carbon dioxide and other pollutants from power plants and other industrial facilities, including everything from cement plants to oil refineries.
⁶⁹

Green energy is big business.

If you don’t believe me, just ask Barack Obama.

But black energy is even bigger business.

Just ask George Soros.

Drill, George, Drill

Don’t get me wrong.

George Soros is investing in green energy.

In fact, as part of his green energy investment strategy, he’s involved in a move to destroy one of the largest and most important eco-environments in the world: Brazil’s Cerrado.

The Cerrado is a “vast plateau where temperatures range from freezing to steaming and bushes and grasslands alternate with forests and the richest variety of flora of all the world’s savannas.” The area supports some 160,000 species of plants and animals, many of them found only in the Cerrado, a number of them on the endangered list.
⁷⁰

Where is Barack Obama when his beloved endangered species are being threatened in Brazil? The same endangered species he and Lisa Jackson use to make sure that U.S. energy companies can’t pursue energy strategies in this country that benefit the United States?

He’s hiding behind the man who I believe is the architect of his energy policy: George Soros.

Here’s how it happened.

When Congress recently mandated that American consumption of ethanol be increased to 36 billion gallons annually in the next decade, the race was on to develop sources for the “alternative” fuel. That meant increasing the production of crops, such as corn and sugarcane, that can be converted to ethanol. That also meant that Soros was, in effect, partnering with former president George W. Bush, who had negotiated a deal with Brazil in 2007 to increase the production of ethanol in South America.
⁷¹

Soros is backing a Brazilian company, Adecoagro, that is one of the primary investors in Brazilian ethanol. The company plans to spend a billion dollars to build three ethanol production plants in Brazil. Soros’s company, Pampas Humedas LLC, which is an affiliate of Soros Fund Management LLC, owns about 33 percent of Adecoagro.
⁷²

That translates to greater destruction of the Cerrado. The worldwide demand for ethanol, fueled by U.S. legislation, has made crops such as corn and sugarcane used to produce ethanol much more lucrative than they were when they were simply food crops. In the process, it has made the production of beef less profitable.

As the need for more corn and sugarcane from which to produce ethanol has skyrocketed like Obama’s energy prices, so has the need for land on which to plant them. That means that companies in the ethanol business are clearing and planting tens of thousands of acres in the Cerrado that have previously been home to one of the most diverse ecosystems in the world.

The U.S. controls the ethanol market through tariffs and subsidies. It imposes a tariff of 54 cents a gallon on imported ethanol, while at the same time it subsidizes the production of ethanol in the United States to the tune of 45 cents a gallon. The Senate is now claiming that we can’t afford to keep subsidizing ethanol production here. At the same time, Brazil is complaining about the tariffs that keep its products from being able to compete with those produced in the U.S.