AGW Today: Greenpeace Knows Where You Are, Plus Cap And Tax

Here’s a cute little missive from a Greenpeace writer from the other day, which required someone else from Greenpeace to explain that “no, Gene wasn’t really pushing for violence. Really. I’m serious. Because we at Greenpeace are never violent. We don’t spike trees, assault ships, or push people to violent acts through our extreme rhetoric.”

The proper channels have failed. It’s time for mass civil disobedience to cut off the financial oxygen from denial and skepticism.

If you’re one of those who believe that this is not just necessary but also possible, speak to us. Let’s talk about what that mass civil disobedience is going to look like.

If you’re one of those who have spent their lives undermining progressive climate legislation, bankrolling junk science, fueling spurious debates around false solutions, and cattle-prodding democratically-elected governments into submission, then hear this:

We know who you are. We know where you live. We know where you work.

And we be many, but you be few.

Gee, that sounds like a threat of violence. Where’s the State Run Media to cover this?

Elsewhere, the Washington Post editorial board thinks we can get a “smart climate-change bill passed.”

First, the encouraging part about this. If America is to deal with climate change, it has to reduce carbon emissions — the pollution caused by burning oil, gas and coal. The most cost-effective way to do that is by placing a price on carbon that gradually rises, which a cap could achieve. If well-designed, carbon pricing will attract private capital into the clean-energy effort and spur the technological innovation that will smooth the transition to a cleaner economy.

Right. Because the Dems did such a wonderful job with the health bill that they have to go back and fix it, companies are taking massive non-cash hits, and, oh, hey, the carbon markets are replete with fraud and are collapsing, much like the religious belief in AGW.

As the Senate begins to look beyond the health-care fight, the question legislators should be asking is not whether to put a price on carbon. It’s how to do it best.

Actually, the question that should be asked is “do we want to heavily damage the economy for a fake issue,” when you folks at the WP pointed out in the first paragraph of your editorial that this legislation would have a wider economic reach than the health destruction legislation.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

6 Responses to “AGW Today: Greenpeace Knows Where You Are, Plus Cap And Tax”

  1. Kevin says:

    Guess they should change their name to GreenWar.

  2. Otter says:

    The jackAsses were surprised at the response their posting got. And then had the GALL to try and claim that they felt threatened by it all! Not to mention that their threat of violence was ‘not a threat of violence.’ Stupid, Worthless Bastards.

    ‘lil johnny probably upped his donations to them since yesterday.

  3. […] lost the narrative on climate change when Der Spiegel reports on the issue….and yet as Pirates’ Cove points out - Congress is  still NOT GIVING UP and cap&tax…it’s too important […]

  4. I always love how the lefties say “we are non-violent,” and there next words are threats, and they are typically the first to get caught getting violent.

  5. John Ryan says:

    All you climate change deniers who don’t think that the planet is heating up should be over at Intrade you could make 9 times your bet but it seems that no one is really willing to risk any money in denying climate change

  6. Otter says:

    Teach, something is wrong with ‘lil johnny. There’s no long, misinformed rants; there’s no links; there’s no…. intelligence!

    …Ok. So the last part wouldn’t be any different. Anywho, he doesn’t sound like he’s trying, and that don’t sound like ‘lil johnnies style.

Pirate's Cove