Unhinged climate cultist John Sutter is missing something important
America, if you care about climate, vote like it
Linda, a reader in California, wrote to me recently after I invited people to have a dialogue about the looming climate apocalypse. She sent me a question I know many of you have on your minds as US election season nears an end: “Can Biden/Harris make a difference if they are aggressive in putting new [climate change] regulations in place?”
The answer is a clear yes. Voting for the Joe Biden-Kamala Harris ticket — and rejecting President Donald Trump — can be expected to yield actual-tangible results on climate change.
There are limits to those results, to be sure — which is why American voters must also seek out Senate, House and local candidates who support swift action on the climate crisis.
But the 2020 presidential election, in substantive ways, despite all else that is going on in the world, is an election about the climate emergency. There are many issues dividing Biden and Trump, from racial justice to Covid-19. Perhaps no chasm is wider than climate, though. (snip)
[Biden] proposes two overarching goals that, if achieved, would mean the United States was doing its part to try to limit catastrophic warming that makes storms more dangerous, lengthens the wildfire season, drives mass extinction and displaces people around the world.
The first is achieving net zero emissions in the electric sector by 2035.
The second is net zero US emissions — economy-wide — by 2050.
And he’ll do this by skyrocketing your cost of energy, which will skyrocket your cost of living. All while Joe, Kamala, and the rest of the elected aristocrats who vote for this will continue with their big carbon footprints, which you, the tax payer, will be charged for. Your tax money will go to pay for the higher costs associated with supporting the lifestyles of elected officials, as well as all the government bureaucrats, and all the carbon offsets. They’ll just go about their normal day to day lives, taking long fossil fueled trips, riding in fossil fueled SUVs, eating well at the Congressional cafeterias, and so forth. You, on the other hand, will be paying through the nose in your own life, with no one giving you money.
That’s if you have a job, since this will reduce economic activity, reduce jobs, and destroy some businesses.
This also goes to show the extreme bias of the Credentialed media, who run anti-Trump stories almost exclusively. It’s nothing new, obviously, it has just got worse and worse, and the media has pretty much received their marching orders to allow no skeptical views be published. Yet, their own carbon footprints are huge, and they make zero changes in their own operations.
If this was so important, so real, why do they have to vote to implement harsh, regressive policies? Wouldn’t people simply take action in their own lives?
