REPLIES TO THE CURRENT QUESTION

Our question last week was:

What is the best strategy for the opposition to employ to stop the global-warming madness in the U.S. Congress?

Here are your answers.  The name of a writer is included only if he or she actually placed a name at the end of the message.  Otherwise, we assume the writer wished anonymity and "name withheld" is inserted.

I believe the best way to counter the warmers is to point out that in this era of "Go to my PC" and other online ventures, war inquisitors need not move a muscle or burn a single drop of fuel to meet. Global warming fear mongers spend countless amounts of money and fuel and other carbon waste products to have global meetings. They fly in jets to their fancy meeting locations. Al Gore consumes more fuel than many African nations simply with his yacht.

If the science is so compelling, why don't the true believers live like it is so. Or are they hypocrites.  As in the inquisition, are they simply religious zealots who want to control others? Do they simply want to make money selling indulgences? Will they start a series of 'crusades' to counter the infidels?

If the science is so decisively obvious, why won't Al Gore debate a scientist, rather than earn millions in honorariums where no opposition is allowed to appear on stage with him? Hmmm?

Stop global warming by gagging the windbags!

Michael Smith

I promise not to go technical in this response.  Nor, will I go nuclear; which, by the way is the best strategy for solving our carbon emissions problem, but that is not what the question addresses.  Probably the most difficult task for those trying to bring reason and common sense to the issue is trying to get the global-warming madmen to stick to a single issue.  At the moment, there is no global warming problem because the globe has been cooling for about 10 years or so, depending on whose numbers one uses.  "So what!" "No problem!"  The issue isn't "global warming" at all, now it is "climate change," which appears to be a euphemism for "whatever it is that we are doing in the US to remain productive, while the rest of the world goes on the dole"!  As soon as the "opposition," whoever and wherever they can be found, shows that one good volcano eruption anywhere on the globe produces more climate change than everything we are doing for good or ill in this country, the madmen will re-define the issue in some other terms.  

The issue is clearly and simply one of increasing government control over the industrial engine that drives the economy.  That is the evil engine that generates the stuff that keeps big government at bay.  No matter how the histrionics around greenhouse gases, global warming, ozone holes, climate change or any other name one chooses are parsed, the real concern of the madmen is control of the economy.  Hence, it is the industrial engine that the "global-warming madmen" want to take control over.  So, I guess the strategy is clear, the "opposition", whoever they are, must build a wall around the industrial engine high enough to keep the "global-warming" madmen out of the engine room.  At the moment, every brick put in the wall is getting stolen along with a couple of others.

As some other dude put it, "So it goes!"

Don Newell
Vancouver, WA

The underlying problem, it appears to me at least, is the inability to communicate effectively to a broad spectrum of people.  That is the job of the MSM, and they have failed. Sadly, I don't think they have even had a clue that they have failed until recently.When one is sure one is right, one cannot see where one is wrong. The MSM siutation is changing, evolving, but rather slowly, and there is no concerted effort to seriously and critically examine what is going on. It is mostly quibbling about rigged press conferences and town halls.

So, what is the solution? I would suggest that the Republican National Committee start taking out full-page "ads" where facts are detailed, in the major MSM newspapers. Perhaps they could issue a challenge: if you can refute any major item printed on this page, the first 10 people will receive $5,000. That would stimulate interest. It might even stimulate the MSM, if readers start getting interested. After all, if the ad is correct, and the newspaper that had the ad has not said a peep, or has distorted the info, that will make them look kind of funny.

Dave Chiriboga