Public Opinion polls are a curious beastie that mean little as far as the science itself is concerned. What is remarkable here is that the public is moving firmly out of any support for the global warming theory and is certain to punish political types that hang unto the program. This has occurred in the face of almost blind levels of media support for the theory and no end of pro theory propaganda. The anti theory crowd has been fighting a battle to get their side out and in fact has almost been feeble.

Yet the public is in complete revolt if these numbers hold up. Of course, the cause of public skepticism is the unrelenting lack of cooperation from the weather. Two cold winters in a row and a complete reversal of the warming trend line is impossible to cover over and explanations are shallow and not been strongly promoted since the proponents are also now covering their backside.
We’ve got to stop playing with our Sovereignty, democracy and freedom, do you realize that every time our Government attends one of these that our very futures are at stake here?
Now Mexico has got headlines, “Mexico Wants Climate Accord”, after the fraud and wrangling to get free Sovereign nations to sign away their freedoms to the UN and IMF, I for one have had enough of this gambling with our lives! We’ve got to say “NO” to this now proven Fraud of Climate Change, it has nothing to do with climate – it is about the IMF, United Nations and it’s agents claiming control of every facet of our lives! Is that what you want? Look at what the United Nations has been planning all these years while we’ve been sleeping! We have to get out of “The United Nations”
Re: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ArUoyuDd74

Well written, but wrong-headed. Marvin hit most of it so I won’t re-hash here, but to say that the UN Security Council has little to do with this debate; likewise for any “failure” of the neo-con movement (a contrived “movement” if ever was one, and one certainly not on a scale as to enter a conversation about the relative merits of capitalism and socialism).

A little common sense goes a long way here. Just follow the money and examine who’s on what bandwagon. It’s no coincidence that the vast majority of real Global Warming kooks are the same tired collection of leftist radicals, academics, and bureaucrats who all share but one trait: They all stand to gain something, whether it’s grant/research money (the same money everyone has forgotten that we spent on Global Cooling and the coming Ice Age in the 70′s and 80′s), green profits, fighting capitalism, or plain ol’ “stickin’ it to the man.”

Skidmarks,

Krauthammer is a bright guy; he’s not confused or duplicitous. Pulling a quote out of context, however, is one or the other. Krauthammer went on in the passage to which you linked to explain with perfect, cold logic how even IF warming exists, the Global Warming crowd’s approach is wrong and won’t address the problem. It’s a shell game.

This Green Movement is scientific Socialism and Marxism morphed into one, set to oppose capitalism. Marx praised capitalism for having at least rescued “a considerable part of the population from the idiocy of rural life.” From the French Revolution till the middle of the 1800′s the peasants of western and central Europe were gradually freed from feudal servitude. What is ironic is that the peasants themselves played only a minor role in their emancipation. Changes (heard this lately?) were fueled by the “intelligentsia”–the young liberals imbued with 18th century humanitarian philosophy. Marxism was essentially and industrial policy for the transformation of industrial societies.

Political movements are much like religious movements they grow and evolve and take on believers. I personally believe that is what is happening to our country today. The Green Movement is anti-capitalism and President Obama is pushing the wheelbarrow, with all of us peasants in it, to something that Marx would be proud to call his own. IMHO

Are you referring to the Northern European economic powerhouse in Scandavia that produces the vaunted Saab? Or the other Nordic powerhouse that produces Tiger Woods baby machines?

Western Europe? Spain? Higher standard of living? Show us the money.

All humans inspire oxygen and expire carbon dioxide.

Environmentalists are calling for countries to enforce one-child policies.

We all see where this is going…

Constitional rights be damned…full spead ahead!

MIKE… I get it. I get your Congalese orphan thing. Our own president has a half brother that lives in a shack without electricity or plumbing in the Kenyan slum.

Yet El Presidente drops $35 Grand on a vacation at the Vineyard whilst his own flesh and blood shivers in the cold.

Gotta love those hypocrital globalist elites!

Do as I say and not as I do!

So in the interest of the debate, here’s what I would say: Krauthammer is making a larger case that is dead-on. Socialists couldn’t convince Americans that government decision-making was good for everyone. Now they’ve re-packaged the same idea in a way that sounds and feels good, and is easy and mindless to support. Did they sit in a room and plan it that way? Doubt it. But they knew a good thing when they saw it. Everyone feels pressured to “be green and stop global warming” without any clue what that means, and really wanting to know if it ruins the buzz.

The new socialism is about the same thing as the old: accumulation of wealth and power by greedy, sociopathic politicians and their special interest friends. They don’t care about poor people. How do we know that? Because they never consider the costs of this stuff, ever. The green movement means big-bucks for a few. Government incentives for building “green.” Manipulation of the free market by punishing competition. Subsidies for made-up alternative fuel industries. Example? How about ethanol? Taxpayer paid for that, it didn’t work and global poverty soared. Today it’s hydrogen, solar, and wind. Guess who can’t afford all this, both from a taxation standpoint and increased energy costs? Yep – poor people!

Socialism is about government control, concentrated power and wealth – at the expense of a weak, debilitated citizenry. With the environmental movement, checkmark on all three. Krauthammer’s right: we’ve seen all this before. But will enough of us recognize it to stop it?

Lindsey….or whoever you have reading FITS these days ….please pay attention to some of these counter arguments and consider changing your mind
Or I assure you the rancor of county censures will surely grow.

Although you may find it,….. Strategic to be forced into the Independent party with your good friend Joe…this State is neither Connecticut nor Vermont…
Sulking as you slip into the much-needed role of modern Defense Secretary is also not a great long-term option for being wealthy in the future.

Rahmbo just does not like you or McCain…… and as long as Michele backs him up on this…and why not as she and Barry takes arrow after arrow from
The State’s Strom Alumni Club….a club that includes Jesse Jackson by the way………..you ….Lindsey will not succeed.

1. Global warming is not pollution….pollution and or effects of pollution were what the research showed Republicans could support.
2. Global warming and the subsequent Nobel Prize was a Clinton Initiative payoff to Tipper Gore’s purse…time to stop the BS while we can.
3. Energy Independence means drilling in the U.S. and safe nuclear ……..it also means saying FU to the Arab oil players like the Saud’s and the Bush Texans they enrich.
4. Protect the borders…and fix. Immigration….. It is still an issue…. Mel Martinez and Jeb Bush’s promise that Hispanics would vote Republican proved to be folly..quit blaming Tancredo they were never going to go for the GOP…but they need a road back to Mexico now that the housing bubble has made them unemployed….that would be something to help them with.
5. Pay attention to the damn Fed and the deficit…because the economists are completely wrong and our State will suffer greatly.

You are smarter than this try a new tact.

http://symbolic-mirage.blogspot.com/2009/10/dr-charles-krauthammer-interview.html

You can count on him to:
1) Criticize everything about President Obama.
2) Oppose everything the U.N. does.
3) Cite high gasoline taxes and nuclear energy as panaceas.
Otherwise, there’s no predicting his positions or next contradictions.

I wonder if the Bob Jonesites realized when they invited him to speak on campus a couple of months ago that he is all for stem cell research, is pro-choice, and thinks that intelligent design is bunk. Of course, I also have to wonder if those are still his positions.