House Passes Crap And Tax Bill In Record Time: I Fear For My Country!!!
House Passes Crap And Tax Bill In Record Time: I Fear For My Country!!!
By
Ken Eliasberg
In what will go down in history as an act calculated to make Benedict Arnold look like a true patriot, the House of Representatives — that’s our House of Representatives, lest any one be confused — passed a piece of legislation that has nothing — neither form, substance, nor process — to commend it. The measure is commonly referred to as cap and trade (A.K.A. Kyoto II, or Al Gore’s gold mine and America’s descent into an economic maelstrom), but I believe my reference to it in the title of this column is a more accurate description of this bit of nonsense. In short, our(?) representatives passed an unnecessary measure in an inappropriate manner that none of them had even the courtesy to read (how could they, there just wasn’t time?). And this is a piece of legislation that may well bankrupt the country. They passed the Kyoto Treaty, whatever they call this piece of excrement, and it will assure us that you will pay a ton more taxes for your energy, will destroy the coal industry (as well as those industries dependent on it), and will undoubtedly put many of you out of work (although Obama assures us that the loss will be more than made up for with the creation of “green” jobs; it might be helpful if this president focused on red, white, and blue jobs for a change) — all in furtherance of some environmental mumbo jumbo, the existence of which has not been proven, and, in all likelihood, which cannot be proven. Why not? Because the inconvenient truth about Global Warming, as one commentator was thoughtful enough to point out, is really quite simple; what we are dealing with here is nothing but WEATHER. While Al Gore may have made his bones in this dubious area — after first inventing the internet, of course — this legislation will go a long way to reduce America to the status of a second world country (while enriching Mr. Gore in the course of our having to live with this abomination) should the Senate be so foolish (and traitorous) as to follow suit.
The House Bill is an act of political treason. Not just because the substance of this bill is both unnecessary and a potentially devastating blow to our economy. Its substance, as bad as it is, pales into insignificance compared to the despicable manner in which it was rammed through the House — your House folks. I cannot stress enough the disgraceful manner in which this important Bill was rushed through the House (in direct contravention of Obama’s expressed concern over not just transparency, but for providing sufficient time for the public to examine what it is that is allegedly being submitted for transparent consideration). Thus, the process by which this monstrosity was foisted on us is in and of itself and independent monstrosity. That said, while I have emphasized process in this matter, I think it is important to at least take a look at the problem for which this Bill is a proposed solution — GLOBAL WARMING - the topic that Al Gore, an inconvenient boob, has made the crusade of his life.
Why the rush over global-warming legislation; is the world on the verge of turning into a fiery ball tomorrow afternoon? Hardly! Why the rush? Because Obama is on a crusade to push his bank-breaking agenda through while he still enjoys a measure of popularity. The folly here is that
not only is there no need for such expedited treatment of this matter, there may not be any need at all! Why not??
Because, as noted, Global Warming, in its entirety, may be little
more than a figment of Al Gore’s vivid imagination,
2. Even if we are experiencing a “warmng,” it may be little more than
part of the weather cycle, i.e. 30 years ago the scare
de jour was global cooling (these lefties seem to be in constant
need of something to inspire fear in the voting populace).
3. Even if it is established that we are actually experiencing global
warming, to invoke any measure of relief, let alone one as
draconian as the one under consideration by the left, it would
help if it were first scientifically established — on a very broad
based basis — that the problem were man-made, or, at the very
least, man aggravated. Why? Becauseif we are not the cause,
or, at the very least, a cause, how can we be certain with respect
to any man-proposed solution, i.e. if we are not causing the
problem, are the measures being considered for a solution
feasible (on any sort of basis, let alone one that has been arrived
at on some sort of cost-benefit calculation)?
4. And, even if we get over the hurdles noted above, why should the
U.S. unilaterally assume such a substantial burden re the
solution if other industrial countries allegedly contributing to
the problem are not required to act in a similar manner?
5. Why, if the idea of man-caused or man-aggravated Global
Warming is such a slam dunk, does Al Gore refuse to debate an
authority with a different view (and why are such authorities
being marginalized, criticized, and shunned, as well as a
lengthy EPA report which disagrees with the approach being
suppressed), i.e. given the importanceof this problem and the
financial cost being proposed to solve it, shouldn’t all sides be
heard and the problem aired thoroughly before moving toward
such a monumentally expensive solution, and
6. Finally, what’s the rush? Is there evidence that some catastrophe
will occur before the problem is given proper exposure,
evaluation, and debate??
As this matter wends its way through the Senate (where it almost certainly will undergo substantial modification, if not defeat), we may take another look at it, and, in all events, we shall certainly examine the proposal in whatever modified form it emerges from legislative consideration. For present purposes, I return to the question at hand — what is the rush, and how do you justify the unbelievably heavy-handed and abusive manner in which this proposal was foisted on the American public?
At the risk of being presumptuous (not really, I understand the organized-crime mentality of the current White House), let me offer this
thought — this isn’t about the environment, it isn’t about energy, and it’s not about the economy. What then is it about? It’s about central planning; it’s about putting more and more power in the hands of the federal government. In short, it’s about advancing the cause of socializing our country! And that’s not just my opinion, that’s the way it is — check it out! (to be continued).