That’s right. I’m waging a personal war on science at home and abroad. It is, nonetheless, a limited war whose prosecution is not aimed at destroying science. The aims of my war are simply to hold “science” accountable for its claims.
Progressives love to “question authority,” but only when the authority in question that’s being questioned does not toe the Progressive line. Those authorities that do, however, are not in line for questioning; they are to be believed without question.
And, if you do question Progressive authorities you will be smeared as a racist, a homophobe, anti-science or even as the clichéd and worn-out Nazi Holocaust denier. There will be no debate, since debate would expose the single-minded, irrational totalitarianism of Progressive ideology.
There are various areas where this applies, but I’ll tackle two of the most recent and newsworthy battles: Evolution and global warming/climate change. Recently, someone asked Rick Perry about evolution, to which he replied that it’s a theory with “gaps” in it. He also mentioned that he’s not sure how old the earth is.
Inevitably, the Progressive priesthood cried foul and began to brand Perry as an ignoramus who is waging a war on science. To add insult to injury, Perry is skeptical of man-caused climate change, or global warming, or whatever. This was too much for Rolling Stone’s Jeff Goodell, who opined:
Never mind that larger droughts in the southwestern U.S. have long been predicted by scientists who model the changes we are likely to face due to ever-rising levels of CO2 in the atmosphere.
Never mind that Texas dumps more carbon pollution into the atmosphere than any other state in the nation – higher than California and Pennsylvania combined. Were it a separate country, Texas would be the seventh largest carbon polluter in the world.
Never mind that, during his first term, Perry signed legislation to speed construction of 11 new coal plants for the state. Or that he has lead [sic] the charge to undermine the EPA’s right to limit greenhouse gas pollution.
None of this matters. Because as Perry wrote in his new book, global warming is “all one contrived phony mess that is falling apart under its own weight.” Still, the earth’s climate is changing, and so we must pray.
God help us.
Note that Goodell does not address scientific skepticism about global warming (climate change, whatever), of which there is plenty out there. Rather, his evidence is that there’s weather, Texas is trying to generate energy for its citizens and Perry believes in God. This is the typical line of reasoning on the Progressive left, since those who have completely bought into evolution and global warming have bought into a religion.
Also note Goodell’s contempt for the Constitution. Goodell says that Perry seeks to undermine the EPA’s “right” to limit greenhouse gas pollution. Under the Constitution, the EPA has no “right” to do so. That “right” is restricted to Congress and well it should be since members of Congress were duly elected by the people. Where do I go to vote out the EPA? That’s right. I can’t.
Just as Galileo’s inquisitors were fully invested in a geocentric universe, Progressives have morphed theory into dogma. Progressives are philosophically wedded to both theories – evolution and global warming – because they both degrade the individual as a polluter and cosmic accident.
Rather than a special creation with basic rights endowed by the Creator, the individual is of very little worth and should be subservient to the so-called “public” good. As a polluter and contributor to global warming, the individual needs to be restricted and restrained by those who know better, because the planet is more important than the individual. As the Apostle Paul put it: “They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator, who is forever praised. Amen.”
Please note that “those who know better” are exempt from the rules they create to restrict, restrain and regulate the masses. This brings to mind a passage from my favorite book in the Chronicles of Narnia series by C.S. Lewis:
“Well, then, it was jolly rotten of you,” said Digory.
“Rotten?” said Uncle Andrew with a puzzled look. “Oh, I see. You mean that little boys ought to keep their promises. Very true: most right and proper, I’m sure, and I’m very glad you have been taught to do it. But of course you must understand that rules of that sort, however excellent they may be for little boys – and servants – and women – and even people in general can’t possibly be expected to apply to profound students and great thinkers and sages. No, Digory. Men like me, who possess hidden wisdom, are freed from common rules just as we are cut off from common pleasures. Ours, my boy is a high and lonely destiny.”
As he said this he sighed and looked so grave and noble and mysterious that for a second Digory really thought he was saying something rather fine. But then he remembered the ugly look he had seen on his Uncle’s face the moment before Polly had vanished: and all at once he saw through Uncle Andrew’s grand words. “All it means,” he said to himself, “Is that he thinks he can do anything he likes to get anything he wants.”
Following the horrendous vote in the House of Representatives favoring the Cap and Trade bill, eight Republicans who voted for it have been identified (HT to Michelle Malkin). For those of you who see in this bill the erosion of our freedoms and the stifling of our economy in favor of a suffocating federal government, I suggest you call the following members of Congress who voted for it and let them know how you feel:
Mack, CA, 202-225-5330
Castle, DE, 202-225-4165
Kirk, IL, 202-225-4385
Lance, NJ, 202-225-5361
LoBiondo, NJ, 202-225-6572
McHugh, NY, 202-225-4611
Reichert, WA, 877-920-9208
Smith, NJ, 202-225-3765
Why pick on these particular eight representatives? As mentioned, they’re all Republicans, and the only Republicans who voted in favor of the Cap and Trade legislation. So-called “moderate” Republicans who vote on the side of bigger and more intrusive centralized government need to be put on notice that this is not acceptable.
Cap and Trade is an indicator of which side someone stands on. Either you stand with the Constitution and the decentralization of power to the states and the people, or you stand with those who believe in the power and supremacy of the state, and particularly the centralized federal state. The latter are typically called Democrats, and if you’re a Republican who votes for more federal control, please switch parties.
Cap and Trade is a watershed event in our nation’s history that defines the ever widening divide between conservative and progressive. The progressive believes there is nothing government can’t do (control the climate and save the planet!), whilst the conservative generally believes the government should be restricted to the duties enumerated in the Constitution.
Progressives are fascist, according to the classical definition of the term, and are unconcerned about personal freedom, unless the “freedom” in question has something to do with moral depravity, but that’s another topic for another time.
The point is that the Cap and Trade legislation that passed the House and is on its way to the Senate reveals the fascist agenda of the progressive movement in America. It is an agenda which seeks to control each individual’s behavior and restrict their consumption and mobility, all in the name of what is increasingly being proved as a myth of epic proportions.
The myth – climate change, global warming, global cooling, or whatever the hell is the most convenient term based on the current weather – is simply the mechanism or excuse whereby the fascist is able to exert control over his fellow citizens.
As mentioned in a previous post, the progressive fascist is typically insulated from the consequences of his pet policies. They’re either very wealthy, dependent on the government, work for the government or a union subsidized by government, or hipster dufuses (dufusi?) who follow the latest “cool” trend and blindly follow the pack (more on this voting bloc later).
So I understand why a Democrat would vote for the Cap and Trade bill. They have a defined constituency: the very wealthy, hipster dufusi (dufuses?), government dependents, government employees and union employees.
Republicans, on the other hand, are charged with representing the individual, and to put the individual’s freedom and liberty above the demands of the state and its special-interest constituents. Therefore, I have called all eight of those House Republicans who voted for Cap and Trade and left the following message:
Hi…
Just wanted to let you know that though I am a Republican and live in Colorado, I am going to do everything I can to ensure your defeat in the next election, including financial contributions to your opponents.
Your vote in favor of Cap and Trade displays scientific ignorance and a complete disregard for the liberty and freedom of average American citizens who will suffer under the further expansion of the federal government’s power.
I suggest you do two things before you vote on any more so-called climate change bills: re-read the Constitution and look up in the sky at the big burning orb that constitutes about 99 percent of the total mass of the solar system.
Thank you,
Club Soda

Recent Comments