News and Commentary on Politics, Media and Culture

Whoa, when Democrats step in it they usually step in it big. Thus is the case with global warming. You see building a position based on consensus is a lot different than actually building it based on something more concrete, like perhaps fact.

Perhaps that’s why the position on global warming changes so often, to the point that people here in the United States are becoming global laughing stocks as scientists start to backtrack on the consensus, taking safer refuge on the newly predicted cooling trend for the next decade. Thankfully some in the United Kingdom are not afraid to speak up about how wrong the consensus just might be.

I guess as fate would have it that cooling trend already appears to have started here in the United States with the revelation that as of the year 2000 Chicago has experienced the fewest days of 90+ degree heat since the decade that started in 1930 according to celebrated Chicago meteorologist Tom Skilling.

August is the wettest and often the muggiest month of the year. Yet, summer heat continues in short supply, continuing a trend that has dominated much of the 21st Century’s opening decade. There have been only 162 days 90 degrees or warmer at Midway Airport over the period from 2000 to 2008. That’s by far the fewest 90-degree temperatures in the opening nine years of any decade on record here since 1930.

This summer’s highest reading to date has been just 91 degrees. That’s unusual. Since 1928, only one year—2000—has failed to record a higher warm-season temperature by Aug. 13.

Good news for the world, bad news for Democrats. I think I am beginning to see a trend. Recall yesterday that another spate of Democrat doomsday talking points on Oil were debunked by the Washington Post. Compound that with the success of the surge in Iraq and the latest news that No Child Left Behind is actually resulting in higher grades across the board and you have a good majority of Democrat talking points being exposed for the malicious lies that they really are.

And it doesn’t stop there. Today we learned that Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is an investor in a T. Boone Pickens plan for future energy policies that will be imposed on you, the American citizen on the sidelines, if she has her way. The kicker, she stands to make a ton of dough as long as oil prices remain high and American’s are forced into another politically motivated crisis.

As reported on #dontgomovement.com, Speaker Pelosi bought between $50,000 and $100,000 of stock in Pickens’ CLNE Corp. in May 2007 on the day of the initial public offering:

“She, and other investors, stand to gain a substantial return on their investment if gasoline prices stay high and municipal, state and even the Federal governments start using natural gas as their primary fuel source. If gasoline prices fall? Alternative fuels and the cost to convert fleets over to them becomes less and less attractive.”

CLNE also happens to be the sponsor of Proposition 10, a ballot initiative in Pelosi’s home state of California to dole out a combined $10 billion in state and federal funds for renewable energy incentives. Namely: Natural gas and wind.

Follow the money. Or, to put it in economist terms as energy analyst Kenneth Medlock III did in an interview with the Dallas Morning News about the Pickens multi-billion wind farm investment: “A lot of what he’s trying to do is add value to a stranded asset…he’s obviously got millions of dollars on the line.”

And so, potentially, does the Democrat Speaker of the House windily wagging her finger at the financial motivations of others.

But don’t blame me. I didn’t vote for these people. Sadly someone did.

 Send this post a Friend  Tags: Chicago, Global Warming.Democrats, Nancy Pelosi, Oil, T. Boone Pickens

1 Comment »

Trackback URI | Comments RSS