Saturday, June 4, 2011

A Righteous Rant From Down Under

Aussie conservative MK has posted a flaming attack on the enviro-globalists and you must read it.  Go to Down Under on the Right Side for the rant of the year

And calling it a rant doesn't do it justice, for it is a cogent lambasting of environmental fascism.  MK takes the raw materials of vulgarity and righteous anger and turns them into a beautiful, flaming work of art!

Here are a few smokin' samples:
Heck, one of these warmists even admitted that whatever we do, including tossing this computer into the sea and going back to scratching around in the dirt outside a hut won’t do shit to the global temperature for a 1000 years. Yet they insist we must do the equivalent of shooting ourselves and our children in the ass.

The time for rational discourse is over, these fascist assholes have made it crystal clear that they don’t give a rats ass what we think. They’re determined to shove their @#$%ing tax down our throats one way or another. (Down Under on the Right Side)
Please go read this blog from down under.  MK is a master at lampooning the outrages of the left.  He is the sweet and sour pork of Right Blogistan:  He'll have you rolling on the floor laughing even as you are outraged at the latest lefty power grab.


The Born Again American said...

Great post, thanks for the link...
It's nice to know we're not the only ones getting this crap shoved where the sun doesn't shine, or in this case "Down Under"...

Unknown said...

It is right in line with my views and this rant is being echoed around the world.
PERFECT expression of thought from MK!

Trekkie4Ever said...

MK, really knows how to express himself, doesn't he?

And he is spot-on. I can't believe how far those people will go bringing ice sculpture to prove a point. Sheesh!

Silverfiddle said...

Yeah Leticia, and imagine how much jet fuel they burned bringing it there. How big was that "save teh planet" project's carbon footprint?

MathewK said...

Thanks for the link back Silver and your kind words, most appreciated and thanks folks for your kind words.

This carbon tax is getting to a real tipping point in Australia. The left wanting to shove us off the cliff, while the rest of us want an election so that we can all make the choice. And there i was thinking leftards were all about choice.

As you can imagine the leftards are going berserk, on the one hand they promise us that some of our national parks will be wiped out and the seas will consume us if we don't tax ourselves, but if we do, it doesn't really make any difference because we're so miniscule anyway. It's like arguing with a bunch of crazed baboons.

Silverfiddle said...

No problem, MK. And don't sell Australia short. You are a cornerstone of Western English speaking Christendom.

Jersey McJones said...

I sympathize with many of the finer scientific arguments around anthropogenic climate change. There remains most of an entire science to study and learn.

As for people who simply reject ACC, well, let's just say it's a little hard for me and most other observers to just ignore the phenomena, because there's some pretty striking data there.

I do respect the tangible arguments about things like taxation, regulation, trade, investment - all that policy stuff.

As a liberal, I've long detested nationalized ethanol, cap and trade, and many of the same things you guys detest. You'd be surprised. Probably half of us ("far left" progressive liberals) completely agree with you.

Climate change - be it anthropogenic or otherwise - is a very complex subject. I am no expert. But I know this:

Anyone that is pro-friggin'-pollution, pro-friggin'-overuse, pro-friggin'-gambling with the future is a selfish, unAmerican moron.

We can at least agree that we shouldn't POLLUTE THE FRIGGIN' AIR AND WATER. NO?

Let me put it this way - if your rights end at my nose, then don't complain when I demand to not smell friggin' sulfur in the air everyday.

So, we all agree on that, right? From that starting point I think we could have a healthy, productive debate.


Silverfiddle said...

Wow Jersey! Another burst of sanity from you. Of course we don't want to stink up the air and drink poisoned water.

And yes, the climate is changing, but when has it ever been static?

And if the climate is changing, what should we do about it? Spend trillions on globalist schemes? or spend far less helping ourselves adapt (Google Bjorn Lomborg).

Anonymous said...

The climate does appear to be altering -- and not for the better -- but I'm reasonably sure it has little or nothing to do with us and our accomplishments as a species. We're just not that big in the great scheme of things.

Let's face it the earth, the solar system, the Universe -- and whatever may lie beyond never has been and never will be stable. It's been in a constant state of flux ever since it was first conceived in the Mind of God and made manifest untold billions of years ago.

Therefore, while we may be undergoing a dramatic cyclical change, it strikes me that it's ignoble for leftists -- and let's acknowledge, please, that only the left is behind all the alarmist rhetoric on global warming and climate change -- to use the phenomenon as an opportunity to seize yet another facet of the tyrannical power they've been longing for and working towards for more than a century.

Let's stipulate for the sake of argument that all the coastal cities really will be under water in a few more years. Does anyone seriously believe that imposing and collecting a GLOBAL TAX on our use of all the machinery that makes modern civilization possible is going to check the process in any meaningful fashion?

Who and what would such a tax help?

Why the global power elites who have had a seething ambition to rule our lives, of course, -- not for the sake of "doing good" -- not even for the sake of aggrandizing their already-colossal store of wealth -- but, as Orwell said in Nineteen Eighty-Four, for the sheer thrill and delight of wielding raw, unchecked absolute power -- the thrill of having the ability to decide at whim who shall live and who shall die. The ability to cause entire nations to starve to death in agony.

I've had a sneaking suspicion that guys like George Soros, who must be only the tiniest tip of an enormous iceberg, suffer from the inability to give and receive affection -- and probably plain old erectile dysfunction as well. It may very well be that the only way for these types to feel as though they are alive is for them to see the pain and terror in the faces of their victims.

It's just a greatly expanded, highly sophisticated reinvention of the Coliseum -- that place where jaded Roman emperors and their barbarous followers got sexual thrills our of witnessing men forced to kill each other and seeing other innocent human beings torn limb from limb and eaten alive by savage beasts.

The love of POWER -- not of MONEY - is th root of all evil. You may take that to the bank.

Anonymous said...

WHOOPS! Forget to sign that last post. Sorry.

~ FreeThinke

Silverfiddle said...

Powerful statement, Anon. My thinking runs along the lines you articulated.

Silverfiddle said...

I knew it was you ;)

Jersey McJones said...


It is even arguable that the climate isn't really "changing," so to speak. It's still a very young and subjective-ridden science - a very complex subject. I would not claim any expertise.

Again, I would like to just say this - crazy Freethinke with an e on the end guy - "pollution" is the POISONING OF THE POPULACE, you f'n moron.


Always On Watch said...

I love MK's site!

And righteous anger is Biblical, too.

MathewK said...

Thanks folks.

"Who and what would such a tax help?"

Those who are instinctively irritated by human progress, those who are greedy and want to make a lot of money out of it and those who yearn to control people.

jez said...

"if we do, it doesn't really make any difference because we're so miniscule anyway."

Don't think the difference is miniscule -- maybe it is if only Australia gets involved. But climate predictions are certainly sensitive to human inputs. Under the IPCC A1Fl scenario (intensive globalization with continued emphasis on fossil fuel energy sources) global mean temperature rise by 2100 is predicted to be between 3 and 5.5 degrees C; whereas under the B1 scenario (sustainable development and with emphasis on global solutions) the prediction is between 1 and 2.5 degrees C.

You may disagree with that (in which case, I wonder why you aren't writing your objections up and publishing them in the scientific journal of your heart's desire), but by calling it "miniscule" you're certainly misrepresenting what most climatologist's believe about the potential impact of reducing emissions.

Anonymous said...

Where did I ever say I was in favor of pollution?

I said that climate change is probably occurring, but there isn't much if anything government intervention could do about it. raising our taxes and making it more and more difficult for ordinary citizens to function by raising the cost of energy to unattainable levels sure isn't going to help anyone accomplish anything positive.

Ceding all our power to Dictocrats will not have a salubrious effect on anyone, except the Dictator Class.

Do you want to become an out-and-out slave?

If so, keep voting for Statist-Internationalist inherently dictatorial schemes designed to to reduce you and your family to penal servitude.

Industrial pollution may be manmade, but the climate is not. We need to stop trying to play God, and start worshipping Him again. I'm sure that would do mankind a lot more good than taxing us to death.

~ FreeThinke