SOMETHING TO CONSIDER..
By Ann Coulter - Wed Feb 28, 2007 - 6:21 PM ET
Even right-wingers who know that "global warming" is a crock do not
seem to grasp what the tree-huggers are demanding. Liberals want mass
starvation and human devastation.
Forget the lunacy of people claiming to tell us the precise temperature
of planet Earth in 1918 based on tree rings. Or the fact that in the
'70s liberals were issuing similarly dire warnings about "global
cooling."
Simply consider what noted climatologists Al Gore and Melissa Etheridge
are demanding that we do to combat their nutty conjectures about
"global warming." They want us to starve the productive sector of
fossil fuel and allow the world's factories to grind to a halt. This
means an end to material growth and a cataclysmic reduction in wealth.
There are more reputable scientists defending astrology than defending
"global warming," but liberals simply announce that the debate has been
resolved in their favor and demand that we shut down all production.
They think they can live in a world of only Malibu and East Hampton --
with no Trentons or Detroits. It does not occur to them that someone
has to manufacture the tiles and steel and glass and solar panels that
go into those "eco-friendly" mansions, and someone has to truck it all
to their beachfront properties, and someone else has to transport all
the workers there to build it. (And then someone has to drive the
fleets of trucks delivering the pachysandra and bottled water every
day.)
Liberals are already comfortably ensconced in their beachfront estates,
which they expect to be unaffected by their negative growth
prescriptions for the rest of us.
There was more energy consumed in the manufacture, construction and
maintenance of Leonardo DiCaprio's Malibu home than is needed to light
the entire city of Albuquerque, where there are surely several men who
can actually act. But he has solar panels to warm his house six degrees
on chilly Malibu nights.
Liberals haven't the foggiest idea how the industrial world works. They
act as if America could reduce its vast energy consumption by using
fluorescent bulbs and driving hybrid cars rather than SUVs. They have
no idea how light miraculously appears when they flick a switch or what
allows them to go to the bathroom indoors in winter -- luxuries
Americans are not likely to abandon because Leo DiCaprio had solar
panels trucked into his Malibu estate.
Our lives depend on fossil fuel. Steel plants, chemical plants, rubber
plants, pharmaceutical plants, glass plants, paper plants -- those run
on energy. There are no Mother Earth nursery designs in stylish organic
cotton without gas-belching factories, ships and trucks, and
temperature-controlled, well-lighted stores. Windmills can't even
produce enough energy to manufacture a windmill.
Because of the industrialization of agriculture -- using massive
amounts of fossil fuel -- only 2 percent of Americans work in farming.
And yet they produce enough food to feed all 300 million Americans,
with plenty left over for export. When are liberals going to break the
news to their friends in Darfur that they all have to starve to death
to save the planet?
"Global warming" is the left's pagan rage against mankind. If we can't
produce industrial waste, then we can't produce. Some of us -- not the
ones with mansions in Malibu and Nashville is my guess -- are going to
have to die. To say we need to reduce our energy consumption is like
saying we need to reduce our oxygen consumption.
Liberals have always had a thing about eliminating humans. Stalin
wanted to eliminate the kulaks and Ukranians, vegetarian atheist Adolf
Hitler wanted to eliminate the Jews, Planned Parenthood founder
Margaret Sanger wanted to eliminate poor blacks, DDT opponent Rachel
Carson wanted to eliminate Africans (introduction to her book "Silent
Spring" written by ... Al Gore!), and population-control guru Paul
Ehrlich wants to eliminate all humans.
But global warming is the most insane, psychotic idea liberals have
ever concocted to kill off "useless eaters." If we have to live in a
pure "natural" environment like the Indians, then our entire
transcontinental nation can only support about 1 million human beings.
Sorry, fellas -- 299 million of you are going to have to go.
Proving that the "global warming" campaign is nothing but hatred of
humanity, these are the exact same people who destroyed the nuclear
power industry in this country 30 years ago.
If we accept for purposes of argument their claim that the only way the
human race can survive is with clean energy that doesn't emit carbon
dioxide, environmentalists waited until they had safely destroyed the
nuclear power industry to tell us that. This proves they never intended
for us to survive.
"Global warming" is the liberal's stalking horse for their ultimate
fantasy: The whole U.S. will look like Amagansett, with no one living
in it except their even-tempered maids (for "diversity"), themselves
and their coterie (all, presumably, living in solar-heated mansions,
except the maids who will do without electricity altogether). The
entire fuel-guzzling, tacky, beer-drinking, NASCAR-watching middle
class with their over-large families will simply have to die.
It seems not to have occurred to the jet set that when California is as
poor as Mexico, they might have trouble finding a maid. Without
trucking, packaging, manufacturing, shipping and refrigeration in their
Bel-Air fantasy world, they'll be chasing the rear-end of an animal
every time their stomachs growl and killing small animals for pelts to
keep their genitals warm.
