More Bizarre Utterings From The Left —– How Climate Change Is Like Gun Control Which Is Like Health Care?


image  Goodness, these nutters have really flipped.  A fellow named Mitchell Bard has an article in HuffPo which is an utterly mangled bit of inanity…. or insanity.  This is much like the piece I wrote about in my previous post.  It’s filled with creating illogical relationships, mistruths, and very strange reasoning. 

The article seems to be a piece bemoaning the fact that in his mind, we don’t talk about Gun Control, and the closely associated issue Climate Change.  He also dislikes the true characterizations of the conversations we’re not having. 

This is a really strange bit of association.  The article starts in a generic control advocacy manner, but quickly devolves in a morass of insipid stupidity. In Bard’s mind, we’re not having a national discussion on gun control because 2nd Amendment supporters properly say what the left does.  He reference recent rampage shootings, and then states,

But, with each tragedy, we are quickly warned by gun supporters that we can’t have that discussion. To even bring it up is to be accused of politicizing a tragedy or infringing on gun owners’ freedoms.

That is, of course, exactly what gun control advocates do and that is exactly what the conversation is about.  As Bard notes, we have thousands that die by firearms each year.  But, you don’t really hear much out of the nutters until something like Sandy Hook occurs.  They exploit the event politicize the issue.  This isn’t a matter of perspective.  This is the truth.  Additionally, gun control advocates are explicitly discussing infringing upon, not just gun owner’s freedoms, but all American’s freedoms. 

Then Bard falls completely off the rails……

Today it’s gun control, but we’re told this again and again. Climate change is an obvious problem, but we can’t talk about it, so much so that the topic wasn’t even raised in the three presidential debates. Why? Because one side of the political divide has perpetuated a lie that there is a lack of legitimate scientific consensus on the issue, when, in fact, there is near uniform agreement that climate change is real and man-made. Unprecedented hurricanes and tornadoes hit with horrific impact, killing people and costing billions of dollars, the polar ice is melting, sea levels are rising, but the issue can’t even make it into a presidential debate.

What?  Because one side has perpetuated a truth, (see here and here) stating there is no consensus, that somehow means that no one is talking about climate change and compels presidential candidates not to talk about it?  I won’t even bother with his idiocy about “unprecedented hurricanes and tornadoes“.  That’s just more incoherent babbling. 

Bard then takes another leap and draws another illogical parallel.

Health care? You utter the terms “single payer” or “public option,” and you are called a socialist, barraged with cherry-picked statistics about care in Canada or Europe, and told it’s not up for discussion.

We can’t talk about health care?  What the heck was that protracted political battle which dominated the news cycle for over a year which ended with the passage of Obamacare?  Was Bard in a coma during that?

Bard goes on with a screed repeating the same inanities we often hear in the gun control discussion we’re not really having at the moment. 

LOL, if people aren’t talking to Bard about these things, it’s probably because he’s displaying a certain irrationality that scares people. 

This entry was posted in Climate, News and politics. Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to More Bizarre Utterings From The Left —– How Climate Change Is Like Gun Control Which Is Like Health Care?

  1. leftinbrooklyn says:

    Did he actually use ’emotions and paranoia’ in the title of an article supporting CAGW?

  2. Bruce says:

    Mr Bard was right in with the blame Sarah Palin push after the Giffords shooting. Despite Loughner being a mad lefty.

    Nice bubble you have there Mr Bard!

  3. kim2ooo says:

    So here’s the challenge for gun control advocates: explain why you failed the people of Newtown. You cited Connecticut as a national example. You said its laws “reduce risks to children.” You gave no state a higher rating for keeping guns out of public places — like schools.

    And a criminally insane man stole legally-owned guns (owned under Connecticut’s regime) after being denied their legal purchase, broke in through a window, and killed children and adults — adults who were not armed to shoot back, and so died unable to save the children who also died.

    You want this one event to be a national test? Fine. Why are there 20 children dead when the state of Connecticut did what you said they should to keep their people safe?

    Once you answer that question, we can get this conversation underway.

  4. Bruce says:

    I once actually got a lefty to formally replicate the previous solar cycle length (pSCL) relationship with temperature, which shows pretty conclusively the solar dynamo has an effect on our atmosphere, and that it caused half or more of the warming last century.

    What was characteristic was he never agreed with me that CAGW was precluded thereby, he just stopped talking about climate change and global warming.

    And therein is the thing with Mr Bard. Being a certified lefty he must believe all the certified lefty things lefties believe. Its a tribal requirement. Break the circle and you get cast out. On the right side of politics it isn’t very tribal, more like a herd of cats.

    So he may know nothing about global warming but he is accredited to comment on it, being a lefty blogger. Indeed it may be he is just showing his beautiful lefty plumage to other lefties, like the birds in my back garden do (I’ve had some Koels arrive recently, they’re rather striking birds).

    We win when all the lefties in the world all stop talking about climate change, like a certain President we know of.

  5. gator69 says:

    The only person I remember preventing the discussion of healthcare was Pelosi, when she said we would have to pass the bill before we could read it.

    • leftinbrooklyn says:

      ‘…she said we would have to pass the bill before we could read it.’

      And one of our friends here would argue that the 2nd Amendment is becoming LESS valid.

  6. gator69 says:

    Funny, I just got through posting this over at Steven’s site when I saw your post…

    “The left does with climate science what they do with gun control. They single out one possible component that they do not like, and assign full weight to it, while ignoring all other factors.”

  7. DirkH says:

    He links to the politico fact checker and they link to the two old discredited “consensus” papers (the first 97% of 75 climate scientists, the second Schneider and Prall – the unlikely combination of the mastermind of Global Warming himself and an arbitrary computer admin hack).

    It all fell apart after Schneider’s death. He was the guy who made the machine hum.

  8. DirkH says:

    He says
    “I’m fine with losing an argument when both sides stick to the facts.”

    The arbiter of what is a fact and what is not, is of course…
    …the Politico fact checker.

    They’re doing to the word fact what they did to the word progress and the word liberal before.

  9. DirkH says:

    I scanned the comments under his article for who would even swallow his climate change canard. The only guy who responded to that was one skeptic. After the first 4 pages of comments I gave up. (I just searched the word climate)

    • suyts says:

      Yeh, I like to read the comments, too. Sometimes. Other times it shakes my faith in humanity.

      • DirkH says:

        I didn’t read them, I scanned them. Not wanting to dismiss the deep thoughts they put into their comments, but I was just looking for some resonance to his desperate attempt to revive climate change.

        There’s no resonance, and he had a good audience to start with. This is really the most atrocious response the warmists could get.

        Now the big question is of course will Obama join Kyoto 2, introduce a Carbon tax or other ruinous measures based on the pretense of warmism and the intent to fill his coffers. It looks like even an autocrat like him might reconsider this. Even his fanboys seem to not buy it anymore.

      • suyts says:

        It’s the economy. If we were in a better economic position then there would be a chance of that happening, but we’re not, so it won’t fly. Zero will have to rely on the EPA and the like to destroy the remnants of our economy, which is almost as effective.

  10. Dave Trimble says:

    I had no idea what a Koel looked like so I wiki’d it and found this.

    “They are brood parasites, laying their eggs in the nests of other species.”

    Sounds like a lefty to me, drop your load and let others do the hard work while you take the credit.


    • Bruce says:

      Yes, they’re a type of cuckoo. Fortunately they don’t go for the birds’ nests around here, which aren’t the right size. They came for figs in a couple of nearby native fig trees. A pair of channel bill cuckoos also have come and stayed for the figs as well. I chase those away, since they parasitize currawongs and magpies who nest in my area.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s