Ethics Quote Of The Month: David Harsanyi, On The CNN “Climate Crisis” Town Hall

“[T]he most benign climate-change plan proposed during CNN’s seven-hour Democratic Party presidential candidate town hall was more authoritarian than anything Donald Trump has ever suggested during his presidency.”

 Federalist Senior Editor David Harsanyi, who continued, “Democrats were not merely proposing massive societal upheaval but mass coercion.”

I did not and could not watch the town hall; someone would have to pay me to do that, and frankly, anyone who would watch such a monstrosity without compensation has some serious intellectual and cognitive issues to deal with. This was a discussion among non-scientists about a complex topic none of them understand or are qualified to opine on, moderated by an equally ignorant and biased journalist, with questions being posed by activists rather than informed and open-minded citizens. It wasn’t journalism, and it wasn’t public education. Questioners were allowed to wear shirts with climate change slogans on them, like this…

One commentator correctly analogized the scene to Fox News holding an abortion town hall with all the questions coming from anti-abortion activists, with many wearing “ABORTION IS MURDER” shirts.

However, now I have had time to peruse the transcripts to the extent that I could without my head exploding, and reviewed the reviews. Not surprisngly, but depressing nonetheless, the mainstream news media whitewashed the event, focusing on the most benign and relatively reasonable-sounding statements, while ignoring the bat-crazy, “Oh-my-god-did-I-really-hear-that?” moments that should haunt the Democratic Party all the way to November 2020. The Times, for example, headlined its “review,” “CNN Climate Town Hall: Here’s What You Need to Know.”  Since the Times strategically decided that you didn’t need to know that old Joe Biden’s left eye filled with blood, readers should understand what THAT means: “Here’s what we want you to know.”

The Times and other mainstream media organs don’t want you to know, for example, what Hirsanyi accurately points out: the party that has been promoting the big lie that President Trump is a dangerous authoritarian and a threat to democracy is led by individuals who advocate gutting the economy, democracy and personal liberties to address an “emergency” hyped in order to justify doing so. For example,

  • Joe Biden was asked by  Anderson Cooper if the Green New Deal, which to the extent that it means anything stands for banning   fossil fuels, 99 percent of cars and planes, retrofitting our buildings and eliminating meat within the next decade, “goes too far,” and was “unrealistic, promising too much.” Joe answered, “No, no it’s not.” It  “deserves an enormous amount of credit,” said Joe. Recall that Saikat Chakrabarti, the former chief of staff of Representative Ocasio-Cortez and widely believed to be the main architect of the GND, told the Washington Post  that ” it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all, because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.”

In other words, declare an emergency to take over the economy.

To be fair, does anyone think that Biden has read the Green New Deal?

  • Senator Kamala Harris said she would get rid of the Senate filibuster if that was the only way to to pass a Green New Deal:

“If they fail to act as president of the United States, I am prepared to get rid of the filibuster to pass a Green New Deal.”

The President doesn’t have the power to eliminate the Senate filibuster, never has had, and won’t unless one becomes a dictator. Imagine if Trump said something like that. He would immediately be mocked for not understanding the Constitution and the separation of powers, and we would be warned that he was nascent fascist seeking absolute power. Did interviewer Erin Burnett remind the CNN audience that Harris’s pledge was utter nonsense? Of course not.

  • Senator Elizabeth Warren was asked by Fredo—I’m sorry, Chris Cuomo—“But do you think that the government should be in the business of telling you what kind of lightbulb you can have?” This exchange ensued…

    WARREN: Oh, come on, give me a break. You know…

    CUOMO: Is that a yes?

    WARREN: No. Here’s the — look, there are a lot of ways that we try to change our energy consumption, and our pollution, and God bless all of those ways. Some of it is with lightbulbs, some of it is on straws, some of it, dang, is on cheeseburgers, right? There are a lot of different pieces to this. And I get that people are trying to find the part that they can work on and what can they do. And I’m in favor of that. And I’m going to help and I’m going to support. But understand, this is exactly what the fossil fuel industry hopes we’re all talking about. That’s what they want us to talk about.

Isn’t that great? Asked, “Is that a yes?” the top Democratic demagogue said no, and then answered in the affirmative! Banning bulbs and straws and beef IS part of the Green New Deal, but because that’s certifiable, the fossil fuel companies want to focus on that. Warren, who’ now endorses Jay Inslee’s plan to force every American to give up fossil fuel and nuclear energy in 20 years, kept emphasizing  solar panels, without Cuomo or any questioner raising the obvious problem with that: reality. To put this in Natural gas makes up about 23 percent of our energy consumption while renewables, including solar, make up about 11 percent. Only 8% OF that 11%  is solar energy, and it’s only that much because it is subsidized and mandated by government. We use about 19.96 million barrels of petroleum products per day.  Writes Hirsanyi:

“To replace it, we’d have to create millions of unproductive taxpayer-funded jobs, layer every inch of available land with solar panels and windmills, and then pray to Gaia that every day is simultaneously sunny and windy. All for the low cost of $93 trillion.”

Great plan!

  • Bernie Sanders, I guess not surprisingly for a crypto-Communist, says his administration would encourage “population control.” Asked by “Martha”, “Human population growth has more than doubled in the past 50 years. The planet cannot sustain this growth. I realize this is a poisonous topic for politicians, but it’s crucial to face. Empowering women and educating everyone on the need to curb population growth seems a reasonable campaign to enact. Would you be courageous enough to discuss this issue and make it a key feature of a plan to address climate catastrophe?”, Sanders answered, “Yes.”

I believe the Chinese have a great policy regarding that topic, Bernie. Check it out. Bernie also said he would ban all fracking.

There’s a lot more, little of which ever found its way into the mainstream media reporting. If it ever did, I suspect it would have quite an impact, but the media will bury as much of this part-wide insanity if it can, for as long as it can.

Oh…this doesn’t involve the autocratic issue, but the persistent and desperately managed issue that Joe Biden is barely aware of what he’s doing and is obviously attempting to pose as a left-wing nut embracing climate change extremism and the rest of the package convincingly enough to get the nomination. There was this exchange:

QUESTIONER: …Fossil fuel corporations, their executives, their trade and industry organizations, and their think-tank front groups have waged a decades- long campaign of lying to the public about the science, and it has brought us to a crisis that threatens the entire human race. Now, I know that you signed a no fossil fuel money pledge, but I have to ask, how can we trust you to hold these corporations and executives accountable for their crimes against humanity when we know that tomorrow you are holding a high-dollar fundraiser hosted by Andrew Goldman, a fossil fuel executive?

BIDEN: He’s not a fossil fuel executive.

Andrew Goldman is a co-founder of Western LNG, a natural gas production company based in Houston, Texas. He is, in fact, a fossil fuel executive. Was Joe lying? Did he not know who Goldman is? Does he not know what fossil fuels are? The possibilities are endless. Anderson Cooper, in a rare moment of competence among the CNN interviewers, then informed the audience that Goldman was indeed, a a fossil fuel executive. Biden replied, “Well, I didn’t realize he does that.” Then he said he would check to see if Cooper was accurate before deciding whether to attend the fundraiser.

Cooper was accurate.

Biden still attended the fundraiser.


Sources: CNN, New York Times, The Federalist 1, 2PJ Media


39 thoughts on “Ethics Quote Of The Month: David Harsanyi, On The CNN “Climate Crisis” Town Hall

  1. Hypocrites, liars, alarmists, propagandists, demagogues and actual science deniers one and all. Is the globe warming? Ever so slightly. Can we do anything at all to slow or stop it? Very unlikely and certainly not cost effectively.

    Could someone ask these moronic charlatans, why, when some glaciers recede gigantic tree stumps are found? Ummm could it be the earth was significantly warmer in the past? A past long before there were millions, much less billions, of people. And, no evil SUVs and perhaps not even domesticated herd cattle. Frickin’ idiots.

    Have any of them considered solar activity and its effect on our climate? You know, that giga nuclear fire burning 93 million miles away. If they have, they quickly buried it.

    None have any idea how an economy works at the macro or micro scale either.

    All of them want to control and confiscate wealth and power. End of story.

      • I used to believe the answer was, yes, they must see sense in the privacy of their hearts and minds.

        I now believe, no, they have intentionally blinded themselves to reality in order be in good standing with the herd. Facebook and its woke army is a prime example. They will gladly run off any cliff as long as they can hold hands and feel good about themselves as they do it.

        This is a social survival tactic, though it is, in the end, a mortally destructive one.


      • “[A]re they…what? Hypnotized? Deluded? Dumb as rocks? Lying?”

        No. They are neither. They are latent and patent fascists. They know what is best foryou and you had better get in line, or else.


  2. The climate debate is not about the environment – never was and never will be. It is about power and centralizing that power in the government. If the government regulates straws it can regulate what you drink. If it can regulate what you drink it can regulate your behavior. If it can regulate your behavior it can regulate what you think.

    Democrats. What won’t they ban?

    • Hey it’s for the good of the planet. Don’t you love the planet? Don’t you want to save the environment? C’mon, feel good, join the herd.

  3. On Sanders birth control issue. Does he plan to abort only FEMALE fetuses because with fewer females we lower the need to expend resources on abortions.

    That too came from China.

    • I think all the Chinese only wanted boys if they could only have one,Chris. Hence the slaughter of the girl babies. I think it was more an unintended consequence of the policy. Of course, there are never any unintended consequences of totalitarian policies. They all work out perfect!

    • We have been told for fifty years that abortion was about choice and female autonomy over their bodies and reproductive decisions. Remember that penumbra thingy arising out of Griswold and Roe v. Wade? I mean, NARAL and Planned Parenthood tell us all the time that abortion is really just a small, unfortunate,and rare part of women’s health care issues and initiatives.

      It is nice to hear Sanders – in a moment of (unwitting) honesty – say that it is really about population control, especially in the Third World. That he said it is one thing; that he said on a CNN townhall discussion on climate change is more revealing. Would he have said that on ABC? Fox? NBC? Hardly. Yet, he felt secure enough that his audience wouldn’t throw stones at him for such an immoral and unethical position. That truly is openly hostile to children in the Third World.

      Querie: Where are the accusations of racism because he said he would openly violate US federal law to promote, encourage, and implement abortion in the Third World. After all, who lives in the Third World? Brown and Black people. Those people just can’t get themselves together so we will “help” them “plan” families to allow women to work. Margaret Sanger, and her acolyte Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, would be proud.


  4. I believe the overall goal is to supplant those who derived their wealth from extraction industries with a new group of energy monopolists. That is why Tom Stier(? sp) is fighting tooth and nail to get rid of Trump and why the Green New Deal has so many mandates.

    They can control the message to control the people in the short run but need to control the energy sector to maintain control over the long haul. Look at the sectors they want to control – energy snd health care. Do the math

  5. “I believe the Chinese have a great policy regarding that topic, Bernie. Check it out. Bernie also said he would ban all fracking.”

    Sounds like Bernie wants to ban multiple kinds of effing.

    China’s policy was a failure for many reasons and the gender skewing results are horrendous. The rules were often skirted by the elite, too. They could go to Hong Kong or Canada or .. and the rule didn’t apply.

    • And that’s the problem with trying to compare the U.S. with other countries’ economic polices. Even the Soviet Union had its 1% living in dachas while the rest lived in subsidized communal apartment buildings.

      Every system has its elites.

  6. Can someone explain to me why these politicians that are espousing these policies which require centrally planned economies, massive government regulation, huge government subsidies and mandates for behaviors and beliefs spent all this time telling us Trump is dangerous because he is a puppet of the leader of the very type of government for which they are big advocates . Seems to me they would be supporting him. Unless—– he really isn’t what they say he is.

    • Which was always my question with the Russia Collusion story. Who would Vlad rather deal with: A total Wildman with not previous record or a woman who’d been on the scene and walked all over for years? You know, the one with the husband who took huge speaking fees all over the world? The woman who sold uranium supplies to the Russians? What foreign leader would rather deal with Trump than a standard issue globalist like HRC?

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 )

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.