Carey Roberts
Sun spots on Nancy's brain?
By Carey Roberts
For sheer entertainment value, nothing beats a United Nations global warming conference, especially if you were one of millions of Americans holed up in sub-freezing temperatures this past week.
We knew it would turn out this way two weeks ago when local prostitutes, disgruntled with a proposal to keep them under wraps during the high-profile eco-fest, threatened to offer their wares for free to convention-goers. (One only wonders if liberated female attendees would also avail themselves of the offer?)
The carbon-neutral week kicked off according to plan as Global Warmingist-in-Chief Al Gore, citing the research of Dr. Wieslav Maslowski, warned summit attendees the Arctic could become completely ice-free in five years.
But hours later Gore's claim was refuted by the good scientist himself, who noted, "It's unclear to me how this figure was arrived at. I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this."
On Tuesday it was revealed that Rajendra Pachauri, head of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, is tied to a multi-national industrial conglomerate that stands to take in hundreds of millions of dollars by cashing in on unused carbon-offset credits: http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/pachauri_letter.pdf
And later that day outnumbered Danish police began clubbing rock-throwing summit protesters like baby seals stranded on a wayward Arctic ice floe.
The following morning, Connie Hedegaard, Danish minister of climate and energy and president of the UN conference, announced her resignation following revelations of a secret "Danish text" being negotiated by industrialized countries.
On Thursday morning, world leaders trudged through ankle-deep snow and sub-freezing temperatures into the gleaming Bella Center to give their blessing to a multi-billion dollar global transfer deal. Thereupon they gave a standing ovation to Hugo Chavez, socialist president of Venezuela, when he blamed capitalist avarice for the global warming menace.
All this was mere preclude as the eco-zombies awaited the arrival of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in her two Air Force jets, accompanied by 20 other House lawmakers.
Leaving Washington the night before, Pelosi explained to reporters, "We see Copenhagen as a meeting about job creation — how do we move forward to create millions of clean energy jobs and new technologies to keep America number one?"
But turns out she was only interested in job creation for women.
Because shortly before her Thursday afternoon press conference, Pelosi banished from the room the six Republican congressmen who had joined her on the trip. Then she stepped to the podium to offer this ode to global warming hysteria:
"Women have the most to gain and the most to lose in the climate crisis," Pelosi declared. "The impacts are not gender-neutral; as the primary users, managers, and stewards of natural resources, women feel the consequences first."
The first female Speaker of the House continued with her eco-feminist musings:
"Changing agricultural conditions will hit women hardest. In most developing countries, women produce the vast majority of the household food supply. It is the world's grandmothers, mothers, and sisters in most countries who fetch water, gather wood and prepare meals. As resources become more scarce, so do opportunities for these women to attend school, tend crops, and lift themselves out of poverty."
Really?
What consensus-driven UN report appointed women as "the primary users, managers, and stewards" of natural resources? What data-enhanced document concluded "women produce the vast majority of the household food supply"? And when the ice caps melt and the Napa Valley vineyards whooshed away in a climatological apocalypse, will men somehow manage to escape unscathed?
I'm hoping Congresswoman Pelosi will answer these questions. Here's her email: AmericanVoices@mail.house.gov . Fax: 202-225-4188. And telephone: 202-225-4965.
Madame Speaker, I await your response.
© Carey Roberts
December 18, 2009
For sheer entertainment value, nothing beats a United Nations global warming conference, especially if you were one of millions of Americans holed up in sub-freezing temperatures this past week.
We knew it would turn out this way two weeks ago when local prostitutes, disgruntled with a proposal to keep them under wraps during the high-profile eco-fest, threatened to offer their wares for free to convention-goers. (One only wonders if liberated female attendees would also avail themselves of the offer?)
The carbon-neutral week kicked off according to plan as Global Warmingist-in-Chief Al Gore, citing the research of Dr. Wieslav Maslowski, warned summit attendees the Arctic could become completely ice-free in five years.
But hours later Gore's claim was refuted by the good scientist himself, who noted, "It's unclear to me how this figure was arrived at. I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this."
On Tuesday it was revealed that Rajendra Pachauri, head of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, is tied to a multi-national industrial conglomerate that stands to take in hundreds of millions of dollars by cashing in on unused carbon-offset credits: http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/
And later that day outnumbered Danish police began clubbing rock-throwing summit protesters like baby seals stranded on a wayward Arctic ice floe.
The following morning, Connie Hedegaard, Danish minister of climate and energy and president of the UN conference, announced her resignation following revelations of a secret "Danish text" being negotiated by industrialized countries.
On Thursday morning, world leaders trudged through ankle-deep snow and sub-freezing temperatures into the gleaming Bella Center to give their blessing to a multi-billion dollar global transfer deal. Thereupon they gave a standing ovation to Hugo Chavez, socialist president of Venezuela, when he blamed capitalist avarice for the global warming menace.
All this was mere preclude as the eco-zombies awaited the arrival of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in her two Air Force jets, accompanied by 20 other House lawmakers.
Leaving Washington the night before, Pelosi explained to reporters, "We see Copenhagen as a meeting about job creation — how do we move forward to create millions of clean energy jobs and new technologies to keep America number one?"
But turns out she was only interested in job creation for women.
Because shortly before her Thursday afternoon press conference, Pelosi banished from the room the six Republican congressmen who had joined her on the trip. Then she stepped to the podium to offer this ode to global warming hysteria:
"Women have the most to gain and the most to lose in the climate crisis," Pelosi declared. "The impacts are not gender-neutral; as the primary users, managers, and stewards of natural resources, women feel the consequences first."
The first female Speaker of the House continued with her eco-feminist musings:
"Changing agricultural conditions will hit women hardest. In most developing countries, women produce the vast majority of the household food supply. It is the world's grandmothers, mothers, and sisters in most countries who fetch water, gather wood and prepare meals. As resources become more scarce, so do opportunities for these women to attend school, tend crops, and lift themselves out of poverty."
Really?
What consensus-driven UN report appointed women as "the primary users, managers, and stewards" of natural resources? What data-enhanced document concluded "women produce the vast majority of the household food supply"? And when the ice caps melt and the Napa Valley vineyards whooshed away in a climatological apocalypse, will men somehow manage to escape unscathed?
I'm hoping Congresswoman Pelosi will answer these questions. Here's her email: AmericanVoices@mail.house.gov . Fax: 202-225-4188. And telephone: 202-225-4965.
Madame Speaker, I await your response.
© Carey Roberts
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
