Sometimes it seems as if the Main Stream Media (MSM) were sitting under the “cone of silence” with Control Agent Maxwell Smart and the Chief. Beguiling news items flash throughout the blogosphere and the MSM remains silent. The latest example of media malfeasance involves the leaked or hacked emails from the University of East Anglia (UEA) Climate Research Unit (CRU). The intercepted communications indicated that a number of ideologically-driven climatologists were complicit in “cooking the books” regarding data about so-called climate change. When MSM’ers did address the matter, they were muted.
It seems to me that when an issue as comprehensive as man-made global warming/climate change is seriously discredited, then the media should be ferreting out the facts and providing their audiences with trustworthy information with which to make informed judgments. Nearly every facet of public policy in the United States has some climate change component or justification. For example, it has been mandated that we switch from incandescent light bulbs to the twisty (looks like an ice cream cone to me) florescent types. The newbie’s are supposed to last much longer, but their mercury component makes their disposal a touchy problem. The CAFÉ standards that have been imposed on the auto industry are said to be an effort to minimize CO2 emissions although my limited scientific knowledge reminds me that carbon monoxide is the primary exhausted fume.
The proposed “Cap and Trade” (Crap & Tax) legislation is far-reaching and would restrict various outputs all across the private and economic sectors. Please excuse the crudity but it has been proposed that animal flatulence be taxed because of the massive volumes of methane gas that is released. That raises a couple of questions in my mind: Who will measure cow farts to determine that ol’ Bessie is in violation? Whoa, a USDA Flatulence Specialist Grade II, Step 3 at $68,392.76 per year plus a government-provided vehicle. What about my dog? Good grief, Frosty could power a Prius on his bad days. So, do I have to pay a tax for Frosty’s excess gas?or can I configure a “Hefty” bag to capture the noxious doggie byproduct and sell it at my local Farmer’s Market? Does it matter if Frosty blasts his deadly cloud inside (usually in my study) or outside? If I can sell FrostyGas, will the price be regulated…are there quality standards?
If the media were doing their jobs, many of these questions would be answered. Or if the whole climate change scam were proven and reported to be bogus, then all (or most) of my questions would be moot. I say most because liberals and regulators cannot resist telling others how to live. That should be solely the province of God and parents. Read my lips, Clowns. Stay away from my lightbulbs ‘cause I don’t want to pollute landfills with mercury. Stay away from my tailpipe emissions. I reserve the option to suck on it when you boneheaded busybodies succeed at making my life absolutely miserable. Stay away from my dog. He’s sweet, he’s stupid and if he gets as fed up as his master, it could get ugly. Just sayin’.
So, come on, mass media. Do your job.
Monday, November 30, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I anticipate a higher tax on brown swiss than guerseys. Yes!
ReplyDelete