You know it’s a cold day in hell when a liberal outlet like Bloomberg Opinion is critiquing the left’s climate armageddon.
TBS’s Angie Tribeca often takes a turn for the ridiculous when it comes to their plots, but the most recent episode seemed more willing to go for brutal when it came to oil tycoons. Namely, while murderers can be awful, the real monsters are oil moguls.
La division de noticias de Univision se apresta a recordarnos, como vimos recientemente, que tiene una agenda política que va más allá de la inmigración.
Univision's news division is quick to remind us, as we recently saw, that it has a political agenda that extends far beyond immigration.
From the first words out of anchor Scott Pelley on Thursday’s CBS Evening News, one had to know what kind of newscast it would be. Throughout the newscast’s A-block, every segment involved almost exclusive criticism of the Trump administration on issues ranging from the border to the media to Syrian refugees to trade agreements.
You can’t make this stuff up. On Friday morning’s New Day, CNN anchor Chris Cuomo badgered Rep. Marsha Blackburn over defending Trump’s conservative pick for the head of the EPA asking her, “Can you be for clean air and water if you do not believe that man has a hand in global warming?”
Biofuels should serve as an instructive lesson for negotiators in Paris, because they are proof that not all energy sources work as well as anticipated. But journalists are unlikely to remind them or the public.
The early 2000s were the heyday of good press for biofuels. Major newspapers like The New York Times ran stories about Willie Nelson’s biodiesel startup and individuals converting their vehicles into “veggie” cars to run on french fry grease and other forms of biodiesels. The Washington Post even editorialized about people “dreaming big” plans like replacing hydrocarbon fuels (gasoline) with biodiesels.
Certain types of energy are certain targets for the 190 governments’ representatives gathering in Paris this week and from green activists surrounding the melee.
The goal of the U.N. climate conference in Paris, known as COP21, is to get an international agreement on reducing carbon emissions, out of fear that climate change is a global threat. But the agenda of some developing nations to make rich nations like the U.S. pay them billions of dollars to fund a transition to “clean energy” reveals one reason clean energy goals aren’t realistic.
The media are, of course, almost uniformly Leftist - which means they just about always toe the Party line. Including the belief that in order to help the poor - government must perpetually grow. Of course we conservatives also want to help the poor - we just think shrinking government is the way to actually do it.
When things get more expensive - the poor get hammered hardest. But the media misses the obvious - the more government there is, the more things cost. It is axiomatic - in (at least) two ways.
It was the best of coverage - it was the worst of coverage.
The Washington Post Editorial Board has long had a government agriculture policy position that is actually grounded in Reality.
Going back at least half a decade - to the passage of the last terrible Farm Bill - they have been rightly pointing out that the Crony Socialist, picking-losers-at-the-expense-of-winners matrix of taxes, subsidies and quotas is simply a disaster.
MSNBC.com has drawn a line in the sand regarding where it stands on the “consensus” of man-made climate change. Following Bill Nye’s appearance on Sunday’s Meet the Press, MSNBC.com’s Ned Resnikoff continued to peddle the liberal line on climate change and conveniently dismissed any skepticism of human involvement on the issue.
Just yesterday, David Gregory, moderator of Meet the Press, used the term “consensus” six times when objecting to Rep. Marsha Blackburn’s (R-Tenn.) hesitation on whether or not the federal government should spend billions of dollars on climate change related programs. Resnikoff must have gotten Gregory’s memo as he ran a website article nearly mirroring Gregory’s liberal talking points on climate change, including using the “consensus” phrase.