Why the Left fears Pruitt's
EPA reforms
Green groups are
throwing a fit at the prospect of Scott Pruitt reforming EPA. They claim it's about
policy, but commentator Erick Erickson writes, "the real reason has
everything to do with money."
"With the blessing
of the Department of Justice, the EPA has been going after major corporations
and telling those corporations that they can pay a massive fine to the federal
government or pay a lesser amount to various environmentalist groups."
"More often than
not, to get the EPA off their backs, the companies fork over money to left-wing
run environmentalist groups. Those groups then begin a vicious cycle. They
start hounding the corporations that give them money, file complaints with the
EPA, then get the EPA to shake down the companies for more money."
Add legal settlement
money to billions in Green energy subsidies and billions more for the UN's
"Green Climate Fund" and the picture fills in. What we are hearing from the Left is akin to
the squealing of pigs fearing permanent separation from the trough.
Michael Bastasch reports
(https://www.cfact.org/2016/12/09/dems-plotting-to-block-trumps-epa-pick/?utm_source=CFACT+Updates&utm_ campaign=f70d407d50-Why_left_fears_Pruitt_2016_12_
09&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_a28eaedb56-f70d407d50-270308565)
Democrats are lining up
to give Pruitt the full “Bork” treatment.
“We have a fight on our
hands and Republicans have to do a moral gut check and a political one,” Hawaii
Democratic Sen. Brian Schatz told Politico. “This is absolutely a fight worth
having and we’re ready for it.”
For eight years EPA has
been held captive by an elite clique of fat cat, eco-special interest
groups. It’s time this “Big Green”
consortium starts earning an honest living.
Kudos to Trump for his
selection of Scott Pruitt to shake things up.
See below:
Liberal Nonprofits Lead
Attack against Possible Trump EPA Pick, by Alatheia Nielsen and Julia A. Seymour, 11/23/16
Liberals are struggling with the
idea that elections have consequences. Sometimes those consequences include
repealing regulations and policies of the previous administration.
For the past eight years, Obama and
liberal environmentalists claimed that harsh regulations were essential to
combat disastrous amounts of global warming. But now that Donald Trump is
president-elect, Media groups, from left-wing nonprofits like Mother Jones and
Grist, to for-profit outlets like The New York Times and Newsweek, are
petrified for the environment.
“Trump’s win is a deadly threat to
stopping climate change,” Grist wailed on November 9. InsideClimate claimed on
November 16 if Trump is able to accomplish his climate change goals, “it would
be a victory for denial.”
These liberal nonprofit groups have
also personally attacked Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Myron Ebell, Trump’s likely pick to head the EPA. Grist, Mother
Jones, DeSmog Blog,
and InsideClimate
News have all referred to Ebell as a “denier” or a “denialist”
(InsideClimate went so far as to accuse Ebell of writing a “denialist alt-science memo”). That’s despite the Associated Press StyleBook
condemning that terminology because “the phrase denier has the pejorative ring
of Holocaust
denier.”
Carrying the “Holocaust denier”
language farther, in 2006, Grist columnist David Roberts wrote that “we should
have war crimes trials for these bastards — some sort of climate Nuremberg.” Former NASA scientist and climate alarmist James Hansen
similarly called for oil executives to be “tried for high
crimes against humanity and nature”
in 2008, and in 2014 David Suzuki said climate skeptics should be “thrown in
the slammer.”
The nonprofit journalist world
didn’t end their attacks at the word “denial.” InsideClimate News insinuated
Ebell’s climate skepticism was bought by ExxonMobil and other so-called “dark-money donors.”
DeSmog claimed, “For the best part of 20 years, Ebell has been actively working
in favor of the fossil fuel industry by attempting to undermine climate science.”
“Despite such evidence pointing to a warming
planet, Ebell has described the consensus around global warming as ‘phony’ and
‘not based on science,’” PBS wrote on Nov. 14.
DeSmog Blog meanwhile has an extensive bio on Ebell in its “disinformation
database” which supposedly lists people who
have “helped to delay and distract the public and our elected leaders from
taking needed action” on climate change.
For profit outlets have also joined
in trying to discredit Ebell. Newsweek wrote in October that Ebell “revels” in being “sometimes
described as climate denier-in-chief,” and that Trump’s EPA -- with Ebell at
the helm -- will be “sharply at odds with the scientific consensus.”
CBS News referred to Ebell as a
“climate change denier” in a Nov. 11 headline, and Jake Tapper also called Ebell
a denier in a CNN video the same day.
Also on Nov. 11, The
New York Times wrote Ebell “revels in taking
on the scientific consensus on global warming,” and said “he is hardly shy
about lobbing verbal grenades, sometimes directly at scientists and environmentalists.”
The supposed climate experts
at Cosmo magazine meanwhile compiled “9 Infuriating Things You
Need to Know About the Man Donald Trump Is Appointing to Protect the
Environment” on Nov. 12. Their first grievance was that Ebell “doesn’t think
climate change is real,” followed by “Myron Ebell loves to be in the
spotlight,” “Myron Ebell's organization is financed in part by Exxon and the
coal industry,” and “Myron Ebell had an early job in Washington helping to hurt
endangered animals.”
The Huffington Post also joined
the listicle craze, writing “11
Reasons Why Trump’s Climate-Denying
EPA Guy Could Spell Disaster For The Environment.” Like Cosmo, HuffPo attacked
Ebell’s climate skepticism and his organization’s funding.
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/business/alatheia-nielsen/2016/11/23/liberal-nonprofits-lead-attack-against-possible-trump-epa?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTldZMVl6WXhOel JrT0RreCIsInQiOiJyK3FmeFl1amR2d21LR05QY0hUeVwvNXUzMngzMm1qaHd3Q2ZxeVpyRzJzSDN3dkxcL0VNN1RnTitUMHFDb3prK2JBTlRIelRzWnFXZFR3QWNZTnJmR2ZzOEhCSTh0RUJjWDROQk1RXC9wVGJLcz0ifQ%3D%3D
No comments:
Post a Comment