Mitt Romney Stands by Ruling Class, Channels Al Gore: "The world is getting warmer"

By the Left Coast Rebel

Rightklik already touched on this topic (with a superb scientific touch), doing a much better job than I could in refuting that actual facts behind Romney's Globe-bull-warming defense but I have to add my two cents.

How much more proof do tea partiers, libertarians, independents, true conservatives and anyone that wants to scale back the big-government that threatens our way of life need that Mitt Romney is not a "serious" candidate for our times?

Key quotes from Romney, while campaigning in New Hampshire, via Reuters:

"I believe the world is getting warmer, and I believe that humans have contributed to that."

"It's important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may be significant contributors."

This makes me so angry but on the other hand, I would rather see Mitt Romney out-and-in-the-open like this right off the bat. Ceding a key Marxist-left philosophical point like "reducing our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases" is an instant disqualifier for me and should be for anyone that is serious in saving this nation from economic collapse at the hand of progressive socialists and the Republicans who co-opt the socialist agenda.

Would this guy stand for some version of Cap and Trade? I bet he would. If you combine this with the fact that he simply cannot be trusted on the most important issue of our times -- the repeal of Obamacare -- a Romney presidency would simply be a perfect-hair version of Obama with an 'R' next to his name.

I'm sorry if that sounds harsh but I am certain of it.

Via Memeorandum.

ALSO READ: At Rightklik, "Educate Us, Mitt"

BONUS - At Another Black Conservative, "NEW! Mitt Romney 2012 - Now with Global Warming!

RELATED: At Politico, via Memeorandum, "Santorum touts social conservatism"


  1. Although RK may have covered the "scientific touch", you have covered the political aspect.
    I feel this is more of a political issue. Only because it has been politicized.

  2. I'm going to bet money Meg ends up working this train wreck of a campaign

  3. Right Klik exposes the global warmists as the religionists they are by asking, what is the ideal temperature of the earth? The answer that the AGW crowd would provide is the "natural" temperature if man had no impact on the planet. That is of course asinine, because the planet has been both very much colder and very much hotter than it is today in the absence of man. It reveals a worship of NATURE as a god in a kind of misanthropic religion.

    However, we should be careful regarding the manner in which we address the AGW issue. I have a physics degree and I am certain that the change in CO2 levels in the atmosphere due to human activity have had some effect on the planet. The questions are how much effect, what if anything to do about it, and what is the most effective course of action.
    My personal belief is that since the planet has shown relative stability with regards to its mean temperature over millions of years, there must be a negative feedback mechanisms keeping it so. So the best course of action is to adapt to the relatively small changes we have wrought. To do so we must preserve the wealth we have accumulated and continue to build more wealth. This means the socialistic schemes advanced by the AGW crowd must be resisted by all means, because they sap the strength needed to deal with inevitable change. (BTW, I think its 50-50 as to whether we hit another ice in the next thousand years, given the historical record.) Change is inevitable, socialism is not. We need to preserve our wealth to deal with inevitable uncertainty.


Commenting here is a privilege, not a right. Comments that contain cursing or insults and those failing to add to the discussion will be summarily deleted.