Liberal Hot Air: Global Warming

VANUATU (BETTER GO BEFORE IT SINKS)

How do I know that this is a liberal argument? Dave's law: libs will always resort to cursing to make their point.

I really should number those laws, but I digress... here is the curse word in context:

"LIES, DAMN LIES, AND GEORGE WILL'S CITATIONS:"

George's Column that got the Libs so worked up

As a rule, anything that doesn't agree with lefties makes you a racist, liar, murderer, homophobe or all of the above. In this case it makes us planet killers which may deserve a new category. So to be fair let's see exactly what the save the planet types wanted to accomplish with Kyoto.

Time for a new multiple guess game! What would the US signing onto Kyoto have accomplished? Here are your choices:
A) reduced global warming by 10 degrees C by 2040
B) reduced global warming by 2 degrees C by 2100
C) there are no accurate models to predict the outcome
D) reduced global warming by 10 degrees by 2145

The best answer is C: according to

Marshall Institute

Let me clue you into what else would have happened if we signed Kyoto:
Massive blue-collar layoffs in the US due to energy rationing would force companies overseas where Kyoto protocols permit increases in power consumption
Internationally, thousands would have starved as a cash strapped US cuts off foreign aid funding
The UN would bankrupt because the US would have to cut funding, and we carry something like 70% of the dollars used to run the UN
Thousands of birds** would die threatening species as wind power mills multiply (

Alternate Downside

(speculative derived from:

$200 billion economy impact)

Ever notice that they never advertise the details about the benefits of Kyoto? Maybe that's because there AREN'T ANY!

**note: birds are much more likely to be killed by cars than windmills, but the

Audubon Society

has called for a moratorium until more studies can be done to make windmills safer for birds.