RUSH: There's a story from Florida. When I give you the details, you're gonna think it's Port St. Lucie, but it isn't. "Times are tense during the last few remaining days of Shamrock Shake season, as evidenced by a woman in Florida. Witnesses say a Jacksonville woman allegedly set a man's car on fire late Sunday because she was mad that he didn't want to buy her dessert.
"A witness told ActionNewsJax the couple was entangled in a fight about whether she wanted 'either a McFlurry or an ice cream on top and he was not in for it.' The argument apparently escalated when the woman threatened to torch their 1994 El Dorado. She followed through: WFTV-TV in Orlando obtained video of the woman pouring alcohol and gasoline on the man's car, lighting it on fire and then running off.
"It's unclear if she ever got her dessert."
What is it about McDonald's? First in Port St. Lucie you walk in, you want McNuggets, and they don't have them. So you call 911 and you ask for Obama. And there was one other episode involving McDonald's. Now here in Jacksonville, a woman wants a McFlurry, and the goofball guy that she's with says, "Nyet, no way," so she torches his car. Is there any other food, at least in Florida, that evokes this kind of reaction when people don't get it? What's in it that makes people want to burn cars if they don't get it?
RUSH: Bill Gates has weighed in now on how to deal with immigration and employment. Bill Gates has not thrown in with Putin. He's actually a renegade on this. He's an independent contractor on this. He just says what we need to do is raise taxes here and cut taxes there and let the borders open here and close the borders there. I'll share with you the details of his ideas.
RUSH: Oh, man, the Stick-to-the-Issues Crowd is very mad at me. The Stick-to-the-Issues Crowd is very, very upset with me. I just checked the e-mail. "You're spending too much time talking about that airplane. You're spending too much time talking to all these kids in the book. We don't care about that. Stick to the issues!" Some of 'em are mean, very mean.
They're being very mean to me in e-mails to me. "We don't care about your stupid book and those kids and the airplane! You won't stick to the issues, so cancel my subscription!" As William F. Buckley once said to a subscriber, "Cancel your own damn..." I'm just kidding. He did say that, though. He got an angry mail letter from a subscriber at National Review. "You cancel my subscription."
He wrote back, "Cancel your own blank-blank!" Now, you think it's universal love and devotion, and I'm telling you, the Stick-to-the-Issues Crowd, they get in gear. It doesn't matter. (laughing) They do. They all think they can do the show better than me. They all probably think they could fly the airplane right, better than the Malaysian crew.
RUSH: There's a rare redwood tree in Northern California that, if this were 20 years ago, there'd be no doubt that the environmentalist wackos would do everything they could to save it. Now the environmentalist wackos don't care; they want to cut it down. It's a magnificent illustration of the evolution in the environmentalist wacko movement taking place.
RUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, last week we did a Morning Update about a very rare tree growing in California. It's called the albino chimero coast redwood. There are believed to be fewer than 10 of them growing on the entire planet, and this particular albino redwood may be the largest of these rare trees, which would make it totally unique. It's 52 feet tall, has green leaves and white albino sections, which is why it's a white albino redwood.
Some call it a biracial tree. Not all white. Somewhat. The tree stands in Sonoma County in a very small town, Cotati, California, in Sonoma County. If federal regulators have their way, the tree is gonna be chopped down because the Feds have determined the tree is too close to a proposed commuter train line and thus presents a safety problem. So rare or not, the tree has to go.
Now, to soften the impact of the decision to chop drown the biracial tree, a spokesperson for the commuter train line promises that thousands of cuttings will be taken from the tree before it's destroyed, and 20 other redwoods will be planted around the area. But nobody can guarantee that those cuttings would take root and we would have to wait years and years and years anyway for the trees to regrow to 52 feet.
So it may be chopped down to death without leaving any offspring. You know, aborted while still rooted, if you will. Now, what was remarkable about this to me is in the good old days -- you go back to the late eighties and all the way to the mid-nineties -- there is no way a redwood tree would have been cut down for anything, much less something to make humans' lives more convenient.
Not if it had a spotted owl in it, if it was the home to some other rare endangered species. But there's no way they'd chop down a redwood tree for a commuter train. In the old days, you'd have some lunatic climbing up the tree living in it to prevent it from being cut down. You'd have Martin Sheen, a bunch of Hollywood liberals setting up camp nearby, preventing the tree from even being reached by the saw.
You'd have people who'd be adopting the tree as their new cause. But now, nobody cares. This is for a commuter train. So what's happened? You know, why all of a sudden that change? I mean, it really is a 180. And the answer is, the commuter train. The left values mass transit more than they do global warming, more than nature. Mass transit! You know the main thing the tech blogs don't like about Apple Maps on the iPhone?
It doesn't have transit instructions. They hate it. It doesn't have transit. Doesn't tell you how to get on the next bus or what have you. I mean, these people want mass transit, just total control. It's the way the government can totally control the movement of the population, and so here's a tree. Now, the latest on this: "Transit officials in Northern California have now suspended plans to remove the biracial redwood tree to make way for railway tracks.
"The Santa Rosa Press Democrat reports that Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit officials announced their decision last week, bowing to public pressure to save the albino redwood tree in Cotati. They say the tree is only one of a handful of coast redwoods that have both albino and normal foliage." I'd like to think that we played a role in saving the tree, Snerdley. Stop and think.
If that's the case, that we might have played a role in saving a redwood tree -- and I am more than happy to save a redwood tree at the expense some railroad tracks, mass transit railroad tracks, light rail. What an absolute, total boondoggle. Have you ever shown up at a traffic light, and all of a sudden here go the warnings, "Don't cross, there's a train coming"?
You believe it, and it's a two-car light rail train, and nobody's on the damn thing. It's just chugging up and down the tracks. So, anyway, we may have played a small role in saving a biracial tree in Sonoma County, which, of course, takes us to our Global Warming Stack. UK Independent: "Global Warming Will Cause Widespread Conflict, Displace Millions of People and Devastate the Global Economy," and there's a picture here.
The picture is a close-up of an African hand holding an ear of corn that looks totally rotted. In the background is what looks to be a lake that has overflowed. It looks like the picture's taken in the middle of a flood with some poor African holding up his ear of corn, and his route to success has been destroyed. "Leaked draft report from UN panel seen by The Independent is most comprehensive investigation into impact of climate change ever undertaken -- and it's not good news"
No, of course not. "Climate change will displace hundreds of millions of people by the end of this century..." See, this is what they always do. By the end of this century none of us are gonna be alive. Not one of us. Well, I take that back. It's 2014. There will be some of us alive by the end of the century, but not very many. They always tell us that the real damage and catastrophe comes long after we are gone, and that's to add guilt.
"Look what you're doing to your children and grandchildren! Look how you're destroying the environment for them, and look at how what you're doing is destroying the planet for everybody! But you're not gonna live long enough to see it so you don't care." They tried this in the eighties. They tried it in the nineties. This story is replete with pictures of flooded shanties and poor towns. It's just classic.
Then there's this from The Daily Caller: "An assistant philosophy professor at Rochester Institute of Technology wants to send people who disagree with him about global warming to jail. The professor is Lawrence Torcello. Last week, he published a 900-word-plus essay at an academic website called The Conversation. His main complaint is his belief that certain nefarious, unidentified individuals have organized a 'campaign funding misinformation.'
"Such a campaign, he argues, 'ought to be considered criminally negligent.' Torcello, who has a PhD from the University at Buffalo, explains that there are times when criminal negligence and 'science misinformation' must be linked. The threat of climate change, he says, is one of those times." So if there are people that disagree with this professor, put them in jail.
Forget debate. Forget talking all night in the dorm. Forget about the open and free exchange of ideas. Forget waxing poetic over a keg. Forget studying and exploring a different point of view. Forget the absolute freedom to disagree with each other. In today's college environment, there's only one way to think, and if you don't conform, the tenured professoriate wants to put you in jail. This is liberalism on drugs. And it's, to me, an indication of panic setting in.
The LA Times not long ago announced a decision they were not gonna publish any letters to the editor from global warming deniers. Now, when people who want something to happen refuse to accept any opposition or want it silenced, my contention is that they are in the throes of panic. They have been unable to persuade people to agree with them. They have been unable to convince people that what they're saying is right. Now, one thing we know about the left is, one of their objectives is not -- we had a call yesterday, it was a great question.
How come the left, how come Democrats never talk about wanting to cross the aisle to talk with us? Why is there never any talk of any compromise with us by them? Why is it always a one-way street? And the answer is they don't want to debate anything. They don't want to cross the aisle. They don't want any bipartisanship. Only the stupid Republicans want that. The left, the Democrat Party, simply wants to eliminate the opposition, pure and simple. That's the only way they can win. The only way they can win is to criminalize their opposition, 'cause they can't, in the arena of ideas, prevail. They cannot win.
From Gawker, another related story to global warming. Guess what? Everybody admits that if we take the steps that the pro-global warming crowd wants us to take in order to save the planet, we gotta have a carbon tax, which means a tax on energy, which means people are gonna end up having less money. And it also means that everything is going to increase in price, including food.
If you have a carbon tax, the cost of transporting food, distributing it, farming it, developing it, shipping it, process, everything goes up. The way the left is dealing with this is to say rising food prices could be great for our health, because it would force the obese to eat less, and eating less would make them healthier.
"Consider us," it says here, "the average American consumers: couch-bound, sluggish, overweight, grazing on a steady diet of heavy meats, hormone-laced milk, and refined sugars. An economically required fast is the best thing that could happen to us." Fast, meaning don't eat. This is not something about speed, for those of you in Rio Linda. An economically required fast, enforced government starvation. Let me speak it properly. Government enforced starvation. Could be exactly what's called for here.
"Thanks to drought and various geopolitical factors that will do nothing but bore action-oriented American shoppers, food prices are on the rise. The Wall Street Journal reports:
'In the U.S., much of the rise in the food cost comes from higher meat and dairy prices, due in part to tight cattle supplies after years of drought in states such as Texas and California and rising milk demand from fast-growing Asian countries. But prices also are higher for fruits, vegetables, sugar and beverages, according to government data.'"
Hell, prices are higher for everything. "In futures markets, coffee prices have soared so far this year more than 70%, hogs are up 42% on disease concerns and cocoa has climbed 12% on rising demand, particularly from emerging markets." Damn them. And that's another thing, the emerging markets are a particular target of the global warming crowd. Got to keep them poor. If we allow growth, economic growth in poor emerging markets, it's gonna be more planetary destruction. It's gonna be more pollution and it's gonna be more global warming, it's gonna mean more climate change.
"More expensive hogs, beef, milk, chocolate, sugar... hell, you, the consumer can barely afford a bacon cheeseburger and chocolate milkshake any more. Which is great, all things considered. Drink some water and call it a 'Blueprint Cleanse,' America." So the left, not even trying to argue anymore that raising taxes will not raise prices. They're now admitting the obvious. Now they're saying you and me and this whole population, we're a nation of slothful, fat, obese slobs, and the best thing that could happen would be enforced starvation brought on by higher prices. Never mind what happens to the producers. But this is who they are.
Now, this UK Independent story, they've seen the United Nations scare paper on global warming, and it is doomsday hysteria. Favorite section is this. "Based on thousands of peer-reviewed studies and put together by hundreds of respected scientists, the report predicts that climate change will reduce median crop yields by 2 per cent per decade for the rest of the century -- at a time of rapidly growing demand for food."
I mean, just scare tactics, apocalyptic all over the place. It's designed to scare people into supporting Big Government. It's designed to make people feel guilty for destroying the planet, so they'll accept higher taxes and more punitive government proposals and regulations, all for absolution of sin for destroying the planet. They're losing ground, evidenced by the fact they want people that disagree with them now put in jail.