RUSH: I mentioned Jonah Goldberg's column at National Review. I think it was also published concomitantly and coherently at the New York Post. (interruption) Concomitant? It's not... (interruption) No, I didn't make up the word. You've never heard of concomitantly? (interruption) Look it up! It was published concomitantly and coherently with the New York Post.
Cohesively, too -- meaning it looks the same in the New York Post as it does at National Review. Same words. "Climate Activists Uncaged." (interruption) What? (interruption) I told you it was a word. Concomitant is a word. They thought I was making up a word on the other side of the glass. "Gawker's Adam Weinstein suggests arresting those on the wrong side of the climate change debate."
By the way, our buddy Marc Morano, former "our man in Washington" from Rush The TV Show, he's got a website in Climate Depot where he chronicles all of the leftist propaganda on this issue and apparently two accredited, concomitant climate scientists have come out and said that it's perfectly fine to exaggerate and lie about global warming impacts in order to get people's attention and money.
It's perfectly the fine to make it up, perfectly fine to exaggerate. It's entirely within the bounds of propriety to really, really hype things to get people's attention and get their money. Do you realize, folks, the left... I don't care where you find them, global warming movement, militant feminist, militant gays. Do you realize there literally is no moral foundation propping them up?
The whole notion of right and wrong, truth or fact versus lies and BS is irrelevant.
Whatever they believe is going to be what everybody else believes no matter what it takes to make that happen. What they believe does not have to be true. If they want it to be true, you're gonna agree with it or you're gonna be harassed and threatened and intimidated. They establish these rules for themselves no matter what it takes. This threat is so existential that even if we have to lie, we'll do it.
This is the way they think -- proving, by the way, this is a religion. That's a technique that people oftentimes use to permit evil in what they're doing. If what they're fighting is indeed the essence of evil, then you are entitled to do anything to beat it back. There are no rules. So this is what the left reserves for themselves. That is that we, everybody who opposes them, are the essence of evil.
So whatever they have to do to stop us is permissible, even called for. So if we've got if exaggerate global warming to get people's attention and get money for it, then that's perfectly fine. There is no moral foundation. Right and wrong, justice and truth, are irrelevant. Our desired outcome is all that matters. "A writer for..." This is Jonah Goldberg writing here in National Review Online, concomitantly with the New York Post.
"A writer for the website Gawker recently penned a self-described 'rant' on the pressing need to arrest, charge, and imprison people who 'deny' global warming. In fairness, Adam Weinstein doesn't want mass arrests. (Besides, in a country where only 44 percent of Americans say there is 'solid evidence' of global warming and it's mostly due to human activity, you can't round up every dissenter.)"
So this guy, see, he's reasonable. He doesn't want to put everybody in jail. Oh, no, no! No. 'Cause he knows he can't put everybody who dissents in jail.
"Fact-checking scientists are spared. So is 'the man on the street who thinks Rush Limbaugh is right. ... You all know that man. That man is an idiot." He only thinks what he thinks because he listens to Limbaugh. "He is too stupid to do anything other than choke the earth's atmosphere a little more with his ... F-150's gassy exhaust.'" So you people, you drive Ford F-150s or whatever.
You're not gonna be jailed. Don't worry about it. You're just idiots. It is I, the man poisoning your minds, that they want to imprison. "But Weinstein's magnanimity ends there. Someone must pay. Weinstein suggests the government simply try the troublemakers and spokespeople. You know, the usual suspects. People like Limbaugh himself as well as ringleaders of political organizations and businesses that refuse to toe the line.
"'Those malcontents must be punished and stopped,'" says this guy at Gawker. Now, I don't know why a guy at Gawker is getting the attention of Jonah Goldberg. Well, actually I do, 'cause he's not just a guy at Gawker, which most people never heard of. What it is is this is going to be become mainstream thought if it isn't already. That is the whole point here. This stuff isn't new. We've been laughing at it for 25 years.
But all the while they have been deadly serious about it. They really mean this stuff. There ought to be trials. There ought to be people like me put in cages, made an example to show you idiots out there what awaits you if you get too vocal along with me. Now, "Weinstein says that this 'is an argument that's just being discussed seriously in some circles.'
"He credits Rochester Institute of Technology philosophy professor Lawrence Torcello for getting the ball rolling. Last month, Torcello argued," and we told you about this, "that America should follow Italy's lead. In 2009, six seismologists were convicted of poorly communicating the risks of a major earthquake.
"When one struck, the scientists were sentenced to six years in jail for downplaying the risks. "Torcello and Weinstein want a similar approach for climate change." 'Cause apparently six seismologists downplayed the earthquake risk, then an earthquake happened, so they want to put these guys in jail. Well, ergo, I (and a few nameless others) are opposing global warming.
When it happens, they want me put in jail -- and it's happening now. They put me on trial. Mr. Goldberg writes, "This is a great standard for free speech in America. Let's just agree that the First Amendment reads, 'Nothing in this clause shall be considered binding if it contradicts legal practices in the Abruzzo region of Italy.' The truth is this isn't as new an outlook as Weinstein suggests.
"For instance, in 2009, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman insisted that 'deniers' in Congress who opposed the Waxman-Markey climate-change bill were committing 'treason' while explaining their opposition on the House floor. (That same year, Krugman's fellow Timesman Thomas Friedman wrote that China's authoritarian system was preferable to ours, in part, because it lets 'enlightened' leaders deal with climate change.)" And enlightened leaders get to people the people they disagree with in jail.
Now, if we followed Italy's lead like this guy wants us to for sentencing people for getting their predictions wrong about earthquakes? Shouldn't we jail the global warming alarmists? They're the ones whose predictions have turned out to be wrong, not mine. They're the ones who are wrong. They're the ones claiming the sea levels are gonna rise and all this is gonna happen.
Notice that they always make these predictions to come true in a hundred years when none of us are gonna be alive. There hasn't been any warming for 15 years. If you ask me, they -- guys like this Adam Weinstein -- are the fraudsters. If anybody needs to be put in jail, it's them for misleading people, if that's the route we're gonna go. But that's not what the jail is for.
The reason they're putting people in jail is not to punish them. It's to shut them up. Shut them up and get rid of them so they can't influence anybody else. And by getting rid of them, you frighten everybody else about speaking up so that they don't. So you end up with no opposition. Jail the prominent leaders of your option and you have silenced all opposition, which is what the left is all about.
We can sit here and you can say, "Come on, Rush. Nobody's gonna put you in jail over this. Come on, Rush, are you really trying to get us afraid for you that you're gonna go to jail?" No. What I'm telling you is there are people who would do it if they could. I just call your attention to what just happened this poor guy out at Mozilla. It's always been an objective of mine to make sure people really, honestly understand who liberals are and what the left is.
(interruption) How is it different than Third World banana republic?
Well, in terms of persuading, no. You're not gonna convince anybody that this is a banana republic, is the problem. (interruption) My point is that you're not gonna change any minds by say, "You know, these people are just like a banana republic." Most people are gonna think, "This could never be a banana republic. It's United States of America." So they're gonna discard your characterization of this as like what happens in a banana republic.
They'll laugh at it and joke about it.
RUSH: Frank Newport, Gallup poll: "Americans Show Low Levels of Concern on Global Warming." The current level of worry about global warming, current level of concern is 34%. Thirty-four percent in a Gallup poll are concerned about global warming. That 34% is the same number that it was in 1989. That's what Gallup has revealed today. In 1989, 34% were very concerned about global warming; in 2014, it's 34%.
This is why they are in a state of panic, because they have failed to gin up anywhere near majority worry or concern on this. People, so far, are rejecting the idea that they are to blame for destroying the planet and therefore must pay higher taxes and must agree to bigger, more oppressive and controlling governments. People are just not signing on to that. Therefore, the global warming people today have come out and said, "Well, this just means that we are entitled to exaggerate and make things up in order to get people's attention."
Go check ClimateDepot.com. I'm not making that up. Two renowned (if there are such things) climate scientists have said that they are totally justified in exaggerating and making things up to get your attention and your money. "Americans' concerns..." This is from the actual Gallup poll. "Americans' concerns about global warming and climate change have held steady over the past year, while concerns about other environmental threats tested by Gallup have increased.
"The percentage expressing a great deal of worry about pollution of drinking water, as well as contamination of soil and water by toxic waste, increased by seven percentage points." Worry? How can people in this country not be worried about everything, given what the news is every day? Hell, people are worried about coffee! People are worried about virtually everything. Worry and concern is what is the news.