On bulbs, Democrats offer dim demagogueryWashington ExaminerURL: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opin ... emagogueryCategory: Politics
Published: September 12, 2019
Description: Democrats are trying to have it both ways on lightbulbs. They declare that lightbulbs are a trifle, but also that it’s imperative the federal government regulate them. They are up in arms that the Trump Energy Department would undo regulations, but Obama didn’t issue the regulations in question until his last day in power. On lightbulbs, Democrats show a shallow hypocrisy that reflects a deeper one. Elizabeth Warren, one of the front-runners for the Democratic nomination, got very upset recently when CNN's Chris Cuomo asked her, “Do you think that the government should be in the business of telling you what kind of lightbulb you can have?” “Oh come on, give me a break!” she said. “This is exactly what the fossil fuel industry hopes we’re all talking about." She said, "They want to be able to stir up a lot of controversy around your lightbulbs, around your straws, and around your cheeseburgers when 70% of the pollution, of the carbon that we’re throwing into the air, comes from three industries.” We hope the moderators at Thursday night’s Democratic debate ask Warren a follow-up: How can a lightbulb be important enough to outlaw but not important enough to talk about? It’s a common tactic of the Left, and on one level it’s just plain old demagoguery. Regularly, we are told that conservatives objecting to lightbulb mandates are obsessing over trivia. Isn’t the “obsession” on the part of the lawmakers who wrote the laws on lightbulbs, and triggering dozens of regulations about which lightbulbs may be bought, sold, imported, and made? On another level, coming from lawmakers, it's a bit despotic: We will regulate how you live your life, and if you ask us about it, we'll attack you. If lightbulbs are a tiny part of the climate debate, why was there such uproar over the Trump administration’s decision to halt new regulations that were written by the Obama administration but that haven’t gone into effect yet? The 2007 energy bill effectively outlawed most traditional incandescent bulbs through efficiency mandates on “general service lamps.” On the last full day of the Obama administration, the Energy Department issued a rule redefining the term “general service lamp” to include specialty bulbs, such as three-way bulbs and chandelier bulbs. Why did the Department of Energy play this Orwellian word game? “DOE expects these sales will likely increase since these lamps could be used as replacements for other regulated lamp types," the agency explained on January 19, 2017. In other words, the Obama administration knew that people appreciate traditional incandescents and would buy the classes of bulbs where traditional incandescents were still allowed. So they changed the rules to deny consumers even that little avenue of choice. Again, Democrats proclaim it’s absurd to worry about light bulbs, yet a Democratic administration went on a hunt to sniff out where consumers might still be buying traditional bulbs. Also, the media and Democrats are really upset about Trump “rolling back” lightbulb rules, but those rules aren’t even in effect yet. If three-way bulbs and chandelier bulbs were such a threat to the climate, why didn’t Obama rope them into the lightbulb mandates earlier? Trump’s “deregulation” is basically preserving the regulatory structure that existed throughout the Obama administration. These little hypocrisies point to a bigger hypocrisy. Democrats are willing to inconvenience us all in the name of saving the planet, but they’re unwilling to take the most practical steps to actually slash greenhouse gas emissions that are contributing to climate change. Nuclear power is the only feasible zero-carbon source of energy, yet Warren and some of her rivals want to ban it. Sometimes it seems as though the green folk are less interested in saving the planet than they are in telling us how to live, and then telling us to quit complaining.
Elizabeth Warren would appreciate it if everyone stopped pointing out that climate change alarmists want to ban everyday itemsWashington ExaminerURL: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opin ... yday-itemsCategory: Politics
Published: September 5, 2019
Description: Sen. Elizabeth Warren is annoyed that people keep pointing out that her brand of climate change alarmism calls for the prohibition of everyday items, including plastic drinking straws and incandescent light bulbs. In fact, the top-tier 2020 Democratic primary candidate believes it is an unfair, devious, fossil-fuel-industry-promoted talking point to highlight the fact that alarmists like herself — who oppose nuclear energy — back placebos that will do next to nothing to offset the industrialized world’s carbon footprint. On Wednesday, during CNN's seven-hour climate crisis town hall, host Chris Cuomo addressed the senator’s support for supposedly climate-saving bans. “Today the president announced plans to roll back energy-saving light bulbs, and he wants to reintroduce four different kinds, which I'm not going to burden you with, but one of them is the candle-shaped ones, and those are a favorite for a lot of people, by the way,” Cuomo said. He added, “But do you think that the government should be in the business of telling you what kind of light bulb you can have?” Warren was not pleased with the question. “Oh, come on,” she said, “give me a break.” “Is that a yes?” Cuomo pressed. The Massachusetts senator pounced (or seized, depending on your persuasion). “No. Look, there are a lot of ways that we try to change our energy consumption, and our pollution, and God bless all of those ways,” she said. “Some of it is with light bulbs, some of it is on straws, some of it, dang, is on cheeseburgers, right? There are a lot of different pieces to this. And I get that people are trying to find the part that they can work on and what can they do. And I'm in favor of that. And I'm going to help and I'm going to support.” She continued, “But understand, this is exactly what the fossil fuel industry hopes we're all talking about. That's what they want us to talk about.”
Ah-ha! There it is again: The “Republican talking point!” dodge utilized by so many of the 2020 Democratic primary candidates. When confronted with an uncomfortable fact or question, many of the 2020 candidates have avoided answering by alleging a dirty trick by their opponent. In Warren’s case Wednesday evening, the “opponent” is the fossil fuel industry and the "trick" is noting her support for government bans on everyday items. Naturally, the CNN studio audience cheered her response. “They want to be able to stir up a lot of controversy around your light bulbs, around your straws, and around your cheeseburgers. When 70% of the pollution of the carbon that we're throwing into the air comes from three industries, and we can set our targets and say, by 2028, 2030, and 2035, no more. Think about that. Right there,” Warren continued. She added, “Now, the other 30%, we still got to work on. Oh, no, we don't stop at 70%. But the point is, that's where we need to focus. And why don't we focus there? It's corruption. It's these giant corporations that keep hiring the PR firms that — everybody has fun with it, right, gets it all out there — so we don't look at who's still making the big bucks off polluting our Earth.” Now is a good time to stress that Warren absolutely believes the federal government should be “in the business” of telling people what kind of light bulb they can have. She is just annoyed that people are saying that part out loud, especially as she is campaigning for the Democratic Party’s nomination. The fact is, Warren supports things like lights bulb bans. She also opposes nuclear energy, in case you were wondering how seriously you should take her climate change platform.
Site Map
[
]
