Sunday, December 20, 2009

Copenhagen: Let’s Make A (Fake) Deal

Liberals are stupid. And I mean that sincerely. They seem incapable of differentiating between real promises and fake promises, between real deals and mere symbolism or photo ops. They hear “we will agree to agree” as “we have an agreement,” and they wonder why nothing changes thereafter. They’re suckers for fake accords. And nothing is faker than Obama’s Copenhagen deal.

As one might expect, the liberal self-delusion machine is running in high gear trying to sell liberals on the idea that Obama didn’t sell them out again. But he did. I’ve got the receipt to prove it.

“OBAMA SAVES COPENHAGEN, WORLD!” screamed the soothing headlines. Don’t worry my liberal friends, you backed the right messiah. Don’t look behind the curtain, just bask in his glory.

But what did he really agree to? The agreement in question was all of two and a half pages. Here is what is “requires”:

• Signatories will cooperate in reducing emissions “with a view” to keeping temperatures from rising more than 3.6 degrees F about preindustrial levels.
TRANSLATION FOR LIBERALS: Signatories agree that it would be nice if temperatures stayed low. We might even think about doing something to make that happen.
• Developing nations will report the progress of their voluntary actions every two years.
TRANSLATION FOR LIBERALS: We agreed to nothing, but we’ll act like we’re keeping track of our progress.
• Those reports will be subject to “international consultations and analysis”.
TRANSLATION FOR LIBERALS: You can watch us do nothing.
• Rich nations will finance a $10 billion-a-year, three-year program to fund clean energy projects in poor countries, with a goal of creating a $100 billion-a-year fund by 2020.
TRANSLATION FOR LIBERALS: Maybe someone in the future will spend money to help poor countries, but don’t count on it. In the meantime, look for existing aid to be redesignated as “environmental aid.”
The key word, for our liberal friends, is the word “voluntary.” I know this is not a word with which you are familiar. But if you look it up in the dictionary you will find that it means taking actions without being forced to or required to take those actions. That’s right, without the government telling you that you have to do it. Yes. Seriously. People do things without being told. Yes, it happens all the time. Look it up.

So what we have here is a deal that requires nothing, but includes some promises to consider doing some stuff, maybe. That's worthless. And if you want proof, my liberal friends, there’s a simple test: ask yourself, are we required to do anything more after the agreement than we were required to do before the agreement? Answer: Nope.

What? Do you need a crayon sketch to figure this out?

Apparently so.

Despite the obvious, David Doniger, the director of gullibility at the leftist Natural Resource Defense Council, hailed this as “a very substantial breakthrough . . . we’re going to have a real effort that involves all the countries. . . making cuts in that pollution.” Oh goodie! And next week we’ll all lose ten pounds.

Tony Kreindler, a spokes-sucker for the leftist Environmental Defense Fund, gushed, “There was no room for failure, and Obama came through and was able to get an agreement. The process is a difficult one, but the president took a risk, was bold and walked away with an agreement.” Can’t you just feel the awe. . . the lust? (Try reading it again and adding a little hard breathing and you’ll see what I mean.) I’ll tell you what Tony, if you send us a bunch of money, we promise to one day consider saying something nice about your pathetic organization. That’s a solid promise in your book, right? Come on Tony, you know you want to. . . it’ll make the polar bears happy.

The New York Times and CNN jumped on board, defending their messiah by calling this agreement “meaningful.”

But not everyone is as stupid. One climate change group broke the code pretty quickly:
“We’ve got a league of carbon foxes to share guard duty over the henhouse. I think the most depressing part is that it will probably play well politically in the US. Progressives worked their heart out for a guy who has gutted one of the most progressive ideas of the last century.
Who doesn’t love irony? And this group was not alone. Here is a smattering of typical responses:
• Mexico’s President Calderon: “I know this accord is far from what we expected and what the world needs.”

• European something-or-other-irrelevant Jose Manuel Barroso said, “this particular text falls far short of our expectations.” One European diplomat was a little blunter, calling this “a shitty, shitty deal.”

• The African delegation complained that this deal “condemns their continent to a century of devastating temperature rises.”

• Hugo Chaves said that he could still smell sulfur when Obama spoke. Yeah, I get that too when Obama speaks. Chavez then complained that Obama got the Nobel Prize for War and whined about capitalism. . . not keeping his socialist paradise afloat.
The Independent UK described the “‘deal’ as beyond bad” and noted that the requirements were so minimal that the Europeans would actually need to work hard not to meet them:
It's not just that we didn't get to where we needed to be, we've actually ceded huge amounts of ground. There is nothing in this deal – nothing – that would persuade an energy utility that the era of dirty coal is over. And the implications for humanity of that simple fact are profound.

I know we Greens are partial to hyperbole. We use language as a bludgeon to direct attention to the crisis we are facing, and you will hear much more of it in the coming days and weeks. But, really, it is no exaggeration to describe the outcome of Copenhagen as a historic failure that will live in infamy.

What [we] witnessed was nothing less than the very worst instincts of our species articulated by the most powerful men who ever lived.
By the way, the cost of carbon permits in Europe (where they are sold like derivatives) crashed after the deal.

But the American left is oblivious. Fake agreements! To paraphrase Bob Hoskins from Roger Rabbit, “liberals. . . get’s ‘em every time.”


Tennessee Jed said...

A nice fake deal allows Oprah to tear up, have her mascara run, and gush. And there are plenty of her watchers (substitute out of work teachers) to gush right along with her . . . I have never been so proud of our president and country, blah, blah, blah.)

AndrewPrice said...

True Jed, there is nothing quite like a fake deal for letting people show off their emotional depth.

Unknown said...

One of the ironies of this whole global warming/climate change panic is that the U.S. has done at least as good or better job of reducing its greenhouse emissions than most of the nations that signed on to the Kyoto Accord. Cleaning up the environment and promoting clean air is a noble aspiration, but not when its done as an absolute goal, without regard for any other human factors, and under government coercion. The perfect is the enemy of the good, and our imperfect system was doing a pretty good job without airy-fairy governmental nonsense which pursues a goal which will never be perfectly attainable and which is meant to solve a problem which is not scientifically sound--anthropogenic global warming.

But look at the bright side. We have an agreement to agree to have future meetings on agreement, and the politicians get to go back next year to do it all over again.

AndrewPrice said...

Lawhawk, So it's not perfect, at least we have an agreement, even if it doesn't actually agree to anything.

And in the end, isn't that really what this about? Creating fake crises that we can force others to solve (with real or fake solutions) so that we can feel better about ourselves?

In fact, I feel that I just saved a polar bear with my good intentions. Ahh, I'm perfect.

Joel Farnham said...


I am happy for this agreement. It is an agreement similar to Rotary Clubs going non-nuclear proliferation treaty. In other words, nothing new happened with the possible exemption of aid for dependent countries being redesignated to aid for climate change.

If the new health-care bill had similar wording, I would not be as worried about the future.

StanH said...

But Andrew, you know you don’t judge a liberal by results - - it’s their intentions that matter. They care, and have big hearts like the love they show the farmers in the San Joaquin Valley, to save the “smelt.” Or the love they show an inner city kid in the Southside of Chicago or any city or town in America working on third generations, stuck in Sec. 8 housing developments in perpetual poverty, (I could continue in this track for volumes). Liberals depend on a adoring crowd, blind myrmidons waiting for their government cheese. In my mind Copenhagen was par for the liberal coarse, do nothing and claim accolades, regardless of result. Liberal bullshit is a mile wide and a millimeter thick, poke at it, and it evaporates like a stale fart in a brisk wind. We have an amazing opportunity starting in 2010 to really put away the liberals for keeps. I certainly hope our team is up to the task., and will expose the liberals for the ninnies that they are, we need a vigorous primary season. Good post Andrew.

AndrewPrice said...

Joel, I agree entirely. This is the kind of deal that I don't mind liberals striking -- meaningless deals. It's only when they start imposing requirements that problems start arising.

Writer X said...

This one was fun to watch. Nothing like a fake agreement for a fake crisis. With any luck, we can watch Al Gore cry fake tears. Unfortunately, we'll be dolling out real tax dollars to pay for this ponzi scheme.

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks Stan, LOL!

You're right about liberals. It's all about intentions for the. Unfortunately, too often, they get to put those intentions into action by goverment fiat and people get hurt.

But this Copenhagen thing is the good kind of stupid-liberalism, the kind that ultimately means nothing except an increase in their smugness.

It is interesting though that the rest of the world is no longer in love with Obama. Hmmm.

AndrewPrice said...

Writer X, Welcome back... how's the global warming in the midwest? LOL!

This one was interesting indeed. It really exposed Obama as "one who would mislead" his own side -- as if the health care debate hadn't already done that.

It will be interesting to watch as our left starts to realize that they've been had on this as well (the gays, the unions, and the single payer nuts are all already ANGRY at Obama for being had).

I figure they can't help but discover this because the foreign left is furious.

Writer X said...

Andrew, be it ever so humble... I couldn't have picked a colder time to travel.

How long do you think it will be before Obama et al. blame Bush? :-)

AndrewPrice said...

I'm not sure they've ever stopped.

patti said...

it's gotten to the point with the msm that every time barry takes a dump, they feel the need to weigh in with how "meaningful" it is...

Post a Comment