Mitt, We Have a Problem

by Marita Noon on January 10, 2012

in Blog, Features

Post image for Mitt, We Have a Problem

Dear Mitt,

Congratulations on winning the Iowa Caucus! I know you have worked long and hard for the Republican Presidential Nomination.

On the night of the caucuses, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chair, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (DWS), was heard saying: “Republicans, in general, aren’t enthusiastic about any of their choices.” This is clear as evidenced by the search for the “not Romney” candidate.

While DWS was correct, one thing all Republicans are enthusiastic about is beating President Obama. They will unite behind that cause. If you are to be the candidate who unites the Republican Party, you are going to have to differentiate yourself from President Obama to win support beyond Iowa. You’ve got several problems there.

One problem is your view on manmade climate change. The American public doesn’t view global warming as an important issue—this is especially true for Republicans. Yet President Obama continues to tout green jobs. In the name of saving the planet, his administration’s policies are making it difficult for people to feed their families and heat their homes.

People know his Solyndra-esqe failures have eaten up taxpayer dollars at a time when neither individuals nor the government have money to gamble, while adding to his campaign cash. They support the Keystone XL pipeline that would provide jobs and increase our energy freedom—but President Obama won’t make a decision on it. They are seeing their electric bills increasing and food costs going up. Each of these can be traced back to his insistence—in spite of evidence to the contrary—that climate change is a crisis caused by human’s use of hydro-carbons.

In your 2010 book, No Apology, you state, “I believe that climate change is occurring… I also believe that human activity is a contributing factor… I believe the world is getting warmer… I believe that humans contribute to that… I think it’s important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may well be significant contributors to the climate change and global warming that you’re seeing.” As recently as six months ago, you still supported this position.

Your actions as governor were consistent with your belief, like President Obama’s, that humans are the problem and that government can fix it. Your “no regrets” Climate Protection Plan aimed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, claiming that such actions would help the economy. You supported cap and trade. You claimed that coal-fueled electricity “kills people.”

Yes, I know that you did not follow through on your commitment to the “trading of emission credits.” In October 2011, you did back down on your firm “belief” that humans are contributing to global warming. But, you see, it is these revisions that cause angst for Republicans, conservatives, independents, and Tea Party types.

In order to convince the voters that you are serious, you need to be bold in separating yourself from President Obama.

You could start with acknowledgement that when you were Governor of Massachusetts, it was a different political and economic era. At the time, the only “science” getting any airplay said that global warming was a manmade crisis caused by Americans driving SUVs. Plus, pre-2008, we were living large—believing that the good times would go on forever. It seemed that a few extra cents for renewable energy was worth the investment—after all, we were “saving the plant.” However, since then, we’ve found that scientists who disagreed with the so-called consensus were silenced; their research wasn’t funded. We’ve also learned that the “alternative” energies are making our electricity bills much higher and the biofuels have really been a pipedream. We now know that we cannot afford them, and they’ve hurt, not helped, the economy. The “green jobs” have dissipated as uncompetitive companies, like Solyndra and Massachusetts’s Evergreen, have been shuttered—leaving thousands of people filing for unemployment. Washington’s belief that with enough money, we could make anything work has been proven false. People no longer want to subsidize ethanol, wind turbines, or solar panels. Businesses have moved from one state to another; from one country to another, based largely on the cost of energy.

Our own abundant reserves of oil, gas, coal and uranium—including the oil off the Gulf and in Alaska, North Dakota’s Bakken Field, the Marcellus (NY and PA) and Utica Shale (OH), West Virginian coal, uranium from New Mexico, and rare earths from Wyoming (just to name a few)—provide America with good paying jobs. North Dakota has the lowest unemployment rate in the country at 3.5%—thanks to jobs in resource extraction and the hotels, restaurants, and shops that thrive in the booming economy. The Marcellus Shale has given Pennsylvania a boost, while regulations keep New York from the same benefit. Ohio is counting on a similar rebirth due to the Utica Shale. To support this growth, the Keystone XL pipeline will help take all of that product safely to market. Instead of encouraging these job and economy boosters, President Obama’s EPA wants to impose a ban that will send these growing economies back into decay, and he opposes the pipeline. The EPA is not so blatant as to admit their true intentions: to end all fossil fuel development in the US. Instead they use a back-door attack, with headline-grabbing scare tactics, on the modern technology that brings out this new-found wealth.

America is in an economic war. At this point in our history we need to prioritize. Do we take the scarce taxpayer funds and invest them in a faulty technology that may create a few jobs—only to snatch them away when the project fails, or do we open the door for private investment in proven job providers. Jobs lost to a closed power plant, a moved rig, or a cancelled coal mine will not be absorbed into an industrial wind park. We’ve successfully built millions of miles of pipeline and have millions of wells. We know how to do this and private enterprise continues to develop better and safer technologies. We know they offer good paying jobs and develop strong communities. Let’s build on success in America!

You know that the DNC will trot out their pit poodle, DWS, many times again. Imagine what will happen when she starts yapping about your coal-kills comment, or your government interventions, or the praise Al Gore lavished upon you. Your “no apology,” “no regrets” approach isn’t working. Yes, I know you won in Iowa by 8 votes—with 25% of the vote. If you want to be the nominee, you need to do better than that. Why not get out ahead of the chatter?

I know you are getting advice from a lot of people, and you do not know me. But energy is such an important issue because of the dire consequences of the current course. America’s abundant and affordable energy is one of the few weapons we have in a global economic war.

North Korea’s Supreme Leader, Kim Jong Il, died last month. In the days after his death, a satellite photo of the Korean Peninsula at night was frequently seen along with the news accounts. North Korea, the communist country, is black with the exception of a dot of light at the location of Pyongyang. In contrast, South Korea—the free market, democratic, and developed country—is bright. I am sure you’ve seen the picture. Think about it and the attacks on energy and their ultimate goals. Where do Americans want to live? Darkness or light?

The fight for energy is a fight for freedom, and 2012 will be a pivotal year where America will be faced with making the decision that will determine our future. Will you be strong or squishy; definitive or duplicit? Will you present a stark contrast between a bright future—fueled by America’s abundant, available, and affordable natural resources, and President Obama’s restricted, limited, and experimental energy world? If you choose the former, and can paint the picture of a bright America, you will likely win the support of the voters.

I wish you, and America, your very best!

The author of Energy Freedom, Marita Noon serves as the executive director for Energy Makes America Great Inc. and the companion educational organization, the Citizens’ Alliance for Responsible Energy (CARE). Together they work to educate the public and influence policy makers regarding energy, its role in freedom, and the American way of life. Combining energy, news, politics, and, the environment through public events, speaking engagements, and media, the organizations’ combined efforts serve as America’s voice for energy.

mememine69 January 10, 2012 at 11:24 am

Climate Change wasn’t a hoax or a criminal lie, it was an exaggeration and the majority of Liberals are now former believers who are relieved and happy the CO2 crisis wasn’t true after all, not disappointed. The world has walked away from the CO2 mistake and let us not forget that it was the world of “science” that gave us the pesticides that poisoned the planet in the first place. Pollution is real; death for all by CO2 is not, thankfully. If these tens of thousands of concerned “consensus” climate change scientists had actually materialized in the streets protesting and acting like their kids were doomed as well, things may have turned out different. It was a consultant’s wet dream and history will curse us all for this insanity.
Meanwhile, the UN had allowed bank funded and corporate run carbon trading stock markets to trump 3rd world fresh water relief, starvation rescue and 3rd world education for just over 25 years of INSANE attempts at climate CONTROL.

Liam Taylor January 10, 2012 at 12:29 pm

The amount of lies and inaccuracy this blog tells is disgraceful. You make claims that scientists disagree with these facts but you do not name them or give any evidence. Climate change is real and it’s getting worse as conservative think-tanks like this one spread doubt among the general population who haven’t done enough research to know for themselves. Why not name the contributors to this blog such as Exxon, BP, General Motors and every other big company relying on carbon intensive processes to make their money? Money that will be absolutely useless when we don’t have a planet to live on.

jani January 16, 2012 at 12:12 pm

May be Al Gore will buy you an apartment on planet Olduran from the money he made from carbon credits. These warmists get at least $60 billion a year in subsidies and research funds every year from governments in western world , and you can’t tolerate a $50 million a year spent by these think tanks? That shows you how pathetic your “science” is.

desertbound January 11, 2012 at 11:24 am

You’re right about two things here. Republicans are enthusiastic about beating Obama. The crutch here is that they don’t know why. Oh, they may say what they think are the reasons why Obama should be beat, but when asked specifically what Obama has done to them to make their lives so miserable, they can’t name it, or if they try, it’s always complete BS. It’s no different when they all hated Hillary Clinton. They couldn’t say what she did to them, they just hated her. It illustrates quite clearly the power of combining good messaging (true or not) with the inability or unwillingness of voters to think for themselves.

And your statement of “The American public doesn’t view global warming as an important issue—this is especially true for Republicans. ” is only partially true. A majority of Americans DO believe it is an issue. Republicans not so much. Again it’s all because of the inability of Americans (mostly Republicans) who can’t or won’t think for themselves. There case for anthropogenic-caused climate change is as solid as the proven dangers behind tobacco use. Let’s differentiate between what the experts are actually telling us vs what Americans believe. The majority of Americans like McDonalds French Fries but that doesn’t make them a good food choice. Chosen ignorance should not be interpreted as fact, something this BS blog perpetuates.

Scottar January 14, 2012 at 12:43 am

Well I see the AGWers are still drinking the AlGore seminary koolaide on climate change. First of all if you cauliflower brained idiots would go beyond the hype that CO2 is allegedly causing the past warming and do some real research, you wouldn’t continue to talk with your foot in your mouths, nasty habit at that.

Here is some real science for you.

The CRU graph. Note that it is calibrated in tenths of a degree Celsius and that even that tiny amount of warming started long before the late 20th century. The horizontal line is totally arbitrary, just a visual trick. The whole graph would be a horizontal line if it were calibrated in whole degrees — thus showing ZERO warming.

Note that the most accelerated warming happened before 1940 when CO2 emissions started to allegedly accelerate due to the industrial ramp-up. So how can you come to the conclusion that humans are the cause of the past warming, warming that repeated 4 time in the past from the last great ice age? Even a 7th grader should see past the logic of that!

You green-necks also exhibit the lack of reason on renewable energy. But I have noticed that some energy mags will take advantage of that for grubmint funding as the president has the green bully-pulpit for renewables. I’m not sure of his motives, but for energy independence it’s pure stupidity, based on a bunch of political hype. But what can you expect from a community organizer, he needs the village idiots to re-elect him.

And I’m not Republican, I’m Independent-Libertarian. Gary Johnson for President, the best solution.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: