President Obama spoke on November 30, 2015 to the opening session of a 150 nation conference in Paris assembled to confront global climate change. In commending the French for their courage in allowing the conference to proceed so soon after the horrific terrorist attacks recently, the President said the conference is an “Act of defiance that proves that nothing will deter us from building the future we want for our children.” He continued, “What greater rejection of those who would tear down our world, than marshaling our best efforts to save it.”
President Obama clearly says here that having nations agree to a treaty that limits national sovereignty, stifles industry, and weakens economies with ever increasing tax burdens is our best opportunity to defeat terrorism. I find no other plausible interpretation to the words he uses. That level of reasoning reminds me of a version of a childhood rhyme that says: Roses are red, violets are blue. I have a motorcycle, can you swim?
In other words, the President seeks to align things that are totally unrelated in reality. The debate about climate change and the effort to keep radical Islamic terrorists from overrunning the world are only related in the mind of progressive governmental theology, not in reality. Both are critical issues, but both are fueled by existing circumstances viewed by progressive ideologues as the result of western progress and capitalism.
The goal of the approach taken by President Obama is not arriving at solutions, but obfuscating the issue in order to avoid honest debate that reveals the fallacy of progressive logic. His approach creates anger that misdirects energy away from logic and toward emotion. Emotions are much more easily controlled that logical debate. The response must not be continued diatribe against the President’s philosophy, but honest assessment and fact based logical questions that have fact based answers.