The climate crisis crusaders are very unhappy about the first two Democrat candidate debates. If you think (irrationally) that the future of the human species is somehow at stake, then the few scant and mostly empty minutes devoted to the topic are very upsetting. Hence their anger.
As I said originally in my article Priceless Crisis, this topic may rise, fall or be swept under the rug. At this point it is definitely under the fuzzy rug of vague policy pronouncements.
Even when directly asked, no candidate said much of anything, except how awful things are, which few Americans actually believe. For that matter the questions only came way into the two shows, suggesting a decided lack of importance.
Here is how the ever-green Guardian (of what we are not sure) put it:

“Thursday’s Democratic debate demonstrated just how far the the US is from contemplating the climate crisis as a threat that will touch almost all areas of American life and policymaking. Once again, debate moderators waited until nearly 80 minutes into the debate to pose questions on the climate emergency. The California senator Kamala Harris called the crisis an “existential threat to us as a species”. Bernie Sanders said “the future of the planet rests on” the US fighting climate change.”

I particularly like “threat to us as a species” as the most nonsensical political slogan in American history. There is no climate emergency, no crisis, no threat, no nothing. It looks like the debate moderators get that political message, but we have many more debates to wade through.
Of course the climate alarmists used this clear lack of interest in the climate issue to argue for, you guessed it, an entire debate on the issue. I personally would welcome that, because then people could really see just how nuts these folks are. ran a long article with the shrieking title “This Is Not How You Behave in an Emergency’: Demand for Climate-Focused Democratic Debate Grows After Second Night of Paltry Questions.”
They quote Greenpeace U.S.A. climate campaign director Janet Redman saying “This is not how you behave in an emergency. Despite the candidates’ acknowledgement of the existential threat that climate change represents to humanity, we heard next to nothing over two days about how they would actually address this monumental challenge. Talking points and soundbites do not cut it anymore.”
Threat to humanity? How crazy is that?
Elizabeth Warren, who is now being touted in some reports as the front runner, gave us the classic Democrat tax-and-spend line. Fighting climate change will creat millions (yes millions) of green jobs for Americans.
The Democrats think that federal spending is good because somebody gets the money. That these trillions of tax dollars come from ordinary Americans who would rather use it themselves, to maintain their lives, is irrelevant.
On to the next debates. Stay tuned to CFACT.


  • CFACT -- We're freedom people.

  • David Wojick, Ph.D. is an independent analyst working at the intersection of science, technology and policy. For origins see For over 100 prior articles for CFACT see Available for confidential research and consulting.