…and welcomes little fishes in

“Twas brillig and the slithy toves

Did gyre and gimble in the wabe

All mimsy were the borogoves

And the mome raths outgrabe.”

 — Jabberwocky: Lewis Carroll

I’ll just get right down to the guts of this: the link below goes to to a news article about Harris / AOC’s “Climate Justice Act” as it is titled, or whatever it’s called. It was dropped into the Senate and House legislation receptacles before the Democrat convention.

https://www.cfact.org/2020/08/25/kamala-harris-and-aoc-craft-crazy-climate-law/

From the article: Kamala Harris did not mention climate change in her acceptance speech, but she did not have to. She talked a lot about justice and justice is now code for climate. Thanks to Harris and AOC, the strange beast of “climate justice” is now a big part of the Democrat’s agenda.

In fact the team of Harris and A. Ocasio-Cortes has now codified the concept of climate justice. Just before the convention they jointly dropped the Climate Equity Act into the Senate and House hoppers.

The Equity Act does not mean that everyone gets their fair share of climate. The stated goal is for the Federal Government to adjust its investments and regulations to favor those who are supposedly most involved with climate change, or something like that.

The proposed law is so incoherent that it is hard to tell what it is for or what it does. That it would cause an enormous amount of confusion is certain.

The problem is that the central concept in the law is extremely unclear. Harris and AOC have continued the “war on climate” theme that AOC used when proposing the Green New Deal. Thus the Climate Equity Act is about something called “frontline communities.”

Apparently these so-called communities are on the frontline of climate change, or the frontline of stopping climate change, or some such. It is very hard to tell. – article

The following is excerpted from the Climate Equity Act. The proposed legislation itself is 48 pages long, loaded with the following :

Congress finds that—

3 (1)(A) the people of the United States have a

4 right to live in a clean, healthful, and sustainable  (No, really? But I already have that. Not my fault if someone can’t keep a clean house.)

5 environment and climate, with access to clean air and  (Always a good idea to get the well tested yearly.)

6 clean water;

7 (B) realizing the right described in subparagraph (A) will require addressing systemic environmental injustices and the growing inequities fueled

1) by climate change; 3 RYA20642 XK4 S.L.C. 1 (C) the Federal Government has the

2) responsibility to ensure that the right described in subparagraph (A)

3) is realized; and…. (so forth and so on) – Climate Equity Act

To define what is written in the opening part above, unless the Cuyahoga River is so polluted all over again that it is setting itself on fire, or the problems with metal pollution at the Flint, MI, water department have not been resolved, well – the “right to live in a clean, healthful, and sustainable environment” is already covered by the EPA in regard to both water and air contaminants, and that is where complaints go, along with complaints to city, county and state local government offices.  It’s the responsibility of all those offices to ensure that contaminants are properly dealt with. Therefore, this bill addresses an issue that has already been addressed by federal law.

If one goes any further into this, while the document itself is relatively short (a mere 48 pages), its content contains terms such as “climate justice”,  “Climate justice” is without definition. Nowhere has there appeared anything explaining, outlining, or defining the term “climate justice”. This is deliberate, a misdirection intended solely to leave the reader with some amorphous, unspecified threat that in fact does not exist.

To continue from the article: So everything depends on what a frontline community is. It is here that the confusion begins. This central concept, upon which everything turns, is deliberately not defined. That definition is something to be done after the law is passed, by an Advisory Board no less. – article

To not define either “climate justice” (an intangible) and “frontline community” (also an intangible) is deflection. While there appears to be a section defining “frontline community”, it is, again, a deflection. These entities are deliberately undefined in the bill. There is no applicable context, but there is an implied threat in using the term “climate justice”, the implication being that somehow, the climate on this planet can be controlled in specific ways (it can’t) and that there is probably some means of measuring or testing the “climate” in your vicinity to make sure that you’re getting enough “climate”. And again, since we mere humans have ZERO control over the climate on this planet, there is no defined plan to make sure that “climate” in your neighborhood or mine will be adequate for our needs. If you think we mere humans can control the climate planetwide, there’s a hurricane in the Caribbean that needs to be sent packing.

This is gobbledygook. As with secret codes to get into the clubhouse and special passkeys and handshakes, the “special language” that says something but defines nothing is less intelligible than Lewis Carroll’s “Jabberwocky”. It makes no sense of any kind. It just sounds so good, though – the po’ folks get their fair share of climate and those megamoneymakers can just pay for it.

Category: "Your Tax Dollars At Work", 2020 Election, Exploitation