Republicans warn Obama: No global warming money if he end-runs Congress

Just in case you were under the impression Obama is merely wasting time at the UN Climate Conference in Paris, no, he’s looking to waste a fair amount of U.S. taxpayer money too - with $3 billion set to directly from the U.S. Treasury to the UN Green Climate Fund. Now you might remember that whole thing about how Congress controls the purse strings, which somehow never seems to stop Obama from spending as much as he wants however he wants regardless of congressional disapproval.

This time, Republicans swear, things are going to be different:

Looking for leverage, critics of the president’s climate agenda have zeroed in on the president’s goal of directing $3 billion – including $500 million in the near-term – for the U.N. Green Climate Fund, which would help developing nations deal with climate change.

Ahead of the president’s trip, dozens of lawmakers warned the president: No vote, no money.

Special:

“Without Senate approval, there will be no money – period,” Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., said at a hearing last week, stressing that any agreement with legally binding requirements must come before the Senate for a vote.

He and Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, sent a letter to Obama signed by more than three-dozen senators likewise urging the president to have his special envoy relay to developing nations’ representatives that Congress “will not be forthcoming” with the Green Climate Fund money absent a Senate vote.

In addition, Inhofe joined Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Republican Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri in introducing a resolution calling for the Senate to have a say in any climate agreement.

Republicans generally argue that any deal with legally binding elements should be handled like a treaty, and subject to Senate ratification. The Obama administration, though, has given varying statements on how it views any potential pact.

Special:

Secretary of State John Kerry rattled European officials when he was quoted earlier this month in the Financial Times saying any agreement was “definitively not going to be a treaty.” French President Hollande bristled at the notion that a deal would not be legally binding and was quoted saying if that’s the case, “there won’t be an agreement.”

You have to love the Obama Administration’s approach to international agreements. Is it a treaty? Well, not if that means the Senate has to ratify it. Is it legally binding? Well, only the parts that don’t require Obama to respect the constitutional limits on his office.

As he did with the Iraq nuclear deal, Kerry is insisting this agreement will not be a treaty simply because he knows the Senate would never ratify it. That irritates fellow socialists like Hollande who realizes the U.S. could back out of it at any time, and almost certainly would if the next president is a Republican.

Special:

But the more immediate question is this: Would Republicans really stand up to Obama and refuse to fund his contribution to the Green Climate Fund? Usually when Obama wants something and the Republican Congress doesn’t want to give it to him, Obama decides to play chicken and take things straight to a government shutdown unless Congress capitulates. He does this because he knows full well that his media servants will push the narrative that Republicans are once again trying to shut down the government over some petty disagreement with Obama. He also knows full well that Mitch McConnell has the spine of a jellyfish and can usually be counted on to quickly wave the white flag lest he endure the second kick of a mule or something.

But would the same dynamic apply here? I’ve believe all along that Republicans can win these showdowns if they simply resolve to fight on the merits of the issues. And however much the Democrats and the media want the “fight against climate change” to be a mainstream imperative, the public isn’t buying it and never has. If ever there was a battle Republicans could win on the merits, it has to be the pissing away of $3 billion U.S. dollars for this kind of nonsense.

Even so, Sen. Inhofe’s expressed determination notwithstanding, it’s hard to believe Republicans really mean it this time. I want to believe. I really do. But Lucy can always be counted on to pull that football away.

http://canadafreepress.com/article/77143

SuperCut: Obama Calls Climate Change, Not Terrorism, Our Greatest Threat

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWMeWwVEuBU

BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff
December 1, 2015 2:53 pm

A new SuperCut video contrasts doomsday rhetoric from the Obama administration about climate change with news clips of terrorist attacks, plane bombings and beheadings by the Islamic State.

President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and Secretary of State John Kerry offer the following words in the video about climate change.

“Today, there is no greater threat to our planet than climate change.”

“No challenge poses a greater threat to future generations than climate change.”

“It is indeed one of the biggest threats facing our planet today.”

“Climate change is the threat multiplier.”

“If another country threatened to wipe out an American town, we’d do everything in our power to protect ourselves. Climate change poses the same threat right now.”

“And years from now, I want to be able to look our children and grandchildren in the eye and tell them we did everything we could to protect them.”

On Tuesday, Obama appeared to equate the threats of climate change and terrorism, saying they required similar responses. The Hill reports:

“In some ways, [climate change] is akin to the problem of terrorism and ISIL,” Obama said, using an alternate acronym for the terror group.

Both threats, Obama said, require a long, sustained effort by the United States to assess and neutralize them.

The administration has long maintained that the effects of climate change — like rising sea levels, extreme weather, drought and crop problems — could create more harm and unrest than terrorism, and require a similar response.

Republicans have overwhelmingly dismissed the idea and excoriated Obama for understating the threat of terrorism and not taking it seriously.

Obama’s comments came weeks after the ISIS killed 130 people in a series of coordinated gun and bomb attacks in Paris in one of the deadliest attacks perpetrated by the extremist group.

At a news conference on Monday, White House national security adviser Ben Rhodes refused to directly answer which issue, climate change or terrorism, is a bigger threat to the U.S.

“The leaders who have looked at the danger of climate change, they see even the instability we’re faced today significantly magnified by the effects of climate change over time given the disruptions that extreme weather will have on certain countries, given, again, the lives that will be put at stake and the economic disruptions that will take place with the continued effects of climate change,” he said.

American People Billed For Climate Imprisonment

Published on Dec 2, 2015

This is how a new dark age ruled by a totalitarian New World Order is ushered in. 345 global sycophants burned 300,000 tons of Carbon Dioxide to meet in Paris to impose a legally binding carbon taxation plan that will be proactively enforcing climate justice. The first legally binding carbon reduction plan the people of the world have faced.

Obama has already spent $784,825 on his motorcade alone. The New York Daily News reports “President Obama’s flight to the City of Lights emitted roughly 189 tons of carbon alone, burning 19,275 gallons of jet fuel, reports the Daily Caller.His entire trip will send more carbon dioxide into the air than the combined emissions from 31 U.S. homes over the span of a year.”

The State Department spent $407,868 on Limos. The contracted propaganda press spent $376,957. When it was all tallied up, the American taxpayers have already spent $1,805,282 to send a group of elitist New World Order stooges to another country to legally scale back their living standards through incorporated Agenda 21 initiatives.

Once again the liberal sociopaths are ignoring the scientific facts and statistics. Instead, pulling at our heart strings and ramming lies and guilt down our throats in order to achieve their New World Order agenda. Most sufferers of Stockholm syndrome will tell you that Obama and company need that money because these are important people making important decisions. However, the importance of any of these New World Order lackeys will likely be as a stain in a footnote of history. Where stupidity, hubris and greed raised its grisly self important head to once again challenge humanity’s intelligence and resolve.

Help us spread the word about the liberty movement, we're reaching millions help us reach millions more. Share the free live video feed link with your friends & family: http://www.infowars.com/show

Follow Alex on TWITTER - https://twitter.com/RealAlexJones
Like Alex on FACEBOOK - https://www.facebook.com/AlexanderEme...
Infowars on G+ - https://plus.google.com/+infowars/

Republicans warn Obama: No global warming money if he end-runs Congress