How a Children's Television Personality Will Cost the Republicans the Next Election

Blake C. Patria By Blake C. Patria, 18th Feb 2014 | Follow this author | RSS Feed
Posted in Wikinut>News>Politics

The Climate Change Debate continues, shining a light on The Right that is most likely detrimental to their efforts to elect a conservative president.


I think I've seen the crossfires long enough to know the game changers. Specifically, I'm talking about climate change here. For a while, The Left has pleaded to reduce carbon in the atmosphere, and The Right denies that climate change even exists. I'm here to tell you that you better get used to "Liberals" running things now because apparently the Republican Party is the Mel Gibson of political parties.

Enter: Bill Nye . . . The Science Guy

Let's not delude ourselves; for a few years now, we've seen climate change deniers go toe to toe with an iconic TV personality, and just waddle away with their tails between their legs. I speak, of course, of Bill Nye the Science Guy. Many of them argue that he is not a scientist, but he repels that argument with science to back up his claims. If not that, the opposition just comes off looking like a moron. A good example would be the time Marsha Blackburn tried to match wits with him on NBC's Meet the Press. Okay, first mistake, The Right, is you sent a member of congress (that also represents your party) instead of a scientist. All she really had a point about was "Ohhh noooo, the economy." News Flash: the economy is toast, and your party is not going to be able to save it at this point. Especially after the last president you had in the office; you can complain about a one-trillion-dollar health plan and a one-trillion-dollar raise in the debt cap, but you still have two wars on your hands that are somewhere in the ballpark of six-trillion-dollars, and counting. It doesn't end there.

Rush Limbaugh's Lapdog in Washington

The Right raised the bar a bit when they deployed a scientist at Bill Nye on CNN's Piers Morgan Tonight, and when I say "scientist", I mean "political scientist" Marc Morano. It did not go well for climate change deniers. Marc Morano sounded like he'd taken way too many diet pills with his barely coherent rapid-fire "facts". As shallow as this statement seems, I don't think his smug face helped much either. He could be cast as some kind of foppish antagonist character in a Farrelly Brothers movie. Why would I employ such a base judgement? Number One: It's an important issue, and Number Two: Not everybody in America is a senseless rube. My suspicions of him were well-founded when I discovered that he was born in Washington DC to play the game. First off, he worked for Rush Limbaugh in the nineties (so at least we know where he gets those peppy diet pills from). He has 700 scientists to back him up on his man-made global warming denial which is good for him, but he probably should have sent one of them to duke it out with Bill Nye on CNN. It probably also doesn't help that his website, is funded by a billionaire named Richard Mellon Scaife who is known for supporting The Right. All Morano really has on Bill Nye is pointing out on his website that Bill Nye is holding a map upside down. This guy really only furthers the public opinion that it's oil and energy companies who are trying to deny man-made global warming.

Geeking Out will be Our Secret Weapon

Rewind a couple years to The O'Reilly Factor on Fox News. We see another sketchball you'd feel weird buying a car from, Joe Bastardi, going up against Bill Nye in the Great Global Warming Debate. This is the point where I begin to wonder if The Right has a secret plan to actually lose this argument (I just can't figure out why): All they could find for the press was another rat-faced speed-freak with a suggestive last name to fly their denial flag. Where Bill O'Reilly is unusually quiet and attentive, even showing genuine interest, Joe Bastardi compensates with his manic denial, yelling, and cutting off of Bill Nye, who is so patient you'd believe he used to run a daycare center for dysfunctional children. However, Bastardi actually has visual manifestations of the studies he talks about (probably another tactic that makes Bill Nye come out on top at these things. The visuals have a profound psychological effect), and even sounds like he knows what he's talking about (if a little over excited while doing so). Unfortunately for him, he still comes off as a scared, immature little man with charts and graphs, not once cracking Bill Nye's composure. Bill Nye has physical evidence of an increase of carbon in the atmosphere. Nobody who has gone up against him denies this.

Hillary Clinton VS. Undead Ronald Reagan

Now I'm not a scientist, a politician, an economist, nor am I a political scientist, but my short time on this planet has given me enough experience in watching the American political process to know (or at least have a good idea of) who is going to win the next election, and why. I'll put this out there: The Right is not doing themselves any favors by debating climate change in any way. They thought The Left would use that as their next big thing, they were right (hahaha.), and they took the bait. "The World Dying" trumps "The American Economy" in the minds of most decent-hearted voters. There's also the fact that you would have to be living under a rock on Mars to not know that Hillary Clinton is running for president. I'm not saying she's the one for the job, but she obviously has the best campaign, and is off on a head start if a guy with no TV can tell you this. That is one of the many reasons why Obama won in the first place. Also take into account the fact that there are virtually no strong Republican candidates (not to say that they aren't, just that their campaigns suck in comparison, which is one of the many reasons why Mitt Romney lost the last election). Americans are psychotic. They wanted to elect celebrities over these last few decades, and if not a celebrity, they want somebody who is a fighter of social injustice, or at least somebody charismatic. George W. could beat Al Gore for many reasons: He could beat him up in school, he has better stage presence, his father was a president and people were already missing the late eighties/early nineties for some reason, and he has friends and family everywhere to cook the books and load the dice for him. He could beat John Kerry because no matter how stupid Bush looked, what you saw was what you got. Kerry just looked fake, and the 9/11 heat hadn't really cooled down yet--also he made the mistake of trying to out-badass Bush, making him simply look like Bush Light. All he had going for him was the Democratic stamp of approval. Obama won because his campaign was huge, we were fighting two wars with no end in sight and McCain was a shell-shocked war vet that would have kept them going, the stock-market crash further crushed people's hopes, there was a racial component, and enough people thought McCain would have been more of the same. If the Republicans raised Ronald Reagan from the dead, they would still lose against Hillary Clinton. She is the next phase in American social equality, her husband is known for "balancing the budget" (which has that economic sell in it), and she will most likely address the climate change issue. Undead Ronald Reagan would fall short because a lot of voters are still pissed about his "trickle down" economy--actually a significant number of people blame him for the crappy American economy.

Dry Land is not a Myth

As far as global warming goes, I'll say this: It is snowing right now as I type this. It was snowing the other day, and the other day before that. The Right would tell me "See, there's no global warming. It's snowing!" Snow is precipitation. It's basically evaporated water falling out of the air, and onto your head. You might also recognize it as rain which I have also seen plenty of this winter. You probably also read the Bible regularly, and remember the part in Genesis where God killed almost everyone and everything with rain except for Kevin Costner's ancestors in a floating menagerie.There is an increase in carbon in the air which makes sense because there are seven billion people on the planet, and we're using the same technology we were when there was one or two billion. It does not take a huge stretch of the imagination to deduce that an atmosphere full of carbon will cause some kind of greenhouse effect. That's why Venus is the hottest planet in the solar system. It's not as close to the sun as Mercury, but it is about 900 degrees fahrenheit to Mercury's 800 degrees fahrenheit. Some people even talk about doing what we do with carbon emissions now to terraform Mars. I know the climate has been changing on this planet for millions of years, but denying that humanity is contributing does not help your case. It just makes you look like you want to use sources of energy that have been obsolete for a century, but are still here because some people are greedy. Every time you defend global warming deniers, oil companies, and Right Wing war mongers, you look like you are defending the "big, evil, greedy corporations" . . . but that's the main problem isn't it? Greed?

Lizard People are Better at Science Anyway

Now I know it's a huge problem that would take a lot of work to fix, and of course this scares the shit out of The Right; a bigger government, more spending, the world's way of life changing . . . but it's pretty much inevitable. I know The Right likes to call "alarmism" on the climate change debate, but crying "socialism" doesn't seem any less alarmist.

I've heard a conspiracy theory that an initiative to control global warming is just a ruse to get people so scared on a global scale that they'll just give up their rights to "the NWO" just like Americans did for The Patriot Act. Some of the more extreme conspiracy theorists might hypothesize that Bill Nye is a Lizard Person working for the Illuminati. All tinfoil-hat ponderings aside, climate change is the argument that makes The Right look stupid, and they've screwed up too much themselves to get enough people to believe they will fix the economy. Most of the American debt is in the hands of the banks anyway, and if The Dollar crashes, big deal, China will be top dog, and we'll go to hell for a few years. Maybe we'll be as smart as them next time . . . hopefully in a more American way, but I can't stress enough how it is the fault of both parties that the economy sucks (literally). Is there really much of an ethical difference between Big Government and Big Corporations? One manipulates the other in some way, and all of their money comes from the same people.


Banks, Barack Obama, Bill Nye, Bill Nye The Science Guy, Bill Oreilly, Carbon, China, Climate Change, Cnn, Debt, Democrat, Earth, Economy, Energy, Fox News, George W Bush, Global Warming, Greed, Hillary Clinton, Joe Bastardi, John Kerry, John Mccain, Left Wing, Man-Made Global Warming Denial, Marc Morano, Marsha Blackburn, Mitt Romney, Money, Nbc, News, Oil, Piers Morgan, Politics, Presidential Election, Republican, Right Wing, Socialism, Tinfoil-Hat, Venus, War

Meet the author

author avatar Blake C. Patria
My name is Blake C. Patria. I am a musician, a writer, a philanthropist, a philosopher, etc. I enjoy science and its fictions. I also enjoy philosophy and Punk Rock. My work will tell more :)

Share this page

moderator Steve Kinsman moderated this page.
If you have any complaints about this content, please let us know


author avatar Fern Mc Costigan
19th Feb 2014 (#)

Interesting post!

Reply to this comment

author avatar Blake C. Patria
19th Feb 2014 (#)

Thanks Fern! I'm looking forward to posting more!

Reply to this comment

author avatar Blake C. Patria
19th Feb 2014 (#)

Shie-shie nee!

Reply to this comment

Add a comment
Can't login?