The SECOND ISSUE that is shaping the presidential race is climate change. The link that I posted in the previous post was only slightly helpful concerning this topic. There are three questions there that the compilers have gathered. They all refer to energy and relevant topics. Did you visit that page? There is good information there, to be sure!

Think with me about the matter of climate change. Hillary Clinton mentioned in an advertisement for her campaign the fact that her “good friend, Al Gore” has mentioned a particular issue. Frankly, that fact alone makes her position suspect, but the fact is, that Mrs. Clinton, and many in the Democratic Party, have come to accept and fully endorse the mantra of the idea that our society is on a crash course to destroy the entire planet. Her thinking along this line is questionable, but merits examination. The thing is, her platform does not provide in depth answers about the possible direction that her administration would take, if she is elected.

On the other hand, Donald Trump prefers to look at the issues from a pragmatic view point. This is true of other of his ideas in the field of the economy and the choices that the administration is called upon to make. He needs to be more informed, however, and not unlike other areas where he is out of the loop he knows where to obtain the first class help necessary to make informed choices.

The other two more well known parties and their candidates, on the other hand, have much to say about the issue of climate change. The point that I want to make here however, is not which candidate has the most viable solution to the problems of climate change, since quite honestly there is NO 100% SURE WAY TO SOLVE THE PROBLEMS OF CLIMATE CHANGE. The American public is following the Piped Piper towards a blind dance over this matter. Unfortunately, the scientific data is in conflict on this issue. Neither Trump nor Clinton, nor Jill Stein nor Gary Johnson have the final answer on this issue. 

It makes for a good rallying point to cause young voters to get behind the candidate. For others it is a rallying point to speak out against all industrial research and developmental work that tied to or interested in using fossil fuels. The matter of climate change, unlike many other issues, is not a black and white or a “cut and dried” topic. It still needs much investigation and much clear headed and honest evaluation of the feasibility of human intervention in the planet’s climate.

Unlike other watershed issues, the matter of climate change represents other philosophical positions. Don’t be duped into thinking that this matter will change the future of the nation, such as other crucial matters (see this link to help you sort through those issues). My thinking? TAKE HEED America to those who chose to use global warming as a means of economic deterrents for the country. And especially take heed to those tho try to say that the USA is responsible for destroying the climate around the world. It’s those same people who also say that the USA has to solve all the problems of the developing nations, ignoring the fact that the best way to develop other countries to to teach the local people how to build their own economy, including how to tap their own natural resources.

When you vote next week on Nov. 8th, remember alarmists and doomsday sayers often prefer hype over common sense and the real issues of our country’s future like the matter of our national debt, our national leadership, the lack of a moral compass, the failure to protect the weak and the defenseless in our culture. Climate change is inevitable. Administrations will change in the White House. But we are still responsible to stand for the wise, reasonable and efficient use the natural resources that the United States needs.

See you on the 8th!

David Rogers, M.A.Min.