Martha’s Vineyard got a new resident this week (or at least was picked to get a new resident) when word of a real estate purchase made by former President Barack Obama teletyped its way across the media.
Obamas. Purchase home. $15 million. On 29 pristine beachfront acres.
Man oh man, that whole trashing-the-rich-and-standing-for-the-poor thing pays really, really well.
But who cares. Obama earned that money — sort of. Kind of the same way Kim Kardashiandid. It’s his to do with as he likes. If he wants a massive home that could double as a castle or be auctioned off and the proceeds used to feed 3,750 families for an entire year, that’s his right.
Obama’s flush wallet isn’t the interesting part of this purchase. It’s his choice of location that’s intriguing — because it raises one very, very difficult question.
Obama’s reported new home sits atop acres of prime beachfront property in Martha’s Vineyard.
Beachfront property. You know, that stuff that’s not supposed to exist in 10 years (or 12 years or 15 years or 20 years depending on which leftist prognosticator you listen to).
The question, then, is why in the world would anyone make a lifetime investment (of $15 million, no less) for a home he genuinely thinks will be under trillions of tons of sea water in the next decade or two?
The answer is that such a person doesn’t genuinely believe the home will be flooded.
And that’s okay. You don’t have to believe that. I certainly don’t. But you should believe it if you’ve been going around for over a decade talking about how the sea levels, atmospheric warming, and carbon levels are going to wreak havoc on a suddenly (and unexpectedly) fragile earth.
Now this is where it gets prickly and should be pretty uncomfortable for Obama. What does he actually believe?
If he believed the talking points he and his media allies have disgorged onto innocent Americans for years, he never (ever, not even in a million years) would have bought that home unless he’s a truly moronic home buyer. (I know, I know: we can’t completely discount that possibility.)
I mean, even if he did believe the climate change hokum and figured he’d flip the house after running some guns and hosting a beer summit or two, home values should start sinking pretty darn soon since, you know, the land is going to start sinking pretty darn soon. It’s a bad investment, if Obama believes what he’s said.
Tempting as the idea of a stupid Obama is, there’s a more likely explanation (that’s surprisingly even more satisfying).
What if Obama just doesn’t believe any of it? What if he used the idea of climate change, global warming, and rising sea levels to push for economic changes that would punish American success and hand huge advantages to American rivals?
If that seems unlikely to you, remember the truth about the Green New Deal that finally came out? The minions of New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez finally admitted that the focus of the GND was never the environment. The focus was fundamentally changing the American economy.
Sounds an awful lot like “fundamentally transforming America,” doesn’t it?
Time to face facts. Obama’s not stupid. He knows that the 40 years the left has spent creating an issue out of extreme environmentalism can pay off. He knows the issue can be used to scare people, and he knows that scared people have an unfortunate tendency to surrender control to anyone who comes along looking like he’s in charge.
No, Obama’s not stupid. He’s cunning. He’s used the bugbear of climate change to advance his political agenda for years. Remember how he himself would stop the seas from rising?
He knows none of it’s true, and he knows he can never admit that. But he also wanted a pretty nice house.
And, honestly, picking up a nice house that so obviously violates the image you’ve carefully crafted isn’t that big a deal for a leftist. Remember, for them the mantra is always “good for me, but not for thee.”
Via WesternJournal
