Why would NR include a piece like this as satire? It makes fun of the wrong people, as far as they are concerned.

I don’t think he’s kidding.  After all, it is the National Review.  It is global warming denialism.

The problem with these right-wing parodies is that the absurdity they mean to make funny is so close to the real positions of actual rightists that you can’t tell joke from belief. No doubt many NR readers are saying “Hell yeah! If I have to admit global warming is real because Pat Robertson finally copped to it, at least I can say it’s a good thing.”

Real good, when the entire population of Phoenix, Ariz. has to flee because their clothing spontaneously bursts into flame every time they step outside between March and November. Those crop pattern diversions? That would be when corn isn’t grown in the Midwest any more because of the sand dunes.

I guess it doesn’t take much in the way of brains to become an editor at the National Review….

Maybe you should rethink your position, that global warming is the ultimate investment oppotunity along the following lines….

How much good will money do you on Venus?

I don’t know about the NRO piece, but I’m pretty sure that the link at my name is not a satire.

It’s satire. Like Beevis & Butthead for Freepers. “He said ‘inconvenient truth.’ huh huh, huh huh.”

Leave it to a conservative publication to view a global catastrophe as a way to make money.  Money / greed trumps everything for these bastards.  I have two words for them “FUCK THEM”.
Will

Who set this idiot loose on a keyboard?  This guy is incapable of producing anything as coherent as satire or criticism.  He imagines that he’s being amusing.  In fact, he’s just stringing together neocon buzz-phrases interspersed with pathetic jokes. I saw a piece on Al Gore written in a similar “style” in GQ at my hairdresser’s two days ago.  I guess that winning combo of mean, stupid and oblivious has filtered down from the top.

“Investment opportunity of a lifetime…” Although its satire he raises some interesting points. However the phenomenomena he leaves out is polarshifting. What does he think might happen once the ice caps melt revealing whats underneath? New ice caps might form elswhere creating new poles? I really don’t know…