Liberals often point to conservatives and accuse them of greed. OK, maybe in some cases, fair enough. However, I think as many or more liberals are envy driven. Nor are liberals exempt from greed.

What’s the difference? Greed is kind of like your three-year-old eating all their candy until they have a stomachache. An example of envy might involve your five-year-old eating all your three-year-old’s share of the candy while the three-year-old is watching cartoons.

These are very similar. If the five-year-old were a budding congressman, especially but not exclusively on the road to becoming a Democrat, he could probably convince his mother that he was entitled to the three-year-old’s candy because the three-year-old was not capable of eating it properly. The mother, if a Democrat, might let the five-year-old get away with it if he promised to dispose of all the candy wrappers in an environmentally sensitive manner.

Most of us believe in disposing of waste properly, but not as an excuse to commit theft.

It doesn’t seem to matter what anyone has or does in life; others want them to deprive them of it. In the Old West, if one person wanted someone else’s cattle or horses and acted upon their greedy or envious impulses, they could face swift justice at the end of short rope thrown over a tall tree – or perhaps gallows if the formalities were observed, such as a trial.

Many feel like they have a right to your stuff. Those who feel like they are owed something or are entitled are often tempted to try to deny others the fruits of their labor by rules and/or legislation. The envy driven are just as dangerous as the greedy – maybe more so – and they seem more willing to use the force implicit in government to try to get what they want.

Around the supper hour in the sane central part of our nation Friday night, you were the victim of envy and greed. That’s right, while you were buying tickets for a movie , munching on a burger – or hopefully something less mundane – or otherwise enjoying the fruits of your labor, a host of congressmen were engaging in robbery in the name of making this all a better world. Never mind that the largest nations in the world (China, India and Russia) are not going to participate.

While you were prepping for your weekend, Carbon Cap and Trade passed your House of Representatives. Yippppeee! Windmills, solar panels and higher utility and gasoline prices through hidden taxes for everyone, not to mention a structurally more sluggish economy, unless the U.S. Senate stops it. It narrowly passed the House of Representatives (219-212) in time for Speaker Nancy Pelosi to board her government-provided, 50-person-seat, carbon-burning jet and fly non-stop to California at your expense. She is too good to stop for gas, though she would like to sequester it. At around 3 a.m. the morning before the vote, over 300 more pages of pork were ladled onto the lard to grease a few more Democrats and the eight Republicans that voted for this pig.

The bill was over 1300 pages long, according to The Washington Post. I doubt we can find a single congressman who has read it all – at least one who could pass a lie detector. Well, maybe that was overstated, since being able to lie without any physiological symptoms seems to qualify so many for public office.

We all know that many Northeastern and West Coast Democrats detest the oil business. They detest conservative states like Texas where energy is produced. Many in our Congress opted for government "service" because they couldn’t make it in the private economy. Yet watch a few televised hearings, and it becomes obvious that many in this Congress would rather lash out at success than create an environment where others can succeed. To me this is envy writ large and dangerous.

Several amendments were offered by Republicans; one offered to suspend new taxes if gasoline went to over 5 dollars a gallon, another to suspend if unemployment went to over 15 percent. Both were beaten down by the true believers.

It probably makes sense that many investors put their money behind companies that do things they think are beneficial, but don’t you think people to whom you provide government carbon-burning jets should avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest? Speaker Pelosi, specifically her husband, manages a family portfolio that is positioned to gain from this bill that will raise your cost of living. (Don’t forget, it’s a big tax.)

Many legislators and officeholders have opted to have their investments managed by blind trusts on which they would have no influence. The Pelosis are an exception. Her portfolio is managed by her husband. Is there pillow talk?

But we must save the environment, you say? Well, I would agree with that, but an increasing number of scientists are skeptical that much of our climate variability is caused by man. Several scientists have been legally involved in trying get their names removed from the UN agreement on climate change. Some have protested that their names were used without their permission. Russian scientists scoff at the concept of a man-produced gas that is found in nature being the cause.

Other scientists have warned that if "climate change" is addressed through carbon limitation (what the House passed), that the agenda is political and not scientific.

There is only a scientific consensus between Al Gore’s narcissistic ears, and most climate scientists are now acknowledging that global temperatures peaked in 1998. Regardless, temperatures have been both much cooler and much warmer in the last 10,000 years, before man could have been much of a factor.

Regardless of our intention, the fact is though our nation uses much of the world’s energy, we are responsible for an even greater share or the world’s prosperity through our economic activity and innovation. To slow our nation’s economy is to slow the world’s at a time in which I think it is most unwise. It’s time to make a call to your senators.