You need to give me some money.  And you need to do it right now.

Let’s be clear – this is an emergency.  The time for debate is over.  The time for action is now.  There is a clear consensus among experts in the field of law, like me, that you are legally obligated to give me some money.


Why?  Well, it’s a legal thing, and frankly you wouldn’t understand.  I’m a lawyer; I do understand these things.  You need to trust me.  Our futures – and our children’s futures (particularly my children’s) – depend on it.

Now, I reject any attempt to compare this important crusade to the advocacy of the anthropogenic global warming believers.  Sure, as the latest New York Times op-ed by Al Gore shows, there are some superficial similarities.  Yes, the global warming crowd tells you to believe the “experts” and here I’m telling you to do the same.  But “experts” do play an important role.

For example, very few of us are climate scientists who have personally researched the global warming issue.  For that reason, our decision to either prostate ourselves before the pagan polar bear god of the climate change scammers, or to embrace heresy, has to depend on our assessment of the credibility of the experts.  Of course, Al Gore is not one to let something like the total refutation of his most prominent assertions create a doubt in his mind:

But the scientific enterprise will never be completely free of mistakes. What is important is that the overwhelming consensus on global warming remains unchanged. It is also worth noting that the panel’s scientists — acting in good faith on the best information then available to them — probably underestimated the range of sea-level rise in this century, the speed with which the Arctic ice cap is disappearing and the speed with which some of the large glacial flows in Antarctica and Greenland are melting and racing to the sea.

But in my case, well, as far as you being obligated to give me money, the consensus among legal experts is unchallenged.  Ask any of my lawyer friends – they’ll tell you.  It’s the law.  And there are no grounds for amateurs to doubt either my interpretation of the applicable legal authority or the resulting policy prescription.  I have a law degree.  I passed the California Bar Exam.  And Thomas Friedman agrees – plus he’s observed that in efficient China the leaders would have already ensured that I was paid.


I have not had any of the credibility problems that the climate change believers have experienced.  You have not seen the release of emails discussing how I suppressed challenges to my legal research.  I have not had to explain how I somehow lost that critical legal research.  I have it right here – but you can’t see it because you non-lawyers wouldn’t understand it.  Moreover, some deniers would probably just criticize it, and that kind of thing is counter-productive and would just get in the way of what must be done.  And any attorney who denies this manifest truth is clearly on the take from the Big Corporations and/or the Special Interests, probably in association with the Tea Partiers and Sarah Palin.

That should end the inquiry.  Now, I realize that some of you know that in the trial law business we routinely refer to “experts” as “whores” and assume that the other side will be able to pay some quack, charlatan or buffoon a few hundred an hour to get on the stand and spout whatever drivel is going to get his plaintiff paid.  And you may know that we understand that the best way to test the truth of a so-called expert is to tear into his credentials, his assumptions, his methods and his data like Al Gore tears into a whole wheat muffin.  If you can’t shake him, if he holds up, what he says might be true.  And if he falls apart, he was probably full of it from the word, “Go.”

Now, the climate change scammers have started to fall apart.  That’s why Al Gore’s little missive has such an undercurrent of fear, not least of all for his considerable personal stake in a climate catastrophe.  He wants you to ignore the problems with the work of the” experts” he’s pushing and march forward off the cap-and-trade cliff.  In contrast, my assertion of your legal obligation to send me some money is demonstrably more reasonable, verifiable and plausible than the climate change agenda our liberal overlords are hell-bent on enacting.

So hurry!  This is no time for doubt or discussion.  I’m not afraid of a full, open and honest debate.  It’s just that the issue of giving me some money is so important, so critical to our very survival, that there is no time to test my hypothesis or to hear out the deniers.  I take small bills, bank checks, loose change, anything.


Trust me.  I’m an expert.