Every so often a news reports comes in that, after years of litigation, a huge corporation has been convicted of doing major damage to the environment. They are then fined a few million bucks.

This is a joke. Those few millions wouldn't pay for the paper clips used by that corporation over those same years. The fine means nothing. If people are committing a purposeful crime, which you must prove in cases like this, you should JAIL those responsible, no matter how rich they are.

But liberals and self-styled environmentalists, who claim to be tough on corporate greed, never propose such a thing. No corporation will be deterred by a threat of such a fine, and we all know it. Corporate fines don't work, and liberals support them.

If rich people purposely commit crimes, you must jail them for it, or stop playing games.

An environmental policy that would work is like any policy that would work. Regulations that work produce few rules, but every single rule is ruthlessly enforced.

If you rigorously enforce the rules, that assures that the rules will be few. People are careful about passing restrictions if they know they have to obey them.

My approach to the environment or to education or to crime would work, because it is intended to work. I want a clean world, I want crime down, I want better education. So, my policies would be designed to produce these things.

Liberals are not primarily interested in a clean world or less crime or better education. Liberal proposals are made to push liberal causes.

The left is not interested in reducing crime. Its real aim is to take guns out of private hands.

Good education does not really concern them. What they want is to RE-EDUCATE children into leftist ideas.

And in the case of the environment, it is not accidental that all the people who used to push outright socialism are now calling themselves "environmentalists." What they want is not clean air but government control.

As you can see, real liberal goals have nothing to do with a policy that WORKS. In fact, a policy that actually SOLVED problems would get in the way.

Nothing liberals advocate ever WORKS. The left keeps advocating that government billions be spent on solar power, geothermal and wind power. But if any of these started to WORK, the left would turn on them the way they did on nuclear power when it threatened to solve the energy crisis.

This is a very simple and obvious conclusion if you know anything about political strategy.

Everybody on the left wants to deal with the energy crisis by "conservation," while the right wants to deal with it by "production." The left wants to have bureaucrats dominate American life in the name of "conservation." They want price controls, rationing, and large   government-run searches for unworkable "alternative sources of energy."

Liberals cannot say, EVEN TO THEMSELVES, that what they really want is for government to ration and control the price of every source of energy FOREVER. So they tell themselves, and everybody else, that they want bureaucrats to rule our energy use until an "alternative" is found.

In other words, liberals tell us -- and probably think they believe -- that total government control of energy will only last until they find an abundant "alternative" energy source. In the meantime, the total government control they dream of will be a "temporary solution."

It is generally known that there is nothing as eternal as a "temporary government program." Liberals always demand government control of situations UNTIL GOVERNMENT FINDS A SOLUTION. And liberal "solutions" NEVER work.

So what the liberal code words, "a balanced solution," really means is increased government power in the name of conservation and price controls, and government programs for long-term solutions that will never work.

So, as soon as any "solution" looks promising, liberals no longer like the sound of it, and turn against it.