Pittsburgh Government Covertly Attempting to Induce Climate Change

by Mark Saporta, Municipal Machinations Correspondent

In a shocking development in local politics, an expose on the internal workings of the municipal government of Pittsburgh released earlier this week has revealed that both the mayor and the city council are actively attempting to effect climate change.

The document, released anonymously, directly quotes several higher-ups in the city government brainstorming ways to discreetly funnel money towards advancing climate change, from hiring gang members to destroy electric cars, to creating a vaguely-purposed super PAC that secretly devotes all contributions to setting aerosol cans on fire, to breeding especially flatulent cows.

Naturally, this report has enraged and confused many Pittsburghers, who are understandably loath to see their tax money both figuratively and literally burned on a seemingly counterproductive enterprise. Like them, readme is seeking answers to why the Democrat-controlled city government has taken such an aggressively climate-unfriendly stance, and has turned to Mayor Bill Peduto for an explanation:


readme: In all my years as a political analyst, I have never encountered any government actively embracing climate change, let alone a liberal one. Why are you doing this?

Peduto: Look outside.

readme: What? Uh…okay.

(At this point, your correspondent looked out the window of the mayor’s office. As per usual, it was overcast.)

Peduto: Q.E.D.

readme: Well, I mean…

Peduto: Pittsburgh has the most dismal weather this side of Chicago. The only times it’s not cloudy is when it’s raining. The only times it’s not uncomfortably cold is when it’s uncomfortably hot. It’s humid, it’s damp, it’s windy, it’s just generally gross. Our snow even sucks! Why wouldn’t we be trying to change the climate? What change could there be that wouldn’t be an improvement from what we have?

readme: Isn’t that rather selfish?

Peduto: As the mayor of Pittsburgh, my duty is first and foremost towards my constituents. If parching California gives us more sunny, 70-degree days in February, then I know where my priorities lie. And hey – any money we invest in inducing climate change will be more than recouped by the tons of rock salt we won’t have to buy every winter. It’s just good governance.

readme: That day was pretty damn nice.

Peduto: Imagine if every day in February was like that. All it would take would be a few more wildfires, a few more islands sunk into the ocean, and a few more sad people on the other side of the world. My government considers the costs worthwhile, and we think voters will too.

readme: Well, Mr. Mayor, thank you for your time, and hopefully the history books don’t demonize your decision any more than is appropriate.

At press time, the temperature in Pittsburgh had once again fluctuated 60 degrees, just like every goddamn Tuesday.

President Obama Reject Keystone XL, Atmospheric CO2 Immediately Disappears


Mark Saporta, Government Dysfunction Political Correspondent

Climate scientists were baffled last week as President Obama’s decision to reject the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline unexpectedly removed all greenhouse gases from Earth’s atmosphere.

Furthermore, analysis conducted at the nation’s power plants and factories confirmed that as a result of this decision, carbon dioxide is no longer a waste product of power generation, manufacturing, or any system involving the burning of fossil fuels, in defiance of our current understanding of chemistry. Environmentalists are celebrating the world over, secure in the knowledge that their years-long effort to prevent the construction of the Alberta-to-Texas pipeline has protected the planet from climate change for the foreseeable future.

Bill McKibben, head of the anti-Keystone XL group 350, released a statement in the wake of this victory:

“When we at 350.org told the nation that keeping the Keystone pipeline from being built was an incredibly important environmental prerogative, people scoffed. Some even said – get this! – that the Keystone fight was mostly symbolic, and that existence or nonexistence of the pipeline would have only a marginal effect on the environment one way or the other.

“Well, now the whole world can see what we’ve known here at 350 for years: canceling the pipeline would instantly solve our global warming crisis. It was that easy! We didn’t have to worry about fuel efficiency, or alternative energy, or even recycling! We just had to prevent Keystone from happening, and bam! Environment fixed!

“Oh, and by the way. If the President had allowed Keystone to go through? We’d all be dead by now, since the atmosphere would have become 100% carbon dioxide in a matter of seconds. Anyway, no need to thank us; we already know that we’re awesome.”

Seeing as President Obama has taken literally any action, there are, of course, dissenting voices. Senate Majority Leader and coal fetishist Mitch McConnell has harshly criticized the President on his decision, saying that by nixing Keystone, Obama has “doomed America’s economy unto a thousand years of torment, where it shall know only sorrow and worryingly high unemployment.”

Republican frontrunner (prolonged sigh) Donald Trump has also criticized the decision in a recent campaign appearance, in between saying something racist about immigrants and inviting an audience member to confirm that his hair is real.

At press time, President Obama pardoned several dozen prisoners convicted of low-level drug offenses, instantly ending America’s problems with mass incarceration and drug abuse.