jdobbin Posted December 29, 2007 Report Posted December 29, 2007 (edited) From Friday's Washington Post: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22424845/ With just a year left for Bush, the issue is heading down parallel domestic and international tracks. Bush will reconvene officials from major polluting nations in Hawaii next month, and the Senate is to take up a global warming bill in the spring. Some lawmakers said they have picked up hints from Bush aides that he might sign a bipartisan cap-and-trade bill with a reasonable timetable and economic safeguards."The private conversations have been very encouraging," said Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.). "We believe if we produce a bill that reflects our criteria, I personally think the president would sign it." It looks like Bush is much more persuaded by the science if the Post is correct and there could be a major reversal in direction from the Whitehouse in the next months. The coming year offers a final test of whether Bush is willing to move beyond the policies of the past seven years and embrace more aggressive measures, including a mandatory limit on carbon emissions with pollution credits that can be bought and sold — a system known as cap-and-trade. If presented such legislation by Sens. Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Warner (R-Va.), supporters hope, Bush might sign it. Edited December 29, 2007 by jdobbin Quote
jbg Posted December 29, 2007 Report Posted December 29, 2007 From Friday's Washington Post:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22424845/ It looks like Bush is mush more persuaded by the science if the Post is correct and there could be a major reversal in direction from the Whitehouse in the next months. Any hard actions, such as hobbling the US economy, will have to pass the Senate. This won't happen. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
bush_cheney2004 Posted December 29, 2007 Report Posted December 29, 2007 Any hard actions, such as hobbling the US economy, will have to pass the Senate. This won't happen. Agreed....I don't think the Global Warming faithful and US gazers understand this. There is no ruling party or cult of personality to carry the day for wholesale changes to the hydrocarbon economy. Hell, Al Gore couldn't even win his home state. Any changes will be driven by what matters...economics. Investing one's faith in trendy icons won't get it done. 1998 Kyoto Senate Vote: 95 - 0 .....NO! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
jbg Posted December 29, 2007 Report Posted December 29, 2007 (edited) 1998 Kyoto Senate Vote: 95 - 0 .....NO!Technically, the vote was an affirmative vote on a non-binding resolution directing Gore to demand, as a condition of US signature, that China and India, i.e. non-Annex One countries, also accept binding CO2 limits. Everyone knew that was a nonstarter, since those countries were/are too smart to hobble their economies, so in effect you are right. Edited December 29, 2007 by jbg Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
sharkman Posted December 30, 2007 Report Posted December 30, 2007 (edited) Interesting that the left automatically assumes Bush is an Envirohater. His ranch in Texas, for which he receives zero coverage from the MSM who doesn't want the truth to get out, has a number of environment friendly technologies for heat and lights. His ranch actually embarrasses Al Gore's home which consumes enough energy for 20 or 30 normal homes. Edited December 31, 2007 by sharkman Quote
capricorn Posted December 30, 2007 Report Posted December 30, 2007 His ranch actually embarraAl Gore's home which consumes enough energy for 20 or 30 normal homes. Apparently, Gore buys carbon offsets from himself. "With little media monitoring, both Strong and Gore are cashing in on the lucrative cottage industry known as man-made global warming. Strong is on the board of directors of the Chicago Climate Exchange, Wikipedia-described as "the world's first and North America's only legally binding greenhouse gas emission registry reduction system for emission sources and offset projects in North America and Brazil." Gore buys his carbon off-sets from himself--the Generation Investment Management LLP, "an independent, private, owner-managed partnership established in 2004 with offices in London and Washington, D.C." of which he is both chairman and founding partner. To hear the saving-the-earth singsong of this dynamic duo, even the feather light petals of cherry blossoms in Washington leave a bigger carbon footprint." http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/cover031307.htm Strong, is a Canadian. Maurice Strong used to be head of the Canadian International Development Agency then of Petro Canada under Trudeau. Carbon credit trading is a hot new market made possible by the discovery of global warming. Quote "We always want the best man to win an election. Unfortunately, he never runs." Will Rogers
Topaz Posted December 30, 2007 Report Posted December 30, 2007 Interesting that the left automatically assumes Bush is an Envirohater. His ranch in Texas, for which he receives zero coverage from the MSM who doesn't want the truth to get out, has a number of environment friendly technologies for heat and lights. His ranch actually embarraAl Gore's home which consumes enough energy for 20 or 30 normal homes. I think its two reasons. one, Bush likes spend other peoples money but not his own and it's time for the president of the US to plan his library and what to put in it. Bush's is kinda empty. Quote
Higgly Posted December 31, 2007 Report Posted December 31, 2007 If Bush changes his position now he is only hobbling his successor and/or trying to cultivate votes for his party's next candidate. This is a guy who has absolutely no credibility anymore on any issue. I doubt it matters what he says about anything. My guess is that once Bush is gone, he is going to be buried so deeply in the American subconscious you are going to need a proctologist to find him. Quote "We have seen the enemy and he is us!". Pogo (Walt Kelly).
geoffrey Posted January 7, 2008 Report Posted January 7, 2008 I may be stretching a bit, but doesn't it seem that everything Mr. Strong gets involved with is some kind of political farce where the vast majority end up getting screwed? Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.