Conservatives should always say that they support a “clean environment” when discussing global warming. Opponents try to smear those that don’t support global warming as reckless and willing to trash the environment.
I support a clean environment but I don’t buy into all the global warming BS.
Hmmmm. Guess they lost my phone number.
How does one define clean and when is it good enough?
“clean environment”
I take a different tact. I want to protect people, not the environment. This means I’m willing to support reasonable pollution controls but I also realize the technology and industry are necessary and am not willing to place concerns for the environment over people.
To me, people are more important. The EPA was originally named “The pollution control agency” when it began under Nixon and under that perceived mandate got republican buy in.
Now we have the environment being more important than people so you can’t build a needed road because of some obscure critter nearby, etc..
A more egregious example is in Calvert Cliffs Maryland where people are not allowed to take measures to protect their homes from falling into the Bay because it’d fail to preserve the natural state of those delicate cliffs.