Posted on 06/03/2002 5:08:19 PM PDT by TLBSHOW
Ladies and gentleman, on the front page of Monday's New York Times there's a story that has the Bush administration essentially saying, "Yes, the phenomenon known as global warming exists, and guess who's causing it? You! American humanity with our highly technologically advanced lifestyle - our automobiles, air conditioners and whatever else, we're the ones causing it."
The Times story begins, "In a stark shift for the Bush administration, the United States has sent a climate report to the United Nations detailing specific and far-reaching effects that it says global warming will inflict on the American environment. In the report, the administration for the first time mostly blames human actions for recent global warming. It says the main culprit is the burning of fossil fuels that send heat-trapping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere." George W. Algore, anyone?
So what are we going to do about this? Nothing. According to the administration, it's too late to do anything about it in terms of reversing or changing it. It's here baby, it's a fact of life. Global warming is with us. It's with us as the sun is with us. All we can do is adapt and live with it. If you have a chance, drive your car a little less. Well folks, I’m just not buying it.
When I first became aware of this story Sunday night, I thought about what I would say on Monday's program: "Well folks, guess what? I have been wrong about global warming. The president says it is happening and that human beings are causing it, so I've been wrong." I couldn't say that because I don't think I am wrong. There are too many scientists out there whom I implicitly trust that have proven to me these predictions are basically apocalyptic doom and gloom based on raw emotion. Even the global warming advocates, to this day, will not tell you it is definitively happening.
Global warming has always been a hot topic, no pun intended, which we have discussed extensively over the years here at EIB. If you're a Rush 24/7 subscriber, you have access to a plethora of information on the subject in the EIB Essential Stack of Stuff. Just last Friday, I went through some of the most common enviro-myths that many folks fall for hook, line and sinker. If you're one of those individuals with question marks, especially in light of this New York Times story, check out Friday's Limbaugh Institute: Rush Smashes Environmentalist Myths.
We also learned last week that there may not even be a finite supply of oil. It may be infinite because mother earth is still making the stuff at this very moment. We also talked about this last week during class at the Limbaugh Institute: Maha, Where Does Oil Come From? Folks, it's just going to be a question of when will it become affordable, economic and profitable to get oil in some of these places like underneath the ocean floor. But only when we learn what the limits of our supply are, will these alternative fuels really get going with gusto.
Now folks, I don't want anyone to misunderstand. I'm not etched in stone or opposed to the possibility of global warming. But what I will not admit is that human beings are causing it. We do not have that kind of power, which is what the environmentalist wacko coalition maintains. This is a political, not scientific, issue for them. The leftists who use this issue are using it to advance a political agenda, which is anti-capitalism, anti-Western culture, anti-America, and pro-big government.
To say that we can outdo what the sun does is absolute folly. But there are so many people with apocalyptic outlooks that they want to believe we're capable of this kind of destruction by living our lives in ways that are based on improving the quality of life. And folks, I'm just not going to join that chorus.
Now friends, all of this takes Algore's number one issue away from him. Daschle and Gephardt are probably banging their heads against the wall. Here's another issue they thought they owned that has been taken away. But actually, it may not have been, because the report has also alienated environmentalist wackos, too.
You can hear me read excerpts from the Times piece and explain in further detail in the links below - as well as read the rest of the coverage of this story in articles throughout the website. The administration appears to have abandoned another core conservative principle, leaving us all to grapple with the question, "Why?"
I think it is the democrats plan to do this non-stop hits on Bush like the NYtimes story!
to depress turnout by rightist voters, by inducing apathy through disillusion.
Nuff stated, Rush has told the truth that he uses the New York Times as his show prep when he is done with the back nine.
Great show prep, Rush.
The tax cut was a disappointment. The Stem Cell decision was not restrictive enough. Partial Birth abortions are still legal... and on, and on and on..
TLB... he is just not conservative enough for me, though he is a damn site better than gore would have been. I am going for "gridlock" this november. Barring a miraculous turn of events.
I wish bush would just have tabled the report and ordered a new study.. instead of issuing the "clinton holdovers" report, as they build their own job security into the national agenda....
And all this reaching out is supposed to get us a repub senate, well guess what, republican polsters all over the place are saying that local issues are what the votes will be about. SO it looks to me like for all this "reaching out" we may not even get a republican senate. SOunds good huh? We get all this liberalism and a good chance of nothing to show for it.
Nonetheless, I intend to vote on November, but if the strategerie doesn't change after that, I'm not going to the polls in '04.
I have a question for you. As you know, we are looking back with 20/20 hindsight at all of the terrorist activities, particularly those on September 11th, and we're trying as hard as we can to learn whether or not we had all the clues we needed to learn of those attacks in advance, and stop them from happening.
My question is this: Looking back now, in hindsight, have we had sufficient clues presented to us that would have told us in advance of the hijacking of our conservatism? Had we looked at them in a different light, would we have known that conservatism was to be hijacked and, therefore, could we have taken action to prevent this hijacking of conservatism?
When I heard about the Bush administration's latest flip-flop - on global warming - I went to the databases, conducted exhaustive research, and concluded that we should have seen this coming.
The evidence that this was coming has been abundantly clear, going all the way back to June, 2001 in this BBC headline, "Scientists Warn Bush On Global Warming." Here's an excerpt, "U.S. president George W. Bush has been told by leading scientists that climate change is real and getting worse. Their White House commission report is now being viewed by the president, as he prepares to face European leaders angered by his attack on the Kyoto protocol."
Let's move to August 4, 2001 - headline Washington Post, "McCain, Lieberman Urge Greenhouse Gas Curbs - Senators Press Bush on Global Warming." That story outlined how Bush was influenced by McCain and Lieberman - two interesting names, when you look at the politics of this. Guess who doesn't have an issue now on this? McCain, Lieberman, Gore and the Democrats. But don't misread any enthusiasm here. I still disagree with this whole business of how you broaden your coalition, because we're taking issues away from them, but we're advancing something that need not be advanced.
Our next story comes from August 6, 2001 in the Washington Post, "Bush: Warming Plan Likely, Says Aide. Card is Optimistic Kyoto Alternative Will be Ready by Fall." Colin Powell is prominent in this story - another interesting political player to pop up on this subject.
We move on to the Washington Post, February 14, 2002, "Bush Touts Greenhouse Gas Plan." Here's an excerpt, "President Bush today will unveil his long-promised proposals for combating global warming." Then on the next day, February 15, 2002, Washington Post, headline, "Bush Unveils Global Warming Plan. President's Approach Focuses on New Technology, Incentives for Industry." It was all right here in front of us, if we had been paying attention, folks.
And in the midst of all this, there's this story in Monday's Los Angeles Times, "A Natural Split with Bush, and Many Quit." This is a story about James Furnish, an evangelical conservative who voted for Bush, and plans to do the same in 2004. He was a deputy chief of the U.S. Forest Service. He left the government last fall at a substantial financial sacrifice because he was frustrated by what he called the Bush team's, "strident pro-development philosophy and unwillingness to even listen to his perspective." He quit because nobody was listening to him. I wonder how he feels today?
So, folks, this is what appears to be the hijacking of conservatism. Could it have been prevented, looking back in hindsight?
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_060302/content/stack_b.guest.html
Yeah right. Hillary, Ted, and Jesse would push through a tax cut, give the UN the finger on global taxation, and say that the 2nd amendment is an individual right.
Your beating the chains on your back self-flagellation act gets tiresome.
Looks Rush doesn't like being relevant anymore. Oh well as someone on the other thread said, money is not the main concern for Rush, power is.
And it looks like Rush doesn't like W. not following his advice 100% and keeping a 75% approval rating.
Temper tantrums are never pretty.
"And darkness covered the earth, and gross darkness the people."
However you feel about GWB, every thinking person must admit one thing. He's turned his broken glass conservative base into a mess. Many, many of us are truly pissed off and feel betrayed. It's one thing after the next with this admin.
God bless Rush. He's taking a very controversial stance and has the balls to give his concern for popularity the back seat because he's a conservative GIANT that won't sell himself out.
If only our politicians would be so bold and put their country before their ass. It's about time some conservative started holding our back stabbing politicians accountable. I say burn the f***ing party down if this is what it's become.
SING IT TO ME RUSH
I dont like GW's not calling a spade a spade as far the terrorists within the Palestinian Authority go but I comprehend that he is playing the game.
I wish he wouldnt but....ahhh what do I know?
Anyway...
For someone to say they arent gonna vote in 2004 is lame.
Go vote for the person who you feel is the closest thing to a real American.
Hmm lets' see who's wrong and who's right? Well,, let's see a man who has been an unapologetic supporter of conservatism for the last 13 years, never once waivering.
Or is it the guy who said "don;t balance the budget on the backs of the poor", who lauded his highest ever spending on education by the federal government, the "compassionate (as opposed to what?) conservative" the guy who said Yasser Arafat "is a partner for peace" who said the "Saudis are our friends" the guy who defended affirmative action in court. The guy who is going after "racial profiling" the guy who wants steel tarriffs, the guy who wants amnesty for illegals, the guy who signed the farm bill, the guy who federalized the airport employees, the guy who refused to go after any CLinton corruption, and the guy who says global warming is real and a man made problem????
There is something going on what is it?
Yeah one guy sticking to his principles and another guy abandoning his. Can you guess which is which?????
Mega dittos!
I admire a guy who stands up for his principles much more than a guy who says my party (president) right or wrong.
And Rush has bought it hook, line and sinker. As I posted on the other thread, I highly suspect Rush and Drudge are going after O'Reilly. And considering that O'Reilly just ripped Rush in his talking points, this is becoming more and more about ratings, not conservative ideas.
Uhuh and on what basis do you reach this conclusion?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.