GOP Fears Terror, Dems Warming; Could Americans Be Farther Apart?

IBD Editorials ^ | 6/11/07 | MICHAEL BARONE

[mtnwmn]

GOP Fears Terror, Dems Warming; Could Americans Be Farther Apart?

Listening to the recent debates among the candidates, monitoring their Web sites and reading the poll numbers, one gets the impression that the Republican and Democratic primary electorates are living in two different nations — or the same nation that faces two very different threats.

The Republicans want to protect us against Islamist terrorists. The Democrats want to protect us against climate change. Each side believes the other's fears are largely imaginary.

Rush Limbaugh regularly treats global warming theories as a "hoax." A prominent political scientist dismisses Republican candidates' appeals as sounding "like the day after Sept. 11."

When asked about possible new attacks, Democratic candidates — with the exception of Hillary Clinton — talk about seeking international support and understanding. Asked about climate change, Republican candidates — with the exception of John McCain — talk about getting more information.

Both threats are, in different ways, known unknowns. We don't know where the next Islamist attack will come — Fort Dix? JFK Airport? — or when. We don't know the effects of warming temperatures, or at what rate they might become apparent. And we can't be sure whether our efforts to parry either of these threats will be availing.

We can try to track down loose nukes, shadow suspected terrorists, protect the very many vulnerable potential targets in our open society. But the terrorists only have to succeed once, and we must succeed every time.

[Puppage]

GOP Fears Terror, Dems Warming; Could Americans Be Farther Apart?

Terrorists or weather? Hmmmm

[WhiteGuy]

Divide and conquer...................

[AU72]

Democrats have been treating Katrina as THEIR 9-11.

[Lightcutter]

I’ll vote for the guys who protect me TODAY rather than the guys who want to protect me from somtething that MAY happen fifty years from now.

[jebeier]

Islamic terrorism is real

Global Warming is hoo-haa

Thousands of innocent people have been killed by Islamic terrorism

Global Warming has killed nobody.

[SolidWood]

Conservatives don’t “fear” terrorists. We realize the danger they pose to our country, we hate them and we are ready to fight them.

[GloriaJane]

Every time I hear of global warming, I think “global warming BACK UP!”

Or am I the only one who was taught in school that the worlds climate was warmer before the ice age, then it is now?

[deadrock]

Global Warming has killed nobody.

I think the wackos on the Left would argue that it has: tornados, hurricanes, tsunami...etc

[George W. Bush]

The bipartisan answer: terrorists cause global warming.

[Grateful One]

Whether he meant to or not, it seems that Mr. Barone has accurately described the difference between those who justly fear what they have seen (twin towers) and those who fear what they (secretly) want to see.

[Paradox]

How about this, we reduce our dependence on foreign oil, money from which finds its way to terrorists in the Middle East. We do this by investing in alternative energy sources. I like Nuclear Energy myself. 2 birds, one stone.

[Rudder]

Oh, this calls for a bipartisan solution.

[irv]

Conservatives don’t “fear” terrorists.

Good point. It's not just a contrast of differing fears. It's a contrast of completely different approaches to life: Rational response to real events vs hysteria over unrealistic fears.

[ex-snook]

Chertoff warns New York City to get ready for hurricane.

[IamConservative]

On September 11th, the United States was attacked by:

a. Global Warming
b. Islamic Extremists flying airplanes
c. Hillary’s girdle
d. I don’t know, I voted in Palm Beach county

[ex-snook]

"How about this, we reduce our dependence on foreign oil, money from which finds its way to terrorists in the Middle East. We do this by investing in alternative energy sources. I like Nuclear Energy myself. 2 birds, one stone. "

Of course you are right but if we did that, we would no longer need any presence in the ME. But we could have been on that path a long time ago. Apparently, politically, it is a non-starter.

[jebeier]

I think the wackos on the Left would argue that it has: tornados, hurricanes, tsunami...etc

The wackos would, yes. But their so-called "serious scientists" all poo-poo the notion that any particular weather event, even Katrina, was effected by Global Warming.

[jebeier]

The bipartisan answer: terrorists cause global warming.

No, you have it backwards. Global Warming causes Terrorism.

Global Warming reduces more and more of the earths formerly lush and green surface to sandboxes like the Middle East. It is in this environment that fundamentalist Islam flourishes...

You get where I'm going with this...

[Steve_Seattle]

"No, you have it backwards. Global Warming causes Terrorism."

Some version of that looney logic will prevail when Al Gore wins the Nobel Peace Prize and is declared Time magazine's Man of the Year. They will say that by alerting the public to the dangers of global warming, Gore is triggering changes in energy policy that will defuse political problems exacerbated by our reliance on Middle East oil.

Of course, this will all just be part of the Nobel Committee's and MSM's ongoing vendetta against Bush. We all know that Gore hasn't done a damn thing to promote world peace or earn Man of the Year, but that won't prevent him from getting the deuce. IMHO.