Digging deeper: The enviro-nitwit-ization of the GOP

MichelleMalkin.com ^ | December 13, 2007 | Michelle Malkin

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Well, fun was had by all yesterday covering the stultifying Schoolmarm and the GOP candidates in Iowa. Fred Thompson earned his gold medal for refusing to follow Schoolmarm’s order for a show of hands on an inane global warming question. Now, let’s dig a little deeper.

As I noted yesterday, the rest of the leading GOP candidates’ responses to Schoolmarm’s global warming query demonstrate a rather disturbing greening of the party. And not just mild green. But bright, neon, Gore green. Total enviro-nitwit-ization. Can these guys really belong to the same party as stalwart, anti-fearmonger Sen. Jim Inhofe? Have they not been briefed on NASA’s shenanigans? Like John Stossel says: “What you think you know may not be so.”

Look at the screenshot Allah captured of the exact moment Schoolmarm asked the candidates to raise their hands if they “believe global climate change is a serious threat and caused by human activity.” I lightened, annotated, and labeled the pic for ease of scrutiny:

4hands.jpg

Faster than Al Gore’s Gulfstream, the hands of Giuliani, Huckabee, and McCain shot straight up in agreement with the First Commandment of Global Warming: Thou Shalt Blame Man. What about Romney? As Allah sharply noted (he’s also got video), Mitt’s mitt waffled at “half-hearted half-mast”–before he sheepishly turned it into a clap for Thompson.

You want to cringe some more? Here’s the relevant portion of the transcript of the exchange.

MS. WASHBURN: Thank you.

I want to take on a new issue. I would like to see a show of hands. How many of you believe global climate change is a serious threat and caused by human activity?

MR. THOMPSON: Well, do you want to give me a minute to answer that?

MS. WASHBURN: No, I don’t. I –

MR. THOMPSON: Well, then I’m not going to answer it. (Laughter, applause.)

MS. WASHBURN: Okay.

MR. HUCKABEE (?): How about 30 seconds?

MS. WASHBURN: No, I — you know, I want –

MR. THOMPSON: You want a show of hands, and I’m giving it to you.

MS. WASHBURN: We’re going to follow up on that, but what I need to know is who believes global climate change is serious and caused by human activity.

MR. GIULIANI: I do.

MS. WASHBURN: And then we’ll talk in more detail about it.

MR. : Serious? It is.

MR. GIULIANI: I believe that global climate change is a serious –

(Cross talk.)

SEN. MCCAIN: And I think climate change is real, and I –

MR. HUCKABEE (?): Let’s have a chance about it –

(Cross talk, laughter.)

MS. WASHBURN: Go — I’m going to start with Senator McCain, come back to Mayor Giuliani.

SEN. MCCAIN: I’ve been involved in this issue since the year 2000. I have had hearings. I’ve traveled the world. I know that climate change is real.

But let me put — put it to you this way. Suppose that climate change is not real, and all we do adopt green technologies, which our economy and our technology is perfectly capable of. Then all we’ve done is given our kids a cleaner world.

But suppose they are wrong. Suppose they are wrong, and climate change is real, and we’ve done nothing. What kind of a planet are we going to pass on to the next generation of Americans? It’s real. We’ve got to address it. We can do it with technology, with cap-and- trade, with capitalist and free enterprise motivation. And I’m confident that we can pass on to our children and grandchildren a cleaner, better world.

MS. WASHBURN: Mayor Giuliani?

MR. GIULIANI: I agree with — I agree with John. Climate change is real. It’s happening. I believe human beings are contributing to it. I think the best way to deal with it is through energy independence.

MS. WASHBURN: Who doesn’t agree?

MR. GIULIANI: And I think energy independence is a –

MR. : That I agree with.

MS. WASHBURN: Who doesn’t agree?

REP. HUNTER (?): But he said “contributing” but not totally –

MR. : No — yes.

MR. : No.

MR. : Yeah.

MR. : Oh, okay.

MR. : Yeah.

MR. : Yeah.

MR. : Well, and I — (laughter) –

(Cross talk.)

REP. HUNTER (?): On our party, you’re getting closer –

SEN. MCCAIN: More than contributing, my friend –

MR. ROMNEY (?): Give us — give us each a chance.

MS. WASHBURN: I did.

MR. GIULIANI: And I think that our party should embrace this as an issue for us, in our positions –

MS. WASHBURN: Well, let me come at this way. Let me come at it this way. What impact on the economy would be acceptable in order to reverse global warming and greenhouse gas emissions?

Governor Romney?

MR. ROMNEY: Well, it’s going to help our economy because we’re going to invest in new technologies to get ourselves off of foreign oil, and as we get ourselves off of foreign oil, we also dramatically reduce our CO2 emissions. That’s good for the environment; it’s also good for our economy. Because $300 to $400 billion worth of oil a year from other people who use it against us, that’s bad for our economy, it’s also bad for the environment.

MS. WASHBURN: So then our –

MR. ROMNEY: We can do these things in a way that help both the environment and the economy and national security. That’s the beauty of what we’re talking about here, which is, yeah, is global warming an issue for the world? Absolutely. Is it something we can deal with by becoming energy independent and energy secure? We sure can.

But at the same time, we call it global warming, not America warming. So let’s not put a burden on us alone and have the rest of the world skate by without having to participate in this effort. It’s a global effort, but our independence is something we can do unilaterally.

No effort to challenge the fundamental premise of the question. Just Gore-approved soundbites and cheery “have our eco-cake and eat it, too” platitudes.

No full-throttled attack on radical eco-fear-mongering and the manipulation of environmental science for political gain.

Not even a mild-mannered “Well, the science isn’t settled and there is by no means a consensus.”

Is this the best we can do?

Bad enough we have border control cross-dressers leading the GOP presidential pack.

Must the Republican nominee also be a Gore-in-GOP clothing, too?

[JohnnyZ]

I know some people want him to be a clear “NO” on the question, but he’s not.

Mitt had his hand in the air.

He's a clear yes liberal.

Your attempt to equate the two is pitiful.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Mitt gave an answer in the debate. We can discuss what he actually said, or you can keep assuming that a hand-wave means an unequivical yes, when as Fred Thompson pointed out you can’t answer the question yes or no.

Anyway, for most people global warming is not a matter of “conservative” or “liberal”, it’s a matter of being right or wrong. There’s nothing “conservative” about NOT “believing in global warming”.

We need to stop politicizing science. The left has done that. We need to be open to serious scientific inquiry, and let the chips fall where they may when the truth is known. Trying to tie your political beliefs to one side or another is a liberal thing to do — I prefer to “believe” whatever the science actually says.

If they find clear evidence that something man is doing is harming the environment, I don’t expect to be called a liberal for “believing” it. I’m a conservative because the conservative philosophy is the right philosophy, leading to positive outcomes for our nation and it’s people.

As Rush says “conservatism has worked whereever it is tried”. If conservatism FAILED, I wouldn’t be one. I think though some people here would still be, because they are “conservatives” before they are thinkers.

I’m not afraid of smart people, because the smart choice is conservatism. Smart thinking people turn from liberalism to conservatism, not the other way around.

[JohnnyZ]

You’re the perfect Mitt-worshiper, spouting liberal platitudes ad infinitum!

[CharlesWayneCT]

I doubt most conservatives would consider the search for truth a “liberal platitude”. liberals tend to not want to search for truth.

[dennisw]

bttt

[steelyourfaith]

~~Anthropogenic Global Warming ™ ping~~