The One Environmental Issue (Huck and McCain side with dems on Gorebull Warming)

The New York Times ^ | January 1, 2008 | The Editors

[2ndDivisionVet]

The overriding environmental issue of these times is the warming of the planet. The Democratic hopefuls in the 2008 campaign are fully engaged, calling for large — if still unquantified — national sacrifices and for a transformation in the way the country produces and uses energy. The Republicans do not go much further than conceding that climate change could be a problem and, with the notable exception of John McCain, offer no comprehensive solutions.

In 2000, when Al Gore could have made warming a signature issue in his presidential campaign, his advisers persuaded him that it was too complicated and forbidding an issue to sell to ordinary voters. For similar reasons, John Kerry’s ambitious ideas for addressing climate change and reducing the country’s dependence on foreign oil never advanced much beyond his Web site.

Times have certainly changed. It is not yet clear to what extent Americans are willing to grapple with the implications of any serious strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions: more specifically, whether they are ready to pay higher prices for energy and change their lifestyles to reduce their consumption of fossil fuels.

Polls suggest, however, that voters are increasingly alarmed, and for that Mr. Gore is partly responsible. His film, “An Inconvenient Truth,” raised the issue’s profile. Then came four reports from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which shared the Nobel Peace Prize with Mr. Gore, predicting catastrophic changes in weather patterns, sea levels and food production unless greenhouses gases can be quickly stabilized and then reduced by as much as 80 percent by midcentury.

There is also a growing appetite for decisive action — everywhere, it seems, except the White House.

[Our man in washington]

Thanks for providing a much-needed perspective on FR.

I’m a conservative because I’m NOT ideological. I go with where the facts take me. I’m not going to conclude that anthropogenic global warming doesn’t exist just because I’d prefer it didn’t exist. I have to read what the scientists are actually saying.

[HerrBlucher]

You mean scientitst such as these?

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.SenateReport#report

Or do you mean only those scientists that support the theory of anthro global warming?

[cogitator]

I’m not going to conclude that anthropogenic global warming doesn’t exist just because I’d prefer it didn’t exist. I have to read what the scientists are actually saying.

That's a very refreshing attitude around these parts.