Posted on 04/16/2008 2:26:41 PM PDT by rightinthemiddle
(The Politico) President Bush has laid out a new global warming policy that seeks to stop the growth of greenhouse gas emissions by 2025, but the lack of a mandated cap on carbon emissions has led Democrats to blast the proposal as falling well short.
The reaction from Democrats _ in advance of the Bush announcement on global warming this afternoon _ comes as no surprise. Democrats have used climate change as a bludgeon to bash Republicans, yet have been unsuccessful in pushing legislation with mandatory caps on carbon emissions.
"After seven years of denying the seriousness of the climate crisis and delaying tough action to save the planet, President Bush finally will discuss the subject," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said. "With just nine months left in his term, the White House has already made clear that the Presidents announcement today will not reverse his record on global warming before he leaves office."
Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) said the plan was "too little, too late."
The Bush administration clearly believes unrealistic mandates and carbon taxes will harm the economy, and he warns Congress against taking such actions.
"We believe we need to protect our environment. We believe we need to strengthen our energy security," Bush says, according to advance excerpts of his speech. "We believe we need to grow our economy. And we believe the only way to achieve these goals is through continued advances in technology."
The push to reduce emissions will focus on incentives for power plants to reduce their pollution. Bush also plans to push for increases in use of nuclear power.
But top Democrats charged with writing global warming legislation say waiting until 2025 means allowing 17 more years of damaging growth of greenhouse gas emissions.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
In the meantime, envirowacko policies are destroying our economy.
Good. Now hopefully Bush will wake the f#$k up, realize that the left will hate him no matter what he does, and act like a conservative for what remains of his term.
The Nutcases:
http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/bush-global-warming-47041608
Noticed the website describes itself as “The Consumer’s Guide to the Green Revolution.”
Unfortunately, he hasn’t realized it for the past 7 1/2 years.
It’s a shame.
Bush Announces Greenhouse Gas Strategy — Surprise! It’s Bad.
http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/04/bush-announces.html
I have a good idea.......
Lets have all our farmers start growing corn for gas. The world don’t need no stinkin grain. We have sushi!
Funny, I see it as too much, too soon.
Just before he hopped aboard the Archer Daniels Midland corporate jet to fly to LA for a quick fundraiser at David Geffen's forty-thousand square foot Malibu beach shack.
If Obama's elected, all of the corn fields will be converted to arugula.
I am looking for the day when BDS is listed in the medical journals and accepted by the medical establishment as a legitamate mental disorder.
By the time 2025 rolls around, we'll be in another mini ice-age.
Interesting how the Dems are bloviating about the delay, yet are doing nothing as Medicare will start going bankrupt in about 10 years.
ROLFLMAO
Unfortuately, the food riots and unrest emanate from fighting Global Warming not any actual Global Warming! The unintended consequences of Democrat Policies are unsurprising:
This green thing has gotten way out of control and into the realm of stupid. Policy today is driven by people that are more like activists than rational leaders looking at feasible and reasonable solutions to real problems. These buffoons chase ghosts and have fictional answers to made up problems. But yes, you are right, there is a real tangible cost associated with this stupidity. Every subsidy builds in a market inefficiency. Every one of these laws and programs costs money that could be used elsewhere but is obviously best spent on accomplishing nothing. There is a cumulative effect, and eventually green subsidized power, light-bulbs, paper recycling, etc etc etc will add up and seriously burden us even though indirectly and largely unnoticed by the average consumer. Like paper recycling and many other nonsense "feel good" programs advocated by politicians, almost always nothing for the environment is accomplished. Environmentalism today is like buying a pet rock, can of fresh air, or a stiffened dog leash with the sales pitch that you're walking an invisible dog. They are essentially marketing ploys that sell a nifty little gimmick, but it's neither science nor economics that's driving this in near all cases. The sales pitch is always the same and fallacious, "appeal to emotion."
Bush bends over on ANWR, and carries Al Gore’s water. Some “conservative”.
TO MUCH, TO SOON!!!!
Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) said the plan was "too little, too late."
You know, people can have all the money and material possessions in the world, but still be total morons. Climate change is caused by the Sun; it has nothing to do with greenhouse gases. It is very sad to see both sides of the aisle arguing which side is more stupid!
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.