Posted on 05/14/2008 7:49:36 AM PDT by Dawnsblood
In his climate speech on Monday, Mr. McCain exhibited (as the press usually does) a complete lack of consciousness of the fact that evidence of warming is not evidence of what causes warming. Yet policy must be a matter of costs and benefits, adjusted for the uncertainties involved. Which brings us to today's irony: He who finds a six-figure earmark an affront to humanity is prepared to wave through a trillion-dollar climate bill without, as far as anyone can tell, a single systematic thought about costs and benefits.
He who sees "corruption" behind every campaign check goes all compliant when GE, DuPont and Ford chant that climate policy "will create more economic opportunities than risks for the U.S. economy."
Mr. McCain argues that green energy mandates will leave us better off whether or not man-made global warming is real. This is an error that Mr. Romney wouldn't make – and one Al Gore makes all the time. Yes, hole-digging can be profitable if government subsidizes hole-digging. For society, however, there is only cost – measured in the labor and resources diverted to hole-digging from activities that actually fulfill the wants and needs of people.
Let's see: An estimate by the International Energy Agency holds that, to ward off the worst of climate change, the world by 2030 must build 34 hydroelectric dams the size of China's Three Gorges Dam, 510 nuclear plants, 289,000 wind turbines, 6,800 biomass plants and 714 fossil fuel plants equipped with unproven CO2 capture technology.
None of this will happen; if it did, it would merely slow progress toward a more carbon-rich atmosphere; and (of course) any impact on climate would be purely speculative.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
The science is settled, and we have reached a concensus: John McCain is an idiot.
Anyone who disagrees is a denier.
Good article with a political truth that a lot of conservatives here, along with Limbaugh, are obviously unable to grasp:
“’Nobody who seriously wants to be President in 2008 is going to question the “consensus” on global warming.”’
If McCain didn’t pay lip service to global warming, he would be vociferously attacked by the left as an unfeeling right-wing destroyer of the environment.
You have to take account of public prejudices if you are ever to achieve power to get things done - like the appointment of conservative judges.
Doubt it. By then the Republican Party will be outlawed.
Only those having any longer the DNA for survival have the option of doing nothing. We would not be here today if our ancestors were such primadonnas and followed such utterly suicidal foolishness.
Finally, contrary to your assertions, there is not the slightest indication that McCain would appoint anything but conservative judges to the Supreme Court. You can be damn sure that the judges - and there will be some appointed by the next President - will NOT be conservative if appointed by Clinton or Obama.
I have been very active in posting about the dangers Obama represents. He is clearly a triple threat: black power advocate, Communist, and Muslim, under the guise of a smiling little boy.
It’s not November yet. If it’s McCain vs. Obama in November, then we’ll all have to decide what to do. Meantime, we haven’t yet had either of the conventions. And while I don’t see any alternatives on the horizon, we can always hope for something to happen to change the picture between now and then.
Your reply was not depressing as was the original post. Thank you.
Nothing except his ACTIONS, as opposed to his rhetoric, over the last several years.
I’d trust he was just paying lip service if he didn’t oppose drilling in ANWR and if he wasn’t pushing cap-and-trade.
I thought Romney did a much better job of treading the fine line of pandering on this issue.
Good post, and you are correct. Same with illegal immigration.
They don't need to outlaw it. They have subverted it. The establishment will continue to load our primary with neo-socialist hacks and make sure the most wretched and repulsive betrayer wins with crossover voting and media support.
Any real conservative will be beaten to a pulp, often by our own side.
IMHO his IQ is somewhere between Body and Room temperature.
Can you back that statement with proof? If so, would you please show where that proof is found/ Thank You
Ole John at least mentioned nuclear energy. Now what will he say about the 3rd loss in a row for GOP House races? After all, he is supposedly our GOP leader now. Yet, I have not seen any help by him or the RNC for our House or Senate candidates having much impact. I will vote for ole John but really work for our Congressional candidates.
But any Republican who bases not voting for McCain (and in so doing helping to elect the ultra-liberal Obama) due to McCain's stance on global warming is really not paying attention to the important issues. There's no way we can afford what an Obama administration would do to this country.
Such as, MortMan, his out front ACTION in being an advocate and supporter of Iraqi Freedom - and particularly the Surge and Gen. Petraeus when it was hugely unpopular to do so...????
Is that "rhetoric", MortMan????
It is interesting that a man puts his Presidential ambitions second to emphatically doing what is right in defending this nation (in addition to spending 5 1/2 years in a hellhole of a North Vietnamese torture chamber/prison, refusing an early release until the other POW's were freed) and you term this "rhetoric"...
MortMan, I regret getting personal but you punched my button:
If you say that McCain's manifest actions of duty, honor and country are just "rhetoric", how about supplying us with some examples of your REAL actions, so that we inferiors can, in all humbleness better distinguish between action and rhetoric...
I believe that should be self-evident. It would just be an issue for the Dems to exploit to retain independents and conservative Dems.
Back to McCain and “global warming” -
Writing in Wednesday's (14 May) Wall Street Journal, Holman Jenkins Jr., the paper's business columnist, stated: “’Nobody who seriously wants to be president in 2008 is going to question the ‘consensus’ on global warming.’” (p. A19).
Jenkins goes on to write that the sense, however, is that “the fuss over warming is about to cool. Global mean temperatures have been flat for a decade...”
Jenkins echoes your observations on Romney: “It perhaps takes somebody steeped like Mr. Romney in real world analysis to find a footing against the media tide (on this).”
McCain-Feingold
McCain-Kennedy (back-burnered, but no legislative push to enforce the law and build the fence in its place)
Cap-and-Trade (McCain-Lieberman?)
Gang of 14
Actions, all.
I do not detract at all from his military service, nor do I detract from his support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. But neither will I allow anyone to attempt to bludgeon me with selective amnesia over the signature legislative acts and cabal formations that McCain has used to burnish his star over the last several years.
You say I punched your button, but all I did was cite the truth of McCain’s activities over the last 8 years. Perhaps that is something you should consider as you attempt to convince others to follow your line of thinking.
The only bludgeon is to yourself, through lacking - or disdaining - the perspective to realize that everything is possible with national security, and nothing is possible without it.
In other words, because I disagree with you I must be deficient.
Typical.
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.