BUSH DISMISSES ADMINISTRATION REPORT ON 'WARMING'

Drudge ^ | Drudge

[CoolGuyVic]

"'I read the report put out by the bureaucracy,' Bush said dismissivly... "

More to come, I'm sure

[Joe Hadenuf]

You are directing me to a government agency to learn about so-called global warming? No thanks. Global warming is junk science that comes with a global agenda. But you can give it all the credibility you wish. Be my guest.

[Grampa Dave]

Now, that you gave up on Rush, you will be happier and more productive. It is sad, but he decided to attract the Kooky Kore Siders and get into bed with them to savage our president on a 24/7 routine. I hope he enjoys his new friends, the ones he used to call Kooks up the first part of this year.

Stay away for at least a week and then give him one more chance. You will not believe how fast you hit the off button and go do something positive when he starts to whine and moan about GW and some Kristol non issue. You will feel better with your Rush free days.

[Redcloak]

Not meaning to dump any acid rain on anyone's parade, but the AP article Drudge is referring to does not say that Bush is repudiating this EPA drivel...

---

JUNE 04, 12:58 ET

White House Warns on Climate Change

By JOHN HEILPRIN
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush dismissed on Tuesday a report put out by his administration warning that human activities are behind climate change that is having significant effects on the environment.

The report to the United Nations, written by the Environmental Protection Agency, puts most of the blame for recent global warming on the burning of fossil fuels that release carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases into the environment.

But it suggests nothing beyond voluntary action by industry for dealing with the so-called ``greenhouse'' gases, the program Bush advocated in rejecting a treaty negotiated in Kyoto, Japan, in 1997 calling for mandatory reduction of those gases by industrial nations.

``I read the report put out by the bureaucracy,'' Bush said dismissively Tuesday when asked about the EPA report, adding that he still opposes the Kyoto treaty.

Japan ratified the international accord Tuesday and urged the United States and other countries to join efforts to fight global warming by cutting emissions of heat-trapping gases. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's Cabinet gave final approval to the Kyoto Protocol, which passed the upper and lower houses of Parliament last month.

The report submitted to the United Nations was the first by the Bush administration to mostly blame human activity for global warming.

``The changes observed over the last several decades are likely mostly due to human activities, but we cannot rule out that some significant part of these changes is also a reflection of natural variability,'' the report says.

``Human-induced warming and associated sea level rises are expected to continue through the 21st century,'' it says. ``Secondary effects ... include increases in rainfall rates and increased susceptibility of semiarid regions to drought.''

The report also says that despite some lingering scientific uncertainties, ``There is general agreement that the observed warming is real and has been particularly strong within the past 20 years.''

In the United States, changes over the next few decades are expected to put Southeastern coastal communities at greater risk of storm surges, prompt more uncomfortable heat waves in cities and reduce snowpack and water supplies in the West

The extents of aspen, eastern birch and sugar maple probably will contract dramatically in the United States, shift into Canada and cause loss of maple syrup production in northern New York and New England. Great Lakes water levels are expected to drop, which would affect navigation, water supplies and aquatic species. Production of U.S. hardwood and softwood products is projected to increase, mostly in the South. Fewer cold days and reduced snowpack do not bode well for the southernmost ski areas, where costs of snowmaking would rise.

Kalee Kreider, global warming campaign director for the National Environmental Trust, an advocacy group, said environmentalists want from the administration a climate change plan that joins with other nations in requiring carbon dioxide emission reductions and increased fuel efficiency requirements for vehicles.

``It's good they've done a 180-degree turn on the science. Given the audience, they pretty much had to,'' Kreider said. ``But we're still waiting for a plan that mandates pollution cuts.''

Last year, the White House described climate change as a serious issue but was undecided about how much of the problem should be blamed on human activities. President Bush favors a climate plan with voluntary measures to slow the rate of growth in gas emissions but allow them to continue to rise.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the administration remains convinced that the president's plan is the best path, for two reasons. He pointed to language in the report acknowledging ``considerable uncertainty in current understanding of how climate varies naturally.''

And, he said, Bush's plan will ``significantly reduce the growth of greenhouse gas emissions,'' while investing in new science and technology to curb them. Bush has proposed spending $4.5 billion on climate change science and technology.

European Union countries formally signed the Kyoto Protocol on Friday. It was negotiated in 1997 to stem pollution and global warming; President Bush has rejected it. The ratification by Japan and the 15 EU countries at the headquarters of the United Nations represented a major step toward putting the treaty into force.

---

George Bush and the White House are still on the side of the environmentalist whackos. As I stated yesterday in another thread, this isn't truly a flip-flop since he's always embraced the theory of global warming. "Oh! But Red... He refused to sign up to the Kyoto Treaty." Are you confident that had Kyoto been just a little less heavy handed, Bush would still have rejected it? And should a watered down treaty come before him, are you confident that he'll reject "Kyoto-lite"? I'm not. It is still the position of this government that human activity is to blame for the rise in global temperature that's been going on since the 17th Century. Do you want Bush holding such a view?

[LisaFab]

no comment on Regean's actual signing of the ozone depleting treaty ? Should we have evicted Reagan ?

Good catch. Reagan always said: take what we can now, and come back for the rest later.

[Poohbah]

Small problem: most of those folks are civil service and are legally protected from politically-motivated reprisal. In practice, this means firing ONE misbehaving employee is almost impossible; a wholesale brooming is never gonna happen without Congressional assent, and Bush won't get it unless he can get a cloture-proof majority in the Senate.

[concerned about politics]

Absolutely and maybe even more so if we allow them to have any impact.

[3D-JOY]

'98, those were different "good old days"!

[vaudine]

He should dismiss many at EPA as well as their report. Even the report is not a strong endorsement of greenhouse gas theory.

vaudine

[Tuor]

no comment on Regean's actual signing of the ozone depleting treaty ?

This may come as a shock to you, but I believe that some gasses deplete the ozone, and should be restricted. You'll notice that the restrictions were not outrageously expensive and did not give the Environmentalists that much ammunition.

Furthermore, and I guess this is the stuff you want me to get into: Reagan had proven himself to be a Conservative at heart. Nearly all of his actions advanced the cause, or at least didn't do anything to hinder it. Bush has taken on liberal issue after liberal issue, signing laws that were clearly unconstitutional, and refusing to use his veto over anything: his dedication to conservative and small-government issues is in question, maybe not to you, but to many on the Right.

At a time when we are seeing government power expand by leaps and bounds, this report comes to light, which will eventually be used to expand the government further via new regulations, laws, taxes, and policies.

This report will energize large portions of the Left, and the administration inaction in the face of its own admition will infuriate and galvanize them, even if they are hypocrites about the whole thing.

IMO, Reagan would never have let this report see the light of day.

Tuor

[PhiKapMom]

Get with it! I am a Republican and I just gave up my "Conservative" label because of folks like you. What an insult -- I have never voted Democrat or 3rd Party in my life and never will. You should have checked my postings. I quit listening to Limbaugh way before this -- I don't like arrogant, pompous people who talk non-stop about golf, who they know, cigars and use the NY Times, LA Times, and Washington Post for sources.

You have the political insight of a knat! I spent countless hours volunteering for Bush in 1994 and the remainder of his campaigns and will be right there in 2004! Guess you didn't notice that about my postings either. If you think that Rush is helping the cause of our campaign to Take Back the Senate and Keep the House, then you need to rethink. One issue people are not friends of the Republican Party because they don't seem to ever be satisfied! All they do is complain and whine that they don't get their way.

Want to go one on one with me in a debate about Pres Bush and the Republican Party -- fire away. I am a long time member and activists and I don't take kindly to a remark inferring if I don't like limbaugh that I am going to vote RAT! I WILL SHOUT IT OUT -- I DON'T LIKE WHAT LIMBAUGH HAS TURNED INTO -- HE IS NO FRIEND OF THIS ADMINISTRATION AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY -- END OF SHOUT!!!!!

Happy now?

[marajade]

If you look at the report most of the data from which they compiled for the charts is through the year 2,000. That would indicate to me that it was mostly the Clinton administration that wrote it.

[texlok]

I'm very glad he's avoiding Kyoto, but still, the whole situation is weird.

He is basically dismissing the work of those under him, which is a little bizarre. He picks certain people for certain jobs, they do their jobs, report whatever it is they are going to report, and then he basically says to us "just ignore them". Sounds like a big waste of taxpayer money, or he doesn't care what those under him think, or he's not really in charge. I thought some of their stuff was a little ludicrous (okay a lot of it) but for him to just blame bureaucrats (ones that he had a hand in picking) is a bit silly. They are part of his administration.

[marajade]

Well the AP got it right... Thanks...

[Joe Hadenuf]

I WILL SHOUT IT OUT -- I DON'T LIKE WHAT LIMBAUGH HAS TURNED INTO -- HE IS NO FRIEND OF THIS ADMINISTRATION AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY

I am telling you it's a conspiracy against Bush.

[marajade]

Oops UPI not AP

[TYVets]

The bureaucracy is getting bigger

This thread is growing faster than I can read it, maybe after midnight........

[Humidston]

AMEN! Christy didn't do her job. But that's no surprise to those of us who keep up with the record. A RINO by any other name is still a RINO...

[Grampa Dave]

Welcome back and another well done job of exposing the Bravo Sierra of the NY Slimes. We are missing this good reporting here on FR. Too many of the Kore Siders are looking for any good lie to "Say, that did it! I will never vote for Frat Boy again. He is just too liberal. He is losing his Kore of Kook siders, actually they call themselves the CORE.

Well, if they are the core, it is rotten and time for Kooky KOREaddectomies! Replace them with people who like GW and will vote for him. I welcome the new conservatives who are replacing the Kooky Kore!

[Tuor]

#404 directly contradicts you.

I'll repeat myself, just this once...

I *quoted from the report itself*. The thing that is causing all this uproar. My beliefs stem from what it said in its *first paragraph*, which, as I said, I quoted straight from the report.

So, #404 does not contradict me, it contradicts the report itself. If the author of that post wants to argue with those who wrote the report, then that's fine with me. I don't care.

For myself, I choose to doubt that a report would lie about something so basic in the first paragraph of an introduction which is all that most people will read of it (it is a long report).

Why don't you just go and read the Introduction, then you can cut and paste from it and tell us all how it is lying.

Tuor

[Howlin]

You're a little late to the party, pal.