Republicans: still clueless about their own emissions

Tue, 2008-06-10 13:29Page van der Linden
Page van der Linden's picture

Republicans: still clueless about their own emissions

Republican Congressman Steve Pearce represents the second congressional district in New Mexico. The effect of climate change on nearly every aspect of life have been noted, and are predicted to be profound unless action is taken (reports ). However, Pearce's head is deep in the White Sands , because he's convinced that:

“The entire question of global warming is one that has a lot of myth associated with it and probably less science.”

Debate with Rep. Wilson (R-NM01), April 29, 2008, Los Alamos, New Mexico (video)

It's even sadder that his view is shared by 74% of his fellow Republican lawmakers.

Here are the results of a recent National Journalcongressional insiders poll “, in which both Democratic and Republican lawmakers were asked:

Do you think it's been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the Earth is warming because of man-made pollution?

 GOP National Journal poll global warming

In contrast:

Democrats, National Journal poll on global warming

Some quotes from Democrats:

“And there is plenty of proof–in changing weather patterns–to prove it.”

“Only the loonies think otherwise.”

“Yes, it's time to move beyond this debate and do something about it!”

Some quotes from Republicans:

“Reasonable people have doubts. For every Al Gore, there is an intelligent scientist armed with legitimate facts to debunk him.”

“In the '70s, the 'consensus of scientists' was that we were beginning global cooling. Now it is global warming. Excuse me if I am skeptical of this newest form of secular religion. Perhaps we should pause and take a breath before we drink the new Kool-Aid!”

“The Earth is warming, but we don't know whether it's caused entirely by humans or whether human actions can change it.”

In summary: Democrats prefer science and solutions, whereas the free market-touting Republicans are stumbling around their personal flat Earth, blissfully wallowing in Inhofian logic.

As New Mexico GOP Representative Heather Wilson said to Steve Pearce at the debate in Los Alamos:

[During an EPW hearing on climate change] I asked a question about the science… one of my colleagues said 'the science is already decided'. It bothers me that attitude prevails in some circles.”

I'd rather be in that circle than yours, Heather.

Previous Comments

Are you delusional? The republicans quotes were things like “We’re not really certain, and the science is still in it’s infancy, let’s not jump to conclusions” and the democrats sounded like “If she weighs the same as a duck, then she’s made of wood and therefor a witch … BURN HER!”

I don’t even live in the USA and it’s pretty obvious the democrats are answering what feels good and not what makes sense.

STOP THE PRESSES! REPUBLICANS HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS FROM DEMOCRATS!

Who knew?!

And just for Traciatim –

http://tinyurl.com/5vhzna

You gotta love that clip. It sums up the Warmenist Cult mindset so perfectly.

Yes Rob, that’s exactly what I was referring to. The logic in this post, the AGW science logic, and Holy Grail science logic all follow a very similar pattern.

“If CO2 is rising while temperature is rising, CO2 must cause temperature rise … oh wait, temperature stopped rising and CO2 is still going up? Well, it’s obvious that CO2 is still the primary driver, can’t you see? It’s YOUR FAULT!”

If the universe is willing and we really do see the next 30 or so years getting cooler on Earth I hope this madness finally stops and we can get back to reducing our impact because if the consumers reduced buying all the crap they don’t need there are plenty of resources for everyone, rather than the “Stop driving SUV’s, your killing the polar bears [even though they are thriving after hunting controls]”.

Page, I believe you are unduly political in your posts. You say:

“In summary: Democrats prefer science and solutions”

You don’t say. Interesting that it is a Republican governor in California who has enacted the most ambitious CO2 targets so far. Where are the Democratic governors on this issue? Just talking?

Do you actually want information on the climate policies of Democratic governors, or was that just a rhetorical question meant to divert our attention from the sorry record of Republicans in the Senate?

On the off chance that you or someone reading this actually wants to know the position of Democratic governors, I googled for “democratic governors climate.”

Top hit: “McCain Breaks with Bush on Climate Change”
Why did this come up for this search? Here’s why:
“Standing beside Oregon’s Democratic governor Ted Kulongoski, McCain made a sharp break with President Bush and argued the U.S. should adopt mandatory curbs on greenhouse gas emissions”

So that’s where one Democratic governor stands. (The article points out the position proposed by McCain and Kulongoski don’t go as far as the Lieberman-Warner bill)

The second hit is more directly on point, though rather dated, from 2006:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/2006-02-27-west-warming_x.htm?POE=TECISVA

“Half a dozen Western governors impatient for more federal action on global warming are mounting state campaigns to deal with climate change on their own.”

Those six include Schwatzenegger, who has earned a lot of respect for taking a principled stand that goes against the grain of his party’s national leadership. The Western Governors’ Association crosses party lines:
http://www.westgov.org/

Here’s their statement saying that climate change is real, poses real dangers to western states, and requires immediate action, but the needed changes also offer business opportunities:

http://www.westgov.org/wga/policy/06/climate-change.pdf

Among the sponsors of the resolution were Democratic governors:

Janet Napolitano (D-AZ)
Bill Richardson (D-NM)
Dave Freudenthal (D-WY)

Anyway, why exactly do you want to point out that Republican governors have also objected to the climate change inaction from both the Bush administration and the Republicans in Congress? Does that help the case for inaction?

It seems to me to do the opposite: much of America “outside the beltway” of D.C. “gets it” on climate, and it’s only the oil-soaked ideologues in D.C. that are out of touch. It’s expensive to run for Senator or President, and the oil industry lobbyists have a lot of pull in D.C. precisely because they have so much money to donate.

I’ll take a bipartisan alliance of governors over the Senate Republican caucus any day. If you are a climate “inactivist”, your best national leadership is Sen. Inhofe. Eek.

[x]

The Koch brothers have spent far more than even ExxonMobil to spread doubt and misinformation about the 97% scientific consensus on climate change in recent years — over $67 million on climate denial, in fact. Out of 13,950 peer-reviewed scientific journals, only 24 reject global warming. But the Kochs and...

read more