Posted on 11/12/2007 5:21:11 PM PST by pissant
Perhaps the biggest fraud ever to be perpetrated onto the American people is Global Warming. Al Gore is just the symptom. If not given cover by a group of supposed climate scientists and other left-wing academics, Mr. Gore would be easily seen as the nutcase, phony alarmist that he is. Alas, nearly the entire left of the political spectrum has bought into this hoax, and more than a few ‘conservatives’ have also succumbed to the hysteria, including Newt Gingrich and Mike Huckabee.
Fred Thompson, at least since he started campaigning for the GOP nomination, has provided some biting remarks regarding this issue, including pointing out that Mars is experiencing Martian Warming, with nary a human influence (Richard Hoagland’s theories not withstanding).
But what did Fred do and say during his time in the Senate, representing the good folks of Tennessee?
Well for starters, Fred had this to say on April 23, 2002 during the Senate debates on the 2002 Energy bill:
"I would like to thank my colleagues for their statements and indicate my support for the agreement that we have reached with regard to Title X. A lot of hard work has gone into this agreement. It is my belief that there are still many uncertainties with regard to climate change. However, I also believe that the potential risks of climate change warrant study, research and technological development. This substitute to Title X goes a long way towards achieving those goals. This amendment also recognizes that there are many contributors to climate change beyond CO2, and I appreciate that black soot is included. (snip)
This would seem a fairly harmless statement, if one just skimmed over the Congressional Record. Unfortunately for Mr. Thompson, not everyone skims over it. Title X was part of Tom Daschle’s
(Excerpt) Read more at theamericanwriter2007.blogspot.com ...
Ping
..and this after all the buzz today about National Right to Life Committee’s possible endorsement-—very confusing IMO...
What the hell is NRTL thinking?
What in the world is wrong with all these so-called conservative organizations endorsing these stupid moderates.
And Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Rudy Giuliani, and John McCain, and Mitt Romney...
Oops... it said "conservatives."
Just another example of Thompson’s “conservative” record. Boo!! Hiss!!
Yes, I at least put Fred and Newt in that category...
Well, he did spend his days in office as part of the Centrist Coalition with Arlen and Olympia
ping
BTW, there were multiple spellings for El Cabong or Kabong—I chose the Northern Baja California spelling—would you believe Quick Draw McGraw is on Wikipedia LOL!
..fear of Hillary causes responses like this...
Everything is on Wikipedia these days. I miss the cartoons of yesteryear when I see the schmaltz that is currently broadcast.
I was watching youtube captured cartoons of Speedy Gonzalez with my daughter the other night. What a treat, and oh so politically incorrect. LOL
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Now they toss Rudy into the the mix as well.
that sounds about right. It’s been about 40 years since I’ve seen it. Time flies. LOL
And again, I want to know: Who's the best alternative to Thompson with regard to this issue? If you say Hunter, I'll believe it when I see evidence to support that there's a chance he's known or popular enough to win the nomination, let alone the presidency. His campaign certainly hasn't communicated his stance on the issue, as Thompson's has.
I don’t suppose that after 5 years the man might have looked at some of the lack of evidence supporting man-made global warming and the evidence that shows it is caused by the sun and maybe has just changed his mind?
Of all the things for a politician to change their mind on, might it not be OKAY for them to change their minds after reviewing more scientific evidence??
Much of the scientific studies that show the link between the sun, cosmic rays and clouds, which clearly refutes that CO2 is causing global warming, is very recent.
No... I guess that doesn’t matter and this is just an attempt to bash Thompson because he hasn’t always taken a position that conservatives take on this issue.
At least he is one of the few candidates currently saying he doesn’t believe man is causing global warming. Oh wait.. I’ll be Hunter has ALWAYS had the correct opinion.
Too bad he doesn’t stand a snowball’s chance on Mercury of getting elected.
Typical. And when conservatives run (like Tancredo and The Big DH), will the moderate organizations out there endorse them? I wouldn't hold my breath.
You missed the live FR-Hunter press conference I take it? It was the very first question he answered.
Q#1. Conservatives applauded the Senate when it voted a few years ago to toss out the Kyoto protocol from consideration. However, thanks to Al Gore and others it seems to be making a comeback. What is your position on so called Global Warming that is being pushed by so many on the left and is even creeping into the GOP now?
Hunter: While historic measurements of temperatures do indicate that warming has occurred [according the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration the mean temperature for the contiguous U.S. has increased by 1.1 degree Fahrenheit] the apportionment of warming to man’s activities versus the natural cycle is unclear. The Kyoto Protocol would have been disastrous for those who advocate less greenhouse gasses as well as Americans who want to maintain the industrial base of the United States.
Kyoto exempted Communist China and India from limitations. Thus, U.S. industry would be incentivized to move production to these two “smokestack” countries, thereby increasing pollution-per-product made.
I believe strongly in achieving energy independence for the U.S. This should be accomplished by cutting taxes on the production of alternative energy systems, including geothermal, nuclear, wind, solar, etc. In the meantime, ANWR should be open for U.S. petroleum development.
I reject Al Gore’s and others’ doomsday alarmism on the subject.
Hey, I’m all for people changing their mind to more conservative positions. No doubt about that.
Good post.
Don’t expect truth from the Duncanista`s.
Go Fred go!
I just post it. The chips fall where they do.
I'd have to disagree with that assessment.
Governor Mitt Romney on the Current Environmental Debate
Friday, Feb 23, 2007
Boston, MA – Today, Governor Mitt Romney issued the following statement on the current environmental debate. Saying that South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford was right on this issue, he continued:
"Unfortunately, some in the Republican Party are embracing the radical environmental ideas of the liberal left. As governor, I found that thoughtful environmentalism need not be anti-growth and anti-jobs. But Kyoto-style sweeping mandates, imposed unilaterally in the United States, would kill jobs, depress growth and shift manufacturing to the dirtiest developing nations."
"Republicans should never abandon pro-growth conservative principles in an effort to embrace the ideas of Al Gore. Instead of sweeping mandates, we must use America's power of innovation to develop alternative sources of energy and new technologies that use energy more efficiently."
Governor Romney opposed mandatory, Kyoto-like “global warming” regulations in Massachusetts, opting instead for voluntary, pro-growth measures to increase energy efficiency of businesses, reduce carbon emissions and improve the environment....(Office of Gov. Mitt Romney, "Romney Unveils Climate Protection Plan for Massachusetts," Press Release, 5/06/2004)
Yeah, you're just "fair and balanced" without any axe to grind, right? LOL
But...but...Fred’s your 2nd choice!
I missed the FR-Hunter press conference? Give me a break! Thompson made a scathing VIDEO excoriating global warming hysteria that was seen by all kinds of people who've never even heard of FR. And your guy Hunter? Well, gee, I MISSED the FR-Hunter press conference! *sheesh*
Just like you, I have a strongly preferred candidate.
Well, tell the bloggers to quit digging this stuff up and I won’t post it. LOL
lots of uncertainty regarding global warming.....
many things besides co2 need to be understood.....
needs further study......
All things I’d say and I don’t believe in global warming either.
..maybe the bloggers are on the Corleone Family’s payroll LOL!
Fred on Global Warming at youtube.
THOMPSON: Climate change is real. We have to take it seriously. We don't know the extent to which it changes. We don't know what the significance of it is going to be to us. We don't know how [inaudible]A lot of things we don't know yet. We have to find out the answers to those things and do what is necessary--on a global basis. The United States alone cannot solve the problem.
... But global warming is not going to be a problem that can be solved overnight.
If we start doing things drastically, economically, not only before we [inaudible] ... not only are we going to hurt our economy, it's not going to do any good with the Chinese and the Indians not participating.
So we've got to do it on a global basis. Sit down and do some things that make some sense.
Well, we announced prominently far in advance...and you are a freeper. It’s not everyday we get a presidential candidate on FR, even though we are the largest conservative forum out there.
Did you read Title X? I sure as hell hope you don’t say all those things.
And this is my protection money, I reckon. ;o)
LOL. Nice.
IMO, he is one of those riding the fence (unlike Huckabee who has jumped in whole-heartedly with Gore and Schwarzenegger’s cap-and-trade scam)
But, I have a problem with the folks who are going to go along with new laws, regulations and spending saying “well, if we’re wrong, at least we’ll have less pollution” (or similar statements). It is my understanding that is what Mitt did in Massachussets (link below)
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2004/05/07/romney_hedges_on_global_warming/
see some more truth in post 36
How did you uncover my secret?
There you go doing it in the wind again....
Beyond that, I saw Thompson in a crowded room in a meet-and-greet context where only a FOOL of a candidate would respond with remarks classifying the question itself as moronic.
I openly admit that I would prefer to hear Thompson say things like, "This is a 'problem' that's really a cyclical condition that's been a reality on this planet since long before recorded history and geological evidence of the ages indicates that what we do or don't do will have zero affect." Of course I'd rather ALL REPUBLICANS say that. But Thompson didn't say it, and neither has any other Republican candidate, sadly. I'm diasppointed.
But here's the deal. Thompson doesn't just say now because it's expedient that he pursues small, less-intrusive government options; he has a track record that demonstrates it. If I have to settle with a politician who even remotely validates the global warming hoax, I'd damned sure rather it be Thompson, a politician who hasn't made a habit of creating more and bigger government programs as the "solution" to all problems ala Romney and Giuliani.
I don't expect Thompson to be 100 percent right-on with regard to how I want him to be, but so far, he's batting a LOT better on the issues than the alternatives. More important, the philosophical princpiples of smaller government that he follows are better guides to how he will handle issues than sound-bites from be-nice-to-the-idiots meet-and-greet campaign stops.
In a thread about “Fred Thompson The Global Warming President” and responding to comments about Freds words on global warming the best that you can come up with is Title X sucks ?
Go away or I shall taunt you a second time.
Unlike the Kyoto Protocol, Romney's plan focuses on voluntary initiatives. The plan includes no enforcement mechanism for requiring attainment of the goals.
Some of the most economically punitive measures activist groups frequently propose to reach such goals, such as energy taxes and emission caps, are not included in his plan.
Romney made a special effort to convey that he personally had doubts about alarmist global warming theory, going so far as to attach a letter to the plan's final version suggesting he remains unconvinced that man-made greenhouse gases are an environmental problem.
No worries, I won’t expose ya.
As much as I love and adore Free Republic, and as much as I agree with you (which is totally) in saying that the global warming agenda is based on a hoax, I think that if Hunter is relying primarily on FR as a national campaign vehicle, he’s going to miss a lot of potential voters.
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.