Posted on 12/15/2007 9:22:53 AM PST by TheEaglehasLanded
BTTT
Well .. maybe not .. but since he’s an underling .. I doubt it would be public. I’ve never known Bush to berate anyone in public.
Yep, the US Senate rejected the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=105&session=1&vote=00205
And that’s a fair take on it IMO. I would expect some clarification if that were the case though.
The problem for me is that there doesn’t seem to be anyone pleading the case of reason at these conferences. Every nation on the planet lines up behind blithering loonacy and even we seem rather timid to stand up and say this is nonsense, and here are the reasons why.
How can we ever prevail using this tactic?
We should be lining up scientists by the thousands to lay out an alternative view on all this. Instead we scamper around like church mice trying not to be noticed.
No we didn’t sign on, but we made it look like it’s only a matter of time before we will.
UNANIMOUSLY,95-0.
At least he wasn't spending any more of my bucks on socialists programs. He sees a buck, he wants to spend it. He's drunk with spending power.
Well .. the state dept has always believed they were superior to any American President - and therefore they are willing to challenge Bush’s authority - as far as I’m concerned, it’s just more of the Bush-derangement syndrome.
But .. even if somebody at the meeting had “signed on” - wouldn’t Congress have to ratify such an agreement ..?? And .. if that’s true .. “signing on” could end up being worthless.
What a brilliant move by Bush. This is actually a play from the Clinton 1997 play book. In 1997, the Senate, in a 95-0 vote, acknwledged that global warming was bogus and Kyoto was an economic disaster if allowed to be enacted. However, Clinton sighed the treaty and was able to say he did his part.
If Bush can negotiate a treaty similar to Kyoto before his term expires, he will force the Democratic controlled Senate to act, or react. In other words, it puts the Dems in the hot seat as to either ratify the treaty and guarantee economic disaster or run away from it and thus infuriating their base.
If Bush is as smart as I hope he is, he will quickly sign a Kyoto type treaty in 2008 and “give in” to the demands of Algore and the UN warm mongers and force the Dems’ hand. It would be fun to watch how the Dems agonize over this political hot potato.
>>>Did anybody even READ the article? It has got JACK to do with Bush and basically the U.S. committed to NOTHING. Good Lord, take your conspiratorial, nonsensical rantings back to DU where they belong. The brainpower and reading comprehension on this forum is all but gone. It would be laughable if it weren’t so freakin sad.
Hear Hear! I’ve read multiple threads on this story and each one is the same. People read the headline and stop, collapsing into paranoid hysterics over the “betrayal” of making a deal at Bali. That it was a “deal” that agreed to absolutely nothing of substance goes over their heads.
Have most everybody who can critically read a story been banned, or just given up.
As long as the Senate refuses to ratify this or any other treaty, this is meaningless. Clinton signed on to Kyoto I, but nobody in the Senate voted for it. That’s the key to this nonsense.
That’s actually debatable. Our Congress did not sign off when Clinton signed us on to the International Criminal Court. It depends on how the whole thing is framed.
BTW, I agree with the tone of your State Department Comments. Most of the State Department stays on through administration after administration.
I doubt that you are very encouraged to hear that our rep stated that we will be signing on down the road. I sure wasn’t.
According to Rush’s comments the day after the event, our agreement “was only an agreement to agree later” .. with no timeframe involved. I don’t think the Bali group got as much from us as they think they got.
If by chance Fred Thompson gets in - I’m hoping (but not holding my breath) that he will have learned the errors of the Bush admin and do some major housecleaning.
Also .. I heard Hugh Hewitt talking about Mitch McConnell - and saying he’s really the leader in the senate and that the 70bn the president wanted - Mitch delivered - and without a timetable. Some of the repubs are doing a great job in congress.
In fairness, some of Bush’s failures haven’t been his alone. We’ve had a tag-team of sorts, with presidents passing the buck on down the road. Still, it has been quite frustrating to have ‘our guy’ in there and watch as some of this has taken place. My hope about Thompson seems the same as yours. Keeping my fingers crossed...
~~Anthropogenic Global Warming ™ ping~~
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.