From the artcile: ''We seek your leadership,'' Kevin Conrad told the Americans. ''But if for some reason you are not willing to lead, leave it to the rest of us. Please get out of the way.''
This is the weakest quote in the article. Doesn't Conrad realize that by not ratigying Kyoto, we are providing leadership? If he doesn't like the direction we are hoing, its a free world and he can do whatever he wants.
1 posted on
12/17/2007 5:00:02 AM PST by
NRG1973
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 next last
To: NRG1973
To: NRG1973
I wish I had been the US representative at this stupid event.
My response would have been "Well %$#& you!" before walking away laughing.
4 posted on
12/17/2007 5:06:43 AM PST by
SIDENET
(Hubba Hubba...)
To: NRG1973
''We have learned a historical lesson: if you expose to the world the dealings of the United States, they will ultimately back down,'' he said.
5 posted on
12/17/2007 5:07:43 AM PST by
EBH
(Loose lips sink ships.)
To: NRG1973
We should lead. Conrad is right, but not about the direction. We should be the first to get out of the UN.
6 posted on
12/17/2007 5:10:49 AM PST by
Smokin' Joe
(How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
To: NRG1973
"....the way was cleared Saturday for adoption of the ''Bali Roadmap", after a dramatic half-hour that set the stage for a grinding two years of climate talks to come." These talks will accomplish nothing, will change nothing, because in the end this nation will not sacrifice it's growth and prosperity for that of other nations based on a plan that is grossly unfair and intended, in the end, to accomplish the Socialist plan of wealth redistribution. That aside, the schism between the pro and anti human caused GW theorys grows wider by the day and will provide ample ammunition for us to use against the nut bag gloom and doomers.
To: NRG1973
has any one seen an estimate of the life style impacts of a these kind of reductions? I’m not looking for one of those silly carbon offset calculaters. I’d like to see something along the lines of this is how much we would have to reduce and this is what that would mean to our life styles. How much would we have to reduce the size of our houses, what would the typical automobile look like, how many fewer flights would be allowed?
10 posted on
12/17/2007 5:14:21 AM PST by
DugwayDuke
(Ron Paul - building a bridge to the 19th century.)
To: NRG1973
Don’t dis my compact florescent light bulbs, BRO!
11 posted on
12/17/2007 5:14:27 AM PST by
wolfcreek
(The Status Quo Sucks!)
To: NRG1973
From the second google hit:
Kevin Conrad is executive director for the Coalition for Rainforest Nations, an. intergovernmental initiative which seeks to better align market incentives ...
12 posted on
12/17/2007 5:14:29 AM PST by
palmer
To: NRG1973
Did they chant
BURN THE UNBELIEVERS! KILL THE HERETICS!"?
13 posted on
12/17/2007 5:15:31 AM PST by
Travis McGee
(---www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com---)
To: NRG1973
“we seek your leadership. but if for some reason you are not willing to lead, leave it to the rest of us. please get out of the way.”
???
14 posted on
12/17/2007 5:15:48 AM PST by
ripley
To: NRG1973
But if for some reason you are not willing to lead, leave it to the rest of us. Please get out of the way.' Rather impertinent, coming from someone who is no doubt going to be looking for heavy US funding, to support this socialist boondoggle. Sort of like a penniless son, blaming and haranguing his parents for money, imho. If this really were about the purported dangers of "climate change," there would be no exceptions or allowances for any part of the world.
To: NRG1973
I would wear those boos as a badge of honor...
17 posted on
12/17/2007 5:23:46 AM PST by
Vaquero
(" an armed society is a polite society" Heinlein "MOLON LABE!" Leonidas of Sparta)
To: NRG1973
From the artcile: ''We seek your leadership,'' Kevin Conrad told the Americans. ''But if for some reason you are not willing to lead, leave it to the rest of us. Please get out of the way.'' Hey, if the guy from the country with zero industry wants to make a symbolic statement and ratify Kyoto, go right ahead, his country is free to remain a zero industry country for as long as it wants.
Those of us who actually have economies can feel equally free to differ.
To: NRG1973
19 posted on
12/17/2007 5:24:53 AM PST by
Vaquero
(" an armed society is a polite society" Heinlein "MOLON LABE!" Leonidas of Sparta)
To: NRG1973
"Please get out of the way."
Done.
20 posted on
12/17/2007 5:28:09 AM PST by
Libloather
(Hillary donors find their way to the cover of Time. And the very next day they're doing it...)
To: NRG1973
21 posted on
12/17/2007 5:28:41 AM PST by
SkyPilot
To: NRG1973
Last month, the Peoples Public of China became the world’s number one largest producer of “greenhouse gases”.
Our own role in generating these gases is falling. Less every year.
China’s is growing rapidly.
China should no more get a waiver from the most stringent enforcement of every “global warming” restriction, than should for example ... India.
Anything else, is simply yet another scheme to hobble the USA.
To: All
If they want to leadership, maybe we should lead them to Cuba or Venezuela? I’ll be one of the millions lined up to watch the UN pack up and move.
23 posted on
12/17/2007 5:34:57 AM PST by
newnhdad
To: NRG1973
Glenn ReynoldsTHE A.P. GETS IT WRONG ON KYOTO AGAIN:
"The U.S. is the only major industrial nation to reject Kyoto. President Bush contended the emissions cuts would harm the U.S. economy, and should have been imposed on China, India and other fast-growing poorer economies."
We've been over this whole thing before, and more than once: "On July 25, 1997, before the Kyoto Protocol was finalized (although it had been fully negotiated, and a penultimate draft was finished), the U.S. Senate unanimously passed by a 950 vote the Byrd-Hagel Resolution (S. Res. 98),[40] which stated the sense of the Senate was that the United States should not be a signatory to any protocol that did not include binding targets and timetables for developing as well as industrialized nations or "would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States". On November 12, 1998, Vice President Al Gore symbolically signed the protocol. Both Gore and Senator Joseph Lieberman indicated that the protocol would not be acted upon in the Senate until there was participation by the developing nations.[41] The Clinton Administration never submitted the protocol to the Senate for ratification."
You have to wonder, though, why people bother to listen to the Associated Press when it can't get basic bits of recent history right.
24 posted on
12/17/2007 5:35:35 AM PST by
sono
(Hillary's Campaign Theme Song? Donovan, "Season of The Witch")
To: NRG1973
If only we had a gonadic president our atendees would snap their attache cases shut and storm out of the meeting place!
A gonadic president would do all in his power (along with his vice-president) to mount the bully pulpit that comes with the job and announce his intent to pull our nation out of the cesspool known as the UN and commence drilling for oil in the so-called 'pristine wildnerss'. He'd flush them out of Flushing Meadow, he'd recall our Ambassador to unfriendly nations, (practically all of them) he'd shut down the border, he'd recall our ambassador to disgraceful Mexico and place a moratorium on ALL immigration to the United States until all those illegals here are sorted out and kicked back across the border from whence they came
That is, of course, if a gonadic president sat in the oval orifice today!
Not to fear, Empress Hitlery stands ready to take charge and make our lives even more miserable, and if not her, then Osama bin Bama will build a mosque on every street corner even if he has to remove the gas station currently occupying those corners.
25 posted on
12/17/2007 5:37:18 AM PST by
fweingart
(Life's a bitch. So why vote for one?)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson