Posted on 06/13/2010 7:15:25 PM PDT by rabscuttle385
Sen. John Kerry, D-MA, got lots of well-deserved grief during the 2004 presidential race for saying he actually voted for the War in Iraq before he voted against it.
But Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-SC, appears determined to give Kerry a real run as the Senate's champion flip-flopper. Last fall, I described the South Carolina GOPer as the densest Republican in the Senate because "he thinks he's brokering a bipartisan deal on cap-and-trade. What he's really doing is pulling the Democrats' fat out of the fire on the issue."
That deal didn't go anywhere, but more recently some sort of anti-global warming energy deal appears more likely, thanks in great part to the Gulf Oil Spill.
But now along comes Graham who, incredibly, manages to take both sides of the cap-and-trade/global warming issue within the same news conference, in response to questions from Mother Jones' Kate Sheppard.
The occasion was a news conference called by Sen. Richard Lugar, R-IN, to unveil his version of an energy bill, which Graham has decided to endorse. During the course of that discussion, Graham offered the following observation:
"The science about global warming has changed. I think they've oversold this stuff, quite frankly. I think they've been alarmist and the science is in question. The whole movement has taken a giant step backward."
Stunned, and mindful of Graham's vigorous advocacy of GOP action to combat global warming, Sheppard offered him an opportunit to clarify his statement.
"The public acceptance about global warming has changed," he said. Sheppard asked him the obvious followup: "Well, what do you think?"
Here's Graham's lengthy response, which Sheppard described as a "humdinger," which it is indeed:
"It makes sense to me that the planet is heating up because you can measure heat. It's not a stretch to say that what goes into the air is contributing to global warming, but I don't want to be in the camp that says I know people in Northern Virginia will never see snow.
"At the end of the day, I think carbon pollution is worthy of being controlled, whether you believe in global warming or not. I do believe that all the CO2 gases, greenhouse gases from cars, trucks, and utility plants is not making us a healthier place, is not making our society better, and it's coming at the expense of our national security and our economic prosperity.
"So put me in the camp that it's worthy to clean up the air and make money doing so. This idea that carbon's good for you. I want that debate. There's a wing of our party who thinks carbon pollution is okay. I'm not in that wing."
In a masterful piece of understatement, Sheppard concludes her report with this graph:
"This is quite different from what Graham has been saying for the past eight months. Last October, he co-authored an op-ed with John Kerry (D-Mass.) arguing that that 'climate change is real and threatens our economy and national security.' Now he's fumbling to figure out how to make it seem like he still cares—but not too much."
Perhaps Kerry can explain what Graham means.
If the money is really tainted, maybe the charities shouldn't accept it, either. Instead, if it goes anywhere, it should be prorated back to the Rothstein's victims, from whom it originally came.
In any case, McCain, rightly or wrongly, is already associated in many minds with Keating, so he should know that he can not afford to be involved another financial scandal.
Anyhow, I hope this is the albatross around his neck that finally drags him down, since he is too stupid to retire gracefully.
He's acting SCARED--see Drudge...BP was one of the early supporters of "cap and trade."
Something about BP and LG is going to come out soon.
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.