I'm going to let this article speak for itself.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/13/us...mccain.html?hp

Thoughts?

This is a losing stance for McCain to take as a republican:

- Environmentally conscious voters would tend to favor Obama on this issue as Obama's stance is similar, but more aggressive.

- Business minded conservatives are not going to like the cost implications of this plan and this is going to inspire resistance from many people who are leaning toward, but disenchanted with McCain. Some of these people may sit out, or defect to other candidates.

McCain would do well not to focus on or elaborate on environmental issues.

__________________


Screw Change!! Let's have a Seamless Transition of Power and Policy.. John McSame in 2008!

Didn't the Senate vote 95-0 against the Kyoto treaty back when Clinton was pres? If so, McCain was part of that vote...

And McCain is wrong on this. We should NOT sign on to Kyoto or any other CO2 scheme until more is known. There is enough evidence that points to other causes of the recent warming.

Kramer

__________________
“It's time to admit that public education operates like a planned economy, a bureaucratic system in which everybody's role is spelled out in advance and there are few incentives for innovation and productivity. It's no surprise that our school system doesn't improve; it more resembles the communist economy than our own market economy."
Albert Shanker, former president of the American Federation of Teachers

He's not talking about Kyoto as far as I can see, but rather about adopting mandatory greenhouse gas caps and cap-and-trade systems to reduce greenhouse gases. I suppose if he voted against Kyoto that might be something an opponent could bring up to show insincerity or something.

I completely disagree that he's wrong about this in terms of national policy; he's absolutely right and we do need to take action. I'm not even sure it's a bad political move, for a couple of reasons. One, there's an increasingly strong Green Christian movement emerging among evangelicals, focusing on moral stewardship of creation. And two, he needs to give moderates and Democrats every reason to consider his candidacy.

Here are a couple of articles on the green evangelical movement which I think might be part of the reason for this, insofar as it's politically driven and not a measure of McCain's sincere beliefs (which I don't know).

Evangelicals Go Green - TIME

washingtonpost.com: The Greening of Evangelicals

These are interesting times we live in, no? The new Democratic majority coalition may actually include substantial numbers of evangelical Christians. Whoda thunkit?

McCain is just a much as a dumbass as Gore.

Just last week the GW'ers were saying that there will be a 10 years of cooling because of wind currents over the oceans to excuse why we have seen two straight years of cooling and one of the worst winters in a long time.

The right is getting centric in America while the left is leaning to the further left...

We may see a very liberal America soon -- a country like Denmark.

Well, that's true, Sherriff, but at the same time I think there may be something else going on. A lot of these green evangelicals remain very conservative on most social issues such as abortion and gay rights, but for moral reasons -- ones I understand and sympathize with, although as a non-Christian I would express them differently -- they are also concerned with protecting the earth and conserving our natural heritage for future generations.

What I see is that whatever else happens, we will have two environmentalists running for president in this election. My vote still goes to Obama, and I believe he'll win, but the fact that someone is going to push for action on global warming no matter who wins is very, very encouraging to me.

I also wonder how evangelicals are eventually going to break out on other economic and foreign policy issues. I have a hard time seeing how corporate greed and irresponsibility, whether it's towards the environment or towards the working class, can be compatible with what I understand of Christian morality. And the same can be said for warmongering. Religious faith is a dangerous tool for conservatives to use.

It is very interesting reading this NYT article and how misleading it is w.r.t. how McCain actually differs with the current administration on global warming: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/06/20050630-16.html

The only difference I see between what McCain is saying is that he wants to make “cap and trade” mandatory, whereas it currently is not mandatory under GWB.

The NYT has many readers believing differently, apparently.

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them, speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition

I agree that this isn't going to be an issue that gets out the vote for McCain, but I suspect he's been told that by about a bajillion aids already and decided to go forward anyway the same way he decided to tell blue collar workers in Michigan that they weren't going to somehow get all their old jobs back.

Personally, I like the idea of a Republican interested in environmental protection.

I'd say there's a HUGE difference between making something like that mandatory and making it optional.

__________________
To educate a man in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society. -Theodore Roosevelt

I say it's a big difference, too, as what is currently being done is not federally mandated. Yet, the article still misleads the readers, in the sense that apparently, there are plenty who believe nothing is being done by this administration. The fact remains, that much is currently being done and global warming has been officially addressed since 2002. That fact is not even alluded to in the article, among with several other facts.

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them, speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition

Much is being done by this administration, to prevent anything effective from being done. If that could be accomplished by literally doing nothing, I'm sure he would do that. Since it can't, he'll instead call for more studies, or for measures that will not solve the problem or even contribute to doing so.

Any effective measures will be mandatory. Cap-and-spend introduces some flexibility into the program, which is good, but the requirements remain even if there are two ways to meet them. McCain is calling for something that is actually doing something, where Bush is doing something that amounts to doing nothing. Big difference.

Nothing has been accomplished? Please read (from Feb. last year): Post-Kyoto Surprise: America's Quiet Efforts to Cut Greenhouse Gases Are Producing Results

Quiet indeed.

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them, speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition

What Volker was talking about was not a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, but a reduction in the rate at which greenhouse gas emissions are increasing. Things have not improved; they are in fact still getting worse; but they're not getting worse as fast as they were. Perhaps you find this encouraging. I do not particularly.

It is interesting that he says some things in Berlin that run completely counter to things that Bush has said in Washington:

Bush has publicly denied that it is known human activity contributes to global warming, yet Volker on his behalf says the administration agrees. One must ask who is being honest here. He has certainly lied either to the Germans or the American people, but I'm not in a position to say which.

Yup, and not only is that rate decreasing greater than it is in Europe, ours has decreased much greater when indexed with our economy. Not bad, for nothing.
Right, and getting less bad than other nations. ALL nations are increasing their rate of greenhouse gases. We just happen to increase our rate less than the others.
I do, when taken in context with what the rest of the world is also not doing.

And when did GWB publicly say that? I'm asking because I don't know when and in what context GWB said that.

(BTW, thanks for actually taking the time to read the link. I respect that in posters.)

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them, speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition