Skip to main content

The Wonk Room at Think Progress has been taking a look at Republican Senate candidates on the issue of climate change, and it should come as no surprise that when it comes to Republicans and science, never the twain shall meet.

A comprehensive Wonk Room survey of the Republican candidates for the U.S. Senate finds that nearly all dispute the scientific consensus that the United States must act to fight global warming pollution. In May, 2010, the National Academies of Science reported to Congress that "the U.S. should act now to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and develop a national strategy to adapt to the inevitable impacts of climate change" because global warming is "caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for — and in many cases is already affecting — a broad range of human and natural systems."

This finding is shared by scientific bodies around the world. However, in the alternate reality of the fossil-fueled right wing, climate science is confused or a conspiracy, and policies to limit pollution would destroy the economy.

Remarkably, of the dozens of Republicans vying for the 37 Senate seats in the 2010 election, only one — Rep. Mike Castle of Delaware — supports climate action. Even former climate advocates Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) now toe the science-doubting party line. If Castle loses his primary on Tuesday to Tea Party candidate Christine O’Donnell, the GOP slate will be unanimous in opposition to a green economy.

Castle, of course, was teabagged out his race, leaving the Republicans in unanimous opposition to reality. The Wonk Room's Brad Johnson has compiled the statements of GOP Senate nominees, so for those that care about the actual science of scientific issues, let's compare some of those statements with those of actual scientists.

  • Sharron Angle, Republican Senate nominee from Nevada:

    I don't, however, buy into the whole ... man-caused global warming, man-caused climate change mantra of the left. I believe that there's not sound science to back that up.

    The National Academy of Sciences:

    As part of its most comprehensive study of climate change to date, the National Research Council today issued three reports emphasizing why the U.S. should act now to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and develop a national strategy to adapt to the inevitable impacts of climate change.  The reports by the Research Council, the operating arm of the National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of Engineering, are part of a congressionally requested suite of five studies known as America's Climate Choices....

    The compelling case that climate change is occurring and is caused in large part by human activities is based on a strong, credible body of evidence, says Advancing the Science of Climate Change, one of the new reports.  While noting that there is always more to learn and that the scientific process is never "closed," the report emphasizes that multiple lines of evidence support scientific understanding of climate change.  The core phenomenon, scientific questions, and hypotheses have been examined thoroughly and have stood firm in the face of serious debate and careful evaluation of alternative explanations.

    "Climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for — and in many cases is already affecting — a broad range of human and natural systems," the report concludes.  It calls for a new era of climate change science where an emphasis is placed on "fundamental, use-inspired" research, which not only improves understanding of the causes and consequences of climate change but also is useful to decision makers at the local, regional, national, and international levels acting to limit and adapt to climate change.  Seven cross-cutting research themes are identified to support this more comprehensive and integrative scientific enterprise.

  • Ken Buck, Republican Senate nominee from Colorado:

    I’ll tell you, I have looked at global warming, now climate change, from both sides. While I think the earth is warming, I don’t think that man-made causes are the primary factor. I am one of those people that Al Gore refers to as a skeptic.

    (At about the 24:00 mark of this video.)

    The American Geophysical Union:

    The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming. Many components of the climate system-including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons-are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century. Global average surface temperatures increased on average by about 0.6¡C over the period 1956-2006. As of 2006, eleven of the previous twelve years were warmer than any others since 1850. The observed rapid retreat of Arctic sea ice is expected to continue and lead to the disappearance of summertime ice within this century. Evidence from most oceans and all continents except Antarctica shows warming attributable to human activities.

  • Linda McMahon, Republican Senate nominee from Connecticut:

    I think there's evidence to the positive and to the contrary about global warming.

    The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration:

    The 2009 State of the Climate report released today draws on data for 10 key climate indicators that all point to the same finding: the scientific evidence that our world is warming is unmistakable. More than 300 scientists from 160 research groups in 48 countries contributed to the report, which confirms that the past decade was the warmest on record and that the Earth has been growing warmer over the last 50 years.

  • Marco Rubio, Republican Senate nominee from Florida:

    In an interview with the Tribune on that subject Friday, Rubio called Crist "a believer in man-made global warming."

    "I don't think there's the scientific evidence to justify it," Rubio said.

    Asked whether he accepts the scientific evidence that the global climate is undergoing change, he responded, "The climate is always changing. The climate is never static. The question is whether it's caused by man-made activity and whether it justifies economically destructive government regulation."

    American Association for the Advancement of Science (pdf):

    The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society.

  • Rand Paul, Republican Senate nominee from Kentucky:

    Now Osama bin Laden had a quote yesterday. He’s says he’s after the climate change as well. It’s a bigger issue, we need to watch ‘em. Not only because it may or may not be true, but they’re making up their facts to fit their conclusions. They’ve already caught ‘em doing this.

    (At the 2:56 mark of this video)


    Pennsylvania State University has completed the second half of a two-part investigation of Michael Mann's role in the so-called "Climategate" affair. The 2-month inquiry has found that Mann is innocent of the remaining charge of scientific misconduct that had been raised by e-mails uncovered in November....

    A previous investigation found him innocent of suppressing data, deleting e-mails, and misusing confidential information.

    House of Commons Science and Technology Committee (pdf):

    In addition, insofar as we have been able to consider accusations
    of dishonesty—for example, Professor Jones’s alleged attempt to "hide the decline"— we consider that there is no case to answer. Within our limited inquiry and the evidence we took, the scientific reputation of Professor Jones and CRU remains intact. We have found no reason in this unfortunate episode to challenge the scientific consensus as expressed by Professor Beddington, that "global warming is happening [and] that it is induced by human activity".

  • Pat Toomey, Republican Senate nominee from Pennsylvania:

    There is much debate in the scientific community as to the precise sources of global warming.

    American Chemical Society:

    Careful and comprehensive scientific assessments have clearly demonstrated that the Earth’s climate system is changing rapidly in response to growing atmospheric burdens of greenhouse gases and absorbing aerosol particles (IPCC, 2007). There is very little room for doubt that observed climate trends are due to human activities. The threats are serious and action is urgently needed to mitigate the risks of climate change.

  • Roy Blunt, Republican Senate nominee from Missouri:

    There isn’t any real science to say we are altering the climate path of the earth.

    American Meteorological Society (pdf):

    Indeed, strong observational evidence and results from modeling studies indicate that, at least over the last 50 years, human activities are a major contributor to climate change.

    Direct human impact is through changes in the concentration of certain trace gases such as carbon dioxide, chlorofluorocarbons, methane, nitrous oxide, ozone, and water vapor, known collectively as greenhouse gases.

  • Dino Rossi, Republican Senate nominee from Washington:

    I believe the Earth is warming. There is still debate in the scientific community about the level of human impact on climate change, which is why I think the more important question is what we are actually going to do in order to reduce carbon emissions. Promoting new technology and providing incentives to cut emissions is the best way to accomplish that goal.

    The city of Seattle admits that personal efforts to be efficient have had far more impact on greenhouse gas reduction than government regulations. My approach is to allow individuals to make choices.

    American Physical Society (pdf):

    The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.

  • Carly Fiorina, Republican Senate nominee from California:

    Q: Is climate change real?

    Fiorina: I’m not sure. I think we should have the confidence and courage to test the science.

    (At 0:08 of this video)

    Joint statement by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Chemical Society, American Geophysical Union, American Institute of Biological Sciences, American Meteorological Society, American Society of Agronomy, American Society of Plant Biologists, American Statistical Association, Association of Ecosystem Research Centers, Botanical Society of America, Crop Science Society of America, Ecological Society of America, Natural Science Collections Alliance, Organization of Biological Field Stations, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Society of Systematic Biologists, Soil Science Society of America, University Corporation for Atmospheric Research:

    Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver. These conclusions are based on multiple independent lines of evidence, and contrary assertions are inconsistent with an objective assessment of the vast body of peer-reviewed science. Moreover, there is strong evidence that ongoing climate change will have broad impacts on society, including the global economy and on the environment.

This would be funny if it weren't so dangerous. This isn't a debate between Republicans and Democrats about what to do about climate change, it's a debate between Republicans and reality about the very existence of climate change. And it's clear that no amount of science will convince Republicans of something they just don't want to believe. The question is whether the voters want to listen to the scientists or to those whose beliefs are not based on anything remotely rational or factual. And it's only the future of the world as we know it that's at stake.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:00 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Discuss (7+ / 0-)

    That word at the end of the post is ironic in this context.   What exactly is there to discuss with people who are unwilling to acknowledge reality?

    •  The same thing there is to discus with (7+ / 0-)

      creationists - nothing.

      Its a complete waste of time.

      I am unsure why we should waste time debating something where one way is correct and the other side manufactured lies and horseshit.

      We no longer, so far as I know, discuss whether the moon is made of green cheese or not....

      Spray tons of carcinogens into the ocean to hide petroleum spewed from a hastily-drilled hole from a greedy corporation, but don't smoke pot.

      by xxdr zombiexx on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:26:27 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  But I hear 20% of American adults think (0+ / 0-)

        ... the earth revolves around the sun, so it really shouldn't be surprising that the same percentage fail to understand something as simple as an insulating blanket of pollution making the planet hotter:

        Dr. Miller's data reveal some yawning gaps in basic knowledge. American adults in general do not understand what molecules are (other than that they are really small). Fewer than a third can identify DNA as a key to heredity. Only about 10 percent know what radiation is. One adult American in five thinks the Sun revolves around the Earth, an idea science had abandoned by the 17th century.

        One thing that really bothers me about that quote is the last clause in the last sentence. Science didn't abandon the idea, science proved it was wrong.

        This is a classic example of the media helping to create misunderstanding. The average adult has a 6th grade (or worse) grasp of our language. Using subtle phraseology in reference to certainties leads those with un-subtle understandings of the language to misunderstand.

        Green Energy Times: promoting renewable energy in New England

        by mataliandy on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 08:55:41 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I`m not sure.... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wishingwell, RJDixon74135, eXtina, annieli

    if Obtuse Angle can spell

    don't, however, buy into the whole ... man-caused global warming, man-caused climate change mantra of the left. I believe that there's not sound science to back that up.

    science, let alone analyze any sort of findings.

    it tastes like burning...

    by eastvan on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:06:40 PM PDT

    •  If the GOP carries out the beltway narrative (6+ / 0-)

      and actually gains control of Congress ( they won`t ) they will eager to establish an industry based on green ideas and products.

      Problem is, it will be in one of hose awful Socialist wasteland of a European country.

      Republicans are good for the economy....

      Other peoples economies....

      it tastes like burning...

      by eastvan on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:10:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The Chinese will develop green technologies (13+ / 0-)

        The Chinese have chosen the electric car as one of their 4 pillars for the future.  The spinoffs from development of battery technology will drive innovation on other fields, and we just won' be there.  Read Tom Friedman on this in today's NYT.  At least he gets this issue right.  The Europeans are leading also in fusion and next gen nuclear.

        The GOP ignoring of and even hostility to science is going to undo whatever progress has been made and make us once again the pariahs of the world.

        I don't know what it will take to get people in this country to understand that climate disruption is real.  Loss of artic ice in the summer by 2015?  Florida Keys and parts of Chesapeake Bay slip underwater?  More heat waves and hurricanes?

        The problem is, by the time people realize it is real, it is too late.

        Why does Meg Whitman want China to win the race for green tech dominance?

        by Mimikatz on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:18:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The wrong approach has been taken.... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          A Siegel, judyms9

          Forget the 'save the whales' crap---it doesn't work with these people. Sell it as something that could generate obscene profits and make the rich richer, well then, one just might attract their interest.

          Sell it as a chance to move up from a trailer park to a gated trailer park, and they'll get on board.

          it tastes like burning...

          by eastvan on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:32:31 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm not selling to them (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mataliandy, eastvan

            at all.  Let them figure it out.  They're adults.  I'll go and make money from it first before they do.

            They've actually given us all a wonderful business opportunity with their stupidity.

            The future is green:

            by bogmanoc on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 08:32:22 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  It's already too late! (5+ / 0-)

          Not that we shouldn't be doing everything possible to try and lessen the impacts. Nevertheless, at least as far as sea rise is concerned the train has left the station long ago and not much will change what is coming. The seas are rising now at more then twice the rate they were just 20 yrs. ago and they are accelerating. Oh and if anyone out here thinks the rise will be linear they can forget that myth. The sea rise could double again or more in just a few yrs depending on the feedback mechanisms that are now entering into the equation. As the Arctic Ice cap melts more and more heat will be absorbed by an already warming Arctic sea and this causes more permafrost melting and then more fresh water and methane releases etc et al.. You get the picture. The GOP doesn't get it and all the facts will never make any difference even when it's happening             big time. They'll blame it all on that Kenyan we had as President back there before Sarah was crowned Empress for life.

          "It's better to die on your feet then live on your knees" E. Zapata

          by Blutodog on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:33:34 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Right (0+ / 0-)

          it's a losing business position now, which you'd think they care about.  But oil and gas lobby has them in their hip pocket, and many Dems, too. It's just the old guard with money is ruling the day and we'll be left in the dust.

          The future is green:

          by bogmanoc on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 08:31:22 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  of course not, Sharron, It's Mother(!) nature, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I don't, however, buy into the whole ... man-caused global warming, man-caused climate change mantra of the left. I believe that there's not sound science to back that up.

      "...calling for a 5" deck gun is not parody. Not by a long shot." (gnaborretni), AND........."I don't vote for a Teabagger God"

      by annieli on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:31:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Remember (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mataliandy, eastvan

      "Sound science" is a code word for industry supported anti-science work.  See anti-science syndrome sufferers threaten lives.

      Blogging regularly at Get Energy Smart NOW! for a sustainable energy future.

      by A Siegel on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 08:38:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Republicans are, as we know, FULL OF BEANS. (6+ / 0-)

    And that is the cause.

    Case closed!

    "So, am I right or what?"

    by itzik shpitzik on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:09:00 PM PDT

  •  It's not a mistake, nor ignorance (25+ / 0-)

    It's an INTENTIONAL demonstration of fealty to the cult.

    All cults require true believers to prove their dedication to the belief system by all agreeing to believe in an obvious fiction.

    2+2=5 in George Orwell's "1984" example (and my DK name reference).

    Republicans are now at the point where denying science is the proof that they have sworn loyalty to the Right Wing Cult.

    Now if only they'd fly off together to join Hale Bopp.

    •  I think you are right (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mataliandy, wishingwell, Egalitare

      They MUST deny global warming. Or not fit 'in'.

    •   Cult is funded by Kochs-"laughing to the bank" (6+ / 0-)

      The Kochs and others are cashing in bigtime having developed this cult to serve their monetary interests.

      The Founding Fathers would be screaming if they could see how poorly their system is coping with the intense concentration of wealth - the Constitution has been subverted, and the our national interests are no longer being served.

      The current Republican Tea Party is the least patriotic and most anti-constitutional (served by their 5 activist judges on SCOTUS) threat this country may have seen the Civil War.

      "Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist."

      by oregonj on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:55:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Republicans are Kochs' suckers (3+ / 0-)

        The Kochs have made billions off by running up gasoline prices when supplies are tight. Oil refiners have an oilgopoly oligopoly that manipulates markets when supplies are tight.

        The Kochs have screwed the little Republicans that cry about the high cost of gas.

        But those stupid Republican fools (I repeat myself) jump on the Koch climate denier bandwagon. Renewable energy could put a lid on fuel prices, but the Kochs brainwash Republicans to work against their own interests.

        look for my DK Greenroots diary series Thursday evening. "It's the planet, stupid."

        by FishOutofWater on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 05:42:18 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Koch-suckers are mere puppets (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          The U.S. has become an oligarchy and oilgarchy. The little Republican-voting puppets are dutifully playing their role against their own personal interest.

          "Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist."

          by oregonj on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 05:56:55 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  exactly right (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      people act sooooo surprised that the Republicans deny the science.

      They deny it, because as of right now they think that enhances their chances of winning.

      Since when did Republicans ever give a shit about understanding or evidence ?

      As I've said before, it's great scare tactic.

      "if we pass climate change legislation you'll lose your job ! and it will be for nothing because it doesn't really exist !  oh, and you'll pay more for energy ! Look ! over there ! it's liberal, environmental, elitists ! Al Gore's fat !"

      big badda boom : GRB 080913

      by squarewheel on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 06:52:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Oughtta give a shoutout (12+ / 0-)

    to rlmiller's series on climate zombies.

    And remember, September is Zombie Apocalypse Awareness Month.

    The question is not whether the chickens needed replacing, the question is whether the fox should have been guarding them in the first place.

    by happymisanthropy on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:10:49 PM PDT

  •  At least some of them admit warming exists (4+ / 0-)

    Even if there are folks like Toomey who, I dunno... think it as the cumulative effect of bird farts or something?

    No surprise from Fiorina. Fresh from the destruction at HP, it is only natural she might want to progress to the biosphere.

    If apes evolved from humans, why are there still humans?

    by Bobs Telecaster on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:12:14 PM PDT

    •  Carly Failurina is showing all the judgement (4+ / 0-)

      that got her booted from HP. She has been railing against State initiated green programs.

      Which of course goes over well in her state.

      Someone needs to buy Failurina a map. So she can see she`s running in California, not the Coal Belt.

      Boxer will have no problem cock blocking her state from becoming Carlyfornication.......

      it tastes like burning...

      by eastvan on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:20:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  ok--Democrats win...they concede... (5+ / 0-)

    Okay Okay - they'll reluctantly admit it - they're right about climate change and all the experts back them up - but do they have to brag about it?

    It just seems so unseemly to crush Republican opposition with this stuff.


  •  Fiorina "not sure"?? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    skrekk, Pete Rock, eXtina

    The former head of one of America's top tech corporations, and she doesn't have the mental equipment to evaluate straightforward evidence? This goes beyond the what's the matter with Republicans. We have to start wondering how a mental midget like Carly get to run a company based on science? WTF is wrong with HP? How many other supposed technology companies are led by know-nothings like her? And why do their execs get paid such bloated salaries when at least some of them are clearly across-the-board incompetent?

    Everybody talkin' 'bout Heaven ain't goin' there -- Mahalia Jackson

    by DaveW on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:17:06 PM PDT

    •  Adding to the Failurina saga.... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wishingwell, skrekk, judyms9

      most CEO`s, just like hockey and football coaches, baseball managers, et al generally land a new spot with a new team right away after getting the boot from their old organization.

      So how come no one offered Carly a new job? Or is the word out on her?

      Heck, she even got binned from the McCain joke of a campaign. And when that batch of disconnected losers turfs you, you really gotta be bad.

      it tastes like burning...

      by eastvan on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:26:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I bet Fiorina doesn't actually disbelieve (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      She's probably just going along to get along.

      I'll also bet that she and eMeg will have totally wasted hundreds of millions of dollars come election day.

      Live more, fear less, fight harder

      by Anthony Page aka SecondComing on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 06:20:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  She knows full well there is man made climate (0+ / 0-)

      change but she also knows she can't admit it, so she equivocates with the noncommittal 'I don't know, we need to 'test' the science.' Yeah right.

  •  What the hell (12+ / 0-)

    does this mean?

    I think we should have the confidence and courage to test the science.

    So, just "ignore" the science, basically?

    Do republicans even care if they make sense anymore?  geeezus....

    "Mediocrity cannot know excellence." -- Sherlock Holmes

    by La Gitane on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:18:10 PM PDT

  •  In many ways, what is worse than the (10+ / 0-)

    anti-science mantra of Republicans is the complete pandering to that notion by essentially every "journalist" in the country.

    This is exemplified by the Carly Fiorina video linked at the end of the diary.

    Why is Fiorina asked, "Is climate change real" or "Do you believe there's global warming ... is it man-made" when the more pertinent question is, "Why are you denying the now-undisputed scientific consensus that human activities are causing significant and perhaps irreversible changes to the Earth's climate."

    I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires. -- Susan B Anthony

    by NoMoJoe on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:19:36 PM PDT

    •  The Defense Dept folks need to talk to the GOP (6+ / 0-)

      At least most of them do.  They believe it is real and a national security threat.  Perhaps they could educate the GOPers if they win Congress.

      Same with the business leaders who understand that it is real and we are throwing away any opportunity to lead technologically in the future, plus exacerbating instability.

      But I agree that for the followers it is like a cult to be a denier, and they are demanding cult-like behavior from their putative leaders like Fiorina.

      Why does Meg Whitman want China to win the race for green tech dominance?

      by Mimikatz on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:24:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes a national security issue, a group of (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        veterans believes this strongly and while I cannot remember the name of the group, they recenty did a conference call for PA Democrats. It was excellent.  

      •  The Department of Defense already has, but (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mataliandy, A Siegel, eXtina

        it doesn't seem to have done any good. Thirty-three retired US military Generals and Admirals did so in their April 29, 2010 letter to Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell also published in Politico, RollCall, and all 4 Military Times publications. Here's the text of the letter:

        Dear Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell,

        Climate change is threatening America's security. The Pentagon and security leaders of both parties consider climate disruption to be a "threat multiplier" - it exacerbates existing problems by decreasing stability, increasing conflict, and incubating the socioeconomic conditions that foster terrorist recruitment. The State Department, the National Intelligence Council and the CIA all agree, and all are planning for future climate-based threats.

        America's billion-dollar-a-day dependence on oil makes us vulnerable to unstable and unfriendly regimes. A substantial amount of that oil money ends up in the hands of terrorists. Consequently, our military is forced to operate in hostile territory, and our troops are attacked by terrorists funded by U.S. oil dollars, while rogue regimes profit off of our dependence. As long as the American public is beholden to global energy prices, we will be at the mercy of these rogue regimes. Taking control of our energy future means preventing future conflicts around the world and protecting Americas here at home.

        It is time to secure America with clean energy. We can create millions of jobs in a clean energy economy while mitigating the effects of climate change across the globe. We call on Congress and the administration to enact strong, comprehensive climate and energy legislation to reduce carbon pollution and lead the world in clean energy technology.

        and a list of the signatories

        Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction -- Pascal

        by RJDixon74135 on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 05:55:31 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Well (0+ / 0-)

      , it is time to Act Blue for Climate Heroes vs Climate Zombies because, well, humanity's future literally rests in the balance.

      Related: Anti-Science-SyndromE Suffers Threaten Lives

      Blogging regularly at Get Energy Smart NOW! for a sustainable energy future.

      by A Siegel on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 09:05:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Great Diary (8+ / 0-)
    But on what issue ISN'T it Republicans Vs. Reality?


    The greatest trick the devil every pulled was convincing half of America the GOP gives a damn about them

    by blingbling65 on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:21:19 PM PDT

  •  A frightening juxtaposition. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Ken Buck's motto: The Buck Doesn't stop here. It goes straight into my kitty.

  •  Trying to fight climate change is like trying to (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    squarewheel, judyms9, jan4insight

    stop time.

    It's gonna' happen, all we can do is adapt. Or die.

    •  Fiorina and other wealthy folks, as in (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Republowkins, all have yachts, cruise ships and gator huntin' punt boats, so what do they care if everything melts, except for the part about rounding up pairs of animals?

    •  No ... (0+ / 0-)
      1. We have built in seriously damaging amounts of climate chaos -- without question.  
      1. But, hopefully, we have some choice/control over just how much worse it gets.
      1.  Sadly, there is a limit to the how much we can adapt to as a civilization and, well, as individuals.

      We have to adapt -- but we also have to mitigate or, well, as you put it so eloquently, "or die".

      Blogging regularly at Get Energy Smart NOW! for a sustainable energy future.

      by A Siegel on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 09:09:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I would like to see someone ask (9+ / 0-)

    Republicans that if they were to regain power in Congress, would they defund the military's efforts to anticipate the effects of climate change.

    It's about time I changed my signature.

    by Khun David on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:23:35 PM PDT

  •  Like I say.` (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mataliandy, DontTaseMeBro, Road Dog

    Global Warming is the New Reefer Madness.

    Brought to you by the same people that brought you the old reefer madness.

    Lying through their teeth on both subjects.

    Rejecting science except where it pleases them on both subjects.

    Spray tons of carcinogens into the ocean to hide petroleum spewed from a hastily-drilled hole from a greedy corporation, but don't smoke pot.

    by xxdr zombiexx on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:24:10 PM PDT

    •  sayeth AquaBuddha and his climate bong: (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      xxdr zombiexx, DRo

      Now Osama bin Laden had a quote yesterday. He’s says he’s after the climate change as well. It’s a bigger issue, we need to watch ‘em. Not only because it may or may not be true, but they’re making up their facts to fit their conclusions. They’ve already caught ‘em doing this.

      "...calling for a 5" deck gun is not parody. Not by a long shot." (gnaborretni), AND........."I don't vote for a Teabagger God"

      by annieli on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:36:58 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  "Climate Change"... (10+ / 0-)

    is an anagram for "Align The Mecca".


    I think not.

  •  It's 90 degree's in Idaho (4+ / 0-)

    In late September

    What climate change? I can handle this!

    •  We picked tomatoes in VT today (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Krush, A Siegel

      [Bleeping] tomatoes in late September!!! There's a green pepper awaiting another day or two's ripening, and 3 jalapenos still going strong!

      We should be thinking ski season, not salsa. Jeeze! Killington used to open for the season about a week from now - granted with only a few trails and lots of mud, but, um, there was, you know, um, SNOW! Not something you find in the 87 degree weather we had 2 days ago...

      Green Energy Times: promoting renewable energy in New England

      by mataliandy on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 09:22:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Funny that every time a politician (0+ / 0-)

    makes a statement, they cite some poll or scientific study to back up their claim. At least until they're on the wrong side of the argument.

    "The human eye is a wonderful device. With a little effort, it can fail to see even the most glaring injustice." Richard K. Morgan

    by sceptical observer on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:28:52 PM PDT

  •  Cf the urgency of invading Iraq (5+ / 0-)

    Remember that one?  Hard to argue with that one, "we don't want the smoking gun to appear in the form of a mushroom-shaped cloud."  Hey, if there's any possibility of WMD in Iraq, it would be so irresponsible not to treat the threat very very very seriously.

    I am very discouraged today.  As long as these guys can win with this BS, they will double-down.  And they are winning, due to their ownership of so much of the media, and the terrifying willful ignorance of too many of our people.

  •  awesome article n/t (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    You can safely assume you have created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do. Anne Lamott

    by zooecium on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:30:58 PM PDT

  •  Speaking of being out of touch with reality (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Steny Hoyer is a clueless elitist completely out of touch with what America's middle class thinks.

    He needs to be jettisoned and put out to pasture like a well dressed cow.

    Write In: Alan Grayson

    by Detroit Mark on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:31:47 PM PDT

  •  I've been tracking deniers in both House and (11+ / 0-)

    Senate, and have named them "climate zombies."  I've looked at 16 states so far, and have found a grand total of one candidate (VT-Gov) who admits that global warming is human-caused, and one more who wants to reduce his carbon footprint (NV-01).  The rest either deny the science, are presumed to deny the science because they've taken the Koch "no climate tax" pledge, or haven't said anything on the subject.

    The next climate zombies diary will examine KS, NV, TN, and two states TBA (suggestions and links appreciated).

  •  Thanks for this terrific compendium of scientific (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evilpenguin, tari, LaughingPlanet, DRo

    thinking on the issue of climate change.  I've read many places that there is almost total agreement that global warming is the result of human activity, but I've never seen it laid out so clearly and completely.  I'm saving this to my hard drive so I can pull it out whenever I get stuck dealing with a "climate change from natural causes" person.

    If, in our efforts to win, we become as dishonest as our opponents on the right, we don't deserve to triumph.

    by Tamar on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:38:40 PM PDT

  •  In non-Senate races (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evilpenguin, sodalis, DRo

    you can add Steve Pearce running in NM-02 and the republican candidate for governor of New Mexico, Susanna Martinez.

    Deny, deny, deny - keep the oil money coming.

    Progressive...Democrat...Proud! - me

    by TigerMom on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:41:26 PM PDT

  •  it's always republicans versus reality (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    they have whole channel on the tv devoted to this endeavor

  •  How I feel, what I think... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mataliandy, Misterpuff

    We are living The Sheep Look Up and I feel like Futurama's Professor Farnsworth:

  •  No It's Conservatives and Moderates vs Reality (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Conservatives and moderates takes in the entire Republican party and enough of our party that we can't act at anything approaching sufficiency.

    The planet can not accept one single new molecule of CO2.

    Conservative and pragmatic Democrats are doing nothing reflecting that reality.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:55:11 PM PDT

  •  OT...Like their Pledge...a Contract ON America! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mataliandy, annieli

    They are destroyers, fear and hate mongers.
    The NYTimes:

    While it promises to create jobs, control deficit spending and restore Americans’ trust in government, it is devoid of tough policy choices. This new "governing agenda" does not say how the Republicans would replace revenue that would be lost from permanently extending all of the Bush tax cuts, or how they would manage Medicare and Social Security, or even which discretionary programs would go when they slash $100 billion in spending. Their record at all of these things is dismal.

    The best way to understand the pledge is as a bid to co-opt the Tea Party by a Republican leadership that wants to sound insurrectionist but is the same old Washington elite. These are the folks who slashed taxes on the rich, turned a surplus into a crushing deficit, and helped unleash the financial crisis that has thrown millions of Americans out of their jobs and their homes.

    Not only are the players the same, the policies are the same. Just more tax cuts for the rich and more deficit spending. We find it hard to believe that even the most disaffected voters will be taken in. But again, these are strange and worrying times.

  •  Angle: "I believe (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evilpenguin, judyms9

    that there's not sound science to back that up."

    If she believes it hard enough, I guess that makes it true.

    Teabaggers are Koch suckers (not that there's anything wrong with that).

    by psnyder on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:56:33 PM PDT

  •  Republicans versus reality (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evilpenguin, tari, annieli

    and reality is losing badly.

    We Destroyed this Village in order to save it from the Viet Cong er um Taliban

    by JML9999 on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 04:59:37 PM PDT

  •  nice work, Turk (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evilpenguin, tari, judyms9

    Their quotes juxtaposed to the science however has the scent of dirty socks being compared to the works @ The Louvre.

    We have this brown woolen sock here.
    We have the Mona Lisa here.

  •  you cannot reason with the gop (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    they are anti-science

  •  WTF?!?! Repubs and Science (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Why do the republicans want Science to tell them definitively that man made global warming??  They don't believe scientists about anything else.  Take evolution.  They don't believe that.
    What about faith?  There is no carved in stone proof that God or Satan exists or that miracles ever occurred but they believe it.  Why do they believe a book that is 1. a compilation of oral stories that is known to have over 30,000 errors in it  2.  isn't the whole story but only bits and pieces that the Roman Catholic Church allowed to be in it, 3.  has been translated from previous translations, is the word of God?  
    Why can't they just look around them and see what is in front of their faces and believe man made climate change exists?  Behaving like it exists won't hurt them, behaving like it doesn't, hurts us all.

  •  GOP: latter-day Flat Earth Society. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evilpenguin, eXtina

    Except maybe the Flat Earthers believed in what they said. Republicans would tell us to love OBL and Ahmadinejad if they thought it'd keep all that oil-industry money coming.

    As a scientist, Throckmorton knew that if he ever were to break wind in the echo chamber, he would never hear the end of it. --Bulwer-Lytton Contest entry

    by Wom Bat on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 05:02:26 PM PDT

  •  Time to talk about global security (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Road Dog

    and the need to get off of oil. Who cares if it's human generated, the trend is clear and so are the consequences of doing nothing. Why are the Dems not presenting this as a national security issue, pointing out the gap in investment between the US and China, the gap between the US and Europe and the fact that we are supporting regimes that do not wish us well by buying their oil? And then blasting out the PR asking, "Why are the Republicans soft on national security? Is it because they are owned by big oil?"

    That is the only reason for this so called doubt. Big Oil has recognized that people don't like being blamed for things and turned it into a strategy. Time for an aggressive counter strategy that pushes the economy buttons (as in, we will create jobs that can't be outsourced) and the national security buttons. People respond to those. Anything that sounds like do-gooding or altruism or responsibility is a fail with this electorate. But selfish fear issues and jobs? We should own this conversation because we have real answers, but we don't.

    Yes we did, yes we will. President Obama

    by marketgeek on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 05:09:53 PM PDT

  •  Like coal? Don't bother to vote. (0+ / 0-)

    Big coal loves Republicans including extremists like Rand Paul, in the state where they lop off mountaintops.

    Alternatives aren't perfect - wind is sporadic and not good mid-day, nat gas is not the panacea people make it out to be (though it's superior to coal and not as bad as made out to be), and ethanol should be made from Brazilian sugar and not from American corn.

    But one thing is clear - coal is by far the worst, dirtiest energy source.

    Don't care?  Then don't vote, because if Republicans take the house that could be the end of even the tamest energy reform and a new lease on life for Big Coal.

  •  Shorter GOP: Carbon Rocks!!! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mataliandy, kovie

    Mostly, it's the money captured by Big Oil and Big Coal that they revere. And all that really matters is the next few reporting quarters, right?

    Who cares if there are fewer economically recoverable coal reserves than the 200 year figure that is accepted as unchallenged by the Village? That's our children's problem (though it was assumed to be our great-grandchildren's problem until recently), and it shouldn't impact any policy that would negatively impact the short term profitability of Big Carbon.

    (and just in case someone's snark alert isn't fully charged....)

    "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." -- Frederick Douglass

    by Egalitare on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 05:27:14 PM PDT

    •  Ironically (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mightymouse, Egalitare, Road Dog

      Carbon-based fuel is just stored solar energy over millions of years, which contradicts the GOP's official stance on the age of the earth AND solar energy. They like fossil fuels. They're just not comfortable with the science that explains where it came from.

      Kind of like those old conservatives who want government to keep its hands off Medicare.

      Of Mice and Republicans.

      "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" --Alexander Hamilton

      by kovie on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 05:43:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Sadly net result of Dems or GOP nuts the same. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mataliandy, Road Dog

    No climate bill passed. No US energy policy that cuts US energy use to world standards, cuts US oil imports, cuts US greenhouse gases by 80%.

    Democrats do nothing but wish they did something, or so they say.

    GOP does nothing and that's their goal.

    Result is sadly the same. US government no longer works, largely because that is the GOP policy to keep voters hating inefficient government and because Democrats are too addicted to filibuster and holds and other dysfunctional "rules" that give them personal power but cripple government founder designed.

  •  No surprise here (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    aren't Republicans against reality on just about every issue nowadays?  As we all know, reality has a liberal bias.

    Winning Progressive

  •  Other issues about which here's still doubt: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Did OJ kill his wife and her friend?

    Did we really put men on the moon (double points for OJ allusion)?

    Is the earth really over 6000 years old?

    Was Darwin wrong about evolution?

    Did Saddam have WMD in 2003?

    Could Galileo have been wrong about the earth orbiting the sun?

    Is ketchup a vegetable?

    Was Nixon a crook?

    Will the sun rise tomorrow?

    Did I type this?

    Are you reading this?

    Are we real?

    "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" --Alexander Hamilton

    by kovie on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 05:37:59 PM PDT

  •  To a person, Republicans are either liars or (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ...fools on this subject.

    Why are they this way?

    Simple--for them, politics and the sanctity of capitalism trump facts and science always.

    "Certainly the game is rigged. Don't let that stop you; if you don't bet, you can't win." Lazarus Long

    by rfall on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 05:39:01 PM PDT

  •  Krugman ended his Saturday column stating (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    that if the rethugs take over the Congress the US will become a banana republic.  In light of the information in the diary, he may want to revise that downward.

  •  This is a totally bogus "position" by the GOP. (0+ / 0-)
    1. Climate change denial is based on a series of lies, and they repeat them because they "believe".

    a  "it's unproven", b. "there is scientific proof  in opposition, c. "science is divided", d. ".skeptics and industry are dubious and the evidence just isn't there" .

    Everyone of these paid shills trots out one or more of these truths they get to regurgitate, from Angle to Fiorina.

    The stenographic sold out media brigade (many flacks and stringers for the AP and others) faithfully parrot and repeat these statements even after many times being called on them being lies.

    These Republicans are so shameless they stick with the lies ebven after refutation, because that is the money is.

    Their miserable Party would fold up like a cheap tissue paper tent in a thunderstorm if they didn't keep singing the message the billionaire fossil fuel deniers keep feeding them.

    On Friday, September 23rd, Syracuse New York's Erie Boulevard East was 105  degrees at 5:30 PM. I checked it 3 different places because I thought my digital gauge was off.  My home was only 96 a mile away. That is the most wintry, snowiest city in the country.  Nothing to see here, move along, we don't have enough evidence to say one way or the other, blahblah blah.

    Hypocrites and lying a wholes. The entire lot of them.

    cast away illusions, prepare for struggle

    by Pete Rock on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 05:55:40 PM PDT

  •  I especially hate how liberal wusses... (0+ / 0-)

    were so easily cowed into changing from "global warming" to "climate change".

    I suppose it is sort of funny how many of those who are too cowardly to fight for a simple and correct name are the same who whine about congresscritters having no spine.

    Physician heal thyself, and all that rot.

    I'm gonna go eat a steak. And fuck my wife. And pray to GOD - hatemailapalooza, 052210

    by punditician on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 05:57:11 PM PDT

    •  um (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      but it is climate change. which includes things that aren't experienced as warming, such as colder winters in some areas, and more severe storms.

      The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

      by Laurence Lewis on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 06:07:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  not a surprising comment (0+ / 0-)

      "Climate change" and "global warming" have both been used to describe this issue for a long time.

      A seminal paper was "Climate Change: Are We on the Brink of a Pronounced Global Warming?" published in 1975 in Science by Wally Broecker.

      Both terms are appropriate. The globe (on average) IS warming. And Climate around the world is changing as a result. One drives the other. They are both significant.

      An ambulance can only go so fast - Neil Young

      by mightymouse on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 06:25:43 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  What is more tragic.... (0+ / 0-)

    What really troubles me is that there are many people who will believe the Repub line.  

    the stupid and naive will always allow themselves to be swayed by the rapacious and greedy.  As it was, thus it always shall be.

    After all, for progressives, taking one for the team is desirable, but all too often at present, we are taking one from the team.

    by El Tomaso on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 05:57:59 PM PDT

  •  The consequences need more public attention. (0+ / 0-)

    That is why global climate change and the disaster that will occur because of it should be part of Stephen Colbert's "Keep Fear Alive" rally on 10.30.10.

  •  i often wonder (0+ / 0-)

    where these global warning deniers think they are going to live with all their money from industries causing global warming.

  •  Ike is spinning in his grave. n/t (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    It is better to light one candle than to curse the darkness - Eleanor Roosevelt

    by Fish in Illinois on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 06:11:17 PM PDT

  •  Maybe the Chinese can take the lead (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mightymouse the fight against the ruination of the planet, since Republican candidates for the Senate are obviously too stupid or crooked to accept the facts. I'm surprised they can remember to breathe.

    Hell, maybe the Chinese will figure out how to shrink people as in Kurt Vonnegut's masterful Slapstick and we'll all be fine living our little lives.

    Or maybe, just maybe.. We're fucked.

    Live more, fear less, fight harder

    by Anthony Page aka SecondComing on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 06:11:42 PM PDT

  •  What are the chances (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    that Marco Rubio studied the evidence?

    "I don't think there's the scientific evidence to justify it," Rubio said.

    And of course, his state is one that stands to lose the most.  It's much easier for him to declare it all bunk than to admit that Florida is in grave danger and to work on solutions.

    And at some point, when it becomes convenient for him to change his mind, should he ever decide to do so, will there be any consequences for his undoubtedly politically convenient choice today?

    Disclosure: I'm working as an unpaid citizen journalist covering the Sestak campaign/ PA Sen. race for Huffington Post's "Eyes and Ears 2010" project

    by joanneleon on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 06:18:34 PM PDT

  •  I am by profession a biologist. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mightymouse, A Siegel

    I am to be precise an evolutionary biologist.  I have published a fair number of journal articles, book chapters and other publications.  I have never received a dime for global climate change research and thus I don't have a vested interest in the results of research on the subject.  However the evidence has piled up and piled up, while these boobs use the almost non-existent "controversy" (as they do on evolution) to politicize something that should have no politics, so that they can get a short-term gain (presumably on the thought that Jesus will save their bacon or that they won't live long enough to reap the results of their folly.)  They are not above manufacturing facts and seem to consider it a virtue in the Ayn Rand tradition - profit, freedom without responsibility, and the worst of technocracy above everything. Even the most "religious" of them practice Social Darwinism, despite their hatred of true evolutionary though, but their real god is wealth - the great god Mazama.

    They are sowing the wind, and shell reap the whirlwind (or at least their children and grandchildren will.)  They are a hard-headed and hard-hearted people.  The unfortunate fact is that we will all go down with them.  

  •  Fiorina Has Flip Flopped (0+ / 0-)

    I saw her on television some time in the last few years, I think it may have been on Real Time, and she espoused the very sane view that unless we can foreclose the possibility that climate change is man made, the only rational course is to hedge our bets and take protective measures.

  •  To date the energy issue has been a sideshow for (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    boatsie, bogmanoc

    Democrats.   It needs to be the intense focus of the “Change We Can Believe In” Administration.  It needs to be the issue that is woven into every facet of American public opinion.  The American people need to be sold on an "Energy New Deal" to fight our "War on Terror".    The American people need to be sold on an "Energy New Deal" to tackle climate change.  The American people need to be sold on an "Energy New Deal" to retool our economy for a green energy future.  The American people need to be sold on an "Energy New Deal" for a healthier, cleaner environment.  The ideas are endless.  It’s the focus that is needed.

    A look back in time to the American economy during WWII reminds us what this country is capable of accomplishing when united in a common cause.

    This  "Energy New Deal" should be sold to the American public with patriotism, patriotism and more patriotism.  It should be spoken about with an abundance of hope and optimism.  As freedom gardens, war bonds, and ration coupons united us in WWII, Americans should be given a myriad of ways to participate.

    The Administration needs to enthusiastically endorse Vice President Al Gore's call for energy independence in 10 years the way President Kennedy challenged the nation to put a man on the moon within that same timeframe.  The “Yes We Can” tag line should be permanently tied to this challenge.  

    I believe Americans will willingly sacrifice if they are convinced that “Yes We Can” make the change; that the program offered is “Change We Can Believe In”.   I believe Americans will have the “Audacity to Hope” if this Administration and the Democratic Party emerge with the audacity to offer such a program.

    "Can we do it?"

    "YES WE CAN!!!"

    Don't forget the 10-2-10 One Nation Working Together March on Washington! Put this comment in your signature. Pass the word!!

    by Road Dog on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 06:49:41 PM PDT

  •  McCain once led the party on climate change (0+ / 0-)

    See what happened to him. Will he get his spine back? After the reelection? When? After teabaggers are history? When?

    And where are the churches? They had been so outspoken - also teabagged into koran burning and climate change denying?

    The churches have to lead the way again and it would be a losing cause for the GOP.

  •  Lawrence, can't rec, but sure would like to (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laurence Lewis, boatsie, eXtina

    add an eKos tag to your list.

    Thank you so much.

    "Never, desist till we ... extinguish this bloody traffic, of which our posterity, will scarce believe that it suffered a disgrace and dishonor to this country.

    by Regina in a Sears Kit House on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 08:13:21 PM PDT

  •  Hmmm (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laurence Lewis

    "And it's only the future of the world as we know it that's at stake."

    Then we're screwed. ;)

    Great post. It's obvious this was long ago not about convincing anybody with evidence. Conservatives think godalmighty capitalism is too fragile and weak to make the change over to a low-carbon economy, and they'd have to live like Afghans.

    I will now shamelessly plug my latest blog post:   What Is a Green Asteroid Anyway?

    The future is green:

    by bogmanoc on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 08:29:51 PM PDT

  •  Republicans versus Reality? (0+ / 0-)

    Republicans will win each and every time.  Count on it.

  •  if limbaugh/hannity can deny all day- (0+ / 0-)

    from the same stations that do the traffic weather and maybe even the pro or college sports, pillars of the community, and no one gives a shit, why should there be a problem?

    those radio stations make the denial acceptable because the left ignores them.  if limbaugh and hannity can do it all day to 50 mil a week why shouldn't it have a legitimate place at the table, no matter how irrational and idiotic it is.

    Progressives will lose all major messaging battles until they picket the limbaugh/hannity megastations and boycott those stations' local sponsors.

    by certainot on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 08:59:26 PM PDT

  •  Preaching to the choir... (0+ / 0-) can we tell them that won't listen?

  •  Have to say .. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laurence Lewis

    that it is sad that every single traditional media in the outlet in the nation has utterly failed to do anything like this.

    Blogging regularly at Get Energy Smart NOW! for a sustainable energy future.

    by A Siegel on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 09:13:45 PM PDT

  •  Republicans should visit Easter Island. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laurence Lewis, MixedContent

    It's a pretty good metaphor for what their denial means for the whole planet.

    Barack Obama: Ignores his legal obligation to prosecute people who tortured prisoners to death. Good at photo ops, though.

    by expatjourno on Mon Sep 27, 2010 at 01:19:39 AM PDT

  •  Geologist's Know (0+ / 0-)

    I'm a professional geologist.  The earth and organisms on it, including man, change and evolve all the time.  Many species 'move' when their environment changes, others try to manipulate their local environment, much like we are when we build shelters to keep us warm, or use fossil fuels or other energy sources to help survive both external and man-made phenomena and 'storms' of all sorts.  Embracing change, learning to adapt, has always worked better than trying to 'go back' and fight against nature.  Mankind is part of nature, we are part of the ecosystem, we are not apart from it, no matter how many want to believe it. A parking lot is just as natural a setting as a forest, unless you believe men are from outer space. Setting up large scale movements of people near floodprone areas to areas updip is the best long term solution.  Rolling back emissions is sn admirable goal, but it may not work, and to not start funding adaptation and large scale movements is almost too conservative to contemplate.  EMBRACE CHANGE!

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site