HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Video & Multimedia (Forum) » What Happened To The Repu...

Tue Mar 11, 2014, 05:49 AM

What Happened To The Republican Consensus On Climate Change?

#t=84

This video includes quotes from George W. Bush, Sarah Palin, House Speaker Boehner, Senator John McCain and others talking about how they see Climate Change as a threat, that it is real and that it is human caused.

So, what happened here?

7 replies, 2375 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 7 replies Author Time Post
Reply What Happened To The Republican Consensus On Climate Change? (Original post)
rosesaylavee Mar 2014 OP
CanonRay Mar 2014 #1
daybranch Mar 2014 #3
Enthusiast Mar 2014 #2
alc Mar 2014 #4
drynberg Mar 2014 #5
proverbialwisdom Mar 2014 #6
tclambert Mar 2014 #7

Response to rosesaylavee (Original post)

Tue Mar 11, 2014, 07:46 AM

1. The Koch Brothers and their money happened

That's what happened. They bought the GOP, lock stock and barrel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CanonRay (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 11, 2014, 08:16 AM

3. Right!

The republicans have been sold. But they meant it tnat way. They wanted to profit from their positions and the donors were available with the cash and other perks. I am so sick of hearing what republicans believe on social issues, when I know they care only about their own economics and ability to get richer . Social issues are just a guise they use to trick ignorants. If their donors want something, the republicans want to help them get it. This is what they do. They stand for nothing but greed and will use any method they can to get richer. I am a little sick of how well these traitors are treated. Gerrymandering to take away the force of our vote here in Ohio sure seems traitorous in my mind. Every vote cast in Ohio should carry more or less equal weight but the Gerrymandering caused 12 republicans to go to the US House and only 4 democrats although the number of votes cast for either of the major parties was bout the same. If followers of Democratic Underground really want to elect more Democrats, a good way to start would be to support elimination of Gerrymandering in Ohio. This elimination alone should add 4 more Democrats in the US House of Representatives even if Republicans and Democrats cast even numbers of ballots. This is a pretty big payoff for the whole country if we remove Gerrymandering in Ohio. For us in Ohio, according to a League of Women Voters study 106 of 109 legislators were selected by Gerrymandering in Ohio. All of you can help us, no matter where you live, no matter your age, and no matter your financial situation. Please pledge to help us end Gerrymandering. Please pledge to help on our MoveOn petition The link is http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/gerrymandering-in-ohio?source=c.fwd&r_by=99591
Democracy supported anywhere supports democracy everywhere. Thank you for reading.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rosesaylavee (Original post)

Tue Mar 11, 2014, 07:49 AM

2. That's shocking. Obviously fossil fuel interests have

changed the landscape. No pun intended. As with all the other pressing issues, the nation is hostage to big money. And it is ruining the nation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rosesaylavee (Original post)

Tue Mar 11, 2014, 08:22 AM

4. a few things - mostly carbon markets


a few major things have happened to reduce republican support

1. up until 2010 the IMF was pushing for international carbon markets. That would mean 10s of billions of dollars a year for carbon brokers (mostly bankers) to do nothing but trade papers (huge profit margin). In summer 2010 the IMF said the future for carbon markets is dead. (Copenhagen climate talks didn't come to any agreement in December 2009 and they couldn't find another way to push carbon markets than an international agreement)

2. after TAR (2001) the most vocal scientists insisted that all man made forcing was CO2. The other factors were insignificant (black soot, urbanization, deforestation, methane, etc). That made an easy target - CO2. Now there's consensus that the other factors are as significant as CO2 when added together. That makes the target harder since "fixing" the CO2 problem still leaves us with enough forcing to cause the catastrophic feedback (assuming the feedback models are right)

3. a lot of dire warnings were made 5-10 years ago that didn't occur. there are plenty of explanations why, but people don't want to hear explanations. if those who "cried wolf" 15 years ago can (need to) explain why their warning didn't happen now why won't they be coming up with new explanations in another 10/20/50 years why they were right but what they warned about didn't happen. It's hard for politicians to keep people wanting carbon markets when they keep being told things that don't pan out.


On the science side the republicans have a harder battle supporting climate change also. There are 2 components to global warming.

forcing is definitely real and man-made. it's also not catastrophic. this is what 98% of climate scientists agree on.

feedback (additional temperature increase after the forcing) is catastrophic but is based on models rather than something you can observe and measure. but under 50% of climate scientist agree it's a danger.

When your donors and base either want carbon markets or wants humans to stop polluting the environment they are happy to let you conflate these 2 and say that 98% of the climate scientists believe in catastrophic global warming (vs non-catastrophic global warming). When your donors have given up on the carbon market "gold mine" and base has decided jobs are more important than environment they don't let you get away with that trick.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rosesaylavee (Original post)

Tue Mar 11, 2014, 08:54 AM

5. THIS RAPID ABOUT FACE DEMONSTRATES TOTAL LACK OF SINCERITY

So, what to do? I say use these "changes" of an extreme nature without facts changing to show in Nov. elections that we are being lied to by these Fossil Fuel Hacks, selling our very future for their own gains. I say expose these ReThugs for the Hoes they are, let the voters know and get 'em to the polls. We are less than 8 months from the biggest election of my 65 years on this 3rd rock. Time to ACT.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rosesaylavee (Original post)

Tue Mar 11, 2014, 12:23 PM

6. Booker read this last night during his turn, naturally.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/02/opinion/a-republican-case-for-climate-action.html?_r=0

OP-ED CONTRIBUTORS

A Republican Case for Climate Action
By WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS, LEE M. THOMAS, WILLIAM K. REILLY and CHRISTINE TODD WHITMAN

Published: August 1, 2013


EACH of us took turns over the past 43 years running the Environmental Protection Agency. We served Republican presidents, but we have a message that transcends political affiliation: the United States must move now on substantive steps to curb climate change, at home and internationally.

There is no longer any credible scientific debate about the basic facts: our world continues to warm, with the last decade the hottest in modern records, and the deep ocean warming faster than the earth’s atmosphere. Sea level is rising. Arctic Sea ice is melting years faster than projected.

The costs of inaction are undeniable. The lines of scientific evidence grow only stronger and more numerous. And the window of time remaining to act is growing smaller: delay could mean that warming becomes “locked in.”

A market-based approach, like a carbon tax, would be the best path to reducing greenhouse-gas emissions, but that is unachievable in the current political gridlock in Washington. Dealing with this political reality, President Obama’s June climate action plan lays out achievable actions that would deliver real progress. He will use his executive powers to require reductions in the amount of carbon dioxide emitted by the nation’s power plants and spur increased investment in clean energy technology, which is inarguably the path we must follow to ensure a strong economy along with a livable climate.

<>


Many other senators last night discussed a polluters tax (cents per ton, I think) to pay for development of renewable energy projects/jobs. Why give away that option?

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/05/08/1702861/price-carbon-tax-broad-bipartisan-support-congress/#

A Price Is Right: Carbon Tax Has Very Broad, Bipartisan Support (Outside Of Congress)
BY RYAN KORONOWSKI ON MAY 8, 2013 AT 4:59 PM

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rosesaylavee (Original post)

Tue Mar 11, 2014, 01:19 PM

7. Yes, yes, all those guys say one thing. But what do the Koch brothers say?

And the CEOs of Exxon/Mobil and other oil companies? Those are the Republicans who really matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread