Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

John McCain: Eco Warrior

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 03:30 PM
Original message
John McCain: Eco Warrior
Yikes, it’s really true. John McCain is running for president as a tree-hugging liberal.

No, not an all-the-time environmentalist — rather, as a swing-state-savvy, targeted-message-peddling, hoping-to-pick-up-the-votes-of-lifestyle-liberals-who-want-to-address-climate-change-on-the-cheap murky-shade-of-green Republican.

So, today, in the battleground state of Oregon, where a reverence for the outdoors requires that Republican contenders greenwash their appeals, McCain’s campaign will begin airing a new television commercial that essentially says: “Look, I’m not like George Bush and Dick Cheney. I don’t live in la-la land when it comes to global warming. I actually believe in something I like to call ’science.’”

The senator — who broke a little bit with Bush and Cheney on environmental issues, but who never really lined up with the serious Republican environmentalists who were isolated by the administration and burn-the-planet GOP leaders like Tom DeLay — is reinforcing the message with a major campaign swing through the northwest, where he hopes to put the sometimes swinging states of Oregon and Washington in play by presenting himself as John McCain: Eco-Warrior.

The presumptive Republican presidential nominee swept into Portlandon Monday to deliver a major address outlining his plan to “re-establish America’s environmental leadership in the world.” Here’s a hint about how he’ll do it: The McCain campaign says the candidates wants to “mobilize market forces.”

More: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/05/13/8916/

Curiously, I just spoke with someone last night who's falling for the "but he's not like Bush" line.

I think I'll call her back today and remind her of how Bush tried to outflank Gore in 2,000 with a "plan" to cut carbon dioxide emissions.

I'll ask if she recalls how that worked out:

Bush Changes Pledge on Emissions
By Seth Borenstein
Philadelphia Inquirer
March 14, 2001

Reversing a campaign pledge he made in September, President Bush announced yesterday that he would not regulate power plants' emissions of carbon dioxide, which scientists say contributes to global warming. Bush's change in position contradicted the public stance taken recently by Environmental Protection Agency head Christie Whitman.

Vice President Cheney, who is directing energy-policy oversight for the new administration, told Republican senators yesterday that promising to regulate carbon dioxide "was a mistake." The administration must back away from Bush's promise because of a national energy crisis and high electricity prices, Cheney said. The burning of fossil fuels - especially coal and oil - produces carbon dioxide, a key ingredient of global warming, the world's top scientists reiterated earlier this year in a UN report.

In a letter yesterday to Sen. Chuck Hagel (R., Neb.), Bush said that regulating carbon dioxide would reduce the use of coal to generate electricity. Hagel and three other Republican senators - Larry Craig of Idaho, Pat Roberts of Kansas and Jesse Helms of North Carolina - had written Bush to oppose the regulation plan. "We must be very careful not to take actions that could harm consumers," Bush's letter said. His policy change angered environmental groups and scientists who study global warming, but utility interests cheered.

"It only took Bush 60 days to walk away from his most explicit environmental campaign promise," said Philip E. Clapp, president of the Washington-based National Environmental Trust. During his campaign, Bush offered a "four pollutant" plan to regulate carbon dioxide and mercury emissions from power plants under the Clean Air Act, just as the law now regulates sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide, which cause smog.

http://globalpolicy.igc.org/socecon/envronmt/bore0314.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Reynardo Parris Donating Member (12 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 06:01 PM
Response to Original message
1. Obama's plan (and Clinton's) is far superior
This "cap and trade" deal does not do enough to cut emissions. I read an article that affirmed that the North Pole could be ice-free this year.
The urgency is here now. Urgent measures are therefore necessary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 04:27 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC