ThinkProgress Logo

Climate Progress

Bush Touts Meaningless Greenhouse Gas Targets While Making his Double-U-Turn on Climate

Readers of Climate Progress knew that “Bush’s astonishing U-turn on global warming,” predicted by Big Media, would be a Double-U Turn. And indeed Reuters now explains “The Bush administration has no plans to ease its opposition to national limits on greenhouse gas output.” The Wall Street Journal gives more detail (subs. req’d):

The president also damped speculation that his administration is exploring a major shift in global-warming policy and may soon embrace some kind of formal government-imposed limits. Though Mr. Bush did imply that a shift could happen in the unlikely event that the modest voluntary goals set by his administration to reduce so-called greenhouse-gas emissions were failing.

NOTE #1: It is time for the media to stop using the modifier “so-called” for greenhouse-gas emissions. Even scientific journals refer to carbon dioxide, methane, and the like as plain old greenhouse-gas emissions.

NOTE#2: If the WSJ calls an administration goal “modest,” it must be pretty darn modest — and in fact Bush’s voluntary “goals” are so modest that they don’t actually require anybody to do anything but continue the rate of growth of GDP and greenhouse gases that the country experienced before Bush became president — as explained by both World Resources Institute and the Pew Climate Center.

Still, Bush goes on to say:

“I put some targets out there and we’re meeting those targets,” Mr. Bush said. “But should we not meet the targets, then I said that the country ought to consider a cap and trade,” in emissions credits, he said.

Since Bush’s lame targets are virtually unmissable, this is one more reiteration of his opposition to carbon caps, which are the main strategy the rest of the industrialized world has adopted to address the climate problem.

Politics

Gingrich: House Leadership Would Have Been Accused Of ‘Gay Bashing’ If They Investigated Foley ‘Overly Aggressively’

This morning on Fox News Sunday, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich excused the House leadership for their apparent cover-up of Mark Foley’s predatory behavior. Gingrich said the emails seen by House leadership were “relatively innocuous, there was nothing sexual in those notes.” Asked if there should be “second thoughts” about the leadership’s conduct, Gingrinch responded:

Well, you could have second thoughts about it, but I think had they overly aggressively reacted to the initial round, they would have also been accused of gay bashing.

Watch it:

[flv http://video.thinkprogress.org/2006/10/newtfoley.320.240.flv]

Full transcript: Read more

Politics

Showing up

dean.jpg

I wasn’t expecting this reaction at all, but having read the article I think Matt Bai really nails it, writing about Howard Dean, his “50 State Strategy,” his conflicts with the DSCC and DCCC, and related matters:

Most analysts in both parties now believe that Democrats have better-than-even odds of winning at least the House. But if they don’t, rather than dissect the mechanical failures that cost them a few thousand votes here or there, Democrats might be forced to admit, at long last, that there is a structural flaw in their theory of party-building. Even a near miss, at a time of such overwhelming opportunity, would suggest that a national party may not, in fact, be able to win over the long term by fixating on a select group of industrial states while condemning entire regions of the country to what amounts to one-party rule. Which would mean that Howard Dean is right to replant his party’s flag in the towns and counties along America’s less-traveled highways, even if his plan isn’t perfect, and even if he isn’t the best messenger to carry it out. As another flawed visionary, the filmmaker Woody Allen, once put it, 80 percent of success is just showing up.

Another thing I would add, that Bai doesn’t really get into, is that just about every election looks uniquely crucial. Which isn’t to deny that 2006 does, in fact, look uniquely crucial. But I recall 2004 and 2002 as having looked the same way. This is just a natural human bias toward over-emphasizing the present, but there it is none the less. Everyone agrees that the long term needs to be addressed sometime or other and, really, there’s no time like the present.

Culture

Playbook

Bill Simmons has some doubts about Al Saunders’ legendary playbook:

[A]llow me to be the 10,000th person to chime in on Al Saunders’ 700-page playbook. I’d like to think that I’m a relatively smart person — did well on my SATs once upon a time, haven’t had a job where I had to shower before 10:30 a.m. in my entire life, feel like I’m reasonably well-read, and so on. With that said, the thought of memorizing a 700-page playbook gives me the shakes. I don’t feel like I could do it. So how does someone like Clinton Portis or Chris Cooley pull it off? Wouldn’t there be screw-ups all the time? We’re forced to read 25 stories a day about Terrell Owens, but I’d love to read one explaining why it’s a smart idea to have a 700-page playbook. Just one.

I’ve been assuming this “700 pages” business is some kind of bullshit for much that reason; either there is not 700 page playbook or else there’s some kind of counting trick happening here.

Politics

Reynolds accepted $100k from Foley in July.

According to our Foley coverup timeline, Rep. Tom Reynolds (R-NY) was informed of Foley’s actions towards House pages in February or March 2006. The New York Daily News reports:

1) “Reynolds’s personal PAC, TOMPAC, wrote Foley a check for $5,000 on May 10, 2006.”

2) “On July 27, 2006, the [National Republican Congressional Committee], which Reynolds chairs, accepted an unusually large contribution of $100,000 from Foley. Hard to imagine something of that size just slipping past the chairman.”

Yglesias

Democracy Alliance

Ari Berman has a fantastic article in the new issue of The Nation on the subject of the Democracy Alliance — the newish coalition of rich liberals that’s been counted on to fund the creation of a new progressive infrastructure to save America, etc. To make a long story short, there are some problems here . . . hopefully problems that will be resolved (it’s not super-unusual for something to get off to a rocky start), but one fears they may not be.

Politics

Barlett: White House Opposes Independent Probe of Foley Scandal, Praises House Leadership As ‘Very Aggressive’

House leadership “knew for months about e-mail traffic between Representative Mark Foley and a former teenage page, but kept the matter secret and allowed Mr. Foley to remain head of a Congressional caucus on children’s issues.”

Nevertheless, this morning on ABC, top White House aide Dan Bartlett praised the House leadership’s handling of the Foley scandal as “very aggressive,” and said the White House opposes an independent investigation of the issue. Watch it:

[flv http://video.thinkprogress.org/2006/10/bartfoley.320.240.flv]

Digg It!

Full transcript: Read more

Media

Hume Compares Mark Foley To President Clinton

This morning on Fox News Sunday, Brit Hume compared Mark Foley’s predatory behavior towards underage pages to President Clinton’s relationship with Monica Lewinsky. Hume said that while Foley is now “in total disgrace in his party,” Clinton’s “inappropriate behavior toward a subordinate [didn't] even cost Bill Clinton his standing in his party.” Watch it:

[flv http://video.thinkprogress.org/2006/10/humeclinton.320.240.flv]

There is zero comparison between Foley’s behavior and Clinton’s. Foley made unwanted advances towards underage boys which one page described as “sick” and reported to authorities. The leadership of Foley’s party covered up his behavior for months.

President Clinton had a consensual relationship with an adult. The fact that it was an extramarital affair was virtually unanimously condemned by members of both parties.

Digg It!

Full transcript: Read more

Older

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up