As a matter of rhetoric, the President’s big job speech exceeded expectations, a solid A.  He used simple language and repetition — the cornerstones of effective public speaking — to promote his “American Jobs Act.”  He repeated some variation of the phrase “Pass this bill” 17times (see transcript here).

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews who, like many of us, has been highly critical of just how mealymouthed Obama has become, said it was “probably his most rousing political performance in a long while.”  HuffPost’s Howard Fineman writes, “Obama Puts Passion Into Speech Rarely Seen In His Presidency.”  If only Obama had been speaking this way for the past couple of years….

On substance, it was a solid B.  The biggest disappointment was that he never mentioned clean energy by name as a focus area.  No, I’m not going to keep giving him a failing grade for not talking about climate change in a jobs speech focused on the near term — although this speech shows precisely what he could have done 2 years ago to get the climate and clean energy jobs bill passed.

The most Obama said on clean energy was to continue his theme that clean energy is a core job-creating industry of the near future:

If we provide the right incentives and support – and if we make sure our trading partners play by the rules – we can be the ones to build everything from fuel-efficient cars to advanced biofuels to semiconductors that are sold all over the world.  That’s how America can be number one again.

And I have the Fact Sheet for the AJA, which points out the $25 billion school modernization effort can be used for “greening and energy efficiency upgrades.”  This is similar to the “Fix America’s Schools Today” initiative you can read about here.

The President also offered a strong defense for maintaining rules and regulations even during this tough times:

Read more

By Jessica Goad, Manager of Research and Outreach, Center for American Progress Action Fund

The House Natural Resources Committee began its fall agenda today with a hearing on creating jobs through developing offshore and renewable energy resources. The Center for American Progress Action Fund’s Vice President for Energy Policy Kate Gordon was on hand to argue that green jobs are a bright spot in the economy, but warned that this success will not last if we do not create a market within the U.S. for clean energy:

In conclusion, the U.S., frankly, risks squabbling while Rome burns on this issue. The future of energy and the economy lies in cleaner energy solutions. We must embrace that future now or we will risk become the world’s great importers of technology and innovation rather than its leaders. Thank you.

Watch it:

Meanwhile, Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-WA) spent his opening statement describing 10 policies that the President should focus on during his speech on jobs this evening. Seven of the ten policies that Rep. Hastings detailed heavily promote fossil fuels, such as drilling more in the Gulf of Mexico, opening up sensitive places in Alaska to drilling, and developing oil shale resources. (The other three policies that Hastings included on his list relate to renewable energy, but as ThinkProgress previously noted, the solutions that the Republican members put forth on this issue could pose “unintended consequences” to the industry).

House Republicans continue to promote the mature and highly profitable fossil fuels industry by accusing the Obama Administration of hindering oil and gas development. A report released yesterday by Wood Mackenzie and paid for by the American Petroleum Institute found that opening up more areas to drilling and getting rid of “regulatory burdens” will create 1.4 million jobs by 2030. The Wood Mackenzie witness at today’s hearing expanded on this point by describing how the “current path of policies which slow down the issuance of leases and drilling permits.”

But as Stephen Lacey at ClimateProgress pointed out yesterday, the oil and gas drilling in the U.S. is actively and steadily increasing under this Administration. Headwaters Economics found that U.S. onshore drilling activity was at 91 percent of the 20-year high. And, the U.S. is currently drilling more than anywhere else in the world: today, according to industry research firm Baker Hughes, there are 1,968 oil and gas drill rigs operating in the U.S. and 1,700 rigs operating in the rest of the world combined.

Read more

Galileo faces the Roman Inquisition who, without evidence, demand he recant his statements on heliocentrism.

The most head-exploding moment in last night’s GOP debate was this:

POLITICO: Gov. Perry, Gov. Huntsman was not specific about names, but the two of you do have a difference of opinion about climate change. Just recently in New Hampshire, you said that weekly and even daily scientists are coming forward to question the idea that human activity is behind climate change. Which scientists have you found most credible on this subject?

PERRY: Well, I do agree that there is — the science is — is not settled on this. The idea that we would put Americans’ economy at — at — at jeopardy based on scientific theory that’s not settled yet, to me, is just — is nonsense. I mean, it — I mean — and I tell somebody, I said, just because you have a group of scientists that have stood up and said here is the fact, Galileo got outvoted for a spell.

Let’s set aside that the U.S. National Academy of Sciences concluded its 2010 review of climate science saying these are “settled facts“: The “Earth system is warming” and “much of this warming is very likely due to human activities.”

It’s the Galileo line that drew all the attention.  The media may not be ready to offer a full-throated defense of climate science, but they know that Galileo was the scientist, that the Inquisition were composed of religious zealots analogous to Perry (who prayed for the EPA to stop environmental regulations), and Galileo didn’t get “outvoted.”

Invoking “Galileo” is Perry’s “dog-whistle” to the deniers, a name they like to invoke on their side, as laughable as that may sound — see “How climate science deniers spread doubt for political ends.”

NY Times Science reporter Henry Fountain has a piece that discusses this issue in more detail, “Historian Says Perry Misses Point on Galileo and Climate Change”:

Read more