Bush has given us a new drinking game: Down a shot whenever the President uses the word “technology” in a climate speech. You’d get 19 shots for today’s 21 minute speech!

As predicted Bush closely follows the Frank Luntz playbook on how to seem like you care about the climate when you don’t. Bush stated the basic do-nothing message well:

Our investments in research and technology are bringing the world closer to a remarkable breakthrough – an age of clean energy where we can power our growing economies and improve the lives of our people and be responsible stewards of the earth the Almighty trusted to our care.

Translation: “If we had those technologies today, then maybe we could take genuine action now. But, darn it, people, we don’t. We can’t grow the economy and be responsible stewards of the earth quite yet. We are close, though, so be patient already and stop with all those calls for mandatory regulation. Sheesh!”

Since this is the main message of the shrewd Luntz-led delayers, who realized years ago it could be politically dangerous to be seen as opposing all action on global warming, let me repeat Luntz’s advice from his 2002 and 2005 memos to conservatives [both must-reads for progressives]. In his 2002 “Straight Talk” memo on climate change messaging he writes:

Read more

Momentarily, the conservative media fudged their climate coverage – but this time it was a bit personal.

In a front-page article for The Washington Times this week, the statements of Kit Batten–the Center for American Progress’s head of energy and environmental policy–were severely misconstrued. In its article on the climate talks in D.C. this week, the paper wrote:

Kit Batten, director of energy and environmental policy at the Center for American Progress, said she did not think the U.S. meetings would “pull away a lot of large emitting nations that have committed to the Kyoto process.”

Except that’s not Batten’s stance at all, nor does that represent Batten’s message during her interview with The Washington Times. Hours later, you can see a much-appreciated editorial correction:

CORRECTION: Due to an editing error, The Washington Times today incorrectly stated the position of Kit Batten, director of energy and environmental policy at the Center for American Progress. Ms. Batten said she was afraid that U.S. conferences on global warming would “pull away a lot of large emitting nations that have committed to the Kyoto process.”

Doh! Bush’s climate summit is nothing more than an obstructionist greenwashing stunt.

The U.S. media in general has blown the climate story countless times, and frankly, wouldn’t it be nice to see bolded CORRECTIONs plastered on each and every one of those pieces?

Once again, the foreign media coverage is not fooled by Bush’s PR stunt, while the U.S. media buys the White House line. UK’s The Independent labeled this a “Greenwashing Climate Summit” in its headline, and opened their story with:

For the first time in 16 years, a major environmental conference opens in Washington, hosted by the Bush administration. But no concrete results are expected, and that — say European participants — is the point of this high-level meeting.

Far from representing a Damascene conversion on climate change by President George Bush, the two-day gathering of the world’s biggest polluting nations is aimed at undermining the UN’s efforts to tackle global warming, say European sources. “The conference was called at very short notice,” said one participant. “It’s a cynical exercise in destabilising the UN process.”

So how does the AP puff piece on the summit begin?

Read more