Let me ask you a question.

[WilliamPitt]

According to Raw Story, televangelist Pat Robertson said God causes power outages to mock global warming.

So, you tell me: what's crazier?

Robertson saying this crap?

Or the Obama administration pushing fracking, the Keystone XL pipeline (which already has tar sands oil flowing through the southern half), and - as was announced this morning in the Times - allowing BP back into the Gulf to drill for oil again?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/14/business/energy-environment/epa-to-lift-suspension-of-oil-leases-for-bp.html

One denies climate change.

The other is actively helping it.

So there's crazy, and then there's CRAZY.

[SidDithers]

1. Robertson is crazier...nt

Sid

[NCTraveler]

18. It's nice when the first answer is the correct one. nt.

[1StrongBlackMan]

38. +1 eom.

[mountain grammy]

20. Always..

[Phentex]

2. Robertson is crazier...nt

...

[roguevalley]

99. robinson is a windbag without real power. He is the less crazy one here.

[MineralMan]

3. Uff da! One thing has nothing to do with the other.

I hope you're not planning to use that false equivalency in a major piece of writing.

Think of your reputation, Will...

[shenmue]

77. True

But why stop at the truth if he can just complain about Pres. Obama?

[MineralMan]

78. No excuse needed for that, though.

[sheshe2]

97. I knew before I clicked the link that it would

another, Bash Barack day!

Rinse recycle repeat!

[tavalon]

103. Oh, knock it off. Will is a supporter of President Obama, just as I am.

We're just both capable of seeing that many times, our Emperor is without his clothes and we have not problem pointing it out. It's a bit bizarre to be this far into the Obama administration and see nothing wrong.

[reddread]

4. Have to go with Jerry Brown's fracking in a drought policies n/t

[abelenkpe]

19. Fracking in earthquake prone state too.

So dissappointed

[seveneyes]

5. Religious crazy trumps Economic follies

Religious insanity will get people killed sooner.

[mindwalker_i]

26. However, making global climate change worse

will kill ALL of us. I'd say that's a bigger problem.

The difference isn't in levels of crazy, it's between crazy and stupid. Robertson is crazy. Policies that promote fracking and burning carbon are stupid.

[LanternWaste]

69. Political and economic crazy seems to kill...

Political and economic crazy seems to kill just as effectively, just as efficiently, and in the same, if not greater numbers...

[Shankapotomus]

6. You have to take into account

that some of the nasty stuff the President agrees to may be out of political strategy. If indeed, he is someone who is twelve moves ahead of Republicans, you have to at least theorize a lot of what he does is aimed at trapping Republicans. In other words, if you know what they want will go wrong, give it to them and then you are in a much better position to negotiate or even demand what you really want later on.

The difference is we can mostly be sure Robertson, to a large extent, really believes the crap he sells.

[sabrina 1]

39. Do you have any examples of how that strategy has worked so far?

Take offshore drilling. For 30 years Democrats managed to keep the ban in place. How has lifting exposed Republicans and protected the environment?

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

48. Well, when you're 12 steps ahead...

...you never have to come up with examples.

[sabrina 1]

53. So, those who haven't seen the last step, where we win on these important

issues, are just too blind to see how clever this strategy is.

I suppose that's possible ....

Anything is possible, including there is no great chess game being played.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

67. on the other hand...

...let's look at TPP, an agreement Obama clearly opposes. How do we know this? Let's look at steps 1 thru 12.

Step 1: join the TPPA (2011)
Step 2: seek fast-track TPP
Step 3: popular opposition swells
Step 4: Congressional opposition grows
Step 5: Congress blocks fast-track
Step 6: Congress does nothing and business as usual for years
Step 7: Nearing the end of his term, Obama begins to second guess the wisdom of TPP
Step 8: Obama admin stops defending TPP
Step 9: Obama comes out and says, "No deal."

Did it in 9 steps Obama!!!

We're at the start of Step 6 now. Working exactly as planned!!!!!!!!!! But cannot claim victory for a few more years. Darn, have to look for another example of 12 step success.

I know!!!

Step 1: I admitted I was powerless over alcohol...

No, that's not it!!!!!!!!

[sabrina 1]

70. Yes, you're missing three steps. How about:

Step 10: Republicans threaten to shut down the Government if Obama won't support the TPP.
Step 11: Obama Invites Boehner to the WH to discuss compromise where Boehner demands cuts to SS as part of Compromise.
Step 12: WH explains why they were forced to choose between SS cuts and blocking the TPP.

And from that point on, we are bombarded with 'what did you want Dems to do? Cut SS benefits 'explanations' of why we 'won'?

Does that mean we checkmated them or they checkmated us? It's so confusing.

Seems they get everything they want when we 'compromise', but I could be wrong.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

72. OH! Nailed it!!!!

[tomp]

109. there is a great game being played.

on one side are the rich, the republicans AND the democrats and on the other side is all the rest of us. this is the undeniable fundamental truth of american politics (this applies on a world scale as well). the sooner people understand this the sooner we can become more effective in political action.

[Skittles]

92. or, apparently, be held accountable for ANYTHING

[Shankapotomus]

50. That I can't account for

I was only addressing the comparison between the President and Robertson. But point taken.

[sabrina 1]

56. Well, on that question I think, and always have, that Robertson is crazy.

I do not think the President is crazy. But I think that policies that help speed up the destruction of the environment are crazy on a much larger scale because we ALL have to live here, including those who are profiting from the destruction. Their children will have to live here.

Maybe short sighted, being kind, is a better description than 'crazy' or just plain greedy. Willing to risk the future of everyone on the planet, including their own loved ones, I don't know what to call that frankly.

[cheapdate]

102. There has been offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico

since the 1930s. There has been a moratorium on oil and gas leasing off the west coast and highly restricted leasing off the Atlantic coast and the eastern Gulf of Mexico since the 1980s. In 2006 congress opened up new areas of the western Gulf of Mexico and in 2008 George W. Bush lifted restrictions on other areas that were protected by executive orders.

The Obama administration has moved to expand oil and gas leases in the western Gulf of Mexico. There aren't any planned sales of oil and gas leases for the Atlantic coast or the eastern Gulf of Mexico that I'm aware of. The moratorium on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is still in place.

Most of the oil we use in the United States is for transportation. We consume about 20 million barrels per day, most of which is used for transportation. The Obama administration has done more to support and expand alternative and renewable sources of energy than any other administration in my lifetime.

I'm sure that a lot more could be done if a majority in the congress would agree, but the fact is that a large segment of the American public are ideologically and ethically opposed to anything that might be considered "progressive" or that sounds like "environmentalism". Many are downright hostile toward it. The problem is bigger than one president acting alone with an opposition party controlling half of the congress.

I think the biggest step we could take would be to get rid of the automobile.

[SammyWinstonJack]

71. Oh gawd.

It never ends.

[Skittles]

91. don't you understand, SammyWinstonJack?

it's a never-ending chess game! GET WITH THE PROGRAM!!!

[Jackpine Radical]

86. Elmer Gantry--Oops--I mean Pat "Blood Diamond" Robertson

no more believes in his own twaddle than I believe that the moon is made of green cheese.

[jsr]

7. While BP is trying to halt its spill payments - and back out of the settlement it signed?

[Ichingcarpenter]

8. Well.....

'I'm more interested in looking forward than I am in looking backwards. ' and
Obama's Natural Gas Support Signals Bright Fracking Future


http://www.exxonmobilperspectives.com/2013/11/22/fracking-safe-says-obama-administration/



More than 250 organizations, including the Center For Biological Diversity, Food & Water Watch and the Post Carbon Institute, said methane from fracked wells would exacerbate climate change and harm U.S. citizens. The groups cite an International Energy Agency Study finding that global average temperature could rise more than 6 degrees Fahrenheit even if methane leaks amounted to only 1 percent of gas produced from fracking.

[Ichingcarpenter]

32. billions of barrels of toxic oil and gas waste are falling through regulatory cracks

America’s dirtiest secret
How billions of barrels of toxic oil and gas waste are falling through regulatory cracks




The oil and gas industry has a dirty little secret, make that a dirty big secret … no, make that one of the biggest, dirtiest secrets in U.S. history.

What is no secret these days is that the potential for negative environmental and health impacts as a result of oil and gas exploration and production activity is very real.

Concern over fracking, with its toxic cocktail composed of some combination of between 300 and 750 chemicals, 70 percent of which are known to be harmful to humans because they are carcinogenic or endocrine disruptors, etc., gets most of our collective attention these days. But this industry practice is not the only or largest contamination problem our nation faces as the result of oil and gas development.

In fact, the oil and gas industry’s other contamination problems are so large, they have literally been deemed impossible to prevent or even clean up by both industry and government. As a result, an unimaginable tonnage of contamination is being placed into our environment every year thanks to the near total lack of regulations over oil and gas exploration and production wastes.

The story behind this unregulated onslaught of contamination is so bizarre as to seem impossible, but it isn’t.

We often hear of the “Halliburton loophole,” a name used to describe a regulatory exemption that was created for the industry in 2005 to relieve fracking fluid of the burden of the Safe Drinking Water Act. But the Halliburton loophole is just one small exemption to federal regulations for the oil and gas industry. There are many others.

The mother of all oil and gas waste exemptions had its beginnings in 1978 when the EPA proposed reduced requirements for a couple of types of large-volume wastes associated with the oil and gas industry, namely produced water and drilling muds.



Today, the federal government and the oil and gas industry seem to have created a revisionist history of this early exemption process that gutted the requirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 — an act created specifically to guarantee that there was cradle-to-grave oversight and enforcement for all hazardous wastes under RCRA’s Subtitle C.

The modern version of the Subtitle C exemption fictitiously ......................................more


http://www.boulderweekly.com/article-12516-americarss-dirtiest-secret.html

[11 Bravo]

9. In the Crazy Derby it's Robertson by two lengths.

(But it saddens me that a guy I voted for twice is even in the race.)

[whatchamacallit]

89. +1

How I feel too :/

[mmonk]

10. I can only worry about reality, so the Obama administration decision is crazier.

[truebluegreen]

11. When the human race is facing a potentially extinction level crisis,

the craziness of one religious whackjob isn't even in the running.

[AverageJoe90]

96. I disagree with you on Robertson; he is definitely THE crazy one by far.

Furthermore, in fact, humanity is NOT actually at risk for outright extinction by AGW alone. Yes, we need to deal with it, but it's not going to be able to destroy all of humanity. Even a nuclear war in the '80s wouldn't have quite succeeded in that(though it would have come a lot closer, admittedly).

Climate denial is wacky, but so is doomerism; in fact, the only real major difference between the two is that one is primarily subscribed to by the hard-right and the other by the far-left(you know, the FDL types, etc.?).

[Kelvin Mace]

12. Well...

both men will make a LOT of money personally for their actions, so they are unconcerned about how these actions are perceived.

[SammyWinstonJack]

76. Yep.

[snooper2]

13. crazy is bitching about a single pipeline

I don't remember seeing a single post about the new Flanagan South Pipeline Project

(Here go the googles LOL)


Is it just because "Keystone" has a catchy name? We'll jump on that one, it's easy to remember just like the beer!

[1StrongBlackMan]

47. +1 ...

I suspect it's because Keystone is something that the republicans really, really want ... so President Obama MUST oppose it, despite the fact that the oil will come out of the ground ... will enter the global market ... and will be burned (in China) ... whether the pipeline is built or not.

With that said (and that recognition), my only objection to Keystone is its path will take it through environmentally sensitive areas. But that is far less dramatic than yelling, "This pipeline will hasten a global extinction!"

[mrdmk]

93. Yes, all of the pipelines do create a hazard. Pipelines are less of a hazard than rail or truck...

But the pipeline itself is not the problem. The problems are two: 1) The Bullying (Eminent Domain) tactic land grab, and 2) The source of the oil (tar sands), which is environmentally destructive.

These are the main issues with the entire project because of the source and the ramifications of the process...

[JackRiddler]

100. Not true.

The rock oil being beaten out of the tar sands for the Keystone XL is not currently economically viable without the pipeline. The stuff about China is propaganda to justify this atrocity. It may turn out to be true in a few years, but not currently. Of course, if it turns out to be true, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy of those who would do anything other than start the necessary switch away from hydrocarbon energy.

[1StrongBlackMan]

101. Okay. eom.

[zeemike]

14. They both work together

To triangulate public opinion toward the goal of the industry.
It has been done to us for years.

[marions ghost]

58. +++ for Truth

The whole trajectory of this Corporatocracy is insane.

[MisterP]

85. and crazy and cynical have simultaneously been converging

it's coming from all 4 elements of the Reagan Coalition--fundies, libertarians, corpo shills, the military

and since people don't pay sustained attention, the one can say he's Godly while supporting blood diamonds and the other can just put his arms around two technocratic TV hosts

[randr]

15. Robetson may be clinically crazier

but the madness of pushing for more fossil fuel use has far reaching consequences affecting all life on Earth.
I would call it the different sides of the same coin.

[geek tragedy]

16. what's crazy is people who drive cars complaining about oil production nt

[reddread]

25. crazy is thinking that sort of intellectual shortcut fools Democratic voters.

but conservatives cant quite catch the final clue there.

[geek tragedy]

27. is there carbon-neutral oil? nt

[reddread]

28. people use bicycles, buses trains subways car pool walk run

and you pass simplified generalized right wing memes dismissing frack protests.

[geek tragedy]

31. this thread is complaining that oil production increases global warming

not talking about pollution, talking about global warming effects.

fracking is bad because it creates localized pollution and other side effects

[cali]

37. Not all driving habits are equal, not all cars are equal.

Fracking destroys the environment and and is detrimental to health.

[geek tragedy]

40. fracking is bad because of its localized effects, especially pollution

but, in terms of global warming all oil is bad, all oil consumption is bad.

if people buy oil, it has to get extracted from the earth's crust somewhere

[cali]

43. fracking is particularly bad in this country because of the insane explosion

of the number of fracking operations and because the industry is largely exempt from EPA regulations.

[geek tragedy]

44. i agree with that, that's the argument to use against fracking nt

[sabrina 1]

42. That's kind of like blaming the people in a country where their government deprives

the people of eating food that is not contaminated, who have no choice but to feed their children contaminated food, that it's the people's fault.

Are you aware of how many times that nonsense has been used to try to dismiss this issue as unimportant?

Here's what we the people have done, well Democrats I should say, to try to make it unnecessary to drive cars. We've elected DEMOCRATS.

Now explain how well that has worked to help people have the choices they clearly want so they do not need to rely on the only thing forced on them to survive in this society?

[1StrongBlackMan]

49. What? ...

folks can't jump on the flavor of the day oppositional movement, without changing their personal, and contributing, conduct? What kind of oppositional movement would that be?

[geek tragedy]

52. I get criticisms of certain kinds of extraction--they are all not the same

but if one's going to object to oil production in general, well, don't gas up then, because that's why there is oil production

[1StrongBlackMan]

54. But ... But ...

"My weekly tank fulls is but a drop in the ocean of oil usage! ... My stopping won't make a difference! ... wait ... "Screw it! I'm special ... and damn you for pointing out my hypocrisy!"

[geek tragedy]

57. I figure not owning a car, not having kids, using public transportation,

living in an energy efficient building, etc is our contribution

[1StrongBlackMan]

60. Not good enough ...

you MUST live in an earthen hut and farm no more than a quarter acre (with hand tools), divided into quadrants for crop rotation.

[geek tragedy]

64. not allowed in Brooklyn, I'm afraid

we do have compost bins and a veggie garden though, along with a plum tree and blueberry bushes.

[1StrongBlackMan]

66. Excuses ... excuses ...

you, personally and on an individual level, are killing my planet.

Now excuse me traffic on the express way is moving again and the law frowns upon posting while driving.

[sabrina 1]

73. There are other forms of energy. Has that occurred to you?

But the money to be made from helping to destroy the environment is far too tempting and there would have to be a will to end the profiteering, and there isn't, that is why it continues.

[geek tragedy]

74. I rely on public transporation that runs on electricity, so yes I know nt

[demwing]

17. if God wanted to mock Global Warming

wouldn't he just turn up the Universal A/C? Maybe snap his fingers and make Al Gore appear on live TV in nothing but a pink tutu and a big, fake, Snidely Whiplash mustache, frozen in a block of ice, and marked by a bronze plaque labeled "Global Warm This, Bitches!"?

No, all we get is power outages? (cue the sad trombone noise...)

uhmm...hey Pat Robertson?

Your God is too small...

[n2doc]

21. Not crazy- corrupt

There are those who think that any change that is severe enough to affect them won't take place for a long time. And that if there is change, the best way to prepare is to amass enough $$$ to be able to move to better places and buy the necessities. This is a true elitist philosophy.

It's not the same as saying that a cold winter is due to gay marriage. That's insane.

[fleabiscuit]

22. I think you are arguing a God of the gaps question.

Perhaps in the division, or gap, between the two is the answer.

Let's look at the gap:

Politics & Religion
____________________M___O___N___E___Y_________________

Religion & Poitics



I don't see much difference on either side.

[PowerToThePeople]

23. One is "crazy" one is "murderous"

But, I am complicit as well. I still drive a fossil fueled vehicle. I still eat non-local foods. I still purchase items manufactured internationally. I am not a Saint.

It is true, as President he should be pushing for sustainable energy and not this world destroying crap. May as well have President Conoco or President Koch industries in there.

[bigwillq]

24. Robertson is crazier

but I already knew that.

The other that is actively helping it, that's very disappointing.

Both are just as bad.

[aikoaiko]

29. Will, did you let your teabagger cousin have access to your account again?

[GliderGuider]

30. At least Robertson is honest about his agenda. nt

[fascisthunter]

33. Only one of the Two is Having More of an Effect on Our Existence

[bigwillq]

36. Congrats on 29,000 posts!

[fascisthunter]

62. Thanks

[cali]

34. Robertson is crazy. The President is sadly a corporate player.

[bkanderson76]

35. What's Crazy is that Pat Robertson's discussion with God isn't anything

close to what God was telling me.....Now don't get me wrong here, but I tend to think somebody is lying.

[L0oniX]

41. Calling for assasination of a president or sending out drones to kill Americans?

[Capt. Obvious]

45. Why do you hate Obama?

Was I first to say that?

[WilliamPitt]

46. Not sure.

Ignore is my friend.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

51. Robertson will die very soon, Obama's decisions will live on for generations

Obama worse

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

55. So, Obama is doing God's work if he caves to the oil/gas industry...again?

[tea and oranges]

59. Robertson is obviously a victim of dementia

Our prez is a victim of demented corporate policies based on greed.

[harun]

61. Not to deminish the importance of Keystone XL, but I think it is simply a distraction

I mean there are a FEW (sarcasm) pipelines already in place.



The general population is not told who maintains them, who is responsible in case a cleanup is needed, who is responsible if they go out of service for dismantling them safely, etc. etc.

No information or outrage about any of them. Why should Keystone XL get all the attention and we ignore the rest?

[WilliamPitt]

68. Because it will be carrying tar sands oil

The most disgusting, pollutive oil in existence.

Emphasis on Keystone XL rightly goes beyond the pipeline itself, but also to the extraction process for the oil itself. The pipeline will leak (because all pipelines leak), which will cause pollution, which is terrible...but the process of extracting that oil is more dangerous by orders of magnitude.

So that's why.

[Throd]

63. Robertson

[Autumn]

65. Robertson is crazy and soliciting favors, Obama is paying back the favors.

Neither are looking out for people, or their souls for that matter.

[Martin Eden]

75. They're both playing multi-dimensional chess ...

...
And the white knight is talking backwards
And the Red Queen's lost her head

[Zorra]

79. I believe that Mother Earth is a living being, and that all the motherfrackers

Last edited Fri Mar 14, 2014, 04:12 PM - Edit history (1)

who are responsible for the insane practice of fracking are criminal perverts. Who is more deranged? They're all deranged; there is no dark side of environmental destruction, it's all dark.

"My young men shall never work, men who work cannot dream; and wisdom comes to us in dreams. You ask me to plow the ground. Shall I take a knife and tear my mothers breast? ...

...We simply take the gifts that are freely offered. We no more harm the earth than would an infant's fingers harm its mother's breast. But the white man tears up large tracts of land, runs deep ditches, cuts down forests, and changes the whole face of the earth. You know very well this is not right. Every honest man knows in his heart that this is all wrong. But the white men are so greedy they do not consider these things...

...Each one must learn for himself the highest wisdom. It cannot be taught in words."

~ Smohalla, 1891

[Bluenorthwest]

80. What's crazier, Robertson saying God shut offt the power or Francis saying

that LGBT people are tools of Satan, used as part of a demonic attack on God's plans?
I'd say the crazy that has a minority group as target of hate speech is the Bigger Crazy.
Not sure what you think Obama has to do with comparing religious nut bigotry. I saw Roberson vs the Pope is a virtual tie, differences being more stylistic and sartorial than philosophical or material.

[ProSense]

81. You know

"One denies climate change.

The other is actively helping it.

So there's crazy, and then there's CRAZY. "

...what's "crazier": hate.

Robertson pushes that too.

I mean, who is crazier:

Mark Udall or Pat Robertson?

Brian Schweitzer of Pat Robertson?

The unions backing Keystone or Pat Robertson?

It's a weird comparison.

President Obama’s New Budget Is Peppered With Efforts To Tackle Climate Change

By Jeff Spross

<...>

The centerpiece of that effort is continued funding for regulations by the Environmental Protection Agency to cut carbon dioxide emissions from the nation’s power plants. The agency has already revealed the rules for new plants, and should release its rules for existing plants in June of this year.

But there’s plenty else on climate and green energy issues in the budget. Here are some of the major items:

Clean Energy Tax Credits. This includes a permanent extension of the production tax credit for wind — a cost of $19.2 billion over ten years — which expired at the end of 2013. There’s also $401 million over that time period for alternative-fuel trucks tax credits, and $1.7 billion for cellulosic biofuel.

Cutting Fossil Fuel Tax Breaks. The budget would axe about $4 billion in tax breaks that are currently available to the oil and natural gas industries, and another $3.9 billion in tax preferences for coal.

Climate Resiliency Fund. Obama announced last month he would ask Congress for $1 billion to fund new technology and infrastructure to prepare for climate change, aid for communities, and new research. The budget makes good on that promise.

NOAA Satellites. Obama wants $2 billion to fully fund a new fleet of weather satellites for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Fighting Wildfires. The cost of tackling wildfires in 2012 was 23 percent higher than the 10-year average. So Obama’s budget boosts the U.S. Forest Service’s budget 4.7 percent to $2.3 billion, in order to suppress and research wildfires.

Infrastructure vulnerabilities. The budget would give the Department of Homeland Security an extra $400 million to track down “critical infrastructure vulnerabilities” to climate change.

Clean Energy Technology. The National Science Foundation would get $362 million under the budget to research advanced forms of green energy.

Energy Networks. Overall, the budget boosts funding for the Energy Department to $27.9 billion in 2015 — an increase of 2.6 percent over 2014. That includes $355 million to beef up the robustness of the electrical grid and fuel transportation infrastructure.

Obama’s budget must be passed by Congress, which is pretty unlikely. “It’s a great place to begin this discussion, but will the Republican-led House of Representatives fund anything with the word ‘climate’ in it?” asked Daniel J. Weiss, director of climate strategy at the Center for American Progress, in an interview with Bloomberg.

Of course, Congresses rarely pass any President’s proposed budget as is, usually writing their own that the President then signs.

But the Union of Concerned Scientists is on board with Obama’s priorities. “The president is confronting members of Congress with a reality they need to face: climate change is already hurting us economically,” said Angela Anderson, the director of the group’s Climate and Energy Program. “Resilience funding is essential to confront the consequences of climate change already being felt. Beyond that, Congress needs to get serious about reducing the risks of the changing climate. Unless and until we start cutting emissions that cause global warming, the problems communities are facing, and their price tags, will continue to grow.”
- more -

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/03/05/3366331/obama-2015-budget-climate/

Thank President Obama for protecting Point Arena-Stornetta Public Lands!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024650005

Jake Schmidt’s Blog

Secretary Kerry Makes Climate Change Top Priority in New Policy Directive: Some key actions to deliver on that policy

Secretary Kerry has just issued his first “Policy Directive” as U.S. Secretary of State. This new directive outlines that climate change is a central issue for the State Department and directs an “all hands on deck” approach to this issue. He rightly recognized that this will require strong action in the U.S., while helping spur global action. This is welcome sign that should ensure that all components of the U.S. diplomatic service are mobilized to help drive climate change action. His leadership will be critical on several key pending actions that can help deliver upon these new guidelines.

Working with the entire U.S. Administration Secretary Kerry can help deliver on these guidelines with a couple of key actions.

1. Reject KXL and other tar sands pipelines that will expand greenhouse gas emissions. The guidelines outline that the U.S. should: “Lead by example through strong action at home and abroad.” Keystone XL would cause an expansion of tar sands production and the associated greenhouse gas emissions (as my colleague pointed out). And tar sands expansion is helping Canada blow past its international commitment to address climate change. In its formal submission to the U.N. Canada acknowledged that it will fail to meet its commitment to cut its emissions 17% below 2005 levels by 2020. And tar sands expansion is the single biggest emissions growth in Canada so enabling these emissions would fail both the “act and home and abroad test” in the directive. Secretary Kerry should listen to the 2 million people urging him to reject Keystone XL.

2. Support strong domestic action to deliver on the U.S. Climate Action Plan to meet the target outlined in Copenhagen. Strong implementation of the Climate Action Plan will put the US on track to meet its commitment to cut emissions 17 percent below 2005 levels in 2020. Chief among these are the domestic actions that the US takes on power plant carbon pollution, reducing the “super-greenhouse gas” called HFCs, and methane leaks from oil and gas. Aggressive implementation of the Climate Action Plan would be a clear sign that call for “strong action at home” in the directive is on solid ground.

<...>

4. Secure a global agreement in December 2015 and push for an “all hands on deck” approach to climate action. In December 2015 countries are set to agree on the next round of legal commitments to address climate change. We don’t have the luxury of “kicking the can down the road” so all countries must come prepared to make bold and decisive commitments to curb their own carbon pollution and mobilize investments in developing countries. The State Department directive recognizes this moment when it states: “negotiate a new, ambitious international climate agreement applicable to all countries by 2015 to take effect in 2020”. Secretary Kerry and his team will play a critical role in ensuring that the U.S. is prepared to act aggressively in this agreement. Countries have begun to outline some of their visions for this agreement (see Reuters on US proposals, Reuters on Chinese proposals, RTCC on EU’s proposals, and here for all of the submissions).

At the same time, Secretary Kerry clearly recognizes that we need an “all hands on deck” approach (his recent speech referred to it as a “you name it approach”) where countries are using all of the tools and available avenues to address climate change. This principle is already evident in the U.S. effort to support phasing down HFCs under the Montreal Protocol, supporting reducing black carbon reductions from dirty diesel and other sources, eliminating public funding of coal projects, and pushing for major companies to commit to eliminate deforestation from their supply-chain. Secretary Kerry can continue to lead this push, while also ensuring that the entire State Department operation is supporting climate action (not supporting more investments in climate destructive activities).

- more -

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/jschmidt/secretary_kerry_makes_climate.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024650409

[JVS]

82. You've touched on something unpleasant that people don't want to face up to.

Being right or wrong in your thinking is much less consequential than being right or wrong in your doing.

Robertson is making up (or possibly actually believes) crazy shit, but it's of little consequence. Nobody trusts him to create policy in this area.

Obama knows better and makes it clear through his statements that he understands the problem. But the policies don't match the rhetoric.

[WilliamPitt]

87. "But the policies don't match the rhetoric"

"Another peace president who became a war president – but a larger affinity may be noticed. (Fmr. President Woodrow) Wilson and Obama share an odd quirk of the national character, a blend of high resolve and extreme detachment, romantic idealism and an almost opaque unconcern with follow-through."

- David Bromwich, July 2012

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v34/n13/david-bromwich/diary

[tavalon]

105. I'm fairly sure you've noticed by now, Will, this place has become very black and white

The ability to hold the very though that David Bromwich has there and still being able to be supportive of good Democratic policies is rare here these days. Very unfortunate, because the education I received here in my early days has shaped me into just such a person. I think it's a shame that a newbie coming here now would get a very different, far less nuanced education.

[MindMover]

108. The black and white of our society is born from the lack of representation in any form in our lives

the (99%) needs and wants are ignored and are now cannon fodder for the jokers Koch and there kind....

you mention a nuanced education like it is something that is attainable for the 99ers, while du has thousands of visitors to an article on a porn star from duke ...

this society along with much of the rest of the developed world is money sick which shows in almost every aspect of every single fucking thing we do ...

which is amounting to coming close to committing our children to a world that will soon enough be uninhabitable .... all for what??????????????

[rock]

83. You asked, so I answer

The republicans keep all the needles pegged on the "crazy" monitors.

[Fearless]

84. Both.

[cui bono]

88. It's not crazy when it's intentional. The real question becomes WHY is Obama doing that?

And the answer is probably not very pretty. But it might explain why Obama does a lot of other things as well, like offer up SS cuts, NSA spying, whistle blower prosecutions, drones... Hm...

[whatchamacallit]

90. K&R n/t

[blkmusclmachine]

94. Coin toss time.

[classykaren]

95. If a teabagger tells you there is no Global Warming just quote Psalms

" God will bring to ruin those ruining the earth " it was his to last to time indefinite. That usually shuts them right up.

[Rex]

98. What is crazy is that Pat has held conversations with presidents.

nt.

[DeSwiss]

104. But it's true!!! It's true!!!

- He's trying to undermine his competition. Didn't you know the G-d was heavily invested in solar and wind power!?!?!

K&R

[functioning_cog]

106. Let me give you an answer.

If you drive a car or heat your home with petroleum products of any kind, then your position on this is rather...uhmm...hypocritical.

[functioning_cog]

107. oh and another thing.

zero facts to support your weak supposition that Obama on balance is contributing to climate change with his policies.


fuel efficiency standards increased under Obama not only for cars and light duty trucks but now larger trucks.

halt to building of coal fired electric plants not only in the U.S. but internationally if they are using funds the U.S. has any control over.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/30/us/us-says-it-wont-back-new-international-coal-fired-power-plants.html?_r=0

I'm starting to think you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.