The Nation: When BushCo sets environmental goals, environmentalists better be worried.

[marmar]

BLOG | Posted 04/16/2008 @ 11:43am
When Is A Goal Not A Goal?
J. Goodrich


I'm not talking about hockey or soccer goals here, but the kind of goal President Bush has decided to set for reducing greenhouse gas emissions:

President Bush will endorse an "intermediate goal" today for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but he will not put forward any specific legislation or proposal on how the goal should be met, White House officials said.

Now that will do wonders for stopping greenhouse gas emissions, won't it? There's no actual plan, no legislation and no negative outcomes if you don't manage to make the goal. In short, there's no need at all to try to reach the goal by cutting back on emissions.

So why even mention it? Ah. That has to do with political speech and the way the game is played. Sort of like "The Clear Skies Initiative" which was not about clear skies at all. Or like "The Healthy Forests" initiative which seemed to suggest that a healthy forest is one with nary a tree left to get sick.

With Bush, up really is down.


http://www.thenation.com/blogs/passingthrough?bid=769

[leftyladyfrommo]

1. I thought the exact same thing. When he is out then we can

start working on the environment.

He and his ilk don't care about anything but money. And that's a terrible place to start when it comes to saving our little planet.

[Cresent City Kid]

2. Deja Vu

This reminds me of the prescription drug plan, touted as help for the needy, but effectively locked in the excessiveness of the prices.