What If the GOP Was the Climate Change Party?

[blindpig]

What If the GOP Was the Climate Change Party?

Some of us say what we believe, and believe what we say. Some of us even fight for what we believe. There are also those who claim to believe something or other, but won't fight for it. That's the way of the world. So let's imagine a world only slightly different, with only the names changed to protect the guilty...

Imagine if you will, an alternative universe, in which the GOP believes in climate change, and the Democrats are the naysayers? How would a climate crusading Republican Party approach this most consequential issue?

In their customary hard-nosed fashion, the GOP would no doubt have made more progress on climate change—replete with tough regulations and high-minded international treaties—than we have seen so far. GOP politicians and talking heads would be making hay from all the horrible weather, beating the drums about the grave danger to our “national security” and way of life posed by climate change. They would be warning of gloom and doom and calling for—to hell with cap-and-trade—new legislation with stricter timetables for cutting greenhouse emissions, higher carbon taxes and stiffer penalties for polluters. And they would dare the president to veto it!

Republican politicians would be talking about climate change in town hall meetings, with obligatory reference to the increasingly ferocious tornadoes and hurricanes. “Climate change” and “green jobs” would become synonymous—a mantra seared into GOP political lexicon as Republicans declare that their legislation simultaneously creates jobs, limits greenhouse gases and stimulates the economy. Yes, Republicans would be ready to steamroll Democrats on this one.

more.....

http://blackagendareport.com/content/what-if-gop-was-climate-change-party

[BlueDemKev]

1. Venus' atmosphere would seem BENIGN in comparison to Earth's

[blindpig]

3. Apparently you don't get it at all. n/t

[Nuclear Unicorn]

2. Letter combinations don't earn my vote; policy positions do n/t

[leftstreet]

4. K&R Imagine if the GOP was the Single Payer Healthcare Party

The WPA Jobs Program Party

The AntiWar Party

lol

Excellent piece

[blindpig]

7. Hell, anything.

Some walk the walk, the others just make noises.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

5. Which is why I vote issues, rather than politician or party.

Which is also why I don't hesitate to vote 3rd Party on occasion. And, no, I'm not advising anyone on how to vote.

[alc]

6. in that case

Republicans would be going full speed ahead to force changes in legislation and treaties.

But Democrats are doing the right thing now. Because if Republicans were the climate change party:

Most Democrats would be focusing on the large uncertainty rather than the possible but uncertain worst cases.

And saying that "hide the decline" is sinister rather than standard scientist talk.

And complaining that coordination of the major climate changes scientists and the IPCC and journal editors to control what is published is fraud rather than the way to make sure people have the best information.

And focusing on the less than 50% of climate scientists who say global warming feedback will be a problem rather than the 97% who say global warming forcing is a scientific fact but forcing has a safe theoretical limit. And that reporting the numbers without mentioning forcing vs. feedback is misleading at best and a lie in most cases.

And pointing out that when one research project happens to pick the ideal PC a priori without a thorough justification it may have been luck. But when it happens over and over, they are probably analyzing every PC and cherry picking the one with the result they want.

And wondering why we can be so certain of tree rings 500+ years old when we have speculation, but don't have a definite reason why tree rings 40 years old are faulty.

And questioning if climate scientists should be using new statistical algorithms without having them reviewed by statisticians rather than accepting peer review by other climate scientists.


There are good arguments for the pro-warming side of each of the above items. But can you honestly say you'd buy those arguments if you were on the other side.

In today's world, with all of those issues unresolved, an intellectually honest Democrat should not be going full speed ahead with legislation to make changes that will likely hurt the economy. They certainly wouldn't want the legislation if the Republicans were for it.

[blindpig]

9. Hardly the point

If your point is that Democrats are a bunch of do-nothings who don't walk the walk because they are smarter, more thoughtful or something then I suppose that also applies to the Administration's abominable behavior during the Gulf Spill, it's war- mongering, it's sucking up to Wall St.....

Bullshit, assumptions without any substance.

[FarCenter]

8. It is not a political problem and talk won't get it done.

More talk about climate change doesn't matter at all.

To reduce carbon consumption requires realistic plans for investment in and deployment of energy technologies that will replace a significant fraction of the 400 quadrillion BTU annual global energy supply.

That is 400,000,000,000,000,000 BTUs, where one BTU is the energy needed to raise the temperature of one pound of water by one degree Farenheit.

Simple calculations will show that hundreds of wind turbines and acres of photovoltaics will not do it.

In the end, we will have to adapt to climate change.

[blindpig]

10. kick

cuz people don't seem to be getting the point

[DefenseLawyer]

11. It's kind of a worthless exercise.

No offense. The Republicans aren't just climate change naysayers for the hell of it, they aren't just THAT stupid. They didn't just wake up one day on the wrong side of the issue by accident. They are anti-climate change because it is perceived to be bad for business and they are owned by big business. So for the Republicans to become the "climate change" party they would have to change their fundamental view of the world. Unless that happens, which it won't, I'm not sure I see the point of your hypothetical.

[leftstreet]

12. I thought the point was the GOP's relentless drive & ability to achieve its goals

Could have used any issue

:shrug:

But I could be wrong

[DefenseLawyer]

13. They don't really achieve any goals that the Democratic Party doesn't really agree with, at the top

They "achieve the goals" of looking out for the rich, for Wall Street, for the Insurance industry, etc. because the leadership of the Democratic Party has the same goals. But on other issues, abortion, guns, really you name it, what exactly have they achieved? This idea that they out-maneuver the Democratic Party is naive, at best.

[blindpig]

17. It is amazing that people don't get this.

You ain't wrong.

[me b zola]

14. Sad that so many have missed the point of the OP

And yeah, if the gop had climate change as one of their issues they'd damn sure make the changes needed to turn this around. They have no problem mowing over any obstacle in their path to accomplish their goals.

[rosesaylavee]

15. I get your point.

It really bothers me that we aren't on top of this issue and pushing for change much harder than we are. We are running out of time to address this ... and some issues are so far gone, the impact is now irreversible.

So, yes. I wish we had some loud mouth DEM leaders who were completely fearless champions of this issue and smart in getting their legislation thru Congress.

And if there are any loud mouth DEMS leaders lurking here on DU, let me know you exist, ok?

[blindpig]

18. Not just this, but anything...

anything.

[rosesaylavee]

19. This one is the biggie for me.

Not that the others are not troubling but this one will wipe the other issues off the plate eventually. We need to keep working to get the information out there. Keep repeating the costs we will endure if this continues to be ignored. Costs in lives, environment and actual dollars as that last seems to be the only thing that motivates some.

[amborin]

16. KR