Comments: Kyoto's Been Dead for 9 Years, It's Time to Move Past "Step One" of the Grieving Process

(We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)


Don't let dumb old facts trip you up.

Kyoto climate-change protocol

In March 2001, the Bush administration withdrew from the 1997 Kyoto treaty that committed industrialized countries to cut emissions of gases believed responsible for warming the planet. All major industrialized nations have signed except the US the world's biggest polluter.

whitehouse.gov

cnn.com

news.bbc.co.uk

etc, etc, etc....

Posted by jason at May 23, 2006 08:33 AM

Your first headline is from "commondreams.com" a place I always go to first for "facts." Did you ever wonder how the Bush Administration could "withdraw" from a treaty that the United States never ratified? Yes, Jason, those "dumb old facts," don't let them get in your way.

The first link you posted is a letter from President Bush to members of the Senate which outlines his opposition to Kyoto on the basis of it exempting 80% of the world including China and India from lowering emissions, it's "unfair" and "ineffective," it would harm the US economy, and because the Senate already shot it down 95-0, 4 years before he wrote the letter so he can't sign it anyway.

Pat Jackson omitting the pesky little fact that the Senate unanimously shot down Kyoto 9 years earlier is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts surrounding the reality of a US President being able to sign Kyoto. Whittling the Administration's reason down to the "economy" and leaving out the other pesky fact that Kyoto doesn't apply emissions reductions to countries like China and India is another total misrepresentation of the facts.

If a reporter is going to give background history in a piece about Clinton, who incidentally, never had the balls to put the Kyoto Protocol in front of the Senate for the 3 years he sat in office after it was adopted in Japan, he should get Bush's reason's for opposing it correct, and he should mention that even if Bush loved Kyoto so much that he wanted to ratify it and have the text of the treaty tattooed on his ass he wouldn't have the authority to do it. Don't you think?

The other two articles you posted again show the distorted way the media covers the Bush Administration on the Kyoto Protocol. The BBC article has the line, "French President Jacques Chirac called the US turnabout "a worrying and unacceptable challenge to Kyoto," But no where does the article point out that it represents a firm US policy that existed for 4 previous years. The CNN article has a line that really made me laugh, "British Environment Minister Michael Meacher said Kyoto "was signed up to by every single nation on earth, and if America now tries to walk away ... I think this is not just an environmental issue, it's an issue of transatlantic global foreign policy," but it fails to mention that the treaty China "signed up to" doesn't require them to LOWER EMISSIONS. Hell, I bet US Senate would change their mind about Kyoto if the US didn't have to comply to any greenhouse gas emissions regulations. Duh. And again, CNN fails to point out any Senate action that made Bush signing Kyoto an impossibility.

But please, continue to point the collective finger at Bush, a man who took office almost 4 years after Kyoto was already pronounced dead.

Posted by happymomie at May 23, 2006 11:16 AM

Take it easy on the Scourge, HM. He's so outclassed at just about every venue, but his mental deficiencies don't enable him to even realize it.

Posted by Hube at May 23, 2006 03:37 PM

Great smackdown of Jason by HppyMom & hube. As the libs are so fond of saying, everyone is entitled to their own set of facts but not their own set of facts.

It's common for the MSM to portray Bush as the one who declined to sign the Kyoto Treaty in 1997 (when he was governor of Texas)!

Posted by AJ LYnch at May 24, 2006 09:41 AM

Post a comment









Remember personal info?