Republicans (!) in New Hampshire Talk about Climate Change

What it sounds like when Republicans talk sanely about the climate:

6 Responses to “Republicans (!) in New Hampshire Talk about Climate Change”

  1. knarlyknight Says:

    What’s irksome is that people can’t seem to understand that the issue is greenhouse gases, not simply CO2. People who debate whether CO2 is really a problem are missing the point: normally, CO2 equivalent is used as a proxy to represent all greenhouse gas emissions. Politicians who point out all the natural sources of CO2 are either simpleminded or are attempting to fog a debate.

    The debate should be about how to properly price dirty fuels so that we move to cleaner energy sources. I’d like to hear more details about how to get polluters to internalize the environmental costs they have been foisting on everyone including people who have no use or interest in their products.

    Also, the video missed setting out the views of top tier candidate Ron Paul:

    For a sample, see this:

    Or this excerpt from a November 20, 2008 New York Times / Freakonomics interview with Ron Paul:

    … It is clear that the earth experiences natural cycles in temperature. However, science shows that human activity probably does play a role in stimulating the current fluctuations.

    The question is: how much? Rather than taking a “sky is falling” approach, I think there are common-sense steps we can take to cut emissions and preserve our environment. I am, after all, a conservative and seek to conserve not just American traditions and our Constitution, but our natural resources as well.

    We should start by ending subsidies for oil companies. And we should never, ever go to war to protect our perceived oil interests. If oil were allowed to rise to its natural price, there would be tremendous market incentives to find alternate sources of energy. At the same time, I can’t support government “investment” in alternative sources either, for this is not investment at all.

    Government cannot invest, it can only redistribute resources. Just look at the mess government created with ethanol. Congress decided that we needed more biofuels, and the best choice was ethanol from corn. So we subsidized corn farmers at the expense of others, and investment in other types of renewables was crowded out.

    Now it turns out that corn ethanol is inefficient, and it actually takes more energy to produce the fuel than you get when you burn it. The most efficient ethanol may come from hemp, but hemp production is illegal and there has been little progress on hemp ethanol. And on top of that, corn is now going into our gas tanks instead of onto our tables or feeding our livestock or dairy cows; so food prices have been driven up. This is what happens when we allow government to make choices instead of the market; I hope we avoid those mistakes moving forward.”

  2. enkidu Says:

    I’m sure lil ricky agrees with what lil ricky said here:

    Of course in context – he’s talking to someone who works at the welfare department – “black” people makes perfect sense, but “blah” people? Really?

    “I don’t want to make black people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money.” Sound like any chat bot we have around here?

  3. knarlyknight Says:

    Enk, that’s a good one. I was going to post some videos of the stupid things said and stupid positions taken by the Repugnant candidates, but there are too many on youtube to even bother.

    Instead, I submit this for your consideration:

  4. enkidu Says:

    My in-laws hate it when I proclaim
    “we’re all Americans in this hemisphere!”
    (goofy grin)

    Canada, America’s toque
    America, Canada’s underwear (I might add, the further south you go, the more shit (for brains, smell etc) you have to deal with) ;)

  5. NorthernLite Says:


Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.