<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
	<title><![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for What we learned from the stymied Climate Security Act, and what comes next]]></title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.grist.org/rss/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<description>Grist Comment Feed</description>
	<language>en</language>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #1 by hapa</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/so-what-now/</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2008 04:40:06 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/so-what-now/1</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>what comes next is 350</strong></p><p>and needing to have most of the work done in the time it takes to say "investment cycle."</p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>what comes next is 350</strong></p><p>and needing to have most of the work done in the time it takes to say "investment cycle."</p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #2 by ballmerboy</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/so-what-now/</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jun 2008 04:34:41 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/so-what-now/2</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>So</strong></p><p>Critics who complain about the way Sen Boxer handled the bill are missing a crucial point: it was a BAD bill. It deserved to die, and we're lucky that it did or we'd have been stuck with its egregious provisions forever. The groups that were pushing this legislation with the argument that "any bill is better than no bill, even if it's a bad bill" were the usual coterie of quasi-green corporate enviros: NRDC, ED, and the NWF. They are wrong and the Republicans did us all a favor. </p><p>
Also, I'm unsettled by Kate Sheppard's use, in referring to the next president's role in this issue, of the term commander-in-chief. American culture is already far too militarized. Let's avoid any FOX-News-like misrepresentations of the nature and extent of a president's power and role in civilian issues.</p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>So</strong></p><p>Critics who complain about the way Sen Boxer handled the bill are missing a crucial point: it was a BAD bill. It deserved to die, and we're lucky that it did or we'd have been stuck with its egregious provisions forever. The groups that were pushing this legislation with the argument that "any bill is better than no bill, even if it's a bad bill" were the usual coterie of quasi-green corporate enviros: NRDC, ED, and the NWF. They are wrong and the Republicans did us all a favor. </p><p>
Also, I'm unsettled by Kate Sheppard's use, in referring to the next president's role in this issue, of the term commander-in-chief. American culture is already far too militarized. Let's avoid any FOX-News-like misrepresentations of the nature and extent of a president's power and role in civilian issues.</p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #3 by ballmerboy</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/so-what-now/</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jun 2008 05:29:40 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/so-what-now/3</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>So 2</strong></p><p>Another point I wanted to make and forgot. The Blue-Green Alliance is a sham. There may be an office with a person named David Foster answering the phone, but the idea of a partnership between the Sierra Club and the United Steelworkers is a bad joke. Just ask all the people who worked so hard for the Global Warming Solutions Act in the &nbsp;Maryland legislature. The bill would have cut CO2 emission in MD by 90% by 2050 and its prospects looked pretty good until local steelworkers "partnered" with industry lobbyists to sabotage the bill. They wouldn't even consider language changes that would have assuaged their concerns.</p><p>
I support unions, but their leaders, like liberal Democrats, have morphed into gutless snivellers. </p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>So 2</strong></p><p>Another point I wanted to make and forgot. The Blue-Green Alliance is a sham. There may be an office with a person named David Foster answering the phone, but the idea of a partnership between the Sierra Club and the United Steelworkers is a bad joke. Just ask all the people who worked so hard for the Global Warming Solutions Act in the &nbsp;Maryland legislature. The bill would have cut CO2 emission in MD by 90% by 2050 and its prospects looked pretty good until local steelworkers "partnered" with industry lobbyists to sabotage the bill. They wouldn't even consider language changes that would have assuaged their concerns.</p><p>
I support unions, but their leaders, like liberal Democrats, have morphed into gutless snivellers. </p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #4 by intimidavid</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/so-what-now/</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 14 Jun 2008 03:03:55 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/so-what-now/4</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>More blue than green<p>This is a good article. Most blogs I've read failed to mention the nine senators who wrote letters opposing the bill. As a whole, it does a good job of encapsulating what happened.<p>
But ballmerboy makes a good point about the Blue/Green Alliance. I thought the United Steelworkers were for renewable energy across the board. In fact, they only support it in<a href="http://www.bluegreenalliance.org/site/c.enKIITNpEiG/b.3417251/" rel="nofollow">a few states. And like Maryland, they actually work against their own mission, sometimes. This kind of hypocrisy is probably going to get them in trouble, and I'm grateful for learning about it. <p>
A simple website detailing their hypocrisy, state-by-state would be great. I wish I knew how to do this effectively...maybe Grist does?</p></a></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>More blue than green<p>This is a good article. Most blogs I've read failed to mention the nine senators who wrote letters opposing the bill. As a whole, it does a good job of encapsulating what happened.<p>
But ballmerboy makes a good point about the Blue/Green Alliance. I thought the United Steelworkers were for renewable energy across the board. In fact, they only support it in<a href="http://www.bluegreenalliance.org/site/c.enKIITNpEiG/b.3417251/" rel="nofollow">a few states. And like Maryland, they actually work against their own mission, sometimes. This kind of hypocrisy is probably going to get them in trouble, and I'm grateful for learning about it. <p>
A simple website detailing their hypocrisy, state-by-state would be great. I wish I knew how to do this effectively...maybe Grist does?</p></a></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #5 by SamHec</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/so-what-now/</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 15 Jun 2008 14:17:22 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/so-what-now/5</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>What Now? Here's What.</strong></p><p>First. &nbsp;Don't EVER expect the government to do much. &nbsp;You will be disappointed if you do.</p><p>
Second. Do it yourself.</p><p>
Third. &nbsp;Support those who do.</p><p>
Fourth. &nbsp;Ask, for now, and RIGHT NOW, of the government to do only two things. &nbsp;Clean up its own CO2 (and equiv) wastes, via reductions and offsets (like they are gonna pay a carbon tax!) &nbsp;And then, they are to stop giving subsidies, tax breaks, and other market protections to the fossil fuel companies. &nbsp; Keywords: Revenue Neutral.<br>


<p>This is STILL not a Signiature!</p></br></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>What Now? Here's What.</strong></p><p>First. &nbsp;Don't EVER expect the government to do much. &nbsp;You will be disappointed if you do.</p><p>
Second. Do it yourself.</p><p>
Third. &nbsp;Support those who do.</p><p>
Fourth. &nbsp;Ask, for now, and RIGHT NOW, of the government to do only two things. &nbsp;Clean up its own CO2 (and equiv) wastes, via reductions and offsets (like they are gonna pay a carbon tax!) &nbsp;And then, they are to stop giving subsidies, tax breaks, and other market protections to the fossil fuel companies. &nbsp; Keywords: Revenue Neutral.<br>


<p>This is STILL not a Signiature!</p></br></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
 </channel>
</rss>