<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Republican candidates are keeping their distance from climate change]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by Biodiversivist http://www.grist.org/article/yielding-the-moral-high-ground-part-i/ Sun, 23 Dec 2007 06:35:13 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/yielding-the-moral-high-ground-part-i/1 I suspect that

their polls are still showing if they profess a "belief" in evolution or global warming they are going to lose votes.

As with the abortion issue, these attitudes are based on religion, not reason. Our founding fathers tried to create a system that would keep religious dogma from gaining control of our government, and to date, it has  held it in check but with Bush in office things have gotten dangerously out of hand.

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

]]> I suspect that

their polls are still showing if they profess a "belief" in evolution or global warming they are going to lose votes.

As with the abortion issue, these attitudes are based on religion, not reason. Our founding fathers tried to create a system that would keep religious dogma from gaining control of our government, and to date, it has  held it in check but with Bush in office things have gotten dangerously out of hand.

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

]]> Comment #2 by Sam Wells http://www.grist.org/article/yielding-the-moral-high-ground-part-i/ Sun, 23 Dec 2007 09:34:16 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/yielding-the-moral-high-ground-part-i/2 Founding Fathers

If you asked one the Founding Fathers about Climate Change they honestly wouldn't now what to think.

But I can say they'd look in horror at these people using religion for political aims.

If you look at history correctly, most Americans and Founding Fathers had a very dim view of tyranny in all forms, including the church, King, and measures that suppressed freedom. Many went to church every Sunday but would never extol their "beliefs" in the context of politics, legislation and the Congress.

But why kick a dead elephant? The Republican Party is toast. The pendulum is swinging away from the rightist freebooters to the more socialistic and left leaning, and I would be VERY concerned about that as well.  

Onward through the fog

]]> Founding Fathers

If you asked one the Founding Fathers about Climate Change they honestly wouldn't now what to think.

But I can say they'd look in horror at these people using religion for political aims.

If you look at history correctly, most Americans and Founding Fathers had a very dim view of tyranny in all forms, including the church, King, and measures that suppressed freedom. Many went to church every Sunday but would never extol their "beliefs" in the context of politics, legislation and the Congress.

But why kick a dead elephant? The Republican Party is toast. The pendulum is swinging away from the rightist freebooters to the more socialistic and left leaning, and I would be VERY concerned about that as well.  

Onward through the fog

]]> Comment #3 by caniscandida http://www.grist.org/article/yielding-the-moral-high-ground-part-i/ Sun, 23 Dec 2007 10:34:41 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/yielding-the-moral-high-ground-part-i/3 kicking the elephant

O Sammie, would that you were right, about the elephant's being dead.  But the obituary may be premature.  Too many of the electorate like being deadened by the deadly GOP candidates, who, most of them, show signs of life only when displaying the typical short-sighted toughness and scientific ignorance that the base demands.

You are quite right, about the hypothetical horror of the Founding Fathers.  But who in the world do you mean by "the more socialistic and left leaning"?  Hillary?!  Ha!

BioD,
you are probably right too, though I know nothing about internal Republican polling.  We have already discussed this in Gristmill: Are the evangelical Christians coming around, on conservation, the environment and global warming?  And I think we decided that perhaps some are, but more are not, in good conscience.  Some prejudices that stand in the way are: the belief that environmentalism is a species of communism; the Rove-inspired belief that helping environmentalists means helping liberals, which God forbid; and, among a fair number, the belief that the End is coming very soon, and in that context it makes no sense to do anything to save the environment -- and in that context, it is worth noting that Mike Huckabee and Tim LeHaye, one of the authors of the "Left Behind" series, are good pals.

Joseph,
thanks for this post.  I hate all this faith-test business; but on the other hand, we are perfectly justified in excluding from office, with power over educational policy, anyone who does not fiercely believe that young people ought to be taught the theory of evolution as the foundation of their education in biology.

Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.



]]> kicking the elephant

O Sammie, would that you were right, about the elephant's being dead.  But the obituary may be premature.  Too many of the electorate like being deadened by the deadly GOP candidates, who, most of them, show signs of life only when displaying the typical short-sighted toughness and scientific ignorance that the base demands.

You are quite right, about the hypothetical horror of the Founding Fathers.  But who in the world do you mean by "the more socialistic and left leaning"?  Hillary?!  Ha!

BioD,
you are probably right too, though I know nothing about internal Republican polling.  We have already discussed this in Gristmill: Are the evangelical Christians coming around, on conservation, the environment and global warming?  And I think we decided that perhaps some are, but more are not, in good conscience.  Some prejudices that stand in the way are: the belief that environmentalism is a species of communism; the Rove-inspired belief that helping environmentalists means helping liberals, which God forbid; and, among a fair number, the belief that the End is coming very soon, and in that context it makes no sense to do anything to save the environment -- and in that context, it is worth noting that Mike Huckabee and Tim LeHaye, one of the authors of the "Left Behind" series, are good pals.

Joseph,
thanks for this post.  I hate all this faith-test business; but on the other hand, we are perfectly justified in excluding from office, with power over educational policy, anyone who does not fiercely believe that young people ought to be taught the theory of evolution as the foundation of their education in biology.

Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.



]]> Comment #4 by Delay And Deny http://www.grist.org/article/yielding-the-moral-high-ground-part-i/ Mon, 24 Dec 2007 02:28:47 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/yielding-the-moral-high-ground-part-i/4 We Own It


Conservatives not only share the ecological high ground -- we own it.

It was Teddy Roosevelt who built the national parks.

And Barry Goldwater was a breakthrough "Conservative" as in conservation of nature.

Bush was way out in front with 21st Century alternative energy, way before Al Gore was storyboarding his movie.  Not only that, but he was forging inter-European alliances...in 2003!

(Yet, these facts are suppressed.)

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/06/20030625- ...

On June 25, 2003, the United States and the European Union agreed to collaborate on the acceleration of the development of the hydrogen economy.

Both President Bush and European Commission President Prodi have made the development of a hydrogen economy a major priority.

President Bush's Hydrogen Fuel Initiative, announced on January 28, 2003, envisions the transformation of the nation's transportation fleet from a near-total reliance on petroleum to steadily increasing use of clean-burning hydrogen.

My Log


]]> We Own It


Conservatives not only share the ecological high ground -- we own it.

It was Teddy Roosevelt who built the national parks.

And Barry Goldwater was a breakthrough "Conservative" as in conservation of nature.

Bush was way out in front with 21st Century alternative energy, way before Al Gore was storyboarding his movie.  Not only that, but he was forging inter-European alliances...in 2003!

(Yet, these facts are suppressed.)

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/06/20030625- ...

On June 25, 2003, the United States and the European Union agreed to collaborate on the acceleration of the development of the hydrogen economy.

Both President Bush and European Commission President Prodi have made the development of a hydrogen economy a major priority.

President Bush's Hydrogen Fuel Initiative, announced on January 28, 2003, envisions the transformation of the nation's transportation fleet from a near-total reliance on petroleum to steadily increasing use of clean-burning hydrogen.

My Log


]]> Comment #5 by Sam Wells http://www.grist.org/article/yielding-the-moral-high-ground-part-i/ Mon, 24 Dec 2007 10:36:43 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/yielding-the-moral-high-ground-part-i/5 High moral ground?

OK, President Nixon signed into law more important environmental laws that any other president.  But did that give him any high moral ground?  No, he left as a disgraced liar.  Nobody, and no political party, "owns" any high moral ground.  

It is earned, baby.

Jimmy Carter, who many found to be a piddler & muddler, had extremely high moral foundations.  Given his continued interest in everything from Global Warming to preventing human parasite worms in Africa to building Housing for Habitat in the US, I'd day he earned it pretty good.  Again, no political party has a high moral ground - it is the individual that counts.

I'm not going to engage in bashing, especially on Christmas Eve, but John McCain seems to have a dose of sincere and honest morality.  Maybe he has a sympathy vote because we all know he was a Viet prisoner.  But he seems to have a clearer position of environmental actions, as Joe Romm notes.  A positive one if he can DO something about it.  How refreshing.

I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Joseph Romm for hanging in the game, persistently blogging, and pushing people as to climate action.  Now this boy (if I may have some poetic license, please sir) got some High Moral Ground!
-sammie

Onward through the fog


]]> High moral ground?

OK, President Nixon signed into law more important environmental laws that any other president.  But did that give him any high moral ground?  No, he left as a disgraced liar.  Nobody, and no political party, "owns" any high moral ground.  

It is earned, baby.

Jimmy Carter, who many found to be a piddler & muddler, had extremely high moral foundations.  Given his continued interest in everything from Global Warming to preventing human parasite worms in Africa to building Housing for Habitat in the US, I'd day he earned it pretty good.  Again, no political party has a high moral ground - it is the individual that counts.

I'm not going to engage in bashing, especially on Christmas Eve, but John McCain seems to have a dose of sincere and honest morality.  Maybe he has a sympathy vote because we all know he was a Viet prisoner.  But he seems to have a clearer position of environmental actions, as Joe Romm notes.  A positive one if he can DO something about it.  How refreshing.

I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Joseph Romm for hanging in the game, persistently blogging, and pushing people as to climate action.  Now this boy (if I may have some poetic license, please sir) got some High Moral Ground!
-sammie

Onward through the fog


]]>