What happened?
.
I seem to recall a time when, if a U.S. President traveled overseas, public figures in the U.S. refrained from criticizing him until he returned. That now seems to be observed more in the breech than in fact. What happened?
And, there was also a point of some politeness that ex-Presidents refrained from criticizing the current one, at least in public.
Now we have ex-President Clinton going to a foreign country (Canada - and Montreal to boot, which is REALLY foreign) and castigating President Bush for pooh-poohing the Kyoto global warming accord.
Kyoto was agreed in 1992, and got the necessary signatures in 1997. Clinton was President from 1993 to 2001. We signed the accord, but did nothing to codify U.S. actions - which, it is argued, would put U.S. businesses at a severe disadvantage to those in polluting third world countries.
Bush pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol in 2001, saying implementing it would gravely damage the US economy. His cohorts called the treaty "fatally flawed", partly because it does not require developing countries to commit to emissions reductions. Like China and India, two of the world's biggest polluters and producers of greenhouse gases. Bush says he backs voluntary emissions reductions and new energy technologies.
I'm not a Bush fan, but there appears to be some dishonesty going on here.
Again.
Maybe Clinton didn't lock in to Kyoto because he had too many extra-curricular activities going on. So now, is he just crying over spilt milk?
I seem to recall a time when, if a U.S. President traveled overseas, public figures in the U.S. refrained from criticizing him until he returned. That now seems to be observed more in the breech than in fact. What happened?
And, there was also a point of some politeness that ex-Presidents refrained from criticizing the current one, at least in public.
Now we have ex-President Clinton going to a foreign country (Canada - and Montreal to boot, which is REALLY foreign) and castigating President Bush for pooh-poohing the Kyoto global warming accord.
Kyoto was agreed in 1992, and got the necessary signatures in 1997. Clinton was President from 1993 to 2001. We signed the accord, but did nothing to codify U.S. actions - which, it is argued, would put U.S. businesses at a severe disadvantage to those in polluting third world countries.
Bush pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol in 2001, saying implementing it would gravely damage the US economy. His cohorts called the treaty "fatally flawed", partly because it does not require developing countries to commit to emissions reductions. Like China and India, two of the world's biggest polluters and producers of greenhouse gases. Bush says he backs voluntary emissions reductions and new energy technologies.
I'm not a Bush fan, but there appears to be some dishonesty going on here.
Again.
Maybe Clinton didn't lock in to Kyoto because he had too many extra-curricular activities going on. So now, is he just crying over spilt milk?
posted by Greg Finnegan @ 7:19 PM
1 Comments:
At 11:02 PM,
Sonic Reducer said…
Maybe it's becasue the current president was illeagally elected twice and he's raping the Amrican people. He's taking money out of your pocket and giving it to all his rich friends...
Post a Comment
<< Home