Janesville70.8°

“Obama’s global-warming folly”!

Print Print
John Eyster
July 5, 2013

“Obama’s global-warming folly” - I was quite surprised this morning when I saw the headline on Charles Krauthammer regular OpEd column in the Washington Post.

I need to report up front that Krauthammer did convince me that President Obama’s “climate change” program is a folly. I’ve taught about “Seward’s Folly” in “American History. (You know what Seward’s Folly was, I assume – correct?) Now, will American History teachers in the future be talking about “Obama’s Climate Change Folly”? What do YOU think?

You will find the same OpEd column reprinted in today's Janesville Gazette on p. 4A.

YOU should read the full text of Krauthammer’s OpEd column, “Obama’s global-warming folly” in the Washington Post. You can use the above link for access.

Krauthammer convinced me. Does he convince YOU? There are other issues/situations which ought to have MORE PROACTIVE INVOLVEMENT from the President of the US in July 2013, including, I would assert: Economic growth with JOBS! Human rights for ALL persons in the USA, especially the IMMIGRATION REFORM which has passed our US Senate and need to be approved in our US House with all deliberate speed. International crises with focus on Syria and Egypt. Those are examples of issues/public policies I would put at the top of the President’s list. What would YOU put on the HIGH PRIORITY list?

Alert – BE SURE to read ALL of Krauthammer’s OpEd column, “Climate change? It lies at the very bottom of a list of Americans’ concerns (last of 21 — Pew poll). Which means that Obama’s declaration of unilateral American war on global warming, whatever the cost — and it will be heavy — is either highly visionary or hopelessly solipsistic. You decide:…” Yes, read the whole column!

If Krauthammer’s citation, “The United States has already radically cut carbon dioxide emissions — more than any country on earth since 2006, according to the International Energy Agency. Emissions today are back down to 1992 levels,” is true, then I am the MORE convinced of the appropriateness and timeliness of his case. What is YOUR perspective?

Krauthammer asserts, “To think we will get these countries to cooperate is sheer fantasy. We’ve been negotiating climate treaties for 20 years and gotten exactly nowhere. China, India and the other rising and modernizing countries point out that the West had a 150-year industrial head start that made it rich. They are still poor. And now, just as they are beginning to get rich, we’re telling them to stop dead in their tracks?”

He continues, “Fat chance. Obama imagines he’s going to cajole China into a greenhouse-gas emissions reduction that will slow its economy, increase energy costs, derail industrialization and risk enormous social unrest. This from a president who couldn’t even get China to turn over one Edward Snowden to U.S. custody.” I agree with Krauthammer, “For a president to propose this with such aggressive certainty is incomprehensible. It is the starkest of examples of belief that is impervious to evidence. And the word for that is faith, not science.” What do YOU think?

Here we go…

Mr. E.

POSTSCRIPT - The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel published President Barack Obama's statement about his energy plan - NOW complementing Krauthammer's OpEd column I read Obama's OpEd statement - YOU can access it using this link, "My energy plan will cut carbon emissions, help U.S. face worst effects." I still think there are MORE IMMEDIATE PRIORITIES. What do YOU think?



Print Print