GOP Only Party in the World to Deny Climate Change

[Landslide Lyndon]

Remember folks, climate change deniers don't represent the majority of the Republican Party.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/11/12/shimkus_cites_god_on_climate_change.html

Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL) -- who claimed this week he is "uniquely qualified among a group of talented contenders to lead the Energy and Commerce Committee" -- said that climate change should not concern us since God has already promised not to destroy the Earth," the Toronto Star reports.

Said Shimkus: "The Earth will end only when God declares it's time to be over. Man will not destroy this Earth. This Earth will not be destroyed by a Flood. I do believe that God's word is infallible, unchanging, perfect."



Of course if Shimkus's position is deemed too controversial, GOP leadership can always replace him with well-known moderate Joe Barton.  

So if he's not made the Energy and Commerce Committee chair, does that disprove your point?  He's one representative.  And to my knowledge, he hasn't denied that the climate is changing.

Did you read my last paragraph? Welcome Chairman Joe ("I apologize to BP") Barton!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

http://ecopolitology.org/2010/11/04/house-global-warming-committee-faces-uncertain-future-under-republicans/


Great. The EPA needs to be reigned in significantly, as it is currently an out of control monster bent on "de-industrializing" the US and making China the number one economy sooner rather then later. It also needs to have its funding cut by 50% (2008 levels would actually be a 59% cut I think).


And I think its wonderfull that we can take that useless Global Warming Committee and put it to good use, before utlimately abolishing it.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Remember folks, climate change deniers don't represent the majority of the Republican Party.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/11/12/shimkus_cites_god_on_climate_change.html

Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL) -- who claimed this week he is "uniquely qualified among a group of talented contenders to lead the Energy and Commerce Committee" -- said that climate change should not concern us since God has already promised not to destroy the Earth," the Toronto Star reports.

Said Shimkus: "The Earth will end only when God declares it's time to be over. Man will not destroy this Earth. This Earth will not be destroyed by a Flood. I do believe that God's word is infallible, unchanging, perfect."



Of course if Shimkus's position is deemed too controversial, GOP leadership can always replace him with well-known moderate Joe Barton.  

So if he's not made the Energy and Commerce Committee chair, does that disprove your point?  He's one representative.  And to my knowledge, he hasn't denied that the climate is changing.

Did you read my last paragraph? Welcome Chairman Joe ("I apologize to BP") Barton!

Neither to my knowledge have denied climate change.  And we don't even know who the next chairman will be yet.

[??????????]

http://ecopolitology.org/2010/11/04/house-global-warming-committee-faces-uncertain-future-under-republicans/


Great. The EPA needs to be reigned in significantly, as it is currently an out of control monster bent on "de-industrializing" the US and making China the number one economy sooner rather then later. It also needs to have its funding cut by 50% (2008 levels would actually be a 59% cut I think).


And I think its wonderfull that we can take that useless Global Warming Committee and put it to good use, before utlimately abolishing it.

What enumerated power does the EPA draw its' power from?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

http://ecopolitology.org/2010/11/04/house-global-warming-committee-faces-uncertain-future-under-republicans/


Great. The EPA needs to be reigned in significantly, as it is currently an out of control monster bent on "de-industrializing" the US and making China the number one economy sooner rather then later. It also needs to have its funding cut by 50% (2008 levels would actually be a 59% cut I think).


And I think its wonderfull that we can take that useless Global Warming Committee and put it to good use, before utlimately abolishing it.

What enumerated power does the EPA draw its' power from?

Ask John Dingell.

[??????????]

What enumerated power does the EPA draw its' power from?

Ask John Dingell.

My point is, why is the EPA allowed to act like a fourth branch of government? Why do they have the right to effectively create laws and enforce them like they have any power. The bureaucracy is the greatest threat to our individual liberties. I wouldn't have a problem with the EPA being an advisory board to the congress but with a lot of caution.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What enumerated power does the EPA draw its' power from?

Ask John Dingell.

My point is, why is the EPA allowed to act like a fourth branch of government? Why do they have the right to effectively create laws and enforce them like they have any power. The bureaucracy is the greatest threat to our individual liberties. I wouldn't have a problem with the EPA being an advisory board to the congress but with a lot of caution.

The EPA is hardly the only such agency that engages in such destructive behavior.

[beneficii]

http://ecopolitology.org/2010/11/04/house-global-warming-committee-faces-uncertain-future-under-republicans/


Great. The EPA needs to be reigned in significantly, as it is currently an out of control monster bent on "de-industrializing" the US and making China the number one economy sooner rather then later. It also needs to have its funding cut by 50% (2008 levels would actually be a 59% cut I think).


And I think its wonderfull that we can take that useless Global Warming Committee and put it to good use, before utlimately abolishing it.

What enumerated power does the EPA draw its' power from?

The commerce clause.  Environmental degradation has repeatedly been shown to have large effects on interstate, Indian, and international commerce.

[??????????]

http://ecopolitology.org/2010/11/04/house-global-warming-committee-faces-uncertain-future-under-republicans/


Great. The EPA needs to be reigned in significantly, as it is currently an out of control monster bent on "de-industrializing" the US and making China the number one economy sooner rather then later. It also needs to have its funding cut by 50% (2008 levels would actually be a 59% cut I think).


And I think its wonderfull that we can take that useless Global Warming Committee and put it to good use, before utlimately abolishing it.

What enumerated power does the EPA draw its' power from?

The commerce clause.  Environmental degradation has repeatedly been shown to have large effects on interstate, Indian, and international commerce.

The EPA has no real power, it's not a branch of government.

[beneficii]

http://ecopolitology.org/2010/11/04/house-global-warming-committee-faces-uncertain-future-under-republicans/


Great. The EPA needs to be reigned in significantly, as it is currently an out of control monster bent on "de-industrializing" the US and making China the number one economy sooner rather then later. It also needs to have its funding cut by 50% (2008 levels would actually be a 59% cut I think).


And I think its wonderfull that we can take that useless Global Warming Committee and put it to good use, before utlimately abolishing it.

What enumerated power does the EPA draw its' power from?

The commerce clause.  Environmental degradation has repeatedly been shown to have large effects on interstate, Indian, and international commerce.

The EPA has no real power, it's not a branch of government.

Under the Necessary and Proper Clause, it has long been recognized that Congress may create agencies to carry into execution its powers on a particular subject.

[k-onmmunist]

I suspect this climate change thing will be largely dead in 10 years. And yes, we will be moving from fossil fuels gradually due to economic reasons, and technological advances anyway.

My thoughts exactly.

[??????????]

Under the Necessary and Proper Clause, it has long been recognized that Congress may create agencies to carry into execution its powers on a particular subject.

The problem is the EPA creates virtual laws on its' own and claims some sort of ability to enforce them with fines and jail time. Completely over the line and unconstitutional.

[Dgov]

If anyone wants a good example of what this looks like in practice, here it is:

http://www.appeal-democrat.com/articles/energy-101071-subsidies-renewable.html

[Landslide Lyndon]

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/11/17/most_republicans_now_question_climate_change.html

A new Pew Research poll finds 53% of Republicans say there is no solid evidence the earth is warming. Among Tea Party Republicans, 70% say there is no evidence.

Key finding: "Disbelief in global warming in the GOP is a recent occurrence. Just a few years ago, in 2007, a 62%-majority of Republicans said there is solid evidence of global warming, while less than a third (31%) said there is no solid evidence. Currently, just 38% of Republicans say there is solid evidence the earth is warming, and only 16% say that warming is caused by human activity."

[Keystone Phil]

Very unfortunate

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/11/17/most_republicans_now_question_climate_change.html

A new Pew Research poll finds 53% of Republicans say there is no solid evidence the earth is warming. Among Tea Party Republicans, 70% say there is no evidence.

Key finding: "Disbelief in global warming in the GOP is a recent occurrence. Just a few years ago, in 2007, a 62%-majority of Republicans said there is solid evidence of global warming, while less than a third (31%) said there is no solid evidence. Currently, just 38% of Republicans say there is solid evidence the earth is warming, and only 16% say that warming is caused by human activity."

Well, in light of this new poll, I somewhat agree with you... and these numbers are up from what they were before.  Apparently 62% of Republicans, 20% of Democrats, and 43% of Independents don't know their science (which is a shame, although not all that surprising that 41% overall are pretty ignorant of science).

HOWEVER, the GOP as a party, as in our platform, still recognizes Global Warming as occuring.

[Gustaf]

I'm reminded of all those crazies who didn't accept the science on swine flu vaccinations. Boy, did those people look silly when they all died.