Gosh, Was He?

George Monbiot:

Well it was published on December 11 – I mean to say, December 11 1997. The US had just put a wrecking ball through the Kyoto protocol. George Bush was innocent; he was busy executing prisoners in Texas.

Nice line of course, but given that there was one execution in Texas in December 1997 I don\’t think "busy" really captures it.

When George Bush announced, in 2001, that he would not ratify the Kyoto protocol, the world cursed and stamped its foot.

Erm, George, you do understand American politics do you? The President doesn\’t ratify treaties. The Senate does. And under Clinton there was an indicative vote something like 95-0 against ratification. It\’s simply not in the President\’s power to insist upon something like this: propose, influence, yes, but not insist.

In July 1997, the Senate had voted 95-0 to sink any treaty which failed to treat developing countries in the same way as it treated the rich ones.

He does in fact mention it, but seems not to get the implication.

But underlining his complaint is something very puzzling. He\’s against emissions trading, insisting that each country must reduce its own emissions. Why? This is vastly more expensive than trade: as emissions are a global problem we don\’t actually care where reductions come from, we just want them to come at the lowest cost.

But then George has never really understood trade, has he?

12 comments on “Gosh, Was He?

  1. I hadn’t realized that the governor of a state personally executed prisoners that had been sentenced to death. Thank you George Monbiot for setting me right on that one.

  2. As a Yank, I’d just like to thank Tim for pointing out that the President has absolutely no power to ratify a treaty–the Senate must do so by majority vote.

    Monbiot exhibits the usual anti-American irrationality with which I regret to say I’ve become painfully familiar during my stay in Britain:

    1) When criticizing America (ie, all the time) it’s vitally important to slip Bush’s name into your remarks, even if he has naught to do with the subject;

    2) America should be far more like Europe; as we all know, Europeans are infinitely more civilized than those stupid, racist, fundie clowns across the POnd;

    3) The press have far too much freedom in America; and/or the press are in thrall to corporate interests, and hence don’t give socialists at the UN (and in Europe) their proper due. For Mr. Monbiot, it appears, a free press is a ‘corrupted’ one;

    4) The notion that any legal entity can make monetary contributions to a political movement is, it appears, another ‘corrupt’ practice. We Americans happen to consider such activity as ‘free speech’, and prefer that any and all legitimate domestic entities should be able to do so–the more argument, the more raucous, uninhibited debate, the better. I’d assume Mr. Monbiot believes that the State should fund the parties;

    5) Capital punishment–gotta work that in, somehow, since America is a notoriously evil place for assuming that–wait for it–killing those who murder might, just possibly, deter other would-be killers from taking a life. Me, I believe that if capital punishment deters but ONE person from killing, it’s worth it. But Mr. Monbiot is doubtless far more sophisticated, and far more wise, than I.

    Meantime, of course, we all know that Europe and the rest of the planet are perfectly free to implement CO2 emissions reduction measures whether the US participates or not. And yet–remarkably–it’s the US which has reduced her emissions, while the EU (and others) continue to increase theirs.

    Betcha Mr. Monbiot ‘forgot’ that last bit, eh? Much more fun just to feel so very superior to those morons over in the States….

  3. But then George has never really understood trade, has he?

    I am not sure George understands anything to do with resource management or utilisation. Strange, given that he is actually trained in ecology.

  4. Mark Wadsworth wrote:

    “George W Bush wasn’t even President in 1997, or has somebody already said that?”

    No, he wasn’t; but see my Rule #1, above. You have to understand, kind sir, that the Left has never let facts get in the way of a rant.

    In fact, Mr. Bush wasn’t even ‘busy executing prisoners’ at the time. State governors have no authority to ‘execute’ anyone; they can only pardon the condemned.

    Frankly, it’s difficult to tell whether the Left’s near-complete misunderstanding of American political, legal and social practice is due to stupidity, or to deliberate malice, or some mixture of both.

  5. Matthew, hence the caveat! Is Moonbat saying GWB was innocent (because he wasn’t the Pres anyway) but, as a sideswipe, he was busy not pardoning prisoners, or was Moonbat following EJ’s Rule #1?

  6. Er, obviously he’s pointing out that George Bush is often singled out for blame on Kyoto but in fact it’s not got a lot to do him.

  7. Just reinforces my past observation that, in the UK, anti-Americanism is the last acceptable racism. Believing any and every misdeed by any and every American – but especially President Bush – has now simply become the normative world view in the UK. facts simply don’t enter into it anymore, and it doesn’t really matter what the subject is – any stick does to beat a dog with.

    llater,

    llamas

  8. “This is vastly more expensive than trade: as emissions are a global problem we don’t actually care where reductions come from, we just want them to come at the lowest cost.”

    Nuts to you. Emissions are not a problem at all much less a global problem. This is a nice way for the left to win – they get you to accept the fundamental fallacy and argue over details of the implementation of solutions to the non-existent problem.

    Once you accept the assumption that Kulaks, or Ukrainians, or the ‘bourgeousie’ or ‘polluters’ or the ‘rich’ or ‘corporations’ or ‘executives’ are a problem, when they are not, taxation is right there and murder is only a few steps away.

  9. Blacques wrote:

    “Once you accept the assumption that Kulaks, or Ukrainians, or the ‘bourgeousie’ or ‘polluters’ or the ‘rich’ or ‘corporations’ or ‘executives’ are a problem, when they are not, taxation is right there and murder is only a few steps away.”

    Indeed; we’ve already seen this attitude reflected in the outright lies surrounding global warming: suppression of data which doesn’t support AGW, suggestions that anyone who disagrees with AGW should be charged as a the equivalent of a war criminal, etc.

    The intolerance and love of totalitarianism shine through more clearly with every passing day–and frankly, it’s not just America under threat, but everyone who believes in personal freedom.

    AGW is, quite simply, Stalinism lurching out of the grave to which we thought we’d consigned the monster back in 1991…..

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.