Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Sen. Ed Murray on Rev. Hutcher... | Hearing the Homeless »

Monday, January 28, 2008

Mistate of the Union

posted by on January 28 at 20:35 PM

Go to Think Progress right now for a liberal response. Also known as a fact check.

They’ve got a parade of posts up (22) just like this one here:

SOTU: Bush said: “And let us complete an international agreement that has the potential to slow, stop, and eventually reverse the growth of greenhouse gases. This agreement will be effective only if it includes commitments by every major economy and gives none a free ride.”

FACT — BUSH BLOCKED GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE EFFORTS: The United States remains the only industrialized nation to refuse to sign the Kyoto Protocol. At the most recent global conference on climate change in Bali, the United States rejected mandatory caps on greenhouse gas emissions and was “principally responsible for obstructing progress.” [National Geographic, 12/3/07; BBC, 12/15/07; Reuters, 12/13/08]

FACT — ‘MAJOR EMITTERS’ MEETING UNDERMINES GLOBAL EFFORTS: This week, the United States will convene a “major emitters” meeting in Hawaii. By meeting outside of the U.N. framework and by likely agreeing only to “aspirational targets,” Bush’s ‘major emitters’ meetings undermines the efforts of the United Nations to draw up a global binding agreement. [Reuters, 1/27/08; NYT, 9/24/07; BBC, 12/13/07]

RSS icon Comments

1

I just want to know what Nancy Pelosi was reading.

Posted by Katie | January 28, 2008 8:35 PM
2

that was quick! gotta love the internets.

Posted by Cale | January 28, 2008 8:55 PM
3

I don't like the internet. Or the world wide web.

Posted by Bill O'Reilly | January 28, 2008 9:07 PM
4

No update on the animal-human hybrids?

Posted by Jim Demetre | January 28, 2008 9:08 PM
5

"Major emitters" = China.

Posted by Fnarf | January 28, 2008 9:40 PM
6

What's the quote, from Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, about mendacity?

Posted by Andy Niable | January 28, 2008 10:00 PM
7

Given that this administration has been caught red-handed lying about some pretty major, impeachable shit and absolutely nothing has happened to them as a result, what exactly is the downside of saying whatever pretty lies he wants to whenever he wants to?

Posted by flamingbanjo | January 28, 2008 10:06 PM
8

Cool. Local bars had specifically turned to other channels because nobody can stand watching Bush lie any more.

Remember when we used to impeach people for what Bush and his comrades have done?

Posted by Will in Seattle | January 28, 2008 10:22 PM
9

@8 too bad all his lies weren't involved in some irrelevant tangent to a sexual harassment case deposition.

Uncounted hundreds of thousand Iraqis dead
thousands of Americans dead

small potatoes compared to a lie meant to keep a consensual affair private

Posted by vooodooo84 | January 28, 2008 10:37 PM
10

WIS really not much of an observation. You think people go to bars on Monday night to watch C-SPAN or CNN. Maybe football. That's about it.

Posted by Zander | January 28, 2008 11:00 PM
11

SO...what happens when China passes the US in greenhouse gas emissions in about a decade or less and they are exempt from the Kyoto agreement???? what than?
Will the world's ire suddenly be turned upon China? Somehow I doubt this will happen. And if the activists go there to protest they'll mostly just end up in prison or shot, not allowed to prance around in the streets with big signs.
By the way, Im not saying we shouldnt reduce greenhouse gas emissions as part of a broader strategy to reduce all pollution as much as possible , but it does strike me as horrible policy to not have the soon to be worlds greatest CO2 emitter as part of the treaty.

Posted by Brian in Seattle | January 28, 2008 11:01 PM
12

Why is it that politicians have to be so polite to each other. Would Pelosi lose any support if she introduced Bush by saying "Here's President Bush, thank the fuck Christ that this is the last time we'll have to listen to this asshole giving the State of the Union address. Unless of course Cheney is plotting a coup to keep this shithead in power and avoid the inevitable war crimes trials"? Not from me she wouldn't. And then if the Democratic response started off with something like "Well, if the president were any more full of shit you could use him to fertilize the Sahara desert. Let's see, shall we do the big lies first and work our way down the list or start with the little lies first and work our way up?" I want the British House of Commons, but pissed off and jacked to the gills on bad crank and malt liquor

Posted by wile_e_quixote | January 28, 2008 11:24 PM
13

Say we do get some sort of international protocal, can we really deny the right of developing countries to develop in the same ways we have? Or will green technology catch up?

Posted by sittingduck | January 29, 2008 12:05 AM
14

"can we really deny the right of developing countries to develop in the same ways we have? Or will green technology catch up?"

whichever one that makes more money in the short term, of course. Expensive and responsible long term investment strategies are for bitch ass commie suckas. {/channeling bellevue ave}

Posted by point x point synopsis | January 29, 2008 12:27 AM
15

What gets me is his "we want to open up markets for trade...free markets..oppurtunities for Americans" while simultaneously closing down America to outsiders. It's a two way street dude, either close it all down or open up *your* country too. Nobody'll be complaining if he does either.
Except perhaps NASA might get screwed since it's got 36% Indians alone.

Posted by don quixote | January 29, 2008 6:11 AM
16

@11 Good point, railing on China as possibly the future greatest polluter. By the same standard why shouldn't America as the *current* greatest polluter do something with the rest of the developed world cuts down?

Posted by don quixote | January 29, 2008 6:14 AM
17

@12: Right on. They should have made an emergency call to Karen Finley, so she would show up, ambush the podium mid-speech, and do fun things with yams.

Posted by mackro mackro | January 29, 2008 7:26 AM
18

there were far more stupid ideas in the SOTU speech than this.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | January 29, 2008 10:14 AM
19

facts mean shit.

Posted by max solomon | January 29, 2008 12:43 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).