In a typically verbose speech, [Bill Clinton] put forth his idea of what the U.S. and other industrialized nations need to do: "We just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions 'cause we have to save our planet for our grandchildren." Sounds like he should cut back on his own.
What he actually said:
CLINTON: And maybe America, and Europe, and Japan, and Canada -- the rich counties [sic] -- would say, "OK, we just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions 'cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren." We could do that. But if we did that, you know as well as I do, China and India and Indonesia and Vietnam and Mexico and Brazil and the Ukraine, and all the other countries will never agree to stay poor to save the planet for our grandchildren. The only way we can do this is if we get back in the world's fight against global warming and prove it is good economics that we will create more jobs to build a sustainable economy that saves the planet for our children and grandchildren. It is the only way it will work.
Don't wait for a retraction.
Here is the blog post that started the whole frenzy, with some acidic criticism in the comments section once the whole scam has been unveiled. Here is NY Time's environmental reporter Andy Revkin's take.
PS. Something seems to be wrong with blogger that makes it hard to post and impossible to spell-check. If my spelling is worse than usual today, that's why.
12 comments:
Mr. Clinton sounds alot like Mr. Harper in terms of thinking in a post-Kyoto fashion: it's non-sensical to have only certain countries bound by the caps, the big emitters like the U.S. etc. have to get in the game. That's Harper's view as well. Ideologically the Democrats and the Conservatives are pretty close.
How cute to to see what "caps off" (Biff) thinks is the topic.
I'm really troubled that an investment publication is disseminating distortions like this. No wonder the financial economy is in ruins; it's managed by charlatans.
Actually Ti, While understanding that Caps Off was a little off the intended topic, from reading the quotations, it would seem that Caps Off would be making an accurate statement.
As to the topic, is this not the same thing that every political party has been harping about for at least the last twenty years. The press abandoning its primary role of providing unbiased accurate reporting and instead choosing to reflect the thoughts and political opinion of the author of the article and or the editorially board of the publications. I do not think you will gather much argument that it does not happens on all sides of the great left and right divide we now call politics.
And Clinton was the President who failed to get the USA to ratify Kyoto.
And his VP was The Goreacle.
Now both making hundreds of $millions off the Great Scam.
Ahhh Bill, doesn't know what a cigar is for and still thinks America listens to him.
caps of is bang on.
Considering how popular Clinton was during his reign, its understandable how the prospect of a Clinton-like run by Harper would intimidate the likes of Ti-Guy.
O.T. but Huge,
Harper has launched another inquiry into contracting "irregularites" which took place during the Chretien/Martin reign. (ht Nat Newswatch).
Many were expecting this move, given the obvious "irregularities" that were not covered by the very limited mandate of Gomery.
It was just a matter of time. The investigation will take place during the possilbe spring election, and the results will no doubt be out by the next '09 scheduled election.
Either way, a stroke of genius.
from reading the quotations, it would seem that Caps Off would be making an accurate statement.
Kingston..."Caps Off" was a notorious troll at another blog...probably the same old Biff, but in any case, what he brought up was an attempt to change the channel and you don't score any points with me by encouraging the hijacking of a topic.
I do not think you will gather much argument that it does not happens on all sides of the great left and right divide we now call politics.
How irrelevant and meaningless. "Everybody does it!" has never been a valid explanation or excuse. Didn't your mother explain that to you in the context of jumping off bridges?
Again...*snaps fingers in front of Kingston's face*...Focus! Peddling disinformation to inform business decisions is disastrous. The last people I'd expect to minimise or dismiss that are worshipers of teh fwee mahket!
Man. The moral bankruptcy of people these days is shocking.
"Peddling disinformation to inform business decisions is disastrous. The last people I'd expect to minimise or dismiss that are worshipers of teh fwee mahket!"
I would and I did.
http://freeborncanuck.blogspot.com/2008/02/bigcitylibs-consternation.html
Hmmmm,, Ti,, please copy and paste my concurrence with the practice. I would think this, "The press abandoning its primary role of providing unbiased accurate reporting and instead choosing to reflect the thoughts and political opinion of the author of the article and or the editorially board of the publications." Would express my dis-approval. Or I suppose I could hold my breath until I turned blue in protest if that makes you feel better but my mother instructed me not to do that in the same speech as jumping off the bridge talk. LOL
As to a business report doing it, why is that any different than a political reporter slanting or to use your words peddling disinformation to the public any different. Are you now advocating that "teh fwee mahket!" should be our trusted source for information because that is where big business goes to base decisions, I freaking hope not.
Snaps his fingers in front of Ti-guys eyes and gives him a slap to the back of the head. Get real Ti, what is wrong is wrong, no matter what forum it comes from. You cannot criticize one forum with out criticizing all. When I see you fairly comment on the bias reporting from the Toronto Star and Globe and Mail to the same extent you do the National Post and other right leaning media sources, I will accord you some creditability on this issue.
Ti,, please copy and paste my concurrence with the practice.
Well, don't start your comment by supporting some troll's attempt to hijack the discussion. You gave the impression you missed the point.
I didn't cut and paste the reasonable part of your comment because I'm not your grade three teacher, here to pat you on the back for expressing common sense.
As to a business report doing it, why is that any different than a political reporter slanting or to use your words peddling disinformation to the public any different.
You mean "why is dishonesty bad?"
I'm sure you can answer that.
This isn't just spin, Kingston. This is blatant disinformation sourced at ABC and it's significant that you want to chatter away uselessly to minimise that.
When I see you fairly comment on the bias reporting from the Toronto Star and Globe and Mail to the same extent you do the National Post and other right leaning media sources, I will accord you some creditability on this issue.
I don't read The Toronto Star or The National Post. And when I come across bias or bad journalism in The Globe and Mail I contact the individual responsible directly.
....As an aside, it's illustrative to discover how brittle and petulant many big names in the media, particularly pundits, are. Jeffery Simpson at The Globe gets particularly hissy...
In any case, it's not up to me, as a liberal/progressive to be balanced in my criticism of rightwing dishonesty and disinformation, which has been blatant and alarming for many years now.
That's a job for "principled conservatives"...both of them.
Ha! Bill O'Reilly did the same thing. Although he probably got his information from the Paris Business Review.
Ugh, I see you've got "Biff" hanging out here. You poor fellow.
RT, If you start blogging again you can have Biff back.
Post a Comment