Dem: global warming like civil rights struggle

[ed1066]

Wow! Considering his party is the one that tried to block the civil rights bill, that's some insulting rhetoric!

www.cnsnews.com/news/article/rep-waxman-climate-change-moral-issue-co

Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) says climate change is a “moral issue.” During a speech at the Center for American Progress on Monday, he criticized Republicans for their attempts to eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.

Waxman, the ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said Republicans have adopted “anti-science views,” and he compared the climate change issue to the debate in America on civil rights.

“Climate change is an environmental issue, it’s an economic issue, but it’s also fundamentally a moral issue. We have an opportunity to act now to forestall great harm to our nation and to the world. We had that kind of issue at other times in our history, we had it during the civil rights debate,” the member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee said.

Waxman added, “If we don’t act on this challenge we will not meet our moral ability to shape our future. We will not meet our moral obligation to our children and future generations.”

Waxman’s comments come as members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee are considering legislation that would permanently eliminate the EPA’s climate authority. Several Democrats are joining a Republican effort to block the Environmental Protection Agency from reducing heat-trapping gasses that have been blamed for global warming.

The California Democrat made several recommendations about what should be done, asking lawmakers to protect the Obama administration’s ability to regulate greenhouse emissions. He called for a charge on carbon emissions to reduce the deficit. Waxman also appealed to policymakers to “educate the public” about the dangers of climate change.

[Deleted]

Climate change has been going on long before there were people to make it a "moral issue".

[ChiTownVenture]

Mar 17, 2011 7:16:43 GMT -5 @moneyjenny82 said:

Climate change has been going on long before there were people to make it a "moral issue".

Here is the quote;

“Climate change is an environmental issue, it’s an economic issue, but it’s also fundamentally a moral issue. We have an opportunity to act now to forestall great harm to our nation and to the world. We had that kind of issue at other times in our history, we had it during the civil rights debate,” the member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee said.

www.cnsnews.com/news/article/rep-waxman-climate-change-moral-issue-co

He is comparing the debate, not "civil rights struggle"

[ChiTownVenture]

Here is a little more of the quote

“We are at a pivotal time in which every member of Congress will decide whether they will be on the right side of history or the wrong side of history,” Mr. Waxman said. “Civil rights in the 1960s was a moral issue, and there was a right side and a wrong side. Climate change is an environmental issue. It is an economic issue. But it is also fundamentally a moral issue.”

He warned that if policy makers do not recognize the seriousness of the threat of climate change and fail to act, “history will not judge us kindly.”

green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/07/waxman-angrily-assails-g-o-p-science-deniers/?partner=rss&emc=rss

[Deleted]

My point is that it wasn't a moral issue then, and it isn't one now. People should reduce/reuse/recycle because it creates less waste. It just makes sense to use something until you can't use it anymore. But IMO it's not a moral issue - it's a common sense issue.

[Bluerobin]

Global warming is a myth perpetrated by Al Gore! But, MJ is right, we should re-cycle.

[ChiTownVenture]

Mar 17, 2011 7:48:12 GMT -5 @moneyjenny82 said:

My point is that it wasn't a moral issue then, and it isn't one now. People should reduce/reuse/recycle because it creates less waste. It just makes sense to use something until you can't use it anymore. But IMO it's not a moral issue - it's a common sense issue.

I think it's more to the point that there is a right side and a wrong side. Is it right to continue to damage the earth and effect the climate or is it right to continue for the sake of progress and turn a blind eye to the damage.

Which is more important, to protect the earth or to protect progress? While it may seem obvious to some people today, it's difficult to really know if ignoring the damage being done is going to be worth having to live with results in the future.

It's also easy to say, well I won't be around in 100 years so what do I care, but is that the legacy that our generation wants to leave behind?

[ChiTownVenture]

Mar 17, 2011 7:56:06 GMT -5 Bluerobin said:

Global warming is a myth perpetrated by Al Gore! But, MJ is right, we should re-cycle.

Al Gore is a politician, why not direct your attention to the scientist, including NASA (you know that big technology agency that we fund)?

climate.nasa.gov/

[Deleted]

Climate change has been happening since before humans existed! Yes, we do need to be good stewards of the land, but I just don't buy the hype of it affecting climate change.

[floridayankee]

Mar 17, 2011 0:03:36 GMT -5 @ed1066 said:

Waxman added, ...."We will not meet our moral obligation to our children and future generations.”

says the democratic congressman from a state that apparently has no moral obligation to avoid bankrupting their children's future for generations to come.

I think it's more to the point that there is a right side and a wrong side. Is it right to continue to damage the earth and effect the climate or is it right to continue for the sake of progress and turn a blind eye to the damage.

We can either continue or we revert to the past and live like the Amish. Of course we'll really get our butts kicked economically since other countries will undoubtedly continue to progress.

There really is no viable replacement for fossil fuels at this time.

[ChiTownVenture]

Mar 17, 2011 8:06:14 GMT -5 @moneyjenny82 said:

Climate change has been happening since before humans existed! Yes, we do need to be good stewards of the land, but I just don't buy the hype of it affecting climate change.

Correct Climate Change happened before humans, the climate is always changing, the difference is the current climate is reacting to the forces on earth and is changing for the worse.

I'm just amazed that people are not willing to look at the information that is out, but instead just turn a blind eye.

Why be good stewards of the earth? Because it's the right thing to do? Because we don't want to damage the earth? That is a moral question.

[ChiTownVenture]

Mar 17, 2011 8:12:03 GMT -5 floridayankee said:

Mar 17, 2011 0:03:36 GMT -5 @ed1066 said:

Waxman added, ...."We will not meet our moral obligation to our children and future generations.”

says the democratic congressman from a state that apparently has no moral obligation to avoid bankrupting their children's future for generations to come.

I think it's more to the point that there is a right side and a wrong side. Is it right to continue to damage the earth and effect the climate or is it right to continue for the sake of progress and turn a blind eye to the damage.

We can either continue or we revert to the past and live like the Amish. Of course we'll really get our butts kicked economically since other countries will undoubtedly continue to progress.

There really is no viable replacement for fossil fuels at this time.

So it's destroy the earth or live like the Amish? We have to completely replace fossil fuels or do nothing? Why don't we try and reduce the damage as much as possible (without reverting to being amish) and continue to research and develop alternative fuels, so that we are not left behind when the rest of the world develops these technologies.

[Deleted]

Mar 17, 2011 8:15:29 GMT -5 ChiTownVenture said:

Mar 17, 2011 8:06:14 GMT -5 @moneyjenny82 said:

Climate change has been happening since before humans existed! Yes, we do need to be good stewards of the land, but I just don't buy the hype of it affecting climate change.

Correct Climate Change happened before humans, the climate is always changing, the difference is the current climate is reacting to the forces on earth and is changing for the worse.

I'm just amazed that people are not willing to look at the information that is out, but instead just turn a blind eye.

Why be good stewards of the earth? Because it's the right thing to do? Because we don't want to damage the earth? That is a moral question.

We need to care for the planet because it is our home. It's where we get our land, food, breathable air, etc. We can't just trash it and leave. There is nowhere else to go (that we know of yet).

[rockon]

Chi, Couldn't agree more that we need to understand how our actions affect our environment and take all reasonable steps to wards mitigating the damage but yet no one jumped up and down when we signed free trade agreements with China and we sent them all of our technology and we continue to buy a huge amount of product from the country who is the worst polluter in the world. This alone makes us the biggest hypocrites in the world because we live in a global environment so by promoting trade and manufacturing with countries like them is promoting the very thing we claim to be against.

[floridayankee]

Mar 17, 2011 8:18:26 GMT -5 ChiTownVenture said:

Why don't we try and reduce the damage as much as possible (without reverting to being amish) and continue to research and develop alternative fuels, so that we are not left behind when the rest of the world develops these technologies.

That is what most people are doing for the simple fact that energy is expensive, is it not?

No matter how much I may personally reduce or conserve, it is never enough because people still preach and demand for more government interference to make energy even more expensive. Apparently I have to buy a horse/buggy and a bunch of corn oil burning lamps to light my house, a corn cob stove for heating and cooking, dig a poop pit and build an outhouse (aka live like the Amish) to make some hardcore environmentalists happy.

Honestly...I wouldn't count on that happening. I am going to continue to heat my hot water with electricity, drive my truck when it's raining, my motorcycle when it's not, run my pool pump and heat/cool my home. When a proven, viable replacement comes around, I will embrace it. Until them, I will continue to get preached at I guess.

[jkapp]

>>Waxman added, “If we don’t act on this challenge we will not meet our moral ability to shape our future. We will not meet our moral obligation to our children and future generations.”<<

I always love how democrats/liberals talk about saving the environment for their children while ignoring the economic damage they are causing to them right now. $14 Trillion in debt and counting...sorry kids - go f%$^ yourselves, we've got entitlements to pay for in order to get our votes!!

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

Apparently I have to buy a horse/buggy

What is interesting if you think about it, when the automobile was put into more widespread use, it was hailed as a great solution to the existing environmental problem plaquing the country at the time, which was horse manure that at the time was everywhere.

[ugonow]

sorry kids - go f%$^ yourselves, we've got entitlements to pay for in order to get our votes!!

I think there is a bit of confusion on the part of some on entitlements. It is not just dem voters recieving aid,Medicare,medicaid, etc..and the politician that proposes doing away with them or taking a hatchet to them will find that out eventually. The average American does not want the cuts that would be necessary to make a difference to these,IMO. On one side you have people that want no cuts to anything,on the other side cuts to everything...I think the majority of Americans want something in between these two factions. I think moderates in both parties could take advantage of this chasim.

[ed1066]

>>Waxman added, “If we don’t act on this challenge we will not meet our moral ability to shape our future. We will not meet our moral obligation to our children and future generations.”<<

LOL! You should see how Henry Waxman lives! I know where his home is, he lives not far from my parents in L.A. Nice mansion on about a half acre of well-tended and watered landscaping. Mexican gardners out front every other day...

[marshabar1]

Ed, check your mail.