We’ve long known that Jeb Bush is a “climate change” believer, and, much like Newt Gingrich, is a fan of government solutions. He lets this slip a bit
(IBT) Republican presidential hopeful Jeb Bush said in an interview published Thursday that humans contribute to climate change. Bush, in a departure from recent comments, said that the United States should adapt and make changes to stop climate change, while keeping the country’s finances in mind.
“I think we have a responsibility to adapt to what the possibilities are without destroying our economy, without hollowing out our industrial core,” he said in an interview with Bloomberg BNA. “I think it’s appropriate to recognize this and invest in the proper research to find solutions over the long haul but not be alarmists about it.”
He goes on to equivocate a bit with not wanting to damage the economy, but what he’s really advocating are central government rules and regulations.
I personally think this is a reasonably moderate comment….
1. If a large minority of the country feel strongly about something then its incumbent upon the president to make sure that those feelings are addressed.
2. In this case he is addressing the powerfully strong concerns of many Americans…not a majority but many Americans.
3. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PRESIDENT TO BE THE PRESIDENT FOR ****ALL AMERICANS**** NOT just the base or your own party or those you politically agree with.
The lack of these three simple steps is why this countrys government is now in chaos.
Both sides feel as if any kind of moderation is capitulation and that is BS.
You all know my feelings on Climate change but by the same token because so many people feel strongly in the opposite direction Im perfectly willing to give several inches if it means finding some form of common ground as long as my core beliefs and principals are not compromised in the process.
What if the new PResident thinks it’s a complete hoax by the Goverment-Industrial Complex to pass ever more intrusive laws and redistribute our wealth around the world?
Still pander?
JB that is a hypothetical and difficult to answer.
I am about as conservative as they come….but I am also a pragmatist….I do not let politics cloud my judgement.
As for your hypothetical I could only surmise that:
1. A president does not pass any laws….congress does.
2. The role of the president is to uphold the laws of the land whether he agrees with them or not.
3. If the government in charge deems legally and are within the constitutional limits of their power to do as you say then that is what will happen.
The problem I continue to see for America is that our nation has become so divided politically that no one is willing to compromise on anything because compromise is capitulation.
There is nothing wrong with compromising on many, many things. Finding common ground…reaching consensus on things…..However that seems nearly impossible these days.
As for Bush it will be impossible for him to be a moderate IF he was ever elected to the White House because so many billionaires and millionaires and pacs will have their hooks in him as to render such a presidency doomed to repeated partisan failure.
The same holds for Any other GOP and for Hillary or whatever radical lefty emerges from the ashes on that side of the isle.
What if I told you we were in an interglacial period of an ice age? And that the glacial period is overdue? Would that change your thinking at all?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age
That’s climate.
You must be relatively new to this site JB….I have been preaching that we are on the cusp of the next Ice age for a couple months here on this site. Yes it has changed my thinking but trying to convince the world that the next ice age is much more likely to do us in then global warming is like changing the minds of liberals that more taxes solve everything.
Dansgaard-Oeschger event
A simple imput from the Encyclopedia Britannica:
…period, the climate frequently alternated between full-glacial and nonglacial conditions in less than a decade. Some of these changes seem to have occurred as sudden climate fluctuations, called Dansgaard-Oeschger events, in which the temperature jumped 5° to 7° C (9° to 13° F), remained in that state for a few years to centuries, jumped back, and repeated the process several…
This leads us to Heinrich events. 5 Of which have happened in the last 115,000 years.
Heinrich Event:
A Heinrich event is a natural phenomenon in which large armadas of icebergs break off from glaciers and traverse the North Atlantic. First described by marine geologist Hartmut Heinrich, they occurred during the past glacial periods or “ice ages” and are particularly well documented for the last glacial period.
The most widely accepted theory for the calving of the Laurentide ice sheet is
geothermal heating at the base of the continental glacier. Ice sheets grow due to external
climatic changes, until their size begins to form internal instabilities.
Surprise, surprise….guess whats been discovered under the Antarctic? Geothermal venting.
Humongous amounts of fresh water released into the oceans will have a drastic and detrimental effect on the currents carrying warm, moderate temperatures to the northern hemisphere.
Even the IPCC contains this in their latest report though they gloss over it because it does not demand money for poor nations………….a gradual slowing – which the recent United Nations report said was “very likely†by 2100 – could shift tropical rains south, the study suggests, as it probably has in the past.
The slowdown of the currents is predicted because increasing rain and freshwater in the North Atlantic would make the water less dense and less prone to sinking.
So yeah, I would be preparing for the next ice age not a warmer planet…because a warmer planet we can survive the next ice age will probably kill off 2/3rds of the planets biological life.
I am new, sorry.
Then I guess I don’t understand this:
“Im perfectly willing to give several inches if it means finding some form of common ground as long as my core beliefs and principals are not compromised in the process.”
Compromising means wasting trillions of dollars. Lowering living standards. Taking focus off real problems.
And wealth redistribution and world government.
But to address the one concern, I’ll fight like hell against it, but if it’s made law, I will reluctantly obey.
Let me make this simple. I never said compromise means spending trillions on anything.
I never advocated for wealth redistribution nor did I say anything about a world government nor offered support for such.
You go right ahead and fight…..Its people like you that will ensure that no GOP gets elected to the White House because you want that obnoxious far right whacko running your government rather then a moderate or at least someone sensible who realizes he is the president to all the people not just the whacko right that is only PART of the party……..and IF that obnoxious far right whacko is not nominated you will stay home and make sure that we have an obnoxious far left whacko who would be way worse then A sensible Conservative.
Got cha….G’Day.
Jeb is a liberal, just like his brother. The family is basically from Connecticut and their views are in line with North East Yankees, intrusive, favor big government, desire laws and taxes and regulations on everything.
“om the cusp of another ice age….”
2009 had the lowest solar activity in a century but we still had a very hot year, even though Teach says we are in that miraculous PAUSE tht makes us hot
Iceages seem to appear about every 100000 years so yeah maube the cusp could be 5-10000 years. I am not so worried about that period, I am more worried about the next 100 years
https://www.skepticalscience.com/heading-into-new-little-ice-age-intermediate.htm
Skeptical science bringing out the old CO2 model and saying see…….the earth will get warmer if we continue to pour co2 into the atmosphere.
Awesome science there. It is exactly the warming of the planet that brings on a period of glaciation……its not the cooling of the planet that does so.
A maunder minimum might well have caused the little ice age at a time of NO CO2 from fossil fuels but it was only a cold spell. It was certainly not a period of glaciation.
So the world is not breathlessly awaiting another maunder minimum to have another period of glaciation because……..?
Im glad you want to know……… In a 2012 study, sunspot minima have been detected by analysis of carbon-14 in lake sediments….. In total there seem to have been 18 periods of sunspot minima in the last 8,000 years, and studies indicate that the sun currently spends up to a quarter of its time in these minima.
Hence the contention of skeptical science is that the Maunder Minimum is needed to bring about glaciation which is totally bogus….if that were true we would never not have glaciation on this planet.
They should rename this website….Silly Science as they roll out deceptive analysis and then return to OMG WERE ALL GONNA DIE CAUSE OF CO2.
Craziness.