When Up is Down in Romm World

Huh?

Is Joe Romm trying hard to convince himself that he’s not swimming against the current?

If truth serum existed, and you gave it to Romm just before he sat down to write this post, you can be sure it would have turned out differently.

Even one of Romm’s fiercest loyalists concedes the obvious (at least in the first half of this sentence):

It seems that the Pielkes and Nordhauses are getting through to the Administration, which prefers a smiley message, not a practical one.

Actually, it seems the Administration prefers both a smiley message and a practical one.

5 Responses to “When Up is Down in Romm World”

  1. L. Carey says:

    Yeah, “practical”.  While back in the real world, the Tea Partiers’ favorite Senator has some suggestions, including completely eliminating the Dept of Energy.  So, once again, just where is the money for actually implementing even a fraction of the Breakthrough Institute’s smiley message coming from?
    A detailed look at the Rand Paul spending bill
    Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/01/detailed-look-rand-paul-spending-bill#comments-header-anchor#ixzz1CGs3dY5x

  2. Keith Kloor says:

    It boggles my mind how climate concerned folks don’t recognize the gift horse staring them in the face.

    I recall a few decades ago when certain Republicans wanted to abolish the EPA (seems that one is being reprised again), when they wanted to shut down the govt, and when they generally overreached in many ways–thinking they had a popular mandate.

    If I were a democrat in Congress, I would welcome everything Sarah Palin says, I would highlight everything Rand Paul (and Newt Gingrich) suggests, I would welcome Daryl Issa conduct climate hearings, and so on.

    The American people threw a tantrum in the mid-term election. Some of the folks they elected to office are going to look a whole lot different now than they did on the stump, Rand Paul among them. Like President Clinton did two decades ago, I think President Obama recognizes the gift horse staring him in the face.

    BTW, without any of the aforementioned Republicans, Joe Romm would have nothing to blog about for the next two years.

     

  3. Tom Fuller says:

    There you go again, KK. Romm would have no shortage of targets even without Republicans–including yourself, if he ever tired of Pielke-bashing.

    Hysteria leads to unconscious self-parody much more quickly than is often suspected.

  4. Paul Kelly says:

    For Romm, climate is principally a hook for hyper-partisan progressive politics. His tragedy is that he thought Barack Obama was on his side.
     
    In 2008, I made the case at climateprogress that Obama was the wrong choice for climate voters. I cited his career long avid support of corn ethanol and “clean coal”. While a Senator, he flat out refused to work on climate legislation. He promised alternatives deployment below the current trends. It was a pretty god case. Naturally, I was called names and banned.
     
    If you chart acceptance of the Romm hell and high water scenario against the time he’s blogged, you will see a steady downturn beginning right about when he started. Romm isn’t swimming against the stream. He’s pushing the stream in the other direction.

  5. David44 says:

    @4 Paul –
    “I cited his career long avid support of corn ethanol and “clean coal”.
    I think you were a bit hard on him.  Illinois, the state he represented as a senator, is both a coal and a corn state.  Although these are both bogus environmental solutions, he did have to serve his constituents (read: get elected), you know.  Politics.  Seems to me he sacrificed a lot politically as President to cap and trade, even if unsuccessfully.  He still has to sop to voters (Democrats, even) in places like WV.  Corn, I think not so much; those Republican farmers and agribusiness types aren’t going to support him anyway.  Ideological purity gets him about as far in politics as clean coal translates to clean energy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.