Climate Person of the Year

Until last week, this long-beloved annual traditional seemed to be a lock for one person -- Nobel laureate, itinerant educator, and media superstar Al Gore. Sadly, he only makes first runner up this year. Similar to Time magazine, our Person of the Year is awarded to the person or group who "for better or for worse ... has done the most to influence the events of the year" in the climate arena.

By single-handedly stopping any international action on climate at Bali, by stopping California from regulating tailpipe greenhouse gas emissions, by forcing Congress to drop almost all non-oil-related provisions to cut GHGs from the energy bill -- all in one week! -- one man proved his unchallenged high-impact misleadership on the issue of the century: Dick Cheney George Bush.

[Note to future historians: Curiously, Gore seemed to have gotten more actual votes than Bush did for the honor, but the judges awarded it to Bush anyway.]

In a related story, the FHS (Future Historians Society), having previously named Bush the Worst President in American History, awarded him one of their rare Worst Leaders of All Time Awards, alongside such notables as Neville Chamberlain and Nero, for his tireless efforts to destroy the health and well-being of the next 50 generations.

Bush spokesperson, Dana Perino, said the President always believed he deserved as much recognition for his global warming efforts as Al Gore.

Comments

[BTN]

01:24 AM on 12/22/2007

This is interesting, a complete rebuttal of Al Gore's Global Warming "science"

http://downloads.heartland.org/21345.pdf

[highjinks]

10:41 AM on 12/21/2007

Mr, Romm has apparently bought into the popular, unAmerican idea that the U.S. should be punished for it's wonderful standard of living, still the envy of the world. While smarter, cleaner , more renewable ways of maintaining our lifestyle are important, America should not be punished as some would like to see. Besides, why should I put any faith in an apparently overly educated man who still clings to the silly notion that Gore was actually elected?

[WilliePilgrim]

09:27 AM on 12/21/2007

I would have voted for Freeman Dyson who's position as self-described "heretic" more accurately describes the valuable function contributed by those onto which others would affix the purposely hurtfull (and inaccurate (like so many of the other assumptions that panicky global warming paranoids use) name "deniers".
I do believe, as do many other heretics that there is indeed a human contribution to the climate change, though we question the ability of elected officials and beaurocrats in the UN to be sophisticated or patient enough to understand and/or implement the proper and most effective responses to address the possible consequences of our miserable treatment of the shared environment.
It would be a marked step in the right direction if the monolithic body of the "so-called-informed" would incorporate into themselves a respected core of heretics; a vocal and vigorous challenge to their own assertions so that should this multi-variable confusion called climate be proved wrong we will have sound advice as to how to get beyond instead of the situation we find ourselves in regarding ethanol in the US.

[gcalknet]

07:02 PM on 12/20/2007

I agree. President Bush, by not buying into the myth of human caused global warming, deserves much credit. Should he accept this allegation, which by the way is not established, and still in question, then our economy and way of life will fall about our ears. And DO NOT give me any garbage about the UN. The only reason they support this fiction, is to gain control of the US economy, and force us to become as backward and poor as China, India, and all the other stone age economies. that comprise that "august" body. I am tired of hearing about this subject, especially when led by a psychotic fat man, who is not Michael Moore.

[realitytrumpsbull]

06:18 PM on 12/20/2007

Let's cut through the hype para uno momento,
and get down to the brass tacks of the issue
of Varmit: What's YOUR thermostat set at?
How many miles did YOU drive this week? How
many lights you got on, RIGHT now? A/C working
ok? What's cooking? How much old food did you
toss this week?

My point? It's all good and fine to rag on
George, poor guy's target of convenience
these days, but introspection on the issue
of the environment is much, much more complex.
To whatever infinitesimal and miniscule
degree, we, as individuals impact the environment more than some guy in a suit that
we'll probably never even get to talk to
in real life.

Decisions, decisions, that's what the whole
environmental debate is about, moreso than
voting blocs or high-dollar campaign contributions, it's about what YOU do or what
I do every day, and how we go about it. Taking
the old decision-making to a higher level,
there, making more frugal and intelligent
choices about what goes on, this is the
crux of the debate on environment. Learning
s'more is also good, and considering instances
of hypocritical practices as opportunities
for change.
Consider the humble clipboard. This 20th
century dead-tree personal assistant is still
valuable and useful in our digitally-interconnected consumer model, though it be
anachronistic, it's still effective in its'
information carrying capacity. See, on a
clipboard, you can take this stuff called
'paper', and make little notes on it, like
what all you need to be buying with your
money, and where all you'll be needing to
travel to, probably by car, in order to
get these items. Using this sophisticated
tool, you can compile something called
'a shopping list', and make other markings on
this paper stuff with a 'pen', typically
an ink-filled writing stylus that requires
no electricity with which to operate, batteries
not included etc.
Let George do his job, you have to do yours,
too. Blame is easy, change is hard.