Obama Secures Climate Change Agreement [Updated]

by: Chris Blask

Fri Dec 18, 2009 at 18:58:14 PM EST



As people line up to point out, opine upon, gloat or otherwise comment upon the President's lack of success, in Copenhagen today he secured an agreement that prior to his arrival seemed out of the question.  

I know, it's way more fun to criticize, but sometimes you just have to stand back and admire the handiwork.

Chris Blask :: Obama Secures Climate Change Agreement [Updated]
The BBC has this:

US President Barack Obama said the deal would be a foundation for global action but there was "much further to go".

He said the US, China, Brazil, India and South Africa had "agreed to set a mitigation target to limit warming to no more than 2C and, importantly, to take action to meet this objective".

While the agreement is not yet completely written up and has yet to get the buy-in from other countries, getting any agreement at all out of the conference is more than every other effort has been able to achieve.  Specifically, getting the US and China - the largest contributors to Greenhouse gas emissions - along with continental mega-blocks India and Brazil to agree to limit their impact on global and regional climate is a substantial step.

So, other than:

.  managing the economy to the best possible state that could have been expected based on where it was when he started;

.  doing precisely what he promised with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan;

.  getting Health Care Reform to (so far) the brink of passage;

.  improving the market for green technology and;

.  bringing five of the biggest nations in the world together on climate change,

the guy hasn't accomplished a damn thing!

Where's George Bush when you need him?  By this time he'd driven a surplus into a massive deficit, overlooked warnings about terrorism resulting in the only successful foreign attack against the US mainland and spent a fortune in international goodwill in return for global isolation.  Now that's a resume!

[Update - Dec 21, 7:10am ET]

This AP story gives a little more of the high drama of the day.  At the very least it sketches a picture of fifteen hours that would make a real keen made-for-TV movie someday, whichever way the whole climate issue works out.

I think it is safe to say that folks on either "side" of the issue (I can actually think of four sides, but anyway) could read this timeline as either in favor of or critical of the President.  Not surprisingly, perhaps, I find the picture of a US president blinking at a bunch of scurrying Chinese underlings then striding into the room with a - "Hey, Wen, glad you could make the 7pm meeting.  I see you brought some guests." - delightful.

Since people closer to this than I debate the significance (NWF likes it, "the Post Carbon Institute" doesn't) I'll continue to wait and see (like I had a choice) but I'm no less pleased.  The Bizzaro World image of President Palin in the same situation only makes me more mirthful.

Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Oh yea! (2.00 / 5)
You just match that up to what the Republicans in congress has acomplished! Or Sarah and Rush. You want to see some movers and shakers look at their records!

 Oh wait......


I made an atypical crosspost (2.00 / 6)
to the D and DKOS.  We'll see if anyone can stand the idea of a successful President.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."

[ Parent ]
omg (2.00 / 5)
brace yourself.

Earth is the best vacation place for advanced clowns. --Gary Busey
 


[ Parent ]
Funny, there was only one negative commentor, (2.00 / 4)
and that was on DKOS.  Not even very convincing, really.

As I said in response to that one:

Frankly, I'm surprised that it took this long to get a negative comment.  The rumors of the consistent whine of Left Blogistan has been over stated...

;~)



John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."

[ Parent ]
I saw that! (2.00 / 3)
I thought for sure it would go nuts at the D.  It's been a swamp over there lately.

Earth is the best vacation place for advanced clowns. --Gary Busey
 


[ Parent ]
I dunno, maybe I smell right. (2.00 / 5)
Or wrong.  Or whatever.

The guy on DKOS is mostly just cynical, and 67% of the poll respondents picked Obama (and I think most of the rest are just larking about).

Like the Tea Partiers, I think the actual slice of folks on the left who are completely bent out of shape is smaller than may appear.  Remember, onlyu 1% of Americans watch Glenn Beck, and I'd bet most of them will never (or would never) actually pitch in with the Tea Partiers.  Some small and vocal part of the left is similarly worked up, but even in pretty lefthanded crowds I'd bet it's rarely a majority.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
Honestly (2.00 / 9)
there's really just a handful of people who cause the problem.  And the folks who insist on arguing with/baiting them share some of the responsibility for diaries getting out of control.  There's a couple people who constantly drop into totally innocuous diaries with comments like "will the haters find a way to blame this on Obama too???" which I consider unhelpful.

Without going too far in defense of a site that can definitely be a little nutty, I think there are many people who raise the exact same sort of concerns and criticisms that you can find here at the Moose.  The difference is, at the Moose those criticisms are treated with a presumption of good faith and so we have a productive discussion.  At the D, because of the history of course, the same criticisms are treated with an assumption of bad faith and so things degenerate into a flame war.  Someone was smart to start this site!!

"Economics is not a morality play." -Paul Krugman


[ Parent ]
Agreed. (2.00 / 4)
My expectation was that some thing like Ludwigvan would tromp in to attack Chris.  I didn't expect it from Lemos or any of the other top to mid-tier posters (whose criticisms more often than not deserve a fair hearing). The Lemos response to Chris was overwrought and unfair, but his subsequent consideration and apology were heartening.

There's a couple people who constantly drop into totally innocuous diaries with comments like "will the haters find a way to blame this on Obama too???"

This is undoubtably true, but you can generally count on a few haters showing up to spew anyway.  I'd also agree that haters are normally best left ignored, but there is undoubtably something about the D (maybe the legacy of the epic primary wars, or the tone that the site's proprietor tends to strike) that seems to foster, fertilize even, a disdain for any form of optimism.  At that level, laughing these people off the page is the best medicine.  Ok, maybe long-term it's not, but it sure fucking feels good.


Earth is the best vacation place for advanced clowns. --Gary Busey
 


[ Parent ]
I have allowed myself to be dragged into the shouting matches in the past, (2.00 / 3)
so I can't wave a finger at anyone.  But by and large I've managed to restrain the impulse to argue with fire hydrants almost all of the time for probably a year now.  It's hard not to offer one or two rebuttals just to give fair assumption that the other person might be sincere - if ineloquent - but the energy required along with the derailment of discourse is just never worth the cost.  It has been one of my goals this year to spend less time communicating with people who really don't have any intention of communicating back.

The aforementioned poster did drop by in that thread recently, I'd appreciate if s/he could just be ignored.  I checked his/her comment history and afaict there isn't a useful conversation to be had there.  Like raising kids, I'd rather set an expectation that misbehavior never gets the desired response.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
Fair enough. (2.00 / 3)
I've already thoroughly decimated that particular 'user' in another thread; exhausting them finally I think, so there's no longer any sport in that hunt.

Earth is the best vacation place for advanced clowns. --Gary Busey
 


[ Parent ]
Optimism?!? (2.00 / 5)
Optimism is not a progressive value... ;)



"Economics is not a morality play." -Paul Krugman


[ Parent ]
HA! (2.00 / 2)
Talk radio the other day on the way to work had a Happiest States list.  A caller noted that most of the top-ten were Conservative states, and the hosts looked at the bottom ten and they were all blue:

Top Ten

1. Louisiana
2. Hawaii
3. Florida
4. Tennessee
5. Arizona
6. South Carolina
7. Mississippi
8. Montana
9. Alabama
10. Maine

Bottom Ten

42. Rhode Island
43. Ohio
44. Massachusetts
45. Illinois
46. California
47. New Jersey
48. Indiana
49. Michigan
50. Connecticut
51. New York

I think there is something to it...

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
Interesting (2.00 / 5)
the blue states could probably close this gap by legalizing pot...

"Economics is not a morality play." -Paul Krugman

[ Parent ]
clearly (2.00 / 3)
...since the the top three seem keyed to booze, beaches, or some combination of both. Weed:  the great equalizer.  

Earth is the best vacation place for advanced clowns. --Gary Busey
 


[ Parent ]
Happy how? (2.00 / 2)
Happy about where they live or just generally happy because while we love where we live and will always be proud, there's no such thing as happy in New York.


[ Parent ]
Better link: (2.00 / 1)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/livesc...

Their results come from a comparison of two data sets of happiness levels in each state, one that relied on participants' self-reported well-being and the other an objective measure that took into account a state's weather, home prices and other factors that are known reasons to frown (or smile).

The self-reported information came from 1.3 million U.S. citizens who took part in a survey between 2005 and 2008.



John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."

[ Parent ]
When has anyone seen a New Yorker smile?!?!?! (2.00 / 2)
of course we're on the bottom of the list

[ Parent ]
I dunno, the above link makes some good points (0.00 / 0)
about the validity of the survey.  Self-reporting skews it massively, different geographic cultures are likely to give different types of answers, and New Yorkers aren't going to wax poetic about it (of course, you'd think Californians might, but they're at the bottom, too).

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."

[ Parent ]
I don't think it is a coincidence that the top 10 are almost (2.00 / 4)
all in the South (Maine can be excused because they've got beautiful beaches) while the bottom 10 are almost in cold weather climes.  CA has huge budget issues so that may account for it's inclusion.  OH and MI have some of the worst unemployment; MI has the added downer of crappy sports teams.

I also bet at least half of the top 10 leave high off the federal government teat, too.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette


[ Parent ]
We still have the Red Wings, (2.00 / 4)
and the Tigers lost a one game playoff. Izzo's Spartans will make a run at the Final Four. I know that doesnt stack up to the Vermont teams but we've still got a pulse.

 I suppose we could adopt the Indianapolis Colts, I think their as close to us as say Boston is to you.


[ Parent ]
Heh, you got me on the Vermont teams, although UVM's men's (2.00 / 4)
basketball team made the tournament two years ago.  Woohoo!

I'm actually pulling for the Lions; someday....

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette


[ Parent ]
And the UofM football team (2.00 / 1)
will return to the top in the not too distant future. Aren't they the winningest team in the NCAA Division 1?

This is not a recession. It's a robbery.

[ Parent ]
Not with Rich Rodriguez at the helm. Yuck! Bleck! Plooey! (2.00 / 1)


"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette

[ Parent ]
There's only like an handful of people there period. (2.00 / 2)


[ Parent ]
Well, it's been interesting to say the least. (2.00 / 2)
I'll let my thoughts stand over there for themselves.  Charles seems like as cognizant a Leftie as most of you maniacs, blackflag seems like a good egg and at the very least Jerome has offered a wonderful opportunity to debate his own approach in public, for which I'm generally pleased.

I'm glad I don't agree with all ya'll and that this remains a place where we can get at least a bit worked up over issues without anyone necessarily losing their minds.  I remain convinced that it is possible for these online political forum things to evolve into places where hard issues can be argued honestly, and even counter examples of how that should be done serve a useful purpose.

I will take this opportunity to offer specific thoughts on whether Jerome Armstrong has been terribly useful in contributing to the blogosphere as a whole.  He gave me reason to to ponder what public usefulness he has served, and as something of a public figure (well, he has his own wiki page), I think it is fair commentary to discuss it.

Jerome is commonly seen as a person who is "behind" in some way the left-handed political blogosphere.  It seems to me that, while there is some truth to this, his contribution has not been all or even on average constructive.  

Creative credit: Certainly, Jerome encountered and began political blogging before most, but he did not create the technologies or the structure inherent so it is hard to seriously credit him with creative credit.  He was in the right time and the right place and started doing something before most other people did, but I don't think there would have been any measurable lag in the development of political blogging had he not been around.

Tone:  Since the blogosphere was going to exist with or without him, what Jerome could more accurately be credited with is having a hand in setting the course for Left Blogistan.  As we all know, minor changes of direction early on have enormous impact on final results, so very good or very poor decisions on his part early on will have had (or could have had) significant impact today.  I will suggest that, had Jerome chosen to create his early blog with a productive tone aimed at fostering communications and resolving differences, that this would have ramified down through subsequent blogs as a matter of tone and etiquette.  If he had - as I believe he did - create his early blog with a tone of antagonistic vitriolic moral superiority, embodying the very social aspects that his life-story would suggest he imagines himself to be against, then this tone of nihilistic pompous aggressiveness will also have leeched into the soil that many other progressive blogs sprouted from.

So, other than: joining a group that turned much of the population against environmentalists (Earth First!); planning a presidential campaign that failed like a runaway steam boiler and; setting the liberal political blogosphere on a course to provide endless justification for opposition beliefs, it is hard to point to other real impact he has had on the world.  

I wouldn't go out of my way to count all those as an impressive legacy.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
I haven't commented on you diary this far... (2.00 / 5)
...because I'm still getting to grips with what Copenhagen means. As I've now said on the Big D, I'm disappointed with the halfway approach, but I wouldn't lay that at the door of Obama. Far from it. I think he did the best with the materials he had at hand. It's a fudge, and may be too little too late, but Jesus H Christ, let's remember Bush and Kyoto. At least there's a US president who isn't captured by the pro carbon emissions lobby, and I have no doubt whatsoever he did his utmost to secure the most effective deal he could.

When we're talking about global politics, Obama is a player, not a referee, and I'm pissed at the games being played by others (see Saudi Arabia being swayed by the inane libertarian HMGW deniers). I've yet to work out what Copenhagen means, but I'm in no doubt Obama was the best President to deal with the issues. Problem is - not everything is about Obama.

On the Jerome issue: I think you've made a very salient point about tone. I well remember the multiple bannings of the primary wars which did nothing to foster unanimity or rational discourse (not to mention Texas Darlin, Universal etc. shilling for the oppos). I hope he would have learned from those lessons. But having been personally attacked by him for being a Dick Cheney clone because, from what I'd heard from British military, more troops in Helmand would make life better from the inhabitants, I'm not surprised that he's gone down the 'fanboy' route with you.

It's silly, demeaning, and the best kind of incentive to the ludwigvans or Kents of this world who, through unknowable agendas of the far right or left, would prefer nothing better than to see the current Presidential incumbency end up in demoralising recriminations. That Jerome doesn't ban those posters, and yet insults or bans substantive voices who do not agree with him, is a nasty virus on left Blogistan, and he may be the blogfather of its demise indeed.

Meanwhile, however, things won't stop. The Moose is a small rational friendly place, but I also like it when it doesn't get too cosy, and we disagree - but in good faith. It's hard sometimes not to seek dissension for its own sake, or to seek the welcoming but rather worrying unanimity of group think.

Personally, I don't think it's been a great month for the Presidency, though lots has already been achieved. I knew from the beginning (way back in the Primaries) that this would be a long hard path, and acknowledging errors or disappointments is not disloyalty to our founding principles. It's part of the process of learning.

I'm pretty sure Obama and his team have learned from the setbacks. If the past is anything to go by, they will come back, bruised but more determined to get things done, rather than seek the temporary popularity of failed utopian dreams, or of failed reactionary cynicism.  

The p***artist formerly known as 'Brit'


[ Parent ]
Oh, I don't doubt for a split second that the Obama household is full of (2.00 / 4)
"OK, that didn't go well"s and "Well, I wouldn't do that twice"s.  I may be extrapolating, but in future decades during the "look back" stage of this presidency I would not be surprised to hear of more than a few occasions for Mrs. Obama to give Mr. Obama one of those marital looks that sum up greater criticism of Mr.s deeds of the day than the rest of us could justifiably muster - and further that these were often met with the matching "yeah, tell me about it" look from Mr. Obama.

As far as Copenhagen goes, I expect just about nothing at all from these times of clusterhumps at the best of times, and while I am just about as concerned with global warming as anyone I am absolutely certain that the most Utopian solutions are not going to happen.  Even though this five-nation agreement isn't really complete, it strikes me as perhaps the most hopeful direction I can imagine.  If these five play well for their own reasons (and the EU will play well anyway for its own reasons) then that may be just the about the best we can realistically wish for.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
Well, big kudos to you... (2.00 / 1)
...for your reply to Jerome. He was literally asking for it. Since your diary was misinterpreted as some kind of flame bait over there (instead of your real views) I've replied over there too. But I will also paste it below because, as you so trenchantly divine, it does pertain to something important in the current vitriol in the progressive blogosphere.

Also, who knows how long either comment will last.

That's a pretty devastating takedown Chris.

Not sure I should really add to it - but just let it sit there.

I've known your blogging almost two years now, and I don't think I've ever seen you make a personal attack or act out of anger. So, coming from you...

All I'll add is a tag rider on the concept of the Netroots and Progressive blogging.

Despite having been banned from MYDD, I've been a member here since 2004, and still visit because it has a number a great front page posters to occupy my mind, and indeed some alarming but amusing flame wars to satisfy my dramatists love of drama and a good put down.

Part of me developed a grudging respect for Jerome over the last two years, because he would at least inflame debate, and didn't ban (immediately) those who dissented. But I always hoped he'd get beyond the primary wars phase, and get to real policy rather than reverse justifications of why 'Obama was wrong and I was right'.

There's lots to be said about the failures, successes, roadblocks and roadmaps to progressive politics without it all being about 'Obama', Cassandra cries of 'I told you so', or Leninist accusations of class betrayal. MYDD, a professionally written and much visited site, is smaller and less polarised in many ways than Kos. The Moose doesn't seek to emulate the sway and leadership of blogs like this, so there's a mutual self interest in MYDD getting back on track to serious discussions.

However, when the proprietor echoes a famous troll on this site, and calls you a fanboy, that's not leadership - at least nowhere progressive.

When the proprietor of this site attacks myself, a few weeks back, as being a 'Dick Cheney supporter' for suggesting that more troops in Helmand might help the local population (as I'd just been told by a British Officer who was out there) that's not leadership - at least nowhere progressive.

When dissenting voices find themselves  banned en masse for their political support for the current President, and yet clear trolls like the one so liberally in evidence here are allowed to stay, indeed cheered on by the proprietor, that's not leadership - at least nowhere progressive.



The p***artist formerly known as 'Brit'

[ Parent ]
I've preserved the whole thing as it progressed (2.00 / 1)
just for that reason.  I hate book burning.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."

[ Parent ]
Well (2.00 / 4)
Charles certainly wasn't happy lol

[ Parent ]
Yeah, well, you can't please everyone. (2.00 / 4)
To his defense, he thought I was baiting the crowd there.  If nothing else he made me write a response longer (several times) than the diary, and that's not always a bad thing.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."

[ Parent ]
Hmmm, now why would he think that? (2.00 / 2)
maybe because MyDD is a fucking joke and he knows it.  

[ Parent ]
One small quibble (2.00 / 4)
9/11 wasn't the first, or only, successful attack on the mainland. You forgot the original Twin Towers attack.

This is not a recession. It's a robbery.

Quibble all you want, (2.00 / 3)
we'll make more. ;~)

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."

[ Parent ]
Actually, I did think of that. (2.00 / 4)
IMHO it's a matter of scale.  The 93 bombing was a truck bomb.  That's really more of a police-level issue.  9/11 was a full-scale military attack.

Arbitrary determinations (and overlooking entirely a bunch of Canadians with muzzle-loaders 200 years ago), but literary license lets me do those sort of offenses.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
The blogsphere, of course, says it's a corporate sellout (2.00 / 2)
or something.

Obama will be much better off when he figures out these people are not his friends.  


So not only are we not part of the netroots (2.00 / 4)
now we aren't even part of the blogosphere?

I really wish you would stop stereotyping people.

This is not a recession. It's a robbery.


[ Parent ]
Except grumpy Michiganers (2.00 / 4)
they're all alike...

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."

[ Parent ]
No such thing as a Michiganer (2.00 / 6)
We are Michiganders. Need to get your terms right if you are going to get a good insult.

This is not a recession. It's a robbery.

[ Parent ]
I was never good at that... (2.00 / 6)


John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."

[ Parent ]
This may be a dumb question (2.00 / 4)
but what's in the agreement?

"Economics is not a morality play." -Paul Krugman

Nope. Not a dumb question. (2.00 / 4)
The five-nation deal(from the BBC link):

o promised to deliver $30bn (£18.5bn) of aid for developing nations over the next three years

o outlined a goal of providing $100bn a year by 2020 to help poor countries cope with the impacts of climate change

o set a mitigation target to limit warming to no more than 2C and, importantly, to take action to meet this objective.

o  The agreement also included a method for verifying industrialised nations' reduction of emissions. The US had insisted that China dropped its resistance to this measure.

A lot of folks including Venezuala (did I say "kiss my ass" out loud, or was that in my head?) are not happy with it.  Tuvalu and island nations have the most reason to be cranky, but imho many others are simply obstructionist political opportunists (yes I am looking at you Chavez, you pinhead).  This may not turn into a UN or otherwise truly "global" pact, but if you have the most influential and largest country on each of five continents - and Europe is already being better than the rest - then that may not matter so much as far as making a positive impact.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
Heh (2.00 / 6)
I saw the video of Chavez pulling the old "sulfur" routine with Obama now instead of Bush.  Dude needs some new material.

I hope this is a useful agreement.  I don't really understand a lot about the details, but my overall vibe is something similar to the health care bill - it sorta feels like the process is moving in the right direction, but gawd it's so painfully slow.

I'm not sure if you might be guilty of a little premature celebration here, but with all the negativity of late, I wouldn't blame ya even so.  I try to stay optimistic.  Also, there's seriously a country called Tuvalu?

"Economics is not a morality play." -Paul Krugman


[ Parent ]
Tuvalu - about the most nervous country in the world as far as sea levels go. (2.00 / 4)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...

Tuvalu, formerly known as the Ellice Islands, is a Polynesian island nation located in the Pacific Ocean, midway between Hawaii and Australia. Its nearest neighbours are Kiribati, Samoa and Fiji. It comprises four reef islands and five true atolls. Its population of 11,992 makes it the third-least-populated sovereign state in the world, with only Vatican City and Nauru having fewer inhabitants.

.d.

It is estimated that a sea level rise of 20-40 centimetres (8-16 inches) in the next 100 years could make Tuvalu uninhabitable

A little optimism never hurt, and often helps.  There's nothing I enjoy more than inserting some optimism (that I can defend) into a gloomy situation.  I think things are going pretty well considering where we've been from and it's time to stop crying and start moving.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
I hope this is a positive development. (2.00 / 4)
It seems to be, but I worry about too little too late. Some of the scenarios are truly scary. Climate change may soon reach a tipping point. We are already seeing increased methane levels from the previously frozen tundra. There is an awful lot of methane in the oceans that will also begin to contribute to the process if things warm up much more.

These are things I've read lately. Unfortunately, I haven't read enough to have an informed stance on climate change. I'm far too ignorant on this subject. I need to start doing some serious research. Even if it wasn't a matter of life or death it would be the next big thing in politics. Might as well start paying attention to it. Research is important. Believe it or not, I like to know what I'm talking about when I argue politics.


This is not a recession. It's a robbery.


[ Parent ]
It's a dangerous situation, to be sure. (2.00 / 6)
I've gotten into some deep debate on topic recently, and even the staunchest deniers in the heavily geeky crowd I've been arguing in figures we could double CO2 only four more times before even he would pitch in.

There just isn't anything else to be done.  I didn't expect jack out of this - pardon my french - UN sponsored feel-good circle-jerk - so I'm pleased that there at least appears to be an anchor on every continent.  Enough?  May have to be.

vecky over at MyDD summed up some of my thoughts on this whole thing while responding to the one person who took offense at my diary:

It's a non-binding agreement with no legal enforcement mechanisms and one that lowered targets. Objectively-speaking, Copenhagen did not meet its goals.

I'm not sure what your saying. A binding, legal agreement with lower targets was never a goal of Copenhagen. OK, that may have been in the brochure but it never was a realistic expectation.

Trusting China is letting nations like Tuvalu, Kiribati and the Maldives drown.

I can tell you quite objectively that no one cares about Tuvalu, Kiribati or the Maldives. At least not compared to China, India or Brazil.

For a coup d'grâce, Venezuela, Bolivia, Cuba, Nicaragua and somewhat surprisingly Costa Rica have already denounced the "breakthrough" agreement

Yes, i say the ambassador from the Sudan denouncing it as well. Sudan... wtf...

I'd love to see a Kumbaya moment, but since I don't think that's gonna happen I'm more than happy to see the big boys playing well together.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
Awesome comment. (2.00 / 4)
triple fierce

This is not a recession. It's a robbery.

[ Parent ]
Well said, Blasky. (2.00 / 4)
Sometimes expectations are so high that it's easy to overlook accomplishments. Reminders are good.

Come to me in my dreams, and then
By day I shall be well again!
For so the night will more than pay
The hopeless longing of the day.


Today's paper had a rather lengthy account of the president's day (2.00 / 3)
in Copenhagen.  The article made the Chinese out to be either obstructionists or just playing coy.  They initially sent in a second-tier negotiator and then a third-tier dude much to the surprise of the other countries.  The president, depending on how you want to interpret events (or who you want to believe) either interrupted a meeting between China, Brazil, South Africa or the other countries sat in on a meeting between the US and China.  If Wen was ducking talks or phone calls like the article says he was it looks like he trying to get some other kind of deal or agreement for no deal without including the US.

While I hate to say that everything revolves around us, it does appear that the president managed to get something out of Copenhagen.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette


Actually, everything revolves around Dorset, VT. (2.00 / 2)
It's a well kept secret.  :~)

What paper was that in?  Interested to find it online.

I suspect China was being coyly obstructionist.  You can't underestimate the complexity of positioning dealing with high-level Chinese players, and there are none higher.  I could easily see them playing to have an attitude that dumbs down to: "We'll be at no talks but with the big dog.  Who do you think we are, Burma??"

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."


[ Parent ]
I'll do you one better. (2.00 / 3)
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/s...

Apparently, the AP takes serious issue with copywrite and fair use so I'm only providing the link to the article.

"When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in teh stupid and waving a gun" ~ Esteev on Wonkette


[ Parent ]
Not much have been reached. (2.00 / 5)
I wonder how much emission this event has caused.






I want to say there is some serious jet lag showing there. (2.00 / 4)
but that doesn't explain the French representative shown in the last picture.

This is not a recession. It's a robbery.

[ Parent ]
I made the same observation. (2.00 / 2)
They must have killed a hundred whales to hold that conference.

John Askren - "Never get into a pissing match with a skunk."

[ Parent ]
Search




Advanced Search
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Blog Roll
Angry Bear
Angry Black Lady
Balloon Juice
Black Kos
Booman Tribune
Charles P. Pierce
Crooks and Liars
Daily Kos
Five Thirty Eight
Huffington Post
Juan Cole
Maddow Blog
P.M. Carpenter
Political Wire
RumpRoast
Scholars & Rogues
Smartypants
Stonekettle Station
Talking Points Memo
The Field
Washington Monthly
Wonkette
Moose With Blogs
Atdleft
Barr
BorderJumpers
BTchakir
Canadian Gal
Charles Lemos
Cheryl Kopec
Curtis Walker
Douglas Watts
Hubie Stubert
Intrepid Liberal
ItStands
Janicket
JoeTrippi
John Allen
LibraryGrape
MichaelEvan
National Gadfly
Peter Jukes
Senate Guru
Zachary Karabell




Back to Top

Posting Guidelines  |  FAQ  |  Privacy Policy  |  Contact the Moose  |  Contact Congress
Powered by: SoapBlox