Der Spiegel lambastes Obama over climate change

[G_j]

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,661678,00.html

Obama Has Failed the World on Climate Change

By Christian Schwägerl

US President Barack Obama came to office promising hope and change. But on climate change, he has followed in the footsteps of his predecessor, George W. Bush. Now, should the climate summit in Copenhagen fail, the blame will lie squarely with Obama.

The folder labeled "climate change" that George W. Bush left behind for his successor on the desk of the Oval Office in January likely wasn't a thick one. Although Bush once said that America is overly dependent on oil, he never got beyond that insight. He was too busy waging war on Iraq and searching for a legal basis for extraordinary renditions to pay much attention to the real threat facing humanity. "Forget the climate" seems to have been Bush's unofficial motto.


But few people expected that Barack Obama, of all people, would continue his predecessor's climate change plan. When he took office at the beginning of 2009, it was clear that the success of the UN Climate Change Summit in Copenhagen in December depended almost entirely on the US -- that America needed to take a clear leadership role on a problem that could shake civilization to its very core.

Only if the US manages to reduce its excessive energy consumption, commit itself to mandatory CO2 emission reduction targets and help finance poorer countries' move away from oil is there still a chance that countries like China and India will do the same and that a dangerous warming of the Earth can be stopped. On the weekend, Obama announced that there would be no agreement on binding rules in Copenhagen. It was the admission of a massive failing -- and the prelude to a truly dramatic phase of international climate policy.

Obama Lied to the Europeans

Barack Obama cast himself as a "citizen of the world" when he delivered his well-received campaign speech in Berlin in the summer of 2008. But the US president has now betrayed this claim. In his Berlin speech, he was dishonest with Europe. Since then, Obama has neglected the single most important issue for an American president who likes to imagine himself as a world citizen, namely, his country's addiction to fossil fuels and the risks of unchecked climate change. Health-care reform and other domestic issues were more important to him than global environmental threats. He was either unwilling or unable to convince skeptics in his own ranks and potential defectors from the ranks of the Republicans to support him, for example, by promising alternative investments as a compensation for states with large coal reserves.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

1. Oh wow. President "Empty Suit" huh? Thanks for bringing us this RW Bullshit.

More articles from Steve Malloy:

Call Lindsey Graham: Tell him cap and trade turns you off - Nov 16, 2009
NY Times excuses Gore’s climate profiteering - Nov 4, 2009
ACORN to get cap-and-trade cash in NY - Sep 16, 2009
Spector will vote to doom Pennsylvania - Aug 17, 2009
Obama: Post-partisan or Most-partisan? - Aug 11, 2009

And from the website you posted, Canadian Free Press:

COUNTDOWN CLOCK UNTIL OBAMA LEAVES OFFICE

[G_j]

2. sorry, I changed the post to a direct link

to the Der Spiegel piece,


my mistake

[SemiCharmedQuark]

3. It wasn't a mistake. You posted a link to CFP *and* a snip of the article.

This snip:

"Europe is unhappy with President Empty-Suit on climate. But why would they have expected anything from someone who has no history of accomplishing anything except self-advancement and self-aggrandizement? Did they miss both of Obama’s auto-vapor-ographies?

Obama Lied to the Europeans

Barack Obama cast himself as a “citizen of the world” when he delivered his well-received campaign speech in Berlin in the summer of 2008. But the US president has now betrayed this claim. In his Berlin speech, he was dishonest with Europe. Since then, Obama has neglected the single most important issue for an American president who likes to imagine himself as a world citizen, namely his country’s addiction to fossil fuels and the risks of unchecked climate change. Health care reform and other domestic issues were more important to him than global environmental threats. He was either unwilling or unable to convince skeptics in his own ranks and potential defectors from the ranks of the Republicans to support him, for example by promising alternative investments as a compensation for states with large coal reserves…


Dreamt Up by Hollywood

For most Americans, the world beyond the US’s borders is nothing more than an irritating nuisance. Hence arguments based on appeals about drowning Bangladeshis, starving Africans and flooded islands in Indonesia have little effect. In Hollywood, the United States has an industry that continually pushes the materialistic ideal of Western prosperity to billions of people around the world, while at the same time bombarding them with apocalyptic visions in the form of disaster movies."

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/16987

[saracat]

4. I think the point isthe Der Speigal article. Are you saying it shouldn't be posted?

Should Der Speigal be on a black list? The other website seems biased, I had never heard of it before but Der Speigal? I think we NEED rto know internationl opinion both good and bad.

[G_j]

6. no, I originaly posted another article referring to Der Speigle

but changed it, when it was pointed out that the author was biased to the right.
I had never heard of the CFP either.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

7. "seems" biased? In the same way Free Republic seems a little biased.

You may have missed the OP, but when you open up a post with:

"Europe is unhappy with President Empty-Suit on climate. But why would they have expected anything from someone who has no history of accomplishing anything except self-advancement and self-aggrandizement? Did they miss both of Obama’s auto-vapor-ographies? "

You bet I'm going to have a problem with that.

The Der Spiegel article is not at issue here. I think it makes some good points, but linking and pasting from the CFP doesn't really do much for it.

[G_j]

8. well

I changed the OP immediately!

but clever of you to repost it.
:shrug:

[SemiCharmedQuark]

9. You changed it after I had already replied to your OP.

I think people should know that I was *not* attacking the Der Spiegel piece. People should know what I *was* responding to.

[G_j]

11. yes, I did

and thanks for pointing it out.

[saracat]

12. I understand.

[saracat]

10. I know nothing about CFP but the OP changed the link and Der Speigal is

relevent.It is a legitimate source.

[G_j]

5. I was unaware of the background of CFP

or the author.
But I was interested in the Der Spiegle article, and found a link.