Romney: EPA carbon regulation a 'mistake'

While he won’t win an awards from skeptics for courage, Mitt Romney made a baby step in the right direction on EPA greenhouse gas regulation.

Six weeks after being praised by Al Gore for expresing belief in climate alarmism, Romney tried a different tack at a town hall meeting last Thursday in New Hampshire. According to Politco:

“I think we may have made a mistake,” Romney said Thursday in response to a voter’s question about EPA regulating air pollution from coal plants under the Clean Air Act. “We have made a mistake is what I believe, in saying that the EPA should regulate carbon emissions. I don’t think that was the intent of the original legislation, and I don’t think carbon is a pollutant in the sense of harming our bodies.”

Putting his two statements together, Romney believes in manmade global warming, but he doesn’t “think” EPA should be regulating emissions. So at the very least, he makes a fine blue dog Democrat.

What is lacking from his comment about the EPA is whether he would do anything about the out-of-control agency.

4 thoughts on “Romney: EPA carbon regulation a 'mistake'”

  1. This man, just like the recently transformed Newt Gingrich, has been at the center of information for most of his adult life. All of these guys are just now realizing that they “think” that they “may” have made as “mistake”. The man can’t even say; “I made a mistake!” He “thinks” they “may” have made a “mistake”. Amazing! If this man was a rock in the current he would be sandstone.

    It is also amazing how many of these people have come to new insights regarding the green movement and AGW. I wonder what final piece of scientific information convinced ALL of them after all of this time? Wait..wait..I know. They have all been reading the polls. After all….statistics is considered a science….isn’t it? Then again it is referred to as the “arcane” science so it is a good thing he hedged his statement. After all the “science” may change with next week’s poll.

  2. Interestingly, ‘belief’ in religious terms includes a component of living one’s conviction : a ‘putting your money where your mouth is’ idea. How far do you suppose Mitt is ready to go with this definitely religious proposition?

  3. Surely “Romney believes in manmade global warming” is a statement of a religious position, not a scientific one, no?

  4. This fellow just denies catastrophe. I strongly suspect he misses the boat on accepting co2 as a warming agent – but I’m no scientist.
    http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2010/01/catastrophe-denied-the-science-of-the-skeptics-position.html?gclid=COCilL65iKoCFRJ6gwodgW-IzA
    What do the tree huggers say ?
    http://suzukielders.wordpress.com/2011/06/01/climate-change-evidence-from-the-geological-record/
    And what do the hardcore doubters of fairytale projections of temperature rise as ‘established scientific principle’ ( sure sounds like establishment mindwash to me ) think ?
    http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=8073

    Now I admit to being much more taken with ‘skeptic’s ‘ arguments about the Earth not being a greenhouse – including those scoffing at rampant oversimplification and constrained parameters clipped until a tortured ‘model’ can be trumpeted as foretelling warming- but I think they are so ‘full of it’ that it’s a wonder life can survive in such conditions.
    Opit’s LinkFest! at Blogspot.com
    opitslinkfest.blogspot.com/

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.