Gore is actually right — civilization is at risk.
Chris Horner writes at American Spectator:
So it seems that Al Gore is lamenting that “the climate crisis” is not an issue in the nascent 2012 campaign for the White House. Meanwhile, ClimateWire (subscription required) reaffirms the popular reportage and claim by UN aficionados and Eurocrats alike, that in December the U.S. agreed in Durban to a “pact, which mandates the creation of a legally binding climate treaty by 2015.”
That is, the world believes that we legally bound ourselves to legally binding ourselves to a Kyoto II treaty by 2015. I do recall such pipe-dream political commitments by a Democratic president causing problems for a Republican successor, and the country, in the past.
While on its face such UN-speak is absurd — so, we bound ourselves to be bound, which means we bound ourselves to the new treaty? May we please immediately commence Art. II Sec. 2 “advice and consent” on this? — it does beg a political debate about what in the world is going on and, while we’re at the process of discerning President Obama’s intentions, what distinctions exist between him and the Republican candidates. If any…
To call this dynamic a “free-ride” for the candidates would not be entirely accurate. After all, when whoever it is settles in, we are the ones who will pay for this. Which demands that someone insist these candidates clearly stake out their respective positions on the global warming policies and commitments.
I can guarantee that no Republican candidate will get a vote from anyone at the business I work at if they utter the word “climate”.