Shock: Charles Krauthammer favors global treaty to reduce CO2 emissions

Krauthammer doesn’t like Obama’s central climate control, but apparently would like some flavor of it. Who knew?

Charles Krauthammer writes:

The economy stagnates. Syria burns. Scandals lap at his feet. China and Russia mock him, even as a “29-year-old hacker” revealed his nation’s spy secrets to the world.

How does President Obama respond? With a grandiloquent speech on climate change…

I’m not against a global pact to reduce CO2 emissions. Indeed, I favor it…

Read more…

8 thoughts on “Shock: Charles Krauthammer favors global treaty to reduce CO2 emissions”

  1. Hopefully, he’s just a bit conflicted, simply because he knows the rest of the world would never comply with any CO2 reduction agreements–especially our enemies, domestic and foreign, and especially China–who would love to see America dumped in the trash bin of history. However, the scary part is “Indeed, I favor it.”

  2. Nothing surprises me, he is probably resentful of being called “irrelevant” by younger people in is media outlet.

    With the help of a very good AV department, I am making a You Tube video titled “Global Warming for Young Adults,” to remind them that nobody can make people believe anything said to be fact without evidence.

    I am hoping for bitter resentment from the AGW crowd, which will advertise for me for free

  3. If you read his full article, he does not agree that science proves that there is human caused global warming; he does, however, say that if you were to believe in it then Obama’s plan does nothing to mitigate carbon dioxide levels without all nations cooperating. All this is true.

  4. In other words, he is saying there is nothing to say.

    Good work, Charles Krauthammer, for saying there is nothing to say.

  5. I suppose if you hang around the Washington elite long enough, some of it rubs off if you want to be part of the elite.

  6. Leads to the reaction that I had. Why then does he indeed favor it? He sometimes assumes a position to place himself seemingly in the middle. He wrote a piece on the attractiveness of Obama very early on. That position and this one are ultimately unsustainable. He could never support anything that a global cabal could come up with. So why favor it? I guess he thinks burning stuff is backward, which means he’s taking some things for granted.

Comments are closed.