On To Something

O

The USS Clueless might be giving Europe a clue:

[T]he Democrats don’t have any higher regard for European opinion than the Republicans do, and are no more enchanted by the Europeans as any kind of role model. The main difference between the parties when it comes to foreign policy is that the Democrats are willing to smile and nod at the Europeans before ignoring them, whereas the Republicans are more straightforward in expressing their disdain.

A different way to put that is that the Democrats are more willing to lie; the Republicans are more likely to tell the truth. There’s less real difference between them in practice than the Europeans think.

The Kyoto accord is a perfect example of that. Clinton signed it. But before he did, and even before negotiations over the Kyoto treaty were completed, the Senate passed the Byrd-Hagel resolution. What that made clear was that the Senate would refuse to ratify the treaty unless it were drastically modified, and the modifications the Senate demanded would not have been even remotely acceptable to the Europeans or to other nations involved in the negotiations process.

Clinton signed the Kyoto accord as part of the process of smiling and nodding at the Europeans, but he never submitted it to the Senate for ratification and never intended to. He gave them the impression that he still thought it was a wonderful idea, and they held out hope that he might be biding his time until he thought there was a chance that it might be ratified.

Once Bush became President, one of his first acts was to publicly repudiate the Kyoto treaty and, more or less, “unsign” it. For that Bush has been excoriated internationally, as somehow being the one – and the only one – responsible for America not joining the Kyoto accord. Notably absent from that castigation was any mention of Byrd-Hagel, which killed Kyoto dead long before Bush became President. That’s because Byrd-Hagel passed unanimously. Republican senators and Democratic senators both saw through the rhetoric and fully understood that the Kyoto accord really had nothing to do with “global warming”. Its true purpose was to cripple the US economy through artificial imposition of energy shortages, and they had no intention of letting that happen.

Hat tip to Instapundit.

About the author

Erick Erickson
By Erick Erickson

Erick Erickson

Get in touch

You can check me out across the series of tubes known as the internet.