Did Bill Clinton's big mouth just give away the Global Warming Game Plan?

RMNIXON · 01-31-2008, 06:32 PM

Bill: "We Just Have to Slow Down Our Economy" to Fight Global Warming

January 31, 2008 9:26 AM
Former President Bill Clinton was in Denver, Colorado, stumping for his wife yesterday.

In a long, and interesting speech, he characterized what the U.S. and other industrialized nations need to do to combat global warming this way: "We just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions 'cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren."

At a time that the nation is worried about a recession is that really the characterization his wife would want him making? "Slow down our economy"?

I don't really think there's much debate that, at least initially, a full commitment to reduce greenhouse gases would slow down the economy….So was this a moment of candor?

He went on to say that his the U.S. -- and those countries that have committed to reducing greenhouse gases -- could ultimately increase jobs and raise wages with a good energy plan..

So there was something of a contradiction there.
Or perhaps he mis-spoke.

Or perhaps this characterization was a description of what would happen if there isn't a worldwide effort…I'm not quite certain.

You can watch that one clip HERE or you can watch the whole speech at the website of ABC News' great Denver affiliate KMGH by clicking HERE.
It's worth watching -- he also pushed back against a 9/11 conspiracy theorist heckling him.

"Everybody knows that global warming is real," Mr. Clinton said, giving a shout-out to Al Gore's Nobel Peace Prize, "but we cannot solve it alone."

"And maybe America, and Europe, and Japan, and Canada -- the rich counties -- would say, 'OK, we just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions 'cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren.' We could do that.

"But if we did that, you know as well as I do, China and India and Indonesia and Vietnam and Mexico and Brazil and the Ukraine, and all the other countries will never agree to stay poor to save the planet for our grandchildren. The only way we can do this is if we get back in the world's fight against global warming and prove it is good economics that we will create more jobs to build a sustainable economy that saves the planet for our children and grandchildren. It is the only way it will work.

"And guess what? The only places in the world today in rich countries where you have rising wages and declining inequality are places that have generated more jobs than rich countries because they made a commitment we didn't. They got serious about a clean, efficient, green, independent energy future… If you want that in America, if you want the millions of jobs that will come from it, if you would like to see a new energy trust fund to finance solar energy and wind energy and biomass and responsible bio-fuels and electric hybrid plug-in vehicles that will soon get 100 miles a gallon, if you want every facility in this country to be made maximally energy efficient that will create millions and millions and millions of jobs, vote for her. She'll give it to you. She's got the right energy plan."

In other Bubba News, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, told the spectacular Kate Snow yesterday that this is her campaign, not Bill's, and told Nightline anchor Cynthia McFadden last night that she can control him.
(Which begs the question -- does she want to slow down the economy?)
-- jpt

UPDATE: Not so difficult to predict -- the RNC just issued a statement in response to the former President's comment.

“Senator Clinton’s campaign now says we must ‘slow down the economy’ to stop global warming," said Alex Conant, RNC Spokesman. "Clinton needs to come back to Earth. Her ‘tax-it, spend-it, regulate-it’ attitude would really bring the economy crashing down. No amount of special effects will hide Clinton’s liberal record.”

Sen. Clinton's campaign, meanwhile, has a new TV ad (watch it HERE) that calls her "the person you can depend on to fix the economy and protect our future."

Political Punch

__________________________________________________ _____________

Now from a campaign standpoint this was dumb. I would never advise such a statement be made until after the election. But I am far short of celebrating.

I think this has been a given left policy all along. For example we know the left have nothing against high energy prices to change behavior, as long as the prices are high in taxes, and not evil oil company profits. It is already a normal policy in Europe. The environmental movement has been used by the anti-capitalist left for many decades, and Global Warming Fears may be the Big Score!

So just how much Global Warming Hype will be used to push economic equality around the globe? Will we just be asked to slow our economy? Or pump money into lesser economies to keep them Green?

Just so you know what you are voting for.

Hillary to Bill: "Will you please shut up!"

Donkey® · 01-31-2008, 06:49 PM

No way he could have used the wrong words...no way at all. If you can't understand what he's trying to say, I guess you'd be happy to take this sound byte and run with it.

You do realize that "slow down our economy" wasn't just the US right? Economy was the wrong word. Industrialization would have been a better word...more for the rest of the world, like China and India...but whatever. Democrats want to put us all in the poor house. Continue.

tbone · 01-31-2008, 07:08 PM

kinggovernor · 01-31-2008, 07:12 PM

Originally Posted by tbone

he is running for president again

6SpeedTA95 · 01-31-2008, 07:12 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

No way he could have used the wrong words...no way at all. If you can't understand what he's trying to say, I guess you'd be happy to take this sound byte and run with it.

You do realize that "slow down our economy" wasn't just the US right? Economy was the wrong word. Industrialization would have been a better word...more for the rest of the world, like China and India...but whatever. Democrats want to put us all in the poor house. Continue.

You're seriously arguing that clinton doesn't know the differences between economy and industrialization?

Also keep in mind this is the same Clinton, who's wife is arguing for more american jobs in manufacturing, the highest polluting, biggest CO2 spewing industry in the nation. Heavy steel, auto, all the heavy industries emit tons of CO2 ...classic double speak from the party who has no clue how to run a business or an economy. Clinton needs to talk to his economic advisors again, the same economic team that advised strongly against KYOTO the same team that helped craft his policies and helped push the economy forward in the 1990s.

Donkey® · 01-31-2008, 07:16 PM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

You're seriously arguing that clinton doesn't know the differences between economy and industrialization?

Also keep in mind this is the same Clinton, who's wife is arguing for more american jobs in manufacturing, the highest polluting, biggest CO2 spewing industry in the nation. Heavy steel, auto, all the heavy industries emit tons of CO2 ...classic double speak from the party who has no clue how to run a business or an economy. Clinton needs to talk to his economic advisors again, the same economic team that advised strongly against KYOTO the same team that helped craft his policies and helped push the economy forward in the 1990s.

No doublespeak from the other side of the aisle at all huh? Glad to hear.

DosEquis · 01-31-2008, 07:32 PM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

You're seriously arguing that clinton doesn't know the differences between economy and industrialization?

Also keep in mind this is the same Clinton, who's wife is arguing for more american jobs in manufacturing, the highest polluting, biggest CO2 spewing industry in the nation. Heavy steel, auto, all the heavy industries emit tons of CO2 ...classic double speak from the party who has no clue how to run a business or an economy. Clinton needs to talk to his economic advisors again, the same economic team that advised strongly against KYOTO the same team that helped craft his policies and helped push the economy forward in the 1990s.

I will object to the "party who has no clue about running a business or the economy" portion

Besides if you are going to argue that point it could be a legit statement to say that Bill doesn't know the difference between industrialization and the economy.

There are many successful business owners who are democrats including the 3rd wealthiest person in the world.

7960 · 01-31-2008, 07:42 PM

Did Bill Clinton's big mouth just give away the Global Warming Game Plan?

No, but every time he opens his mouth it seems like he's trying to give away the election.

6SpeedTA95 · 01-31-2008, 08:18 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

No doublespeak from the other side of the aisle at all huh? Glad to hear.

There's plenty of double speak from the reps, thats not what this thread is about.

Donkey® · 01-31-2008, 08:21 PM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

There's plenty of double speak from the reps, thats not what this thread is about.

It wasn't about the Democratic party either.

RMNIXON · 01-31-2008, 08:29 PM

Originally Posted by tbone

Very cute, but I was not talking about his record as President.

It has everything to do with the current campaign and what Hillary will do. Now I will admit, Bill said it and not her. So I will give the benefit of the doubt. She can respond if asked in her own words. I see some are already working "talking points" spin and changing the meaning of what was said. But as long as he is part of her campaign what he says is relevant to the discussion.

RMNIXON · 01-31-2008, 08:35 PM

Originally Posted by DosEquis

I will object to the "party who has no clue about running a business or the economy" portion Besides if you are going to argue that point it could be a legit statement to say that Bill doesn't know the difference between industrialization and the economy.

Lets say he used the wrong word. I don't think he did. Does anyone want to tell the voters who work in heavy industry that we need to slow things down?

The reason I think he said "economy" is simple. With a higher standard of living we all consume more, so we produce more. That includes industrial polution and greenhouse gas. The enviromentalists have made a point about this long before the Global Warming argument. You can't just blame the big bad industrial "corporations" when we consumers drive these industries.

Anyone wants to volunteer for a simpler poorer lifestyle?

northhunter · 01-31-2008, 08:54 PM

Maybe Bill has deep down issues with playing second fiddle to his wife if she's elected and he's trying to torpedo her campaign? I can't believe that's the case, but why does it seem like he's hurting more than helping lately?

Scrum · 02-01-2008, 07:19 PM

Looks like this was taken out of context. Even the wingnuts are pointing it out and defending Bill.

ABC News’ Jake Tapper has caused quite a stir with an item this morning about a speech Bill Clinton delivered yesterday in Denver.
In a long, and interesting speech, he characterized what the U.S. and other industrialized nations need to do to combat global warming this way: “We just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions ’cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren.”
At a time that the nation is worried about a recession is that really the characterization his wife would want him making? “Slow down our economy”?
I don’t really think there’s much debate that, at least initially, a full commitment to reduce greenhouse gases would slow down the economy….So was this a moment of candor?

Actually, no, it’s a moment taken out of context in such a way as to change the meaning of the sentence. Consider what Clinton actually said.
“And maybe America, and Europe, and Japan, and Canada — the rich counties — would say, ‘OK, we just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions ’cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren.’ We could do that.
But if we did that, you know as well as I do, China and India and Indonesia and Vietnam and Mexico and Brazil and the Ukraine, and all the other countries will never agree to stay poor to save the planet for our grandchildren. The only way we can do this is if we get back in the world’s fight against global warming and prove it is good economics that we will create more jobs to build a sustainable economy that saves the planet for our children and grandchildren. It is the only way it will work.”

Tapper appears to have gotten the story backwards. He wrote that Clinton “characterized what the U.S. and other industrialized nations need to do to combat global warming this way: ‘We just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions ’cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren.’” Clinton actually argued the opposite.
But Tapper’s mistake is spreading quickly.

The Republican National Committee, among others, are making hay of the ABC report. “Senator Clinton’s campaign now says we must ’slow down the economy’ to stop global warming,” said Alex Conant, RNC Spokesman. “Clinton needs to come back to Earth. Her ‘tax-it, spend-it, regulate-it’ attitude would really bring the economy crashing down.”
Please. How misleading was Tapper’s report? Far-right blogs are criticizing it. The Corner’s Iain Murray wrote:
[The ABC] video is actually (and again, I can’t believe I’m saying this) really unfair to Bill Clinton. The biter bit, you may say, but I don’t believe this sort of manipulation by the media is in any way helpful. The clip is out of context…. That’s not good journalism in any sense.

Hot Air added:
I have to say, as much as I loathe Billy Jeff and all, ABC is misrepresenting what he said. Sure, he uttered the line about slowing down the economy, but he followed that with an explanation of why that’s a bad idea…. The bottom line is that, for whatever reason, ABC actually played Clinton’s “slow down the economy” line unfairly.

When conservative bloggers are defending Bill Clinton against bad journalism, you know the journalism has to be really bad.
Nevertheless, I’m afraid with the RNC and Townhall.com pushing the bogus story line, we may be looking at media malpractice along the lines of “inventing the Internet.” How soon until pundits are simply asserting, as fact, the notion that Bill Clinton wants to “slow down our economy”?

Donkey® · 02-01-2008, 07:28 PM

Ah, so there was more to it? Go figure.

motivez · 02-01-2008, 08:12 PM

God damn liberal media bias over at ABC

avsp · 02-02-2008, 04:53 AM

If gklobal warming does turn out to be as catastrophic as some fear then the industrialisation & ecomonic activity will be cut back.

Would that be an example of the market in action?

Bill does seem oddly intent on frustrating his wifes candidacy. Regardless of what he actually meant the soundbite exists, ..., he surely knows better. Maybe he is 'loosing it' with age

goldenponderbob · 02-02-2008, 10:03 AM

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

Very cute, but I was not talking about his record as President.

It has everything to do with the current campaign and what Hillary will do.

Some might argue that Bill's achievements as President have everything to do with the current campaign.

Seven years hindsight may be just right to overlook Bills' many shortcomings, but he never couched his tongue then and there's no reason to expect him to now.