By the way from a clean-energy/climate perspective, that debate was a f’ing horror show. We are all doomed.
Yeah, it sucked. Candy Crowley had a question on climate in the hopper “for all you climate people”, but gosh, they just couldn’t get to it because some dude needed to ask a hardball question about, like, “What’s it like to be you?” or some crap.
It even got to the point where Obama was criticizing Mitt for being against a crappy, dirty, deadly Salem Harbor coal plant while he was Governor of MA. Listen to my man Mitt — he’s pretty damned good!
Now, has Romney changed his position? The question answers itself, I think. But lest you imagine that Obama was criticizing Mitt for his current position, rather than his former opposition, check out Obama’s history on coal. It sucks. It was a straight-up pander from the President, and unfortunately nothing new for him.
Now, it is true that new regs and the low price of natural gas have made it very difficult to build new traditional coal plants. And indeed, there is a big substantive difference between the two men on climate, which I don’t mean to diminish. But that wasn’t Obama’s line last night.
The way Obama and the Dems generally talk about a clean energy conversion, it’s still on the level of fairies and pixie dust. “Energy of the future”? In fact, they drastically understate the real potential and economic power of the industry right now. Our motto should be, as Joe Romm says, Deploy, deploy, deploy, research and development, deploy, deploy, deploy.
How can the President or any other politician give any urgency whatsoever to the fight for clean energy sources, without mentioning the proximate reason for developing them? We are in deep @$% right now — we’re losing a race against the clock.