Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (70555)	1/31/2003 12:32:42 PM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

John, there may have been those like Wellstone who believed it was a negotiating stance. I could agree with you on that. However, when talking about the Kyoto Protocols, we shouldn't assume, at some point in the future it will look like a dramatically different document, (especially when considering how many countries are involved in the process), then take the mental process one step further by believing when it is changed, only the right leaning folks would vote against it. Who knows what the change would have looked like. It bears noting how little progress Clinton's team made in the years he had left in office to accomplish even one change. President Clinton signed the treaty (as it stood), and the Senate voted unanimously to dramatically change the treaty or it would never get ratified. What we had was a deeply flawed document which Senator's from all sides of the political spectrum voted against.