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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: longnshort who wrote (335319)	4/25/2007 2:07:51 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576894

it was something like 97-ZERO. How come you know so little ?? Liar, again. Mindmeld knows more than you do. Q. Did the U.S. Senate vote against ratifying the Kyoto Protocol? A. No. The protocol has never been submitted to the senate for ratification. The Bush administration has referred to a vote on the non-binding Byrd-Hagel resolution, which registered views on some aspects of protocol negotiations. The vote on the Byrd-Hagel resolution took place prior to the conclusion of the Kyoto agreement, and before any of the flexibility mechanisms were established. The resolution was written so broadly that even strong supporters of the Kyoto Protocol, such as senators Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.) and John Kerry (D-Mass.) voted for it. In doing so, Sen. Kerry said: "It is clear that one of the chief sponsors of this resolution, Senator Byrd . . . agrees … that the prospect of human-induced global warming as an accepted thesis with adverse consequences for all is here, and it is real…. Senator Lieberman, Senator Chafee and I would have worded some things differently… [but] I have come to the conclusion that these words are not a treaty killer."

To: longnshort who wrote (335319)	4/25/2007 4:19:55 PM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1576894

Ah yes. Well, if you remember, when Clinton was president, there was a Republican majority in Congress. So it was Republicans who lead us away from Kyoto. Clinton was not a man to walk away from the table. He is someone who stays engaged in any debate. Walking away and damning the consequences is a far-right trait, most recently exemplified by Bush and Cheney. So why do you know so little? You should have remembered that Republicans owned Congress when Clinton was President. Here's a history lesson on Clinton, Kyoto, and the Republican Congress that blocked Clinton. This is written by a Republican, so it has a Republican bias to it, which I'm sure will suit you just fine: buchanan.org And fyi, I actually, agree that we should not sign the Kyoto accords in their current state without China and India signing on. However, I DO NOT agree with the tactic of walking away and refusing to negotiate. That's no diplomacy, that is pig-headedness that leads to nowhere but confrontation. Instead, we need to stay engaged and figure out how to bring China and India to the table as signatories. The US simply cannot abdicate its role in this.