Waxman-Markey is such a big step beyond the denial of the Bush years it seems like some kind of milestone, but to celebrate it seems like a tragic joke.

Consider the debate in England before WWII. When it dawned on people Hitler was rearming Germany, there were those who thought it would not mean world war. People took different positions, some of which were very popular, and which turned out to be very wrong. The Obama approach is to declare that it will be adequate, in this analogy, to ramp up English defences in the next 50 years to a level his own military advisers know will not be enough even then to stop Hitler, and he’s selling it as the most that is politically possible to do. So what? What difference is this going to make? We are like Alice in Wonderland, we’ve taken a drink from the bottle marked Drink Me, and the shit is just starting to hit the fan.

At some point it will be seen that it is necessary to seek a solution to the climate problem, and civilization will start to do what is required. Waxman-Markey seems like the people who were training to defend England with sticks, because in the insanity of those times as the world drifted into world war, it seemed to be better than nothing.

It’s one thing to stick to principles and offer a strong critique of the bill, I’m okay with that.

However, if any group is trying to kill the legislation I’m working so hard to get passed, as in running ads telling people to call Congress and ask them to vote “no”, then I’m going to feel justified to criticize them for it. That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be allowed to do it, and they can push their contrary opinion. I’m not stopping them, but I have an equal right to push back.

Especially when some of the talking points used are blatantly untrue or “truthy”, which is something I expect the industry groups to do, not the environmental groups.

So that’s how I feel about friends of the earth running the ad’s they did, which was why I sniped. The quotations around “friends” was disingenuous though, I know they’re an environmental group that pushes for good things, even if I feel they’re mistaken here.

That was more than harsh. As an activist, I’m sure that you appreciate the value of diversity in activism and activist approaches. Rebel, change agent, citizen, reformer. All are necessary, and I’m personally glad that FoE has been speaking out and sticking to their principles with a strong critique of the bill.

I’m glad that the vote was so close. Your words on ‘the super-liberal Kucinich had stated he wanted to make a statement that the bill was woefully inadequate by voting no.’ I think that Kucinich did the right thing, personally, and I see FoE as playing the exact same role, but in the public sphere, instead of Congress.