Why do conservatives think that global warming is a liberal issue?

Question

Granted Al Gore is the most visible public figure talking about global warming, and he has a history as a liberal politician. But forget Al Gore.

"Schwarzenegger, Sarkozy Talk Politics, Global Warming...Both pledged to work together on ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions."

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/6/25/223625.shtml?s=os

Schwarzenegger is a Republican, Sarkozy is the recently elected conservative French president.

"My message, I think, is that the evidence is sufficient that we should move toward the most effective possible steps to reduce carbon loading in the atmosphere," Gingrich replied.

http://www.whereistand.com/NewtGingrich/22869

"We are convinced that the overwhelming scientific evidence indicated that climate change is taking place and human activities play a very large role,'' McCain said.

http://www.livescience.com/environment/ap_050819_mccain_warming.html

Since 2005 even Bush has said humans are causing global warming.

Even if you dismiss Arny and McCain (who are conservatives, not liberals), you can't say the same about Sarkozy, Bush, and Gingrich. I can pull up a bunch more conservative names.

My point is not that global warming isn't a political issue, it's that global warming is not a LIBERAL issue. Many conservatives dismiss the scientific evidence because they say 'oh global warming is just a liberal lie', but this is obviously untrue.

Answer 1

Thank you for your observation and Blue ridge living for her answer. This issue is germane to the welfare of civilization. It shouldn't be classified, considered, or even thought of as a party, partisan, or even political issue in the strictest sense other than to have the attention of the world awakened and focused in a positive effort. This could and should be a uniting posit to bring the citizens of this globe together in a combined front to not only give value to our future but to be respected by history. There are great sums of money spent on dis-information by Corporate America to suggest this as fictitious in order to maintain their profits. LISTEN TO ME...They are profiting at our expense. Our Health, our welfare, our integrity, our values and virtues are being scandalized and just like the war issue we're being duped by a bought and paid for government as well as a system of bigots, liars, and money hungry tyrants that will stoop to any level to line their pockets.

Answer 2

Most politicians are conditioned to respond partisan-style to any issue. Some of this is just habit, some inclination, some political philosophy; a lot of it is simply exploiting a major issue to play to the 'swing' electorate.

However, it is true that their respective financial contributors (and the various lobby specialists such powerhouses employ) will strive to dilute and divert any measures taken to tackle global warming or relieve environmental stress or protect the ecology which would adversely effect their commercial operations.

Unfortunately, to truly address green issues with substantial action WILL harm the interests of big business and large industries. Moreover, the consumer economy the West has been reared on is unsustainable - so there is an inevitable tension, and that will be expressed politically.

'Realpolitik' will continue to dictate the agenda for some time to come - lots of denial, equivocation and 'greenspin' - but, ultimately, reality bites. It always does (as in Iraq). The smart ones (Sarkozy, for example) will stay ahead of the game, but I'd suggest many conservatives (worldwide, not just in the US) run a high risk of being marooned on the political equivalent of a New Orleans rooftop.

Answer 3

"If there were a commercial interest involved, the Law of Gravity would fall into dispute."--Lord Acton

Conservatives don't. There's nothing more Conservative than Conservation. And no two Presidents did more for the Environment than Teddy Roosevelt and Richard Nixon.

But, a lot of people who pretend to be Conservatives are really toadies for Big Business. Ronnie Reagan for one. It was Reagan who made all things Environmental a one party issue, even having the EPA sue states who tried to enforce environmental laws that were tougher than the Federal Laws he watered down.

You can't legislate away a cost of doing business. And cleaning up after yourself is a legitimate business cost. You can only decide who has to pay it, and transferring who pays through inaction only raises the cost.

Bush is paying lip service to doing something Global Warming. But, he hasn't signed the Kyoto Acoords, ordered stricter standards for gas mileage. Repealed the tax break that he rammed through for SUV's or done anything about funding his highly touted alternative energy program.

Insurance Companies are starting to write Florida off and people are still crying about how unfair it is that companies might lose a little of their record profits if they had to clean up their mess.

Blueridgeliving is a woman? In that case....Hi there, Blue.

Answer 4

It's the latest in a long line of pretexts for government involvement in production and consumption.

It's liberal because even if it turns out to be correct, that's not why most of the supporters are supporters. They went with it from the get-go - - - it's not proven now, but 15 years ago it was a complete guess, yet they went with it. Even if this time it turns out to be correct, the principle of the stopped clock being right twice a day applies. These same activists pushed the Monsanto butterflies, the teflon birds, etc.....

And it mirrors other Lib agenda items in terms of the misleading information that is put forth for the cause. The MWP happened. Across the world things grew where they still can't today because it's too cold; land and sea routes were traveled that are now iced over and just beginning to thaw. And we constantly hear about Kilimanjaro even though it has zero to do with global climate change.

And you still have no proof - all you have is that Bush, a guy you call an idiot every day on these boards, has succumbed.

Answer 5

The environment is considered a liberal issue because it fights against capitalism. We can't drill for oil or produce more refineries because of the environment.
Conservative talk shows lambaste global warming all the time.
I think also it has to do with the whole "tree-hugging, granola" eating stereotype. If you are for the environment, you are that type of person.
I remember when Al Gore was made fun of and was called the "environmentalist" and I never understood why that was a bad thing.

Answer 6

You can put all of the links that you want but it doesn't mean that it's true. You are cherry picking your information as if it were the gospel. If Al Gore and Robert Kennedy Jr would lead by example they may have a little more credibility. Al makes excuses why he needs a private jet. He should be flying commercial ( think of it as carpooling in the sky ) therefore he's a hypocrit

Answer 7

You've gotta be 'liberal' to even consider being smart enough to figure out what's goin' on out there.

The polluters ARE repubnuts, with all their money - 'nuff said.

Answer 8

Political environmentalism is "liberal." Those who see it as their last hope of dismantling capitalism are mostly "liberals."

Love Jack

Answer 9

I don't think it is a liberal issue, in fact I don't think it is an issue at all. Look brain dead the earth has been warming and cooling for millions of years, what makes you think that America can have any impact on that. You can quote all the scientist, politicians, and hippies you want, but I can produce a geological history of the earth to counter every argument.

Answer 10

Because Al Gore won't shut up about Global Warming and his carbon credits. Apparently you feel it is a political issue as well because you posted this in the politics section.