MONDAY UPDATE: Think Progress:
Thanks to Colorado Pols, we have GOP gubernatorial candidate and former U.S. Representative Bob Beauprez’s views on climate change — and they appear to mirror those of Buck.
In his 2009 book “A Return to Values,” Beauprez called climate change “at best a grossly overhyped issue and at worst a complete hoax foisted on most of the world.”
…While the state’s Republicans may be in agreement with one another, their anti-climate stance is at odds not just with 97 percent of mainstream science, but with the majority of the state’s residents. 2013 polling by the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication found that most Coloradans — 70 percent — believe global warming is happening and three in four said the issue of global warming is very or somewhat important to them personally. Further, more than half of Coloradans said that more should be done about global warming at all levels of government. 66 percent said their local government should be better preparing for the impacts of climate change, and 61 percent said the same for the state level.
—–
Back in November, we took note of a tracker clip from local TV personality Aaron Harber's GOP gubernatorial primary debate, in which four of the then-principal candidates for governor, Scott Gessler, Greg Brophy, Mike Kopp, and Tom Tancredo, all denied either the existence, human origins, or ability of humanity to intervene in global climate change. To put these out-of-the-mainstream views in perspective, a recent poll found that 81% of Americans believe the government should take action to limit greenhouse gas emissions.
Since the entry of failed 2006 gubernatorial candidate Bob Beauprez into the race, we've been looking for recent statements from him on this hot-button issue. As it turns out, we needn't look any farther than Beauprez's 2009 book, A Return To Values. On the first page of Chapter 11, ironically titled "Let Science Guide Environmental Policy," Beauprez lays out his views on the matter.
Got that? "A complete hoax foisted on most of the world." We haven't kept reading from this point to discover what the "Republican response" should be to said "complete hoax," because, well, what would be the point of that? It's a "complete hoax." "Hysteria." Motivated by "fear." That's well beyond the expressed views of his Republican opponents on the issue, except maybe Greg Brophy who welcomes more carbon dioxide in the air–and we're pretty sure that Rush Limbaugh couldn't say it any better.
Remember, folks, Beauprez has "lived off the land all of his life." So obviously, he's an expert.
I try to find common ground with Republicans where I can. But when they say something this stupid, the only possible response is…
Today's party of Lincoln: Clawing their way back to the Christian Dark Ages, one Republican gubernatorial candidate at a time.
I understand
BothWrongWayBob would consider this article, a NASA-funded study full of facts, "hysteria". But for the rest, we'll let science guide us to the possibilbity that our short-term, consumer culture might be headed for collapse.But, for just a moment, perhaps we can pull our collective heads out of our arse and talk about ideas that make sense for both sides of this argument? An idea where a $50 investment would yield $100-$500 dollars annually:
Can we create an authentic "Morning in America"? (aside from the fact this was a brilliant media strategy, it dismissed the stark reality there was a growing underclass and was void of any rational discussion about the trajectory upon which Reagan had set sail). We'll need to dust it off, show how we've begun the process of unwinding his failed war on drugs, throw in a clip or two on marriage equality and show how, after three decades, are just beginning to set a new course on energy.
On second thought, perhaps "Morning" is happening. In spite of prophets like WrongWayBob.
What next? Our current Governor is more extreme than the KKK? Oh, wait…
Perhaps Mr. Beauprez, a practicing Catholic like myself, has chosen to not only ignore the scientific community – but Papa Francis himself:
I'm confident that Bob can switch positions and be fully on board upon the release of Pope Francis' encyclical on ecology later this year.
Obviously the Pope is a brain washed commie stooge.
…and the ultimate commie stooge: (the real dude, not the imitation on Faux News)
And one of his middle names was "Henry". That's per my dad, the newspaperman. Seriously, I like Jesus. We could have hung out.
I just resist that "only way" thing.
Amen, sister.
Even leaving Jesus and the Pope out of it (I'm sure either one would appreciate it), the idea that Republican-lite, O&G BFFriendly Hick is the most extreme Governor we've ever had? On what planet has BWB been spending his time? When he looks at the sky what color is it? Do voices in his head tell him to do things? Guess the book is highly niche marketed. To wackos.
It's the next Luntz New Speak propaganda technique — use the most crushingly accurate words that describe GOP nutwhackery, and project them back onto Democrats ("extreme", "reality-challenged", etc).
If they slather enough crap over the words, 'pubs think they'll lose their effectiveness against them. As well as the false-equivalency of "if you call me that, and I call you the same thing, then it negates anything you say". And the press and pundits just eat it all up.
I think the 12 Apostles would have been a hoot to hang with. Fortunately, Jesus H. Christ had a sense of humor when he chose those dozen Thugs, Punks and Outcasts. Not a single one of these men who get quoted profusely every Sunday morning on this spinning speck of planetary dust could survive a Republican primary process today.
Like
And don't forget–
Beauprez is billed as the establishment-friendly reasonable-moderate Repub in this race…
Everybody makes mistakes. In the case of Beauprez, apparently lots of people make mistakes.
And on the seventh day, God created Bob Beauprez. That one, She now admits, was a mistake.
Richard Nixon's State of the Union speech, January 22, 1970
"The great question of the seventies is, shall we surrender to our surroundings, or shall we make our peace with nature and begin to make reparations for the damage we have done to our air, to our land, and to our water?
Restoring nature to its natural state is a cause beyond party and beyond factions. It has become a common cause of all the people of this country. It is a cause of particular concern to young Americans, because they more than we will reap the grim consequences of our failure to act on programs which are needed now if we are to prevent disaster later.
Clean air, clean water, open spaces-these should once again be the birthright of every American. If we act now, they can be.
We still think of air as free. But clean air is not free, and neither is clean water. The price tag on pollution control is high. Through our years of past carelessness we incurred a debt to nature, and now that debt is being called.
The program I shall propose to Congress will be the most comprehensive and costly program in this field in America's history.
It is not a program for just one year. A year's plan in this field is no plan at all. This is a time to look ahead not a year, but 5 years or 10 years–whatever time is required to do the job.
I shall propose to this Congress a $10 billion nationwide clean waters program to put modern municipal waste treatment plants in every place in America where they are needed to make our waters clean again, and do it now. We have the industrial capacity, if we begin now, to build them all within 5 years. This program will get them built within 5 years.
As our cities and suburbs relentlessly expand, those priceless open spaces needed for recreation areas accessible to their people are swallowed up–often forever. Unless we preserve these spaces while they are still available, we will have none to preserve. Therefore, I shall propose new financing methods for purchasing open space and parklands now, before they are lost to us.
The automobile is our worst polluter of the air. Adequate control requires further advances in engine design and fuel composition. We shall intensify our research, set increasingly strict standards, and strengthen enforcement procedures-and we shall do it now.
We can no longer afford to consider air and water common property, free to be abused by anyone without regard to the consequences. Instead, we should begin now to treat them as scarce resources, which we are no more free to contaminate than we are free to throw garbage into our neighbor's yard.
This requires comprehensive new regulations. It also requires that, to the extent possible, the price of goods should be made to include the costs of producing and disposing of them without damage to the environment.
Now, I realize that the argument is often made that there is a fundamental contradiction between economic growth and the quality of life, so that to have one we must forsake the other.
The answer is not to abandon growth, but to redirect it. For example, we should turn toward ending congestion and eliminating smog the same reservoir of inventive genius that created them in the first place.
Continued vigorous economic growth provides us with the means to enrich life itself and to enhance our planet as a place hospitable to man.
Each individual must enlist in this fight if it is to be won.
It has been said that no matter how many national parks and historical monuments we buy and develop, the truly significant environment for each of us is that in which we spend 80 percent of our time–in our homes, in our places of work, the streets over which we travel.
Street litter, rundown parking strips and yards, dilapidated fences, broken windows, smoking automobiles, dingy working places, all should be the object of our fresh view.
We have been too tolerant of our surroundings and too willing to leave it to others to clean up our environment. It is time for those who make massive demands on society to make some minimal demands on themselves. Each of us must resolve that each day he will leave his home, his property, the public places of the city or town a little cleaner, a little better, a little more pleasant for himself and those around him.
With the help of people we can do anything, and without their help, we can do nothing. In this spirit, together, we can reclaim our land for ours and generations to come.
Between now and the year 5000, over 100 million children will be born in the United States. Where they grow up–and how will, more than any one thing, measure the quality of American life in these years ahead.
This should be a warning to us.
For the past 30 years our population has also been growing and shifting. The result is exemplified in the vast areas of rural America emptying out of people and of promise–a third of our counties lost population in the sixties.
The violent and decayed central cities of our great metropolitan complexes are the most conspicuous area of failure in American life today.
I propose that before these problems become insoluble, the Nation develop a national growth policy.
In the future, government decisions as to where to build highways, locate airports, acquire land, or sell land should be made with a clear objective of aiding a balanced growth for America.
In particular, the Federal Government must be in a position to assist in the building of new cities and the rebuilding of old ones.
At the same time, we will carry our concern with the quality of life in America to the farm as well as the suburb, to the village as well as to the city. What rural America needs most is a new kind of assistance. It needs to be dealt with, not as a separate nation, but as part of an overall growth policy for America. We must create a new rural environment which will not only stem the migration to urban centers, but reverse it. If we seize our growth as a challenge, we can make the 1970's an historic period when by conscious choice we transformed our land into what we want it to become.
America, which has pioneered in the new abundance, and in the new technology, is called upon today to pioneer in meeting the concerns which have followed in their wake–in turning the wonders of science to the service of man.
In the majesty of this great Chamber we hear the echoes of America's history, of debates that rocked the Union and those that repaired it, of the summons to war and the search for peace, of the uniting of the people, the building of a nation.
Those echoes of history remind us of our roots and our strengths.
They remind us also of that special genius of American democracy, which at one critical turning point after another has led us to spot the new road to the future and given us the wisdom and the courage to take it.
As I look down that new road which I have tried to map out today, I see a new America as we celebrate our 200th anniversary 6 years from now.
I see an America in which we have abolished hunger, provided the means for every family in the Nation to obtain a minimum income, made enormous progress in providing better housing, faster transportation, improved health, and superior education.
I see an America in which we have checked inflation, and waged a winning war against crime.
I see an America in which we have made great strides in stopping the pollution of our air, cleaning up our water, opening up our parks, continuing to explore in space.
Most important, I see an America at peace with all the nations of the world.
This is not an impossible dream. These goals are all within our reach.
In times past, our forefathers had the vision but not the means to achieve such goals.
Let it not be recorded that we were the first American generation that had the means but not the vision to make this dream come true.
But let us, above all, recognize a fundamental truth. We can be the best clothed, best fed, best housed people in the world, enjoying clean air, clean water, beautiful parks, but we could still be the unhappiest people in the world without an indefinable spirit–the lift of a driving dream which has made America, from its beginning, the hope of the world."
Bob just has to let the stupid out every once in a while. Its like a valve.