Obama’s decisions doomed the Paris Climate Accord to failure in the US, experts say

[james_1957]

Blame former President Barack Obama for the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris climate accord, according to policy experts, as Obama’s decision to forgo Senate approval and bank on a Democratic win in 2016 made the agreement politically vulnerable.

“The Paris climate agreement was pushed through against the declared will of America’s elected representatives,” Dr. Benny Peiser, director of the UK-based Global Warming Policy Forum, said in a statement.

President Donald Trump announced Thursday he would withdraw the U.S. from the Paris accord. Trump’s Paris withdrawal was made easier by decisions made by Obama to unilaterally impose global warming policies.

Obama joined the Paris accord in 2016, after years of working behind the scenes to craft the non-binding global warming deal, but he did so without submitting it to the Senate.

His signature achievement on global warming, therefore, depended on Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election and the courts.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/03/o...mate-accord-to-failure-in-the-us-experts-say/

 

[Disgustipated]

http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/03/o...mate-accord-to-failure-in-the-us-experts-say/

What would you do without the dailycaller and Obama? Would your life be more or less pathetic than it already is now?

 

[james_1957]

What would you do without the dailycaller and Obama? Would your life be more or less pathetic than it already is now?

I heard Trump sent Obama a thank you letter.

 

[Hashtag47]

What would you do without the dailycaller and Obama? Would your life be more or less pathetic than it already is now?

Nothing could be more pathetic and a habitual copy & paste(er). Well, I guess if his prostitute wife left him and he had to live in a flop house then that would qualify his as more pathetic.

 

[james_1957]

Nothing could be more pathetic and a habitual copy & paste(er). Well, I guess if his prostitute wife left him and he had to live in a flop house then that would qualify his as more pathetic.

Do you prefer Connie or Skiddles?

 

[handysr]

What would you do without the dailycaller and Obama? Would your life be more or less pathetic than it already is now?

Typical GB flaming liberal. Instead of disputing the story/statement, you revert to petty insults. The DailyCaller didn't make the statement, they reported on it.


Classy move.

 

[Conager]

http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/03/o...mate-accord-to-failure-in-the-us-experts-say/

With the exeption of Obamacare, where he stood aside and let career politicians Pelosi and Reid empty filedrawers of lobbyiest wishlists into it, (student loan takeover in a healthcare bill, wtf??) that is true of every "acheivement" of the God-Emporer with a pen and a phone.

Each and every thing that he did without the express consent of the elected legislature which was specifically elected on a campaign of stopping his agenda can and should be undone.

Unlike Clinton or Reagan he came equipped with absolutely no political or consensus-building skills. He was completely ineffectual unless he could completely do whatever it was he wanted to do without any actual consensus-building.

His entire legacy will be the "historic" nature of his presidency, which is the only reason that he was elected and then reelected.

 

[Conager]

Nothing could be more pathetic and a habitual copy & paste(er). Well, I guess if his prostitute wife left him and he had to live in a flop house then that would qualify his as more pathetic.

Missed this. Lookee!

A second Rob-to-Luke reach around in one day!

All we need now is for CowPieHurler to ride into view and complete the old Cowbro Posse of humorless insult comics!

<insert flashing gif of Jake and Elwood, "We're gettin' the band back together!">

<insert gif of three mental midgets on playground ponies>

 

[Disgustipated]

Typical GB flaming liberal. Instead of disputing the story/statement, you revert to petty insults. The DailyCaller didn't make the statement, they reported on it.


Classy move.

Who in the fuck are you?

 

[Disgustipated]

Missed this. Lookee!

A second Rob-to-Luke reach around in one day!

All we need now is for CowPieHurler to ride into view and complete the old Cowbro Posse of humorless insult comics!

<insert flashing gif of Jake and Elwood, "We're gettin' the band back together!">

<insert gif of three mental midgets on playground ponies>

Are you having another stroke?

 

[Ms_Ann]

Who in the fuck are you?

Connie.

 

[handysr]

Who in the fuck are you?

Of course You don't try to dispute anything, you're just being an asshat again. Thanks for proving my point.

I respect the truth, and a lot of what I see here isn't that. If so many liberals would pull their heads out of the colletctive asses of the clinton and obama families, you could see what shit you are surrounded by.

 

[Hashtag47]

Of course You don't try to dispute anything, you're just being an asshat again. Thanks for proving my point.

I respect the truth, and a lot of what I see here isn't that. If so many liberals would pull their heads out of the colletctive asses of the clinton and obama families, you could see what shit you are surrounded by.

We see you, don't worry.

 

[james_1957]

Without Congress' support, Obama's dealmaking powers are limited

An interesting passage from an article written by former U.S. ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton. The article was written December 1, 2015.

Obama can achieve his climate change legacy only through delicate negotiations with Congress. His poor relations with the House and Senate, especially on foreign policy, appear to render success unlikely. Obama may rely on his unilateral authority to join a world climate pact, but without Congress his most important promises will be empty ones whose fate will be left to his successor.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-e...-climate-deal-not-binding-20151201-story.html

 

[james_1957]

Who in the fuck are you?

Someone better than you, Boo.

 

[james_1957]

We see you, don't worry.

With your multiple alts, I'm not surprised you see him.

 

[handysr]

The funny thing is that no obama-lovers or Trump-haters have tried to dispute the facts of the article. Hmm.

At least James actually added relevant detail to the thread with another quote. Come on libs, where is some useful discussion about this. Can you really argue against this being a good move?

 

[phrodeau]

The funny thing is that no obama-lovers or Trump-haters have tried to dispute the facts of the article. Hmm.

At least James actually added relevant detail to the thread with another quote. Come on libs, where is some useful discussion about this. Can you really argue against this being a good move?

Got any facts to begin with?

You think that the Senate should have anything to do with foreign policy? When has the Senate ever shown any interest or competence toward foreign policy?

 

[james_1957]

Got any facts to begin with?

You think that the Senate should have anything to do with foreign policy? When has the Senate ever shown any interest or competence toward foreign policy?

Fun fact # 1: Obama's gift to the American people is President Donald Trump.

Fun fact # 2: Trump is shredding Obama's legacy.

Fun fact # 3: There's not a damn thing you can do about it.

Bonus fun fact: Trump gets 2, possibly 3 SCOTUS picks before the end of his 1st term.

 

[Disgustipated]

Fun fact # 1: Obama's gift to the American people is President Donald Trump.

Fun fact # 2: Trump is shredding Obama's legacy.

Fun fact # 3: There's not a damn thing you can do about it.

Bonus fun fact: Trump gets 2, possibly 3 SCOTUS picks before the end of his 1st term.

He better hurry the fuck up.

 

[handysr]

Got any facts to begin with?

You think that the Senate should have anything to do with foreign policy? When has the Senate ever shown any interest or competence toward foreign policy?

So a sitting president has the sole authority to arbitrarily sign a contract with another country, promising to destroy US industries while giving untold billions of dollars to foreign countries to expand on those industries outside our borders? For other nations to dictate how American citizens live their lives?

obama already knew that the senate wouldn't approve of the deal, so they did some sneaky maneuvering to bypass them. For the scope and cost of that stupid deal, there is no way that he should have been allowed to sign it without the backing of the senate.

Edit:
It wasn't signed with another country, but the majority of them aligned through the UN. Giving an outside group that kind of control is a bad idea. Having global trade is great, as are some international agreements, but not in the scope of the Paris Accord BS.

 

[Disgustipated]

So a sitting president has the sole authority to arbitrarily sign a contract with another country, promising to destroy US industries while giving untold billions of dollars to foreign countries to expand on those industries outside our borders? For other nations to dictate how American citizens live their lives?

obama already knew that the senate wouldn't approve of the deal, so they did some sneaky maneuvering to bypass them. For the scope and cost of that stupid deal, there is no way that he should have been allowed to sign it without the backing of the senate.

Edit:
It wasn't signed with another country, but the majority of them aligned through the UN. Giving an outside group that kind of control is a bad idea. Having global trade is great, as are some international agreements, but not in the scope of the Paris Accord BS.

Please explain is detail what you mean by the bold parts. Thanks for taking my call, I'll listen to your answer off-air.

 

[phrodeau]

So a sitting president has the sole authority to arbitrarily sign a contract with another country, promising to destroy US industries while giving untold billions of dollars to foreign countries to expand on those industries outside our borders? For other nations to dictate how American citizens live their lives?

obama already knew that the senate wouldn't approve of the deal, so they did some sneaky maneuvering to bypass them. For the scope and cost of that stupid deal, there is no way that he should have been allowed to sign it without the backing of the senate.

Edit:
It wasn't signed with another country, but the majority of them aligned through the UN. Giving an outside group that kind of control is a bad idea. Having global trade is great, as are some international agreements, but not in the scope of the Paris Accord BS.

You are a member of a very small group of people who think the US should not be in the Paris Agreement; 1.3% of the world population.

 

[HisArpy]

You are a member of a very small group of people who think the US should not be in the Paris Agreement; 1.3% of the world population.

So, mob rule?

 

[trysail]

"If you've been in the game for fifteen minutes and you don't know who the patsy is...

...you are."​

https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2017/06/green-climate-fund.jpg




​