Will Romney hire Obama’s climate-change guru Holdren?

mitt_romney_portraitBy Ed Morrissey

Conservatives know well that Mitt Romney has so far refused to back away from his contention that anthropogenic global warming is real, and yet the former Massachusetts governor continues to lead the Republican race for the presidential nomination. In seven debates, none of Romney’s competitors have challenged him on this position. This week, however, the blog Moonbattery found a very interesting memo from Romney’s office in 2005 announcing tough new regulations on emissions¬† and noting a partnership with a familiar conservative b’te noire in this administration (via Sundries Shack):

Governor Mitt Romney today announced that Massachusetts will take another major step in meeting its commitment to protecting air quality when strict state limitations on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from power plants take effect on January 1, 2006. …
Massachusetts is the first and only state to set CO2 emissions limits on power plants. The limits, which target the six largest and oldest power plants in the state, are the toughest in the nation…
In addition to reaffirming existing stringent CO2 limits, the draft regulations announced today, which will be filed next week, contain protections against excessive price increases for businesses and consumers. They allow power generation companies to implement CO2 reductions at their own facilities or fund other reduction projects off-site through a greenhouse gas offset and credits program.

In other words, the Romney administration in 2005 essentially did what Barack Obama’s EPA wants to do now. He imposed CO2 emission caps, “the toughest in the nation,” in an effort to curtail traditional energy production.¬† Not only did Romney impose these costly new regulations, he then imposed price caps to keep power companies from passing the cost along to the consumer. As we have seen in RomneyCare, regulation and price controls eventually drive businesses into bankruptcy or relocation.

So what has happened to Massachusetts’ electrical production since signing these regulations into law? According to the EIA, whose latest data is for 2009, it dropped 18% in four years, from over 46 billion megawatt hours to 38 billion. International imports, however, went from 697 million megawatt hours in 2006 to 4.177 billion megawatt hours two years later, and to almost 5 billion megawatt hours in 2009, more than twice the amount imported in any of the previous twenty years.

And who advised Romney on these regulations? Why, none other than Obama’s chief science adviser, John Holdren…

Read the rest at Hot Air.

32 Responses to Will Romney hire Obama’s climate-change guru Holdren?

  1. NEIL F. AGWD/BSD October 17, 2011 at 2:28 pm #

    Yeah, I know. I completely disagree with Gov. Romney on this. He is not a Conservative, that’s obvious. But, I’ll tell you that if he is the one that wins the nomination for the GOP running against Obama, I will vote for him. But only because Obama’s gotta go.
    I can only hope that he is not the one who wins the nomination.

  2. Joe October 17, 2011 at 10:49 pm #

    Neil, I agree but disagree. I vote values, as you. The less of two evils? Can’t we find candidates that we “Believe in?” They are out there I assume? Yes Romney has been a business person. If he firmly believes in global warming what will that do when he has to confront the EPA? Think about it. I have. As you basically say, anything is better tham President Obama. Time will tell if he, Romney is honored to be elected.

  3. NEIL F. AGWD/BSD October 18, 2011 at 7:31 pm #

    I don’t like Romney, but I like him better than Obama. And I did say that I hoped Romney was NOT the winner of the nomination. The people I really like are not running. I just hope it is a true conservative that wins the nomination. Romney is not a conservative.

  4. Joe October 18, 2011 at 9:57 pm #

    Tonight he talked a good game. Mr. Cain made some points and Perry lost major style. Bachman? Go back gome. By the way, I liked the inter-action of the group. They disagreed vehemently and then come to a common ground. Getting this morbid economy back on track. For this I agree. Finally, love the statement by Newt, 7 hours or debate with Obama with no commercials, no teleprompters. Now that would be better than the “Super Bowl.” Would love to see it be it any candidate.

  5. NEIL F. AGWD/BSD October 19, 2011 at 8:10 pm #

    I don’t want someone who wants to compromise with the Libs. Do Libs compromise with Repubs? If so, when? I’m curious. See, the term compromise means different things. When a Lib says that Repubs should compromise, most people think that they mean a settlement of differences in which each side makes concessions. But that’s not what they want. They want to reduce (Republicans) in quality, value, or degree; weaken or lower. In other words they don’t want us to compromise, they want us to be compromised, or they want us to compromise our values. John McCain reached across the isle, only to get his hand slapped away.
    If Romney gets the nomination, which will mean he is the next president (I don’t think Obama will be re-elected) unless the Dems put up a primary challenge to Obama, then I don’t see the point in even trying anymore because the Liberal/greenie agenda will not have been diminished in the least. Especially if Romney keeps Holdren at his post. It’s a sad state of affairs to even be entertaining the thought.

  6. Rob N. Hood October 20, 2011 at 1:47 pm #

    This delusional black is white blather has convinced me to vote for Obama, no matter how right-wingish and corporate loving he is. You people will win either way- you will get a right-leaning (or more) President either way. But you are too delusional to see your good fortune. How sad, for you.

    • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD October 20, 2011 at 5:20 pm #

      You are the one that is delusional. Iv’e heard you say this more than once, and it gets more ridiculous everytime you say it. On what basis do you say that Obama is right leaning? Is it that he is slightly right of you? Where your delusion begins is that you think you are in the center, so Obama being slightly right of you means that he is right leaning… to you. The only reason that Obama is cozying up to certain corporations like GE, and others, is because they donated heavily to his campaign. DUH!!! It’s not really even chrony capitalism. It is kissing up to donors. You astound me with your ineptitude.

  7. Joe October 20, 2011 at 7:00 pm #

    This Hood guy loves the word “delusional.” Makes sense. He voted for Obama. Now we understand why he is so enamored with the word.

    • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD October 20, 2011 at 8:37 pm #

      I’m pretty sure he just says it to rile me up, and it works.

  8. Joe October 23, 2011 at 7:45 pm #

    Trust me. He does. As to Holdren? Romney would be an idiot to retain him. Simply knowing that he listened to this idiot makes me wonder what his motives really are? Similiar to Obama? Only time will tell won’t it.

  9. Rob N. Hood October 26, 2011 at 5:16 pm #

    I use words to convey as close to the exact meaning that I wish to convey or describe. “Delusion” in the above example happens to fit exactly. But your crazy talk (see, a different word!!) alone won’t make me vote for Obama. The lunacy of the Republican nominee will likely tip the scales.

  10. Joe October 26, 2011 at 9:50 pm #

    Changing your verbiage will not change. It is what it is. Bottom line, If Romney believes in Holdren’s ideas he lost the election. 90% of my friends would never vote for him as well as Obama.

  11. Rob N. Hood October 27, 2011 at 4:30 pm #

    Cmon, admit it- you guys missed me… BTW I didn’t change my “verbiage” as you call it. How twisted is thy logic? A pretzel is sometimes just a pretzel… And you don’t need to tell me Romney is not right-wing nuf for ya… I already knew that.

  12. Joe October 29, 2011 at 12:42 am #

    RNH, check spell check on Verbiage. You would be surprised. Do I miss you? No. Do I like proper discourse? Yes. Have you every answered without chastising? No. Would I enjoy more discourse or lack thereof with you? No. You are firm in your statements and even if God appeared, you would never change. Discourse is exchanging differences of opinion without demeaning others. There is a difference with normal discussion and attempting to lower others you take the prize. I assume you are proud. You have yet to learn and doubt you ever will.

  13. Rob N. Hood October 29, 2011 at 7:19 am #

    Uh, Joe, just because I quotated a word doesn’t mean I think it doesn’t exist or that you used it wrong. Touchy aren’t we? And talk about chastising… OMG, you’re a hypocrite. What I point out at least as often as not are valid retorts and/or rejoinders. And yes I am proud of my intelligence such as it is, and my ability to limit my own hypocrisy, AND my ability to learn. And so are you, as you make very obvious. Except that it takes intelligence to know one’s limitations, and it takes humility to know one’s faults.

  14. Rob N. Hood October 29, 2011 at 7:25 am #

    But, yes, I see where you could conclude that I “changed my verbiage” (just a funny word to me that’s all). And even if so, it was only a slight change or clarification, if that word makes you feel better. Point is I guess, you hunt for, and jump on, any little (very little) thing you can to demean, belittle, etc. This says more about you than your actual words convey.

  15. Joe October 31, 2011 at 8:46 pm #

    You never change do you? My two year old grandson has better verbal manners.

  16. Rob N. Hood November 3, 2011 at 6:19 pm #

    And you just validated my very previous post. Thank you Joe. You are so consistent. Now if you could learn some manners from that two year old, we’d see some progress.

  17. Joe November 3, 2011 at 10:35 pm #

    I learned that my two year old has better verbal/written manners than you. Get back on point. You ar boring others with dribble.

  18. Rob N. Hood November 4, 2011 at 4:52 pm #

    Oh sorry. I thought replying to you was the point. Sort of anyway. My bad. As usual, you are so absolutely correct and perfect. Except for that progress thing.

  19. Joe November 6, 2011 at 11:27 pm #

    Based upon your posts? Think about it. Get back on point.

  20. Rob N. Hood November 8, 2011 at 5:31 pm #

    Oh ok…I “thought” about it. Can you do the same? Just wondering… uh, what’s the point again?

  21. Joe November 8, 2011 at 10:12 pm #

    Would Romney hired Holdren? If elected, which I doubt, if he did, he would be a “one term President.” My humble opininion.

  22. Joe November 8, 2011 at 10:13 pm #

    Would Romney hired Holdren? If elected, which I doubt, if he did, he would be a “one term President.” My humble opinion.

  23. Rob N. Hood November 9, 2011 at 6:50 pm #

    Oh, yeah, I guess we all need to pay close attention to you and your earth shattering Nicodemus-like statements. Oops, a little sarcasm slipped out again.

  24. Rob N. Hood November 11, 2011 at 6:23 pm #

    Other than his religion, what is not for you Wingdings not to like about Willard?? And excepting, of course, his imagainary future appointments ala Joe Nostradomus…?

  25. Rob N. Hood November 15, 2011 at 5:41 pm #

    And…? Do I need to repeat the question???? He’s one of YOUR leading candidates and the likely challenger to Obama…. kinda thought you’d all jump right in here…… gee now that’s odd…???!!!

  26. Joe November 15, 2011 at 11:52 pm #

    And your point is?

  27. Rob N. Hood November 17, 2011 at 6:14 pm #

    …. uh…. that it’s….. uh… odd. I… uh… thought I made that clear….. uh sorry….. to be so obscure and murky.

  28. Joe November 20, 2011 at 10:55 pm #

    Obscure you are as well as murky and that’s being nice..

  29. Rob N. Hood December 9, 2011 at 8:48 am #

    nevermind Joe- it’s ok

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Meet the White Obama. « The Arizona Sentinel - January 12, 2012

    [...] plants.” In short, Romney did what Obama’s EPA wants to do now. It is revealing that Romney was advised on this drastic step by none other than Obama’s chief science adviser, John Holdren. In his [...]

Leave a Reply

A project of Minnesota Majority