Greens and Democrats are toast, say they, because we didn't argue for cheaper energy through new technology. Instead, we expected things to move via more expensive gasoline and emissions capping. The “Green Bubble” has burst.
Only in their heads I'm pleased to report.
Did I hear anyone Green or Democrat arguing against cheaper alternative energy? Thought not.
And since when did scientific truth become a reason to shy away from Green action just because it wasn't tasteful or popular? N and S are claiming that we shouldn't have moved on Green policy because “people” were less into global warming than “we” thought.
Imagine N and S writing an editorial just before slavery was abolished. Slavery shouldn't be abolished, they write, because people are less into abolition than the Washington "elites" think.
The more I read them, the more N and S come across as zombies programmed by the right.
Either that, or they're deliberately messing things around. Which is worse?