Now you are saying he may of signed it but Congress didn't ratify it. Ergo your original statement above is eithr wrong or you were intentionally trying to mislead people. Either way it doesn't matter.
The idea of relegating climate change to partisan issue is assanine.
To your point about "junk" science you are fool if you do not believe there is good science backing up AGW. The indication of which dates back to 1883. We know for a FACT that CO2 absorbs long-wave radiation and deflects it back in all directions. Solar radiation is predominantly short wave. Ergo Short wave comes in heats up the earth the earth emits long-wave radiation. The more CO2 in the atmosphere the more heat gets radiated back to the earth. This really is eigth grade science. It is not junk science. It is provable, observable and recreatable.[/QUOTE]But it IS a partisan issue and you know it. Its no different than the gay community getting all up in arms over Mormon opposition to gay marriage but remaining tragically silent when the Conference of Black Ministers announces an open declaration on gay marriage. The Global Warming crowd has been silent for 6 years and will remain so when (as I believe) a democrat is elected in 2016. But should a republican be elected? We will go right back to the protests and demonstrations and demands that we save the planet that we saw for 8 years during the Bush presidency. Politics? Sure...but politics coupled with mindless ideology...thats...sad.
Did Clinton submit the Kyoto treaty to the Senate for passage? Did he push for ratification? At ANY time during the 4 years of his second admin?
Dont bother...we know the answer.