SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home "White House Puts Back Its Solar Panels," And How The White...

THE SPINE OCTOBER 6, 2010

"White House Puts Back Its Solar Panels," And How The White House Screwed Up, Really Screwed Up On Climate Change

There's an article in this morning's Financial Times reporting that the Obamas have restored the practice of installing solar panelling on the White House residence. I suppose it's better than not doing so. And certainly better than making a mess of the renewable energy neogtiations which senators John Kerry, Joe Lieberman and Lindsay Graham had been quite heroically pressing with a very well-mobilized and well-financed opposition.

Jimmy Carter (and, of course, Rosalynn) put up these panels in 1979 when you got the gas for your automobile on days determined by the last digit on the license it bore. Ronald Reagan took them down, perhaps because Nancy was told by her regular visionary that it was bad luck. George W. Bush put them back up. But not on the residence: just the White House grounds.

Nobel Prize-winning energy secretary Steven Chu commented at the ceremony that the panels "should also be a symbol of America's commitment to a clean energy fututre." He also said that "it's been a long time since we've had them up there."

Along with this dramatic symbolism comes an article by Ryan Lizza in the current New Yorker, an article with dazzling detail: "As The World Burns: How the Senate and the White House missed their best chance to deal with climate change." It reminded me of why I so miss Ryan in our columns.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 4 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

4 comments

"And How The White House Screwed Up, Really Screwed Up On Climate Change" Yeah, right (heavy sarcasm). How many times have we seen this meme already? The Republicans use every tactic short of assassination to block some legislation that the administration supports. They have 40 votes in the Senate, so the legislation either dies or is diluted. Then we get a long and carefully-researched article explaining Obama's mistakes, and how if he'd only done things differently, enough Republicans would have agreed. But of course, no blame attaches to the Republicans; that's just how they are. Hogwash.

- K_Wilson

October 6, 2010 at 12:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Glad to see Ryan Lizza really has recovered from being smacked by the Obama campaign in July 2008 for his profile of Obama as slick Chicago politician. This is the article that Peretz cites. "As the World Burns: How the Senate and the White House missed their best chance to deal with climate change." http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/10/11/101011fa_fact_lizza?currentPage=all If K_Wilson had actually read Lizza's article first, well, why would that stop K-Wilson's auto-pilot for bashing Peretz and all Republicans in a single screed. It is the Senate that bears the brunt of Lizza's bi-partisan critical reporting, with Obama as deliberately distant blunderer for putting his political future ahead of what might be best for the country.

- K2K

October 7, 2010 at 1:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Perhaps Mr Peretz didn't read the article himself. Otherwise, why would he have titled this blog post "How The White House Screwed Up, Really Screwed Up On Climate Change"? I don't see any mention of Republicans or the Senate; do you?

- K_Wilson

October 7, 2010 at 2:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Like Peretz, my conclusion after reading Lizza's article, was to blame Obama for screwing up climate change. Lizza DOES describe how Obama's political calculus that put health care "reform" first was what really screwed climate change. Used up all his political capital on the wrong priority, then put his personal political future ahead of what might be good for the country - another campaign promise never to be believed again. Not that K-Wilson would actually read the article - that would require an open mind - an Obamacolyte would go insane reading Lizza this time.

- K2K

October 9, 2010 at 5:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close