I already knew Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) wasn't a clear thinker, but I still had to chuckle at her quote in today's Washington Post article on climate change:
The president's plan to have America stand by while greenhouse gases reach dangerous levels and threaten America and the world is worse than doing nothing -- it is the height of irresponsibility.
What's the difference between "standing by" and "doing nothing"? Why, no difference at all. Even more amusingly, this was probably a prepared quote taken from a statement issued by her office rather than something she said off the top of her head. Speaking of this Washington Post article, by Juliet Eilperin: It quotes six people taking the alarmist, hurt-the-economy position on global warming, and not one who believes either that alarm is unnecessary or that the hurt-our-economy approach is the wrong way to go. An acknowledgment is made that "senior GOP lawmakers... continue to reject mandatory curbs on emissions," but that's it. No reason why is given. Nor is a reader told that not all of Bush's critics are found on the anti-energy left, and what their take on all this might be. There's a news story to be found in why President Bush took the action that he did, but the Post had no inclination to cover that story. A insipid statement by Barbara Boxer was a higher priority.