Is Copenhagen Dead? | Mother Jones

For enviros holding out hope for Copenhagen, the Podesta-Pachauri statement is a major downer. The two are dramatically depressing expectations—and plotting out an alternative track to the Copenhagen process. What makes Podesta's pessimism especially noteworthy is that for years he was a mentor to Todd Stern, who is now the senior US negotiator for Copenhagen. The two are close friends, and it is unlikely—make that, unimaginable—that Podesta, an experienced political player in Washington (who was a chief of staff for President Clinton), would express such a discouraging position on Copenhagen without consulting Stern.

Given that Podesta is quite well-informed on these matters, this appears to be a strong signal that the Obama administration—as the Senate puts off acting on climate change legislation—is giving up on achieving any grand accord to redress climate change this December. It's a stinging vote of no confidence in Copenhagen—and a sign that Obama administration officials, believing they cannot steer the nations of the world toward a meaningful treaty, are looking for a Plan B.

Inhofe to Kerry: Cap-and-Trade Is Defined As a ‘Tax, and A Great Big One’

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, today responded to remarks made by Senator John Kerry (D-MA), who said, “‘I don't know what 'cap and trade' means. I don't think the average American does,’ adding, ‘This is not a cap-and-trade bill, it's a pollution reduction bill.’"
...
“I think the best way to help Sen. Kerry define cap-and-trade is to turn to Rep. John Dingell (D-MI), who said that cap-and-trade ‘is a tax, and a great big one,’” Sen. Inhofe said. “No matter the semantic games employed, or the extent to which Democrats wish to hide the truth from the American people, cap-and-trade will mean more job losses, more pain at the pump, and higher food and electricity prices for consumers.

“Despite the post-modern denial of ‘the truth’, in which words can mean whatever one chooses, the legislation on display next week will be cap-and-trade, pure and simple. And if the House Waxman-Markey bill is any guide, it will showcase a massive expansion of government mandates, spending, taxes, and energy rationing, all with meaningless effect on climate change.

An E.P.A. Economist’s Climate Complaints - Dot Earth Blog - NYTimes.com

Please read the news article above and the e-mail sequence and then have a look back at the NASA case. Do you see any merit in the arguments of those seeking parallels between the two situations?