I just received an email from fraudster Al Gore--here's an excerpt:

...we've built overwhelming popular support for action on comprehensive climate and clean energy solutions.

But by using the right-wing media echo chamber, record campaign contributions and an army of well-paid lobbyists, the oil and coal industries have stopped at nothing to protect the status quo and their profits. They want to keep using the atmosphere as an open sewer for the dumping of their greenhouse gas pollution.

The Senate's inaction reflects that reality. We have always known that solving the climate crisis is a generational challenge -- and the urgency of the climate crisis demands that despite these substantial obstacles, we must fight for every inch of progress. The science has never been more clear and the evidence is mounting day by day.
...we must win the ongoing battle of science against spin.

We can and must continue the fight. Please join me on Tuesday, August 10 at 8:30 p.m. EDT to discuss our next steps.

Has the BBC’s review of science reporting been cancelled?

Now we have heard - from a source close to the BBC - that the BBC Trust’s much-vaunted review of the accuracy and impartiality of its science coverage has been cancelled. Could it be that the BBC has realised that, in view of the damage done to the Climategate inquires by not properly representing the well justified concerns and evidence of sceptics, their review would also have little credibility if the critics of their science coverage is excluded, and conversely, that if this input is allowed, then the review would inevitably have to reach some very unpalatable conclusions.

Is cap-and-trade to blame for the death of the climate bill? | Grist

Average citizens know almost nothing about politics and even less about policy; they don't care very deeply about climate change; they are highly cynical and suspicious of government and policy elites; the mechanisms that served to drive public discontent on civil rights (and other '60s victories) are not available to climate campaigners due to the nature of the issue -- the harms are mostly far away in time and space and the costs are immediate. And we're not just talking about persuading "the people" to get active, we're talking about creating a credible electoral threat in Nebraska and West Virginia. They're receptive to policy arguments from left intellectuals there, right?
...
6a. Cap-and-trade is a messaging and organizing disaster. On this, I think, almost everyone agrees. Green groups got all jazzed at the bipartisan potential of cap-and-trade after the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments and they made a classic technocrat's mistake: they put mechanisms at the heart of the message. The American electorate does not understand or care about policy mechanisms. They don't particularly care how greenhouse gases are reduced. They don't even care about greenhouse gases at all! They care about their jobs, their families, and their identities. Until climate action is discussed in ways that resonate with those concerns, it won't seriously engage the public.