Written by RSN
What's in a name? Would not a "cap and trade" bill smell the same if renamed "energy independence"? This may not be exactly Shakespeare, but you get the idea. Apparently the "Hope and Change" administration is hoping that changing the name of their odiferous legislation will help.
From Don at Accuracy In Media.org:
The White House has apparently decided that referring to their legislation limiting greenhouse gas emissions as "cap and trade" are more doing more harm than good has changed the nomenclature to "energy independence" despite the fact that it has very little to do with becoming energy independent.
This smacks of political posturing as opponents have derided the bill and named it "cap and tax" for the tremendous costs the legislation would have on businesses and consumers with very little real benefit.
Also with the U.N. Climate Change Conference slated to start on December 7th Obama is looking for anything that will not remind the attendees that a Democrat controlled Congress couldn't pass global warming legislation which has been a major embarrassment to the president who had expected to be a major player in Copenhagen but is now relegated to a minor role.
The White House is getting desperate to pass some type of global warming legislation but if they think changing the name without changing the bill will convince opponents to change their mind they really are clueless.
This emperor has no clothes and no climate change legislation.
It should be noted that this is not the first name change to occur on this issue. As the facts and data continue to mount, disproving "Global Warming", as temperatures continue to cool over the last 10 years, the desperate alarmists quickly but quietly changed from "Global Warming" to "Climate Change", a term first used by the Bush Administration.