In delivering his State of the Union before a joint session of Congress last night, President Trump spoke about the nation’s burgeoning economy, strong national defense, and improved opportunities being opening up for the poor and middle class.
One thing he didn’t mention, however, was climate change. And that put CNN’s John King into a tizzy:
“Every leader, whatever his party should be talking about climate change. You can have a debate about what to do about it. But that the President of the United States, at this moment in the world, did not mention climate change in even a sentence is, just frankly, a disgrace.”
Of course, global warming was dutifully mentioned in the Democratic response to the President’s speech. It was, to be sure, a throw away line. All Georgia’s Stacey Adam’s simply said was: “We can do more, [like] take action on climate change.” Apparently that was enough for Mr. King to praise her as delivering the “best response” he ever heard.
Other Democrats were similarly put off by the President’s attack on socialism. After denouncing the Venezuela’s authoritarian government, Trump boldly proclaimed, “We will never be a socialist country.”
It was a good line. A great line. It brought almost everyone, even Nancy Pelosi, to their feet.
Not, however, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She remained plopped down. Frozen. “Is this a campaign stop or a State of the Union?” she would later chirp to a reporter. As for the President’s “socialism” remarks, “I thought it was great – I think he’s scared.”
One doesn’t have to read between the lines to understand the Democrats are not happy today. The president scored well last night. They are left to nit pick.
They are right about one thing though: No, the president didn’t directly mention “global warming.” Perhaps he should have. Of course, not in the manner the Greens would suppose.
It might have been nice if the President mentioned how he saved America from the disastrous Paris Accord, redirected priorities away from enforcing senseless climate regs that hamper businesses and our military, and steered the EPA away from imposing costly rules that would have shuttered countless energy plants, lost jobs, and driven up prices. These are indeed noteworthy achievements, we believe, but probably wouldn’t have earned him any additional good will from across the aisle.
The truth is the president did talk about the environment, albeit indirectly. How so? By letting us all know how well America’s economy is humming along.
The fact of the matter is that a growing economy is good news for the environment. Countries which have full employment, robust economic growth and provide law and order are precisely the ones that can best furnish for their citizens clean air and water. Socialistic countries like Cuba, Venezuela, China and the former Soviet Union stand as rich examples of the opposite.
The President, by pushing America’s economy to perform better through tax cuts, less regulation, and unleashing our energy potential, is doing more than his predecessor did in helping us keep America’s environment better protected.
If only Mr. King and Ms. Cortez had a clue.
EDITORS NOTE: This CFACT column with images is republished with permission.