We were quite disconcerted to read President Bush's statement on Wednesday that the US is, "working very closely with other [G8 members]...to be able to announce a long-term binding goal," for reducing GHG emissions at next month's G8 meeting in Japan.

It's not for the usual reasons, like his adamant refusal to even utter the words "Kyoto Protocol" during most of his tenure, or his preferred course of action that would allow US emissions to increase through 2025. It's because last week his party did their damnedest to keep the Lieberman-Warner bill from even being debated. Not to mention the President had promised to veto the bill if it ever made its way through the Senate. And, it all went down the day after the historically conservative IEA called for an "energy revolution."

The Wall Street Journal boiled it down to the GOP standing up to "high-minded rhetoric" that ignores how the government will pay to implement the bill. We don't want to open up a can of worms by pointing out the many other bills that Congress has passed without considering how we're going to pay for it.

Sure, all politics is local, so what the lame duck President is advocating on an international level is likely to conflict with the concerns of a Republican Senator seeking re-election, but can we get some consistency? And the fact that neither Obama, McCain, or Clinton bothered to show up because they knew the bill would never get cloture we think is another sign that perhaps our government isn't as committed to addressing the environment as some would like us to believe.