more “moral values” from the WH:
< Before coming to the White House, Cooney was a lobbyist at the American Petroleum Institute, the oil industry’s trade group.>
Oh look, I wonder if this is similar to cherry picking evidence… ?
That’s fucking brilliant! Put an oil lobbyist in a position designed to monitor the effects of greenhouse gasses on the climate!
Perhaps we should appoint some pharma lobbyists to the FDA drug review panels!
A bit more cherry picking:
Revealed: how oil giant influenced Bush
White House sought advice from Exxon on Kyoto stance
John Vidal, environment editor
Wednesday June 8, 2005
Any views?
Makkun
The fact that this article comes from the Moonie Times is a head scratcher.
makkun
This is kind of cherry picking.
You have a decision by Bush that was not popular with enviromentalists. You have Greenpeace finding that he met with Exxon in some form. You then draw a line saying this meeting influenced a decision that the President made.
Did he not/never meet with Greenpeace or any other advocate of the “Green” movement? No sponsors or supporters of the K agreement?
Isn’t it fair to get advice/information on the pros and cons of any side of any decision?
I agree that, by itself, it looks bad. But if we can assume that he also sought advice from pro K groups, then this meeting is really not causal w/r/t the final decision.
sasquatch,
[quote]sasquatch wrote:
makkun
This is kind of cherry picking.[/quote]
Said so. 
The article states a bit more than that:
"“Potus [president of the United States] rejected Kyoto in part based on input from you [the Global Climate Coalition],” says one briefing note before Ms Dobriansky’s meeting with the GCC, the main anti-Kyoto US industry group, which was dominated by Exxon.
The papers further state that the White House considered Exxon “among the companies most actively and prominently opposed to binding approaches [like Kyoto] to cut greenhouse gas emissions”. "
That’s a bit more than just “meeting”.
But yes, off course, it is a small tidbit of information, but it does support a theory that has been harboured for a long time, and that had been debunked by Exxon so far.
He met with Kyoto-supporting governments, yes, but I could not find any news about meetings with environmental pressure groups, such as Greenpeace. But perhaps you are more successful.
Sure, but the article questions just that. Does it paint an accurate picture? Hard to tell.
Hm. I would be happy, if we could find some evidence of him looking for alternative views. I must admit I am a bit biased, as I don’t tend to expect that from him. Especially when finding such a thing in my research:
Bush covers up climate research
White House officials play down its own scientists’ evidence of global warming
Paul Harris New York
Sunday September 21, 2003
But I hope that this is a misconception on my part.
Makkun