Here’s the latest poll from Bloomberg on most important issues facing the country:
Climate change ranks dead last in importance. Source: PollingReport.com
Now compare what the American People think to what Obama thinks in his UN speech today.
The following is the text of Obama’s speech as prepared for delivery today at the UN:
Good morning. I want to thank the Secretary-General for organizing this summit, and all the leaders who are participating. That so many of us are here today is a recognition that the threat from climate change is serious, it is urgent, and it is growing. Our generation’s response to this challenge will be judged by history, for if we fail to meet it — boldly, swiftly, and together — we risk consigning future generations to an irreversible catastrophe.
No nation, however large or small, wealthy or poor, can escape the impact of climate change. Rising sea levels threaten every coastline. More powerful storms and floods threaten every continent. More frequent drought and crop failures breed hunger and conflict in places where hunger and conflict already thrive. On shrinking islands, families are already being forced to flee their homes as climate refugees.
The security and stability of each nation and all peoples — our prosperity, our health, our safety — are in jeopardy. And the time we have to reverse this tide is running out.
And yet, we can reverse it. John F. Kennedy once observed that “Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man.” It is true that for too many years, mankind has been slow to respond to or even recognize the magnitude of the climate threat. It is true of my own country as well. We recognize that. But this is a new day. It is a new era. And I am proud to say that the United States has done more to promote clean energy and reduce carbon pollution in the last eight months than at any other time in our history.
We’re making our government’s largest ever investment in renewable energy — an investment aimed at doubling the generating capacity from wind and other renewable resources in three years. Across America, entrepreneurs are constructing wind turbines and solar panels and batteries for hybrid cars with the help of loan guarantees and tax credits — projects that are creating new jobs and new industries. We’re investing billions to cut energy waste in our homes, buildings, and appliances — helping American families save money on energy bills in the process. We’ve proposed the very first national policy aimed at both increasing fuel economy and reducing greenhouse gas pollution for all new cars and trucks — a standard that will also save consumers money and our nation oil. We’re moving forward with our nation’s first offshore wind energy projects. We’re investing billions to capture carbon pollution so that we can clean up our coal plants. Just this week, we announced that for the first time ever, we’ll begin tracking how much greenhouse gas pollution is being emitted throughout the country. Later this week, I will work with my colleagues at the G20 to phase out fossil fuel subsidies so that we can better address our climate challenge. And already, we know that the recent drop in overall U.S. emissions is due in part to steps that promote greater efficiency and greater use of renewable energy.
Most importantly, the House of Representatives passed an energy and climate bill in June that would finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy for American businesses and dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions. One committee has already acted on this bill in the Senate and I look forward to engaging with others as we move forward.
Because no one nation can meet this challenge alone, the United States has also engaged more allies and partners in finding a solution than ever before. In April, we convened the first of what have now been six meetings of the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate here in the United States. In Trinidad, I proposed an Energy and Climate Partnership for the Americas. We’ve worked through the World Bank to promote renewable energy projects and technologies in the developing world. And we have put climate at the top of our diplomatic agenda when it comes to our relationships with countries from China to Brazil; India to Mexico; Africa to Europe.
Taken together, these steps represent an historic recognition on behalf of the American people and their government. We understand the gravity of the climate threat.
We are determined to act. And we will meet our responsibility to future generations.
But though many of our nations have taken bold actions and share in this determination, we did not come here today to celebrate progress. We came because there is so much more progress to be made. We came because there is so much more work to be done.
It is work that will not be easy. As we head towards Copenhagen, there should be no illusions that the hardest part of our journey is in front of us. We seek sweeping but necessary change in the midst of a global recession, where every nation’s most immediate priority is reviving their economy and putting their people back to work. And so all of us will face doubts and difficulties in our own capitals as we try to reach a lasting solution to the climate challenge.
But difficulty is no excuse for complacency. Unease is no excuse for inaction. And we must not allow the perfect to become the enemy of progress. Each of us must do what we can when we can to grow our economies without endangering our planet — and we must all do it together. We must seize the opportunity to make Copenhagen a significant step forward in the global fight against climate change.
We also cannot allow the old divisions that have characterized the climate debate for so many years to block our progress. Yes, the developed nations that caused much of the damage to our climate over the last century still have a responsibility to lead. And we will continue to do so by investing in renewable energy, promoting greater efficiency, and slashing our emissions to reach the targets we set for 2020 and our long-term goal for 2050.
But those rapidly-growing developing nations that will produce nearly all the growth in global carbon emissions in the decades ahead must do their part as well. Some of these nations have already made great strides with the development and deployment of clean energy. Still, they will need to commit to strong measures at home and agree to stand behind those commitments just as the developed nations must stand behind their own. We cannot meet this challenge unless all the largest emitters of greenhouse gas pollution act together.
There is no other way.
We must also energize our efforts to put other developing nations — especially the poorest and most vulnerable on a path to sustainable growth. These nations do not have the same resources to combat climate change as countries like the United States or China do, but they have the most immediate stake in a solution. For these are the nations that are already living with the unfolding effects of a warming planet — famine and drought; disappearing coastal villages and the conflict that arises from scarce resources. Their future is no longer a choice between a growing economy and a cleaner planet, because their survival depends on both. It will do little good to alleviate poverty if you can no longer harvest your crops or find drinkable water.
That is why we have a responsibility to provide the financial and technical assistance needed to help these nations adapt to the impacts of climate change and pursue low-carbon development.
What we are seeking, after all, is not simply an agreement to limit greenhouse gas emissions. We seek an agreement that will allow all nations to grow and raise living standards without endangering the planet. By developing and disseminating clean technology and sharing our know-how, we can help developing nations leap-frog dirty energy technologies and reduce dangerous emissions.
As we meet here today, the good news is that after too many years of inaction and denial, there is finally widespread recognition of the urgency of the challenge before us. We know what needs to be done. We know that our planet’s future depends on a global commitment to permanently reduce greenhouse gas pollution. We know that if we put the right rules and incentives in place, we will unleash the creative power of our best scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs to build a better world. And so many nations have already taken the first steps on the journey towards that goal.
But the journey is long. The journey is hard. And we don’t have much time left to make it. It is a journey that will require each of us to persevere through setback, and fight for every inch of progress, even when it comes in fits and starts. So let us begin. For if we are flexible and pragmatic; if we can resolve to work tirelessly in common effort, then we will achieve our common purpose: a world that is safer, cleaner, and healthier than the one we found; and a future that is worthy of our children. Thank you.

The insane running the asylum does produce interesting times doesn’t it.
Spots with a given solar cycle have opposite polarity on the other side of the solar equator.
There’s still time for Lief to be right about solar flux as the second spot isn’t directly facing Earth yet, if we see a third group yet than that may be a sign that the Sun finally turned itself on.
Meanwhile we’re having a cool start to fall here and my city paper has acknowledged that the leaves are turning a few weeks ahead of schedule because the cool nights that usually sets that off started in late August instead of mid September.
Just some short thoughts —-
I wondered who Chew Chu thought he was addressing … Or for that matter, who Obama was talking to or for.
And so why do you think Obama cares what Americans think about anything?
I stand by my statement about what global warming is all about — Pay more in taxes to the government, so government scientists can pretend to control the weather.
And when nothing happens in 50 years, we will mostly all be dead so who is going to complain. The perfect guilt trip scam for more taxes. The only problem, the sun decided it was time for anap after blwoing and going for the last 50 years.
Richard Hill (15:49:15)
“You should encourage commenters to act through their own professional societies to get their views known. ”
Steven Chu is a public officer – I suggest polite but direct questions to him on specific points are the best approach. He will be obliged to research and support his answers.
Slightly O/T but related. The Daily Telegraph is generally regarded as one of the UK’s leaders. Although it carries an environment (earth) column infested with typical AGW alarmism trivia, it also carries a respected comment column and popular blog section for current affairs of note where scepticism is not, as yet, censored. Yesterday, an pro-AGW commentary on the Copenhagen Conference appeared in the comment column, where usually they stay for a lengthy sojourn. Today. it rapidly retreated to a suitably well buried place in the ‘earth’ fest area, after a cateract of unanimously sceptic comments. It is still accessible however, and still presumably postable, at
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/6216184/Political-will-can-deliver-change-in-Copenhagen.html
BO is obviously a socialist mole, based on the number of blatant lies in this speech. No lie is too false, no claim is too bizarre for the New Socialist Manifesto. The man is a creation of the media. Watch him as he speaks and see what is within.
Mark (15:15:17) :
I just noticed this in the September 21 issue of Forbes magazine:
In 1991 a reporter [Tim Sebastian] came across a 1983 memo addressed to Yuri Andropov [who was KGB chief and U.S.S.R. leader].
“Subject: Senator Edward Kennedy. On 9 – 10 May of this year Sen. Edward Kennedy’s close friend and trusted confidant [John] Tunney was in Moscow. The Senator charged Tunney to convey the following message.” The offer from Kennedy: a quid pro quo. Kennedy would lend Andropov a hand in dealing with President Reagan; in return, the Soviet leader would lend Kennedy a hand in challenging Reagan in the 1984 presidential race.
Aid and comfort to the Soviet Union, which was working to subvert the U.S. Done in secret.
The KGB changed its acronym to the FSB after the Berlin Wall came down. But the people are the same, and their goals are the same. It is astonishing [to me, anyway] that any U.S. citizen, much less a Senator, would treacherously sell out his country for personal gain.
Based on what’s happening now, it is clear that the problem has gotten much worse.
Phillip Bratby (12:39:18) ..
To use scientific terminology, the speech was a load of bollocks from start to finish
Ah yes, but we have moved beyond this now. We have built upon those original bollocks. And yes, those bollocks have risen from the ground and behold, we now have bollock towers. But behold the Sun, it is written that soon, these bollock towers will come crashing down and (self snip)
(The book of Phil (istein))
0bama Flow Chart
[From the entertaining http://www.moonbattery.com ]
Philip_B (14:51:59) : “There are many thousands of villages in SE Asia built on stilts due to rising sea levels. As far as I am aware they all pre-date WWII and most pre-date the 20th century.”
References? (I’m actually curious.)
Spot area currently stands at 147 x 10 E6 (derived from SOHO MDI cont. 20090922 20:32UT)
Flux is at 75.
Roughly about the same ballpark as the 1024 spot, flux up a point., spot area down a bit.
So far. Both spot groups measured, 1026 & 1027.
We finally have a leader in the White House that consults the scientific experts on these matters instead of his horoscope.
Clap, clap, clap, for a President that finally has intelligence and courage to try to do what is right for Americans and the rest of the world.
Health care and climate change in the same year – truly courageous.
BTW, before you all start shouting Gore at me, I always vote and I have only voted for a Republican or Democratic Party candidate twice in my life: Reagan in 1984 and Obama in 2008. (I know that Nancy Reagan consulted her horoscopes so forgive me.)
Re, Smokey (16:21:31) :
Hey, nice find Smokey. I found the link to this and am getting ready to read it right now.
http://www.forbes.com/2009/08/27/ted-kennedy-soviet-union-ronald-reagan-opinions-columnists-peter-robinson.html
The record low temperature in December in Copenhagen is 9 degreees F.
We can all pray that when the Dec 12th summit occurs…that they have another all time low and a ton of snow.
“No nation, however large or small, wealthy or poor, can escape the impact of climate change. Rising sea levels threaten every coastline. More powerful storms and floods threaten every continent. More frequent drought and crop failures breed hunger and conflict in places where hunger and conflict already thrive. On shrinking islands, families are already being forced to flee their homes as climate refugees.”
How can anyone say these things and keep a straight face. Maybe he’s practicing for another late night talk show?
Jesse
MDM (15:00:00) :
“Jerry, I would hope that you eventually realize that “truth” is rarely black or white (no pun intended).”
OK, MDM. You are obviously correct. Therefore I hereby withdraw the word “exactly” from my comment.
I think it’s very interesting that Obama’s pet media (CNN) basically ignored his UN speech on the climate today. That’s progress. And others have labeled it Ho-hum, boring. Good deal. 🙂
the most foolish ruling the Supreme Court ever made was calling CO2 pollution.
MDM (14:41:35) : Anthony, are you implying that Obama (or anyone else) should use polls to dictate climate policy?
That was conjecture about what Anthony was implying – an implication which is highly doubtful – and then passing a value judgement on that conjecture.
The caption was: ‘Obama’s disconnect with America on the climate issue’. From Obama’s speech “Taken together, these steps represent an historic recognition on behalf of the American people and their government. We understand the gravity of the climate threat.”
These words taken with the poll does indeed show a disconnect between what Obama claims that the American people recognise, and what he purports to understand, about the gravity of the climate threat.
And whereas the should not use polls to dictate climate policy, he should not use economically damaging and unintelligent policy either that will not solve anything but will surely bankrupt an already crippled America and western nations.
michel (12:57:41) :
Q: What do you call a moderate environmentalist?
A: One with an empty gas tank.
“Curiousgeorge (17:01:48) :
I think it’s very interesting that Obama’s pet media (CNN) basically ignored his UN speech on the climate today. That’s progress. And others have labeled it Ho-hum, boring. Good deal. :)”
I noticed that too. Blitzer only talked about his pet subject, Israel. What has Israel done for the US lately? I usually only watch Dobbs on CNN but I wanted to see what the Israeli shill was going to say about BO’s climate speech at the UN.
“And already, we know that the recent drop in overall U.S. emissions is due in part to steps that promote greater efficiency and greater use of renewable energy.”
This is why destroying the economy is so important: people living in caves (those that survive the culling) will emit less pollution. If we don’t do it naturally, thats what those FEMA camps are for.
There should be a new category for sun spots, call them sun blemishes. Galileo would laugh at what we call sunspots these days.
I think we can be sure that this speech was written by Stephen Chu or John Holdren, both poseurs as science advisors and notorious practitioners of junk science and radical alarmism, then refined by a professional speechwriter or two, and proffered to Obambi’s teleprompter for him to recite as imposingly as he could.
Those presidential advisors are quite immune from reality, however hard it comes a-knockin’, and the ersatz President cares only how well he reads these fairy tales to his childlike admirers.
/Mr Lynn
Only 46 percent think the economy is the most important issue?54 percent didn’t care or put other higher.How strange.For me, the economy is a always number 1(national security number 2),and doesn’t belong in such a poll.I wonder how people would answer if asked
can a country with a weak economy have decent health care for all?
I find that poll depressing,just as the GW hysteria is depressing,because it will not be stopped.The writer in the Age knew it,when he made the quote of the week.