BILL CLINTON ON AMERICAN CLIMATE DENIAL: ‘WE LOOK LIKE A JOKE’

[kpete]

Source: Think Progress

BILL CLINTON ON AMERICAN CLIMATE DENIAL: ‘WE LOOK LIKE A JOKE’ | Speaking at the Clinton Global Initiative annual meeting, former President Bill Clinton blasted the Republican Party for supporting denial of climate science. “The best thing you could do is make it politically unacceptable to engage in denial,” Clinton told a questioner about what Americans can do to fight climate change. “We look like a joke,” he continued. “You can’t win the nomination of one of our parties if you accept the science. It’s really tragic. We need the debate between people who are a little bit to the left and a little bit to the right what’s the best way to solve the climate crisis. We can’t have this conversation because we’ve got to deny it?”

Read more: http://thinkprogress.org/green/2011/09/20/323687/bill-clinton-on-american-climate-denial-we-look-like-a-joke/

[Donnachaidh]

1. no -- NAFTA makes us look like a joke

Thanks Bill! :sarcasm:

[stockholmer]

7. beat me to it!

:toast:

[Dogtown]

8. Off topic.

His statement as quoted is accurate. Do you disagree with it?

[Romulox]

43. The US industrial policy and how it promotes pollution is completely on point. nt

[kenfrequed]

74. Hmm True

However I think that President Clinton is still justified in pointing out our stupidity on climate change. Ignorance about science and the environment helps obfuscate the problems of "free trade." Were we better educated about the environment we would probably choose politicians that would be more skeptical of global warming denial and other PR stunts masquerading as debate.

[24601]

71. Well, we know he's never told a lie - it would be very different

if he had.

[Dogtown]

80. So, you're saying he's lying

when he states that climate change denial makes us look stupid?

Do you deny that climate change is occurring and that it's exacerbated by human activity?

[24601]

88. Just read my comment again. I definitely stood up for him without

reservation. If you want to believe the widespread stories about his lack of honesty, it's a free country and that's your right. I'll defend your right as I would expect you'll defend mine.

[ldf]

91. do you think we are idiots?

you made your point. you should have used :sarcasm:

at least have the courage to stand behind what you typed.

instead, you imply that your snide snark was one of support. and you should have followed THAT with :sarcasm:

again, we are not idiots. we know exactly where you are coming from.

rather than admit the man has a point, you apparently want to establish your contempt for all things bill clinton.

[Dogtown]

104. He *was* less than forthcoming

about Lewinsky. Understandably so, IMO.

I misread your statement as sarcasm.
Never mind.....
:hi:

[valerief]

108. Who gives a crap about Lewinsky? That was ONLY friggin' sex! nt

[Dogtown]

109. Exactly.

So many in this thread trying to deflect the conversation away from climate change.

Got to wonder why....


:hi:

[valerief]

107. Yeah, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act really makes us look like a joke. nt

[Dogtown]

110. I fail to see what that has to do with Climate Change.

Can you explain the relevance of your post, please?

[mod mom]

10. and the repeal of Glass-Steagall...

Thanks Bill! :sarcasm:

[AmericaIsGreat]

62. Exactly! nm

[lame54]

105. Glass-Steagall was veto-proof

[gtar100]

69. Don't just put that on his shoulders, Repugs were the driving force behind NAFTA.

Not to diminish President Clinton's role in that travesty, but like the cowards they are, the repugs hide behind Clinton on this one when in fact they are the ones who pushed NAFTA through Congress and continue to push FTA's to this day.

Now...back to the topic at hand.

Clinton is absolutely right. We look like a joke to the rest of the world. Only they aren't laughing. What will the rest of the world do with us.

[jwirr]

89. Most do not know that it was written by GHW Bush and passed on

to Clinton to get passed by the congress. I wish he had told GHWB where to go but he did not. So we have NAFTA.

[PhoenixAbove]

99. NAFTA was a joke...

but Global warming isn't. We need as many people out there as we can get sounding the alarm which is why I recommended this thread.

[Enthusiast]

100. Both! And on so many other issues as well..nt

[rosesaylavee]

2. We not only look like the joke, we ARE the joke

and our lack of decision making on this issue will cost hundreds of thousands of lives unless we can convince our reps to address this issue. We CAN multi task - taking care of this dovetails quite nicely with fixing the economy too.

[MH1]

95. that was my exact reaction too.

[Romulox]

3. Bill Clinton's "Free Trade" with China has caused more environmental devastation than any recent

policy. It does this by shifting jobs from the highly regulated United States to the largely unregulated China.

Like his "Do as I SAY, not as I CONSUME" Veep, Clinton is a hypocrite. :hi:

[BloomTownie]

6. True in the short term

Eventually, the chinese will be able to reign in polluters much easier than we can. There will be no political bickering or deniers. Remember - it is a "People's Republic."

What od you mean by "highly regulated"? I thought the loose regulations of the Bush years is what got us into this mess?

[Romulox]

15. LOL. True depending on what the definition of "is" is...

"Eventually, the chinese will be able to reign in polluters much easier than we can."

As economists say: "In the long run, we're all dead." Today, in 2011, Clinton's disastrous trade policies have caused environmental devastation by shifting industry to China.

[BloomTownie]

4. Deniers are a hopeless cause

No changing the minds of the unbelievers. They will be dealt with later. The best we can hope to do is work on reelecting the president and allow his EPA to enforce the rules (or make new ones) to drive the polluters off our land. Yes - sure the polluters will relocate to asia or south of the border. But with heavy industry gone - the sooner this house of cards will fall. The chinese can get climate change alternatives done much quicker than we can with their command-and-control economy. If only we had that here. <sigh>

[stockholmer]

12. "No changing the minds of the unbelievers. They will be dealt with later." ?!?!

You sound like the Spanish Inquisition or a Stalinist thug.

Horrid.

:thumbsdown:

Btw, your American heavy industry IS GONE, you have lost 85%+ of your industrial manufacturing base in the last 40 to 45 years, it is one of the chief reasons for the labour misery across the land you now see, and also why the US is doomed to go the way of all empires.

[BloomTownie]

14. round 'em up!

If putting 'real-science' deniers in the gulag helps save the polar bears then I am guilty!

And no - there is still some heavy industry in the mode of coal and gas-fired plants. No reason we can't go 100% solar NOW - 24/7!

[Systematic Chaos]

112. I see they finally got this one.

Thank you, mods. :)

[certainot]

17. BOTH of you doomsayers are probably letting your local RW radio station

piss all over you all day long, doing their global warming denial 24/7, enabling the idiocy that is now called the tea party, and threatening progressive reps.

we are in this disaster because every day for the last 20 years since reagan killed the fairness doctrine the RW has essentially been able to scream from every corner and stump in the country that liberals are traitors and their ideas are shit and their mothers are whores and their fathers are thieves, and the collective left just walks on by.

[stockholmer]

30. we do not have 'right-wing' radio here in Sweden, nor do we advocate 'the gulag for dissenters'

You are reading way too much into my comments. I think that the US two party system is utterly broken, and also that when it comes to solving global climate and pollution the systemic controllers have NO intention of dealing with it.

2 points:

1. Cap and Trade : This vastly flawed system will do little to alleviate the actually problems, as it allows the multinationals to simply buy the right to pollute, gives a pass to so much of the third-world emerging powers (ie China, India, etc), whilst crushing all their small and mid-size competition. It simply commoditises another aspect of the global economy, further consolidating wealth in the hands of oligarchs and their banker overlords. The main banking/organisational map that will have oversight over the global flow of carbon credits is a private, for-profit run consortium, with the Rothschild system at the top http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthcomment/3323732/Carbon-trading-must-be-globally-regulated.html . Al Gore (along with David Blood of Goldman Sachs) have set up of the biggest carbon trading companies (Generation Investment Management) http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/energy-environment/03gore.html and stands to profit hundreds of millions (and probably billions) if the scheme is fully implemented.

The end result of this selective redistribution of production, and wealth skimming will literally be the return of neo-feudalism, as the advanced enterprises of the developed world (which in turn fund our vast social safety nets) are shut down , and moved to areas of production where the wage pressure is almost non-existent, and totalitarian governments pollute with impunity.


2. Nuclear Power: As a member of the Miljöpartiet de Gröna (Swedish Green Party), I find it unpardonable that certain infiltrators in the Green movement in high positions of power and influence have come out in favour of uranium-based fission reactors. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/mar/21/pro-nuclear-japan-fukushima These so-called environmentalists claim that it is the lesser of two evils, thus setting up a strawman to knock down. If it was not for the anti-nuclear power movement, most of the modern state apparatus that the Green parties of the EU have erected over the last 40 would not exist.


Unfortunately, for all the well-intentioned laymen and scientists who honestly try to make a difference for our planet, most are simply manipulated pawns in a grand scheme whose end goal is complete domination of 99% of mankind, via chattel debt slavery, wealth and power stripping matrices, combined with military and technocratic surveillance grids of control and punishment. Capitalism's primary drive is for endless expansion, it is a pathology that infects all who grasp its reins of power, and these controllers full stop intend to wield the whip-hand over all.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

If the systemic controllers were truly serious about saving the planet from a crisis they claim to have the 'solution for', then they would be throwing tens of trillions to make this happen:


Study: By 2030, world can run on renewables

http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/JDEnPolicyPt1.pdf

http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/DJEnPolicyPt2.pdf

http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-20029784-54.html

[certainot]

92. thanks for the green energy perspective and links. you're lucky, you don't have the RW radio. it dom

minates politics in this country and the 'left' ignores it completely because it gives them headaches to listen to it and there is no transcript database to read.

1000 + radio stations blasting 50 mil a week with coordinated think tank scripted lies and propaganda, with blowhards protected by call screeners with sophisticated software to make sure the certainty of the liars is hardly ever questioned and paid callers to reinforce and prompt them. they can message over anything obama or liberals do or say, no matter how much time it takes.

RW radio has been instrumental obstructing global warming action, making sure republican politicians are too afraid to question the official denial.

but here's the real problem- the need for certainty, and why:

http://youtu.be/HnrfuTUlqVs

[aquart]

33. Yup. Reagan shifted our steel and tool and die industries offshore.

We can't even build a factory without overseas help now.

I know this because my sister seethes with hatred over it.

[Javaman]

72. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!! nt

[texshelters]

21. Yes, deniers are hopeless, but

let's not give up on the under-educated and the near believers who can be swayed by a few facts and good framing.

The deniers and bugger off.

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[blank space]

93. EPA just issued 250 million ton license for oil

exploration in Alaska - oops. Ba Ba Baracked !

[blkmusclmachine]

5. Hey, Bill-o, how's Blanche doin'?

n/t

[pam4water]

9. I'm hard pressed to come up with a policy that does not make up look like a joke XD

[Auntie Bush]

11. You'd never know this was a Democratic web site!

[rosesaylavee]

13. No kidding! wth is up this thread?

[stockholmer]

18. critical thinking displayed on a Democratic website gives me hope for the future of the US

If you want blind following of the 'dear leaders', I would suggest you look into a visa for North Korea. No shades of grey allowed there!

[rosesaylavee]

22. yours is a ridiculous statement - off topic, not about climate change

[DFW]

26. Finally!

If Bill Clinton has something sensible to say about ANYTHING, it seems that all one has to
do is mention his name for the knives to be drawn and sharpened.

Maybe we should have elected Bob Dole in 1996 instead? (on second thought, don't bother to
answer that--we can do without the Naderites telling us there would have been "no difference")

[rosesaylavee]

27. Hey friend!

Welcome to the crazy thread that's not about climate change but everything else.

[DFW]

29. Weird scenes inside the gold mine for sure.

But I'm stuck here in cold and rainy (or soon to be) Sprout City so maybe I'm just getting a skewed perspective from all the way over here?

[rosesaylavee]

37. No, that's just what I am seeing

and the sun is shining brightly here in the Great Flyover.

[DFW]

44. Sunshine, ah yes, I used to remember what that was......

I think it's scheduled to shine again here sometime next April or May.

[kenfrequed]

75. Nice jab

Good that you followed the legitimate complaint about 'off-topic' with an even more 'off-topic' jab at Ralph Nader. I suppose you couldn't resist.

[Enthusiast]

101. This is done to disrupt the discussion.

Posts of that sort should be removed by the administrators.

We all know enough about the destructive nature of NAFTA.

[stockholmer]

32. it is germane, as some of the comments deal with Clinton's credibility when tossing around platitude...

and framed insults. Sorry if you don't like the rejection of kool-aid.

[rosesaylavee]

38. No. I reject your kool-aid reframing of the actual OP topic

Clinton's been gone 11 years now. The topic is Climate Change btw.

[stockholmer]

51. I already dealt w/ AGW in a previous comment, furthermore I'm free to respond to a post as I see fit

as long as I adhere to the forum rules.

here is my previous post on AGW

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4999980&mesg_id=5000150

[rosesaylavee]

57. So rather than dealing with the very serious and critical OP topic

which apparently you agree with, you chose instead to run with the counter productive, thread hi-jacking,negative bashing of Clinton.

Gotcha.

[stockholmer]

64. thread hi-jacking? lolol, perhaps I need to be 'word-groped' by the USA's TSA goons

Sorry if my non-linearism offends you. If I see a comment that troubles me, I sometimes reply, and the 'non believers will be dealt with later' one (up thread), sure did. I was not the one who started to 'Clinton bash'.

Also, this is far far far from a forum where the source of a quote or statement is simply ignored. As it should be.

Cheers

[rosesaylavee]

67. Whatever you would like to call it - non-linearism is a swell new name tho

But it is thread hi-jacking and counter productive.

[Auntie Bush]

39. How about posting on Free Rethuglic. I'm sure you'll be very welcomed with

open arms.

[stockholmer]

65. if you even did a cursory glance at my posts on here over the past, you would see the absurdity

of your jibe.

[Name removed]

73. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DFW]

85. Det kan inte vara så

eller hur?

(minored in Swedish in college, so sue me LOL)

[rosesaylavee]

86. :)

I know. I shouldn't make assumptions. But somehow, this thread seems a bit over the top in avoiding the 'elephant in the room' on so many levels. Most notably the number of topics about Clinton as opposed to what he is actually talking about. I don't come on here as much as I used to and have heard many complaints about the new breed of troll who hi-jacks threads and sways opinion and talk away from important issues. I just am amazed.

Maybe I have just a soft-glow memory of how it was pre-Dem primary, but weren't there also some funny threads here at one time?

Hope the sun shines soon in wherever you are working!

[DFW]

98. Wherever indeed :-)

Brussels yesterday, Paris today, the German Rheinland tonight, Bavaria tomorrow (for work, not for Oktoberfest: I hate beer!).
There is no rest for the weary. No sun, but the food ain't too bad :-)

I have seen thread hijack in full bloom. Some people must really have nothing else to do with their lives. A friend of mine,
who has achieved a modest degree of prominence in her career as a journalist, gets both lauded (for 70 years of brilliant
journalism)and mercilessly thrashed on DU (for two provoked over-the-top comments made at age 89) the second I mention her
name here. Clinton and Al Gore get the same treatment.

At this point, I expect that if one were to praise Thomas Jefferson's thoughts on the separation of church and state, the
thread would soon be hijacked, tearing him to shreds about Sally Hemings (or maybe for sloppy penmanship when signing the
Declaration of Independence, I'm sure they'd find something).

[rosesaylavee]

106. I remember a recent

thread about your friend. I could argue with you about the 'modest degree' part as I think history will certainly prove that to be a wild understatement. She is a role model for many women and an exceptionally courageous human.

I have seen the thread hijack before - esp disturbs me when it happens to topics like Climate Change that will effect all of us and our children so intimately if not taken care immediately if not yesterday.

[DFW]

111. I might have been understating things a bit

Just a wee tiny bit ;-)

[SkyDaddy7]

84. I know! Extremely SAD!

Come 2013 when Rick Perry is POTUS I fear to think we look back & wish we had just stuck together through the hard times like the idiots on the right do. But right now it seems there are many who want nothing more than to some how teach Obama & others in the Democratic Party a lesson by tearing down our own house so that the barbarians can simply walk into the White House. SAD!

[certainot]

16. our universities endorse the denial by broadcasting sports on RW radio - the single biggest

source of denial.

many of our universities contribute hugely to the ability of the GOP to maintain this irrational position by giving credibility to the limbaugh hannity stations that do denial all the rest of the time they are on the air.

the mission statements of those universities need to waved in front of them until they find alternatives and stop broadcasting on the giant racist science denying soapboxes that enable (and enforce) the GOP's global warming denial.

[Uncle Joe]

19. Whether you agree with Clinton's record or not, this statement in the OP is absolutely correct.

Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, kpete.

[Romulox]

20. If we look like a joke, then Al Gore *has* to be part of the punchline.

:shrug:

[Uncle Joe]

23. You're still having that problem with the forest and the trees, aren't you?

:shrug:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_gore

Gore introduced the Supercomputer Network Study Act of 1986.<51> He also sponsored hearings on how advanced technologies might be put to use in areas like coordinating the response of government agencies to natural disasters and other crises."<52>

(snip)

Gore has been involved with environmental issues since 1976, when as a freshman congressman, he held the "first congressional hearings on the climate change, and co-sponsor hearings on toxic waste and global warming."<57><58> He continued to speak on the topic throughout the 1980s<59> and was known as one of the Atari Democrats, later called the "Democrats' Greens, politicians who see issues like clean air, clean water and global warming as the key to future victories for their party."<32><60>

In 1990, Senator Gore presided over a three-day conference with legislators from over 42 countries which sought to create a Global Marshall Plan, "under which industrial nations would help less developed countries grow economically while still protecting the environment." <196> In the late 1990s, Gore strongly pushed for the passage of the Kyoto Protocol, which called for reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.<197><198> He was opposed by the Senate, which passed unanimously (95–0) the Byrd–Hagel Resolution (S. Res. 98),<89> which stated the sense of the Senate was that the United States should not be a signatory to any protocol that did not include binding targets and timetables for developing as well as industrialized nations or "would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States".<199>

In 2004 he co-launched Generation Investment Management, a company for which he serves as Chair. A few years later, Gore also founded The Alliance for Climate Protection, an organization which eventually founded the We Campaign. Gore also became a partner in the venture capital firm, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, heading that firm's climate change solutions group.<7><8> He also helped to organize the Live Earth benefit concerts.<200>

[rosesaylavee]

25. Thank you

Saved me the time to go look this up. :thumbsup:

[Romulox]

41. "Do as I say, not as I do." nt

[Uncle Joe]

49. Why should I, are you without sin? n/t

[Romulox]

56. "He who DOESN'T live in a mansion, let him point the finger at the peasants. Not so fast, Al..."

:rofl:

[Uncle Joe]

61. Did Al Gore tell you that you couldn't live in a large house?

Did Al Gore tell you that only the poor people should pay the cost of changing to renewable, sustainable energy sources?

:shrug:

If you have a link, please provide it.

[Romulox]

68. No, but he did try to argue that his own massive overconsumption was irrelevant to his

credibility as an environmental scold. Reality didn't tend to support this rather novel argument. Sorry Al. Conserve first, scold second. :shrug:

[Uncle Joe]

77. Does that mean FDR had no moral grounds to take on the wealthy with his New Deal and work to

change society because he was wealthy and lived well?:shrug:

Should FDR have given all or most of his financial resources away before advocating for the poor?

In so far as the case of global warming, climate change is concerned the primary issue is the accumulation of green house gases in the atmosphere, that's it in a nutshell.

The primary solutions is for the world's societies to change to green renewable, sustainable non-carbon burning forms of energy and to stabilize the exploding human population, those are promoted by policy changes, Al Gore has been on the forefront of those needed policy changes first in public service and now in the economic sphere.

You're so embittered that you totally discount any and all context regarding the big picture whether it's related to Gore's private energy usage or his contributions to warning of and promoting solutions to the global warming climate change crisis.:hi:

[Jefferson23]

82. +1 n/t

[Enthusiast]

103. Nice response...nt

[Enthusiast]

102. You just made the list.......nt

[rosesaylavee]

24. No. YOU are part of the joke as you can't think critically.

Read some history and then come on back.

[Romulox]

42. You were just mocking somebody, upthreading for speaking of "critical thinking"

How humorous that you sub-consciously mimicked the same type of argument you decry, upthread. :silly: :hi:

[rosesaylavee]

50. Buddy - you are fooling no one here.

[Romulox]

54. I'm not trying to fool anyone, and I'm certainly no "buddy" of yours.

:silly:

[rosesaylavee]

58. No. We are not buddies. That is one thing you have correct.

[stockholmer]

53. you saved me the trouble of pointing that out

:hi:

[kenfrequed]

76. And that is the point.

Global warming real? check.
Well thought of former president pointing out our folly for denying it? Check.

At the end of the day what he said is what is important. Granted he could have acted better and done more during his administration but honestly this is about America being stupid and electing politicians that are deniers. That is the story.

[Hoosier Daddy]

28. Is this a referendum on Clinton?

I thought it was about global warming. (I refuse to use the watered-down "CC!")

[rosesaylavee]

40. It is more a thread about who shows up to distract and disrupt when

the topic is Climate Change or Global Warming. (I like the CC term as it moves beyond the deniers immediate response about cold winters.)

:hi:

[saras]

31. Has anyone ever LOOKED LIKE a joke without BEING a joke? I don't think so.

[InvisibleTouch]

34. Well said! He needs to keep speaking out.

I'm disgusted with those who are taking this as an opportunity to bash him. Talk about working against your own best interests, attacking an important voice who's on our side of this issue.

[JJW]

35. We are a joke and a very dumb one also, too!

Who is on dancing with the stars this week? I'm betting one of the Presidential nominees will be on there soon.

[DirkGently]

36. Regardless of his other shortcomings, Clinton nailed it here.

[Harmony Blue]

45. Clinton understands what is at stake here

so I will not put him down.

:dem:

[Beacool]

46. Oh, goodie!!!!

Another chance for the Clinton haters to display their wares.

Suck it in, he's still one of the most popular and productive persons in the world stage.

:crazy:

[rosesaylavee]

52. They are getting a two-for-one punch in

Clinton hating AND Climate Change thread hi-jacking.

[Beacool]

59. Yep, they sure are.

:(

[InvisibleTouch]

87. Unbelievable, isn't it? I wonder if I'm on the wrong site today. n/t

[rosesaylavee]

90. There is just good money in frothing up the climate denial myth

The Kochs as 'job creators' is what we have here on this thread. Note how very little of the discussion is about climate change and how much of it is about issues covered many times over.

[Jefferson23]

47. He is right on the money and it is painfully sad. K&R n/t

[barbtries]

48. thank you president Clinton

kicked and rec'd. sadly i think he's only partly correct. we are a joke at this point.

[Ter]

55. Define denier

If one believes that the climate is changing, but not the cause of man, is that a denier? Or are deniers those who say the climate's not changing?

[Romulox]

60. How about shipping some more jobs to China, Bill? I hear they have GREAT environmental laws, there.

:rofl:

[Uncle Joe]

63. Do you believe that if the U.S. changed to green, renewable sustainable energy sources, jobs would

be created here in the U.S.?:shrug:

[Romulox]

66. No. We can't compete with China (see the solar panel industry.)

:hi:

[rosesaylavee]

70. Of course we can compete with China.

What a silly statement.

[Uncle Joe]

78. Why are you so eager to give up the idea of competing with them?

:shrug:

[mod mom]

83. If there were tariffs associated with products produced that contributed

to damaging the environment and if we had strict regulations about how products are produced here, then jobs would be created in the US.

[BEZERKO]

79. Look like a joke?

I thought we were a joke!

[onehandle]

81. Big Damn Dog always gets it right. nt

[goforit]

94. OMG Now, Bill, get real!!!....Gore, your side kick...CLIMATE WARNING!!

Where the Phuck were you for the last 11 phucking years!!!
And Now you phucking defend his ass for the first time????!!!!

Cut me some slack!!!!

Can you tell me .....I'm pissed!!

[DonCoquixote]

96. You know Bill

I do appreciate what you say,
and I do appreciate that you did a lot for this country, even if most of it was simply having a much saner tax policy than Ray Gun Ronnie.

That being said.

It really would have been nice if you said this a few years earlier.

[Vidar]

97. We've been a joke since Bush II, and Bush III took office.