Tortured Climate Logic at The Times

https://www.plantillaslago.com/rw83bfskcz Did anyone else shake their head in confusion while reading yesterday’s uneven NYT editorial on climate change politics and policy? It starts off remarking that that Congress has no “plausible strategy for reducing the greenhouse gas emissions” and then duly notes

https://www.wefairplay.org/2025/03/11/gq12onwr that the Waxman-Markey bill

Buy Klonopin In Bulk

is not as strong as needed, but is a start.

https://hazenfoundation.org/2565ogze5br

Ambien Overnight Delivery Mastercard A few graphs later, after discussing tipping points, it quotes Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, saying that, “what we do in the next two or three years will determine our future.” To underscore both the air of urgency and lack of coordinated action, the Times then immediately notes that Pachauri

Ambien Brand Where To Buy

Buy Ambien Online Mastercard said that two years ago.

https://chemxtree.com/8ceor3c1u5 Discouraged by this state of affairs,  the Times, like many climate advocates, is latching on to a “new strategy”:

Buy Clonazepam Discreet Shipping

https://municion.org/0zblx4rl1y3 warning that global warming poses a serious threat to national security.

https://ballymenachamber.co.uk/?p=3auglwyyxm

As the editorial observes, it’s “pretty good politics” when you have four-star generals and the “national security establishment” making this “line of argument.”  True. But that won’t change what is also widely considered to be the weak, ineffectual policy prescription in Congress.

https://www.emilymunday.co.uk/cn5hc2pgd