Blumenthal flip-flopping on cap-and-trade?

posted at 10:55 am on September 22, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

So says Linda McMahon, who has some video evidence of the charge.  Not so, says Richard Blumenthal, who accuses McMahon of dirty politics. The contretemps got the attention of the NBC affiliate in Connecticut, which delves into the issue — and exposes Blumenthal’s flip-flop in the process:

First, Blumenthal writes Congress urging that they pass a “carbon tax,” which in this context means cap-and-trade, the only proposal the House considered. He then claims that he didn’t support cap-and-trade at all. Then Blumenthal says he only supported the House version of cap-and-trade.  Then he says that cap-and-trade is only the beginning of what he wants done on carbon emissions.

And after all of that, Blumenthal accuses McMahon of dishonesty?  Er … sure.

Cap-and-trade is not dead, unfortunately.  And whatever Blumenthal thinks, tax issues are not just a legitimate issue in any election, they are among the most pressing issues in this particular cycle.  If Blumenthal isn’t prepared to answer it, and answer it honestly and consistently, perhaps he shouldn’t be running for office in the first place.

Update: The Blumenthal campaign says that Connecticut voters don’t have to worry — because what Blumenthal really wants to do is stick it to Kentucky residents:

Over the weekend, the Blumenthal campaign sent out e-mails alleging that McMahon distorted the effect of cap and trade.

Ty Matsdorf, a spokesman for the Blumenthal campaign, said the costs commonly attributed to the legislation don’t apply to Connecticut because the state relies mostly on natural gas, which emits less carbon than oil or coal and is more expensive than those fuels. Cap and trade would raise costs more for coal-burning states such as Kentucky, he said.

Perhaps voters in other states should take that as a warning about what will happen if Democrats control Congress in the next session … especially for Kentucky voters considering Democrat Jack Conway over Republican Rand Paul.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Really nice. The intent of a Senate candidate is to stick it to the taxpayers of another state—not to worry CT, we’ll do this because it feels good and we can f*ck a redstate in the process.

Malevolence.

ted c on September 22, 2010 at 10:59 AM

Kentuckians, support McMahon!

either orr on September 22, 2010 at 10:59 AM

the power to tax is the power to destroy.

ted c on September 22, 2010 at 11:00 AM

He’s been vary clear. He was against a carbon tax before, during and ever since his stint in ‘Nam.

forest on September 22, 2010 at 11:00 AM

Connecticut: how dishonest does a politician have to be before he gets thrown into the Mystic River?

ted c on September 22, 2010 at 11:01 AM

that guy is scum

wheelgun on September 22, 2010 at 11:01 AM

Oops, he did it again!

Dark-Star on September 22, 2010 at 11:04 AM

He’s been very clear. He was against a carbon tax before, during and ever since his stint in ‘Nam.

forest on September 22, 2010 at 11:00 AM

Heh. That’s pretty good.

jwolf on September 22, 2010 at 11:04 AM

Between his military background mishap and this, one could suspect a forked tongue may be at work, no?

a capella on September 22, 2010 at 11:05 AM

Ty Matsdorf, a spokesman for the Blumenthal campaign, said the costs commonly attributed to the legislation don’t apply to Connecticut because the state relies mostly on natural gas, which emits less carbon than oil or coal and is more expensive than those fuels. Cap and trade would raise costs more for coal-burning states such as Kentucky, he said.

Well at least he’s honest(with regard to this one area). But he’s wrong. Crap-and-betrayed will cause the cost of EVERYTHING to increase. So Connecticut residents will be impacted negatively by it.

Doughboy on September 22, 2010 at 11:06 AM

If you are going to continue to advance the fraudulent concept that NatGas produces less carbon dioxide than other hydrocarbons, or coal, you should also admit that the other element in NatGas is hydrogen which produces water vapor when combined with oxygen. Water vapor being an even more potent green house gas than carbon dioxide.

The whole point being any energy argument over green house gas emissions is fraudulent, since both carbon dioxide and water vapor are natural components of our atmosphere, and that life on the planet has evolved to make use of both.

Skandia Recluse on September 22, 2010 at 11:08 AM

Supporting a house version of cap and trade is still supporting cap and trade. duh!

tommer74 on September 22, 2010 at 11:10 AM

Perhaps voters in other states should take that as a warning about what will happen if Democrats control Congress in the next session … especially for Kentucky voters considering Democrat Jack Conway over Republican Rand Paul.

How about Raese in West Virginia? He should be fashioning a TV ad about Blumenthal telling WV voters that he (Raese) is the only WV candidate whom they can trust to halt the likes of Blumenthal.

BuckeyeSam on September 22, 2010 at 11:10 AM

Cap and trade would raise costs more for coal-burning states such as Kentucky, he said.

Um, aren’t we all in this together? Do we want senators pitting regions against each other?

rbj on September 22, 2010 at 11:11 AM

Blumenthal has stated that his opposition to Crap/Trade is seared, SEARED into his memory, along with memories of spending St. Patrick’s Day and Cinco de Mayo on the Mekong.

Bishop on September 22, 2010 at 11:11 AM

Do we want senators pitting regions against each other?

rbj on September 22, 2010 at 11:11 AM

Would they need to? Different regions have been at each other’s throats since America was a ragtag bunch of colonies held (very loosely) together by the Articles of Confederation.

Dark-Star on September 22, 2010 at 11:13 AM

Cap and trade will never be dead as long as special interests stand to make big money from it. Neither will the idea of those egregious wind farms in everyones back yard.

jeanie on September 22, 2010 at 11:14 AM

Um, aren’t we all in this together? Do we want senators pitting regions against each other?

rbj on September 22, 2010 at 11:11 AM

Please. Obama is sending the EPA after us down here in Texas. He’s costing Louisiana over 20,000 jobs by shutting down drilling in the Gulf. He left Tennessee to fend for itself when they were hit with a massive flood. He’s suing Arizona over SB 1070. And the Porkulus bill gave twice as much money to blue districts as red ones.

It’s ironic that one of his most famous and beloved lines(“we’re not a Red States of America or a Blue States of America, blah, blah, blah”) is the polar opposite of the type of leadership he’s brought to DC.

Doughboy on September 22, 2010 at 11:15 AM

Ty Matsdorf, a spokesman for the Blumenthal campaign, said the costs commonly attributed to the legislation don’t apply to Connecticut because the state relies mostly on natural gas, which emits less carbon than oil or coal and is more expensive than those fuels.

Cap and trade would affect the price of power generated from natural gas about half as much as power generated from coal.

But does Blumy really want to talk about Connecticut’s reliance on natural gas, when as Attorney General he virtually single-handedly killed a project for a large LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) in Long Island Sound, which would have supplied (cheaper) natural gas to CT and Long Island?

Does Blumy think CT voters are too stupid to make the connection? If so, McMahon needs to ‘splain it to them!

(Gas-fired) Power to the People!

Steve Z on September 22, 2010 at 11:16 AM

Blumenthal has stated that his opposition to Crap/Trade is seared, SEARED into his memory, along with memories of spending St. Patrick’s Day and Cinco de Mayo on the Mekong.

Bishop on September 22, 2010 at 11:11 AM

But was it seared on a coal-fired stove or on a natural gas powered grill?

Mr. Bingley on September 22, 2010 at 11:18 AM

Most people don’t care about snakes until they crawl up on your front porch or decide to take a rest inside your house. Then, the snake gets the shovel or the shot.

j_galt on September 22, 2010 at 11:19 AM

Don’t forget that Dick “Seargent Rock” Blumenthal ganged up with the AG from New York and killed the floating LNG terminal plan in Long Island Sound. That alone would have brought electricity prices down in the tri-state area and he knew that, but he fought against it tooth and nail and got it killed by the Feds.

Johnnyreb on September 22, 2010 at 11:22 AM

Crist/Blumenthal 2012…?

JetBoy on September 22, 2010 at 11:24 AM

Steve Z on September 22, 2010 at 11:16 AM

Great minds and all that. LOL

Johnnyreb on September 22, 2010 at 11:24 AM

Another urban Democrat pandering to the environuts.

They’re kinda like the gum on the sole of the shoe – they’re really annoying, and no matter how hard we scrape we can’t get rid of all of them.

JEM on September 22, 2010 at 11:24 AM

This guy will make us wish Dodd would return. He’s a serious cold-hearted liberal. Linda McMahon is hardly a better choice. Once again in CT we have but to vote for the evil of two lessers.

Not one of our Catholic reps fail to vote 100% for the official slaughter of innocent lives. Why should we expect such pits of human depravity care about paltry things such as money and taxes?

Don L on September 22, 2010 at 11:27 AM

As a CT resident I’m extremely worried about this guy getting into office. I support Linda and will be casting a vote for her in Nov.

Hopefully the oblivious bastards in this state realize what the hell is going on with the Blumenthal, and the Dems in general, and help right the course of the country.

ayrab on September 22, 2010 at 11:31 AM

Why are these idiots still trying to pass taxes on carbon and global warming when it has been proven a hoax? Ask Great Britan how much they love paying taxes on their BBQ’s in the summer. Then question the custodians of learned research at East Anglia how they are going to have to go back and conduct experiments again because they messed it up so badly that between their sloppy experiements and deleting of emails that they have hopelessly confused the issue.

BetseyRoss on September 22, 2010 at 11:37 AM

As we say here in CT: What a Dick!

Rocks on September 22, 2010 at 11:41 AM

Cap and trade will never be dead as long as special interests stand to make big money from it. Neither will the idea of those egregious wind farms in everyones back yard.

jeanie on September 22, 2010 at 11:14 AM

Any loon, such as a hollywood elite, that flies private jets for their travel, or the likes of Prince Charles, who talks to trees and plants, yet lives the high life of a royal, is most likely, heavily invested in green energies. They stand to make a lot of money on cap and trade. Which is why they’re adamant about the environment, just so long as they aren’t obligated to live under the same rules they seek to impose on the rest of us.

capejasmine on September 22, 2010 at 11:44 AM

It’s times like these that I LOVE having Linda McMahon as a candidate up there. She’s well-funded and used to working with a company that tapes everything in case they need it down the road.

teke184 on September 22, 2010 at 11:51 AM

Um, aren’t we all in this together? Do we want senators pitting regions against each other?

rbj on September 22, 2010 at 11:11 AM

Oh lord, we passed that bridge long ago during the Health Care debate, with the “Cornhusker Kickback”, the “Louisiana Purchase” for Senator Landrieu, and a couple of others (the “Nevada(?) Carveout” or something, and the “(some state, North Dakota or something) Exception”)

ChrisB on September 22, 2010 at 12:02 PM

Blumenthal is lying scum. The fact he is relevant in Connecticut says alot about the state. Oh wait, they’ve elected Chris Dodd for decades, never mind.

volsense on September 22, 2010 at 12:05 PM

If you want a politician who is comfortable lying right to your face and then denying it, Bloomy is your man.

Or any other Democrat, they are all exactly the same.

Scum.

NoDonkey on September 22, 2010 at 12:06 PM

Ha-HA!

Blumers just threw the rope around Manchin’s neck and probably doesn’t even realize it!

Cap and trade would raise costs more for coal-burning states such as Kentucky, he said.

Hey, Rich, know who else not only uses a lot of coal but also PRODUCES a lot of coal? (Aside from Kentucky, natch…)

West Virginia!

Keep doing Manchin favors, Blumers.

I mean it. Keep up the assault on coal.

Actually, Ohio and Pennsylvania use/produce quite a bit of coal too.

Blumers throwing his fellow party Senate candidates under the bus, FTW!

I love it when uppity trial lawyers, out for nobody but themselves, forget that there’s national implications to the stupidity that drips from their oily maws…and double down!

By the way, note that neither NBC 30 or Blumers mentioned exactly how Blumers has “fought” big business interests.

He sues them. At high cost to Connecticut tax payers.

Also helped make the Connecticut job market radioactive as the only companies that still do business here are the ones that were doing business here in the 19th century…the ones that survived, at least…

SuperCool on September 22, 2010 at 12:08 PM

Blumenthal has stated that his opposition to Crap/Trade is seared, SEARED into his memory, along with memories of spending St. Patrick’s Day and Cinco de Mayo on the Mekong.

Bishop on September 22, 2010 at 11:11 AM

Heh.

Jaibones on September 22, 2010 at 12:13 PM

And after all of that dissembling, he was against the Broadwater LNG facility that would have brought more natural gas to CT!

jnelchef on September 22, 2010 at 12:17 PM

Don’t forget that Dick “Seargent Rock” Blumenthal ganged up with the AG from New York and killed the floating LNG terminal plan in Long Island Sound. That alone would have brought electricity prices down in the tri-state area and he knew that, but he fought against it tooth and nail and got it killed by the Feds.

Johnnyreb on September 22, 2010 at 11:22 AM

Even though the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission originally said it would have “minimal impact on the environment”.

I just E-mailed Linda McMahon’s campaign website about this issue. She needs to jump on it.

Steve Z on September 22, 2010 at 12:23 PM

jnelchef – urban Democrats think power comes out of a wall outlet. These are the same people who think you can run your Prius on unicorn farts until the solar-panel kit comes along.

Too many are technically illiterate in a nuts-and-bolts sense and will believe whatever the ‘right’ people tell them.

These are the global-warming fanboys, the ones who will accept predictions of catastrophic warming but not even begin to question where those numbers come from.

JEM on September 22, 2010 at 12:23 PM

Ty Matsdorf, a spokesman for the Blumenthal campaign, said the costs commonly attributed to the legislation don’t apply to Connecticut…. Cap and trade would raise costs more for coal-burning states such as Kentucky, he said.

Apparently Mr. Matsdorf does not understand that people in Kentucky and other coal burning states can read. And react. And that two likely reactions will be to vote republican AND to send money to his client’s opponent. What a maroon.

LASue on September 22, 2010 at 12:38 PM

Really nice. The intent of a Senate candidate is to stick it to the taxpayers of another state—not to worry CT, we’ll do this because it feels good and we can f*ck a redstate in the process.

Malevolence.

ted c on September 22, 2010 at 10:59 AM

Ummm… thats’ what every Senator does. Regardless of party. They are always looking out for their state. In fact, that’s their job.

ButterflyDragon on September 22, 2010 at 12:45 PM

Wolverines!

esnap on September 22, 2010 at 12:48 PM

No Mr (you’ll NEVER be Senator) Blumenthal. The costs of cap and trade will be borne not just “by Kentucky”. Linda M. needs to point out to the good people of CT that Cap and Trade means the highest tax in history…Not just the hiustory of the U.S., but in the history of the world.

Cap and Trade means a tax in the area of $4,300, per year per U.S. family – forever. Just so we can have the privilege of cleaning up the atmosphere over China, India, Russia and Brazil (the world’s largest polluters) and thus stop global warming (or whatever Al Gore and progressive hucksters are calling it right now).

alwyr on September 22, 2010 at 12:49 PM

I don’t see why there is even a debate about what cap and trade will do to energy costs.

If I’m not mistaken, even Obama admitted energy prices would go up. That was part of the “good” thing about it, because that was allegedly going to make people use less energy.

Put it all in perspective. If Obama’s foresight is on par with his health care predictions of cutting costs, imagine just what kind of energy cost hikes we’re going to see. It will be nasty. Really, really nasty.

And it just doesn’t dawn on Democrats and ecofascists that some people may already be at the bare minimum of energy usage because they can’t afford it already. They just assume everyone is in their home with the thermostat cranked up to 90 on cold days and down to 50 on hot ones. While driving their monster truck to the corner store. That’s just not reality. Most people cannot afford it as it is now.

ButterflyDragon on September 22, 2010 at 12:54 PM

What bias? The segment starts with a question concerning Blumenthal’s position and ends with a positive statement regarding Blumenthal, as the talking heads says: “Blumenthal counters by saying he’s the one supporting tax cuts for the middle class.”

PC14 on September 22, 2010 at 1:31 PM

What normal human beings call “flip flopping”, Mr. Blumenthal call “nuance.”

olesparkie on September 22, 2010 at 1:53 PM

The news report uses statistics from the Heritage Foundation! They are trying to put Blumenthal out.

Theworldisnotenough on September 22, 2010 at 3:17 PM

Really nice. The intent of a Senate candidate is to stick it to the taxpayers of another state—not to worry CT, we’ll do this because it feels good and we can f*ck a redstate in the process.

Malevolence.

ted c on September 22, 2010 at 10:59 AM

Ummm… thats’ what every Senator does. Regardless of party. They are always looking out for their state. In fact, that’s their job.

ButterflyDragon on September 22, 2010 at 12:45 PM

They are not supposed to explain away stabbing their own state in the back, by saying that they struck another state a much harder blow.

Slowburn on September 22, 2010 at 3:53 PM

Blumenthal really starting to look like a Spitz clone, don’t you think? Anybody check to see if he’s Client Number 10?

chickasaw42 on September 22, 2010 at 5:07 PM

The whole point being any energy argument over green house gas emissions is fraudulent, since both carbon dioxide and water vapor are natural components of our atmosphere, and that life on the planet has evolved to make use of both

Skandia,
I would suggest that you read up on the science.

Why are these idiots still trying to pass taxes on carbon and global warming when it has been proven a hoax?

Only in the minds of the intentionally uninformed.

These are the global-warming fanboys, the ones who will accept predictions of catastrophic warming but not even begin to question where those numbers come from

It’s obvious where the numbers come from. One doesn’t have to dig very far.

Global climate change is a very serious issue. Cap and trade may or may not be the way to go; nobody, including myself, is in favor of taxes. Perhaps if people were to take George Bush’s advise and consume less (there is plenty of room for improvement) such taxes would not be so much of an inevitability.

oakland on September 22, 2010 at 8:17 PM