No Impact Man: Why I'm fond of saying wisdom trumps science:
"And to my mind, the debate over the science is pointless. All over the world, countries are going to be increasingly buying renewable energy. The question is, does the United States want to be at the forefront of the renewable energy sector or not? Do we want to be exporters of the new green tech, and create green jobs in doing so, or not?"Whether or not you think global warming is real (it is), or if preserving the environment is worthwhile (it is), or if it's better to spend money on schools or jails (schools), or if healthcare is a right (should be in a "civilized" society), or if supporting local/organic food sources is healthier/better (it is), there's often something to be learned by taking a step back.
No Impact Man sums up the issue about climate in a way that even the corporate-shills-we-call-our-elected-leaders should understand - should we (the U.S.) lead or follow?
I've often argued that even if you're a "conservative" you should support programs to help dis-advantaged families/children, provide basic health care to all, and support public education. If for no other reason than to ensure these people don't become a drain on society. Sure, that's a negative way of looking at the problem, but I think it's one that could be compelling to those who are fiscally conservative and against "government handouts." In other words, would you rather spend the money up-front to make these people productive/healthy? Or would you rather spend much more money housing/feeding/caring for them in jail, and paying increased health care costs to cover the un-insured who go to the ER for services?
Of course that argument totally ignores the fact that it's the Right Thing to do (WWJD?).