climate change vs. WMD

I don't usually post about politics on this blog for a number of reasons. I just had to put this quote down though because it is just so hypocritical (which I guess is not unusual in political statements but still...)

the full article:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070131/ap_on_go_co/congress_climate

context:
"Federal scientists have been pressured by the White House to play down global warming, advocacy groups testified Tuesday at the Democrats' first investigative hearing since taking control of Congress. The hearing focused on allegations that White House officials for years have micromanaged the government's climate programs and has closely controlled what scientists have been allowed to tell the public."

the statement:
"At Boxer's Senate hearing, her predecessor as chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., had his own view of the science. There is "no convincing scientific evidence" that human activity is causing global warming, declared Inhofe, who once called global warming a hoax. "We all know the Weather Channel would like to have people afraid all the time."

ummm. I am not even going to waste my time arguing about the truth of that statement. I will say though, what about our current war, the completely false claim of WMD in Iraq and the perpetual state of fear of terrorists that certain members of our govt. encourage??

oh and:
"Some Republican members of the committee questioned whether science and politics ever can be kept separate."I am no climate-change denier," said Rep. Tom Davis of Virginia, the top Republican on the committee, but he questioned whether "the issue of politicizing science has itself become politicized. The mere convergence of politics and science does not itself denote interference."