Exhibit A: Repower America
Repower America sent an email to its list this afternoon that said the following (emphasis in original):
“And as our video shows, we have a President who understands that a clean energy revolution can create millions of American jobs, reduce our dependence on foreign oil and help keep our planet healthy for future generations.
Now it’s the Senate’s turn. Opposition from the fossil fuel industry is fierce, but we have a campaign plan to win. Together, we can make 2010 the year we begin to Repower America — and the first step is to help spread the word about Obama’s commitment to comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation”
The video included in the email omited the part of Obama’s speech in which he explained what he thinks needs to be done to create clean energy jobs.
Beginning at 1:17, the video includes Obama saying:
But to create more of these clean energy jobs, we need more production, more efficiency, more incentives. [footage missing here] And yes, it means passing a comprehensive energy and climate bill with incentives that will finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy in America.
Here is the part that was omitted:
That means building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country. It means making tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development. It means continued investment in advanced biofuels and clean coal technologies.
These are quite plainly not the words of “a President who understands that a clean energy revolution can create millions of American jobs… and help keep our planet healthy for future generations.”
Exhibit B: Natural Resources Defense Council
Before the speech even ended, NRDC released a statement that included the following:
“President Obama issued a clear and unmistakable call to action tonight, charging the Senate to pass the comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation we need…”
“Obama made an urgent case for clean energy legislation that promotes conservation as well as wind, solar and other sources of renewable power.”
“The president is right on the money.”
Does NRDC really consider referring to increased oil and gas drilling, clean coal investments and a new generation of nuclear plants as ‘clean energy’ to be a ‘clear and unmistakable call to action?
Does NRDC really think Obama made an ‘urgent case’ for ‘wind, solar and other sources of renewable power?’
Do they really think Obama’s promotion of dirty energy sources were ‘right on the money?’
NRDC’s statement goes beyond wishful thinking. Like the Repower America email above, it is deliberately misleading.
Exhibit C: National Wildlife Federation
Also prior to the end of the speech, the National Wildlife Federation issued a statement that included the following:
“His call for action tonight was clear. He is ready to help the Senate take on Big Oil and move a bipartisan clean energy and climate bill that creates jobs, limits pollution from energy companies, and reduces our dependency on oil from hostile nations.”
How can the president simultaneously advocate for ‘opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development’ and ‘help the Senate take on Big Oil?’ The two are mutually exclusive.
And can a bill that includes ‘increased oil and gas drilling, clean coal investments and a new generation of nuclear plants’ be considered a ‘clean energy and climate bill?’ I don’t think so. Does NWF?
All three of these organizations failed to push back on President Obama’s Orwellian characterization of oil, gas, nuclear and coal as ‘clean energy.’ If environmental organizations aren’t willing or able to tell the truth when the President promotes polluting industries as clean, who will? Fortunately, members of these three environmental groups aren’t likely to be fooled by their ridiculously optimistic interpretations of Obama’s remarks on ‘clean energy’ last night. If they are anything like Move On’s members, they like ‘clean energy innovation’, they don’t like ‘nukes and oil drilling,’ and they can tell the difference:

In addition to deliberately misleading their members and taking the risk of damaging their credibility, these organizations are enabling President Obama to greenwash polluting industries. Brad Johnson at Think Progress explains:
President Barack Obama’s discussion of energy policy in his first State of the Union address pandered to corporate interests while demoralizing his progressive supporters. Though Obama made a strong case that real investments in clean energy such as solar technology, advanced batteries, high-speed rail and efficiency are critical to job creation and international competitiveness, he also offered sops to established corporate polluters. Republicans, who spent much of the address refusing to applaud Obama’s call for economic reforms, ecstatically applauded his praise of polluting industry. Embracing the language of the John McCain campaign, Obama described nuclear power, offshore oil and gas drilling, and coal as “clean energy jobs.”
A few environmental organizations told the truth about President Obama’s speech last night.
Center for Biological Diversity:
“President Obama is correct that we need energy innovation and clean-energy jobs to solve the climate crisis and invigorate our economy. But a clean-energy economy does not include continued reliance on dirty coal and further risky drilling for oil in fragile offshore areas. We cannot solve the problem with business as usual, but instead need the change that Candidate Obama promised.”
“While we welcome President Obama’s call for comprehensive climate and energy reform — as well as his focus on job-creating high-speed rail and solar power — it was alarming to hear him refer last night to a variety of dirty energy sources, including nuclear, coal, offshore oil drilling and biofuels, as clean.President Obama’s support for all these dirty energy sources was a big win for corporate polluters and their Washington lobbyists, but it was a kick in the gut to environmentalists across the country. The President was essentially telling these Americans that their voices don’t matter.”
In last night’s State of the Union address, President Obama said that “(t)o create more of these clean energy jobs, we need more production, more efficiency, more incentives. And that means building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country.” Despite his statement, the President knows better.Nuclear power is neither safe nor clean. There is no such thing as a “safe” dose of radiation and just because nuclear pollution is invisible doesn’t mean it’s “clean.”
While I appreciate the candor displayed by these three groups, I am truly perplexed as to why Repower America, NRDC and NWF think misleading their members and enabling Obama’s greenwashing could possibly lead to anything good.
All three are invited to respond on this blog in order to clarify their positions.



