One of the more bizarre aspects of the Obama Administration’s reactions to developments in the Middle East is its refusal to talk about human rights. For reasons that are obscure, it has developed the neologism “universal rights.”

The term “human rights” has a long and distinguished history and is used…well, universally. The “rights of man” was an earlier phrase (and was actually used by President Obama in his Inaugural Address) but “human rights” appeared as early as the 1840s; William Lloyd Garrison wrote in his abolitionist newspaper The Liberator that “human rights is the great question that agitates the age.” The Charter of the United Nations states as a purpose for the organization’s founding in 1945 “to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights.”  The UN adopted the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” in 1948. The phrase “human rights” is now everywhere: in the United Nations Human Rights Council, NGOs like Human Rights Watch and Of Human Rights, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the Inter-American Court and Commission on Human Rights, the European Court and Convention on Human Rights….well, one could go on for pages.

The U.S. government on Thursday delayed approval of a Canada-to-Texas oil pipeline until after the 2012 U.S. election, bowing to pressure from environmentalists and sparing President Barack Obama a damaging split with liberal voters he may need to win reelection.

It's been more than 40 years since the first Earth Day and the founding of the modern environmental movement -- an awakening to the notion that human beings can, and do, have a profound impact on the planet. If Republicans in Congress and on the presidential campaign trail have their way, the nation would be put right back to sleep.

Over the next two weeks, representatives from 194 nations will meet in Bonn, Germany, to push forward a deal to stabilize the global climate and help poor countries address the inevitable changes that global warming brings.

"What the heck went wrong?" That, apparently, is the question roiling the environmental community as it realizes that the fight against climate change has fizzled.

Got hope and change?

Congressional Republicans are vowing to prevent the Environmental Protection Agency from using the Clean Air Act to control pollution that contributes to global warming, underscoring the threat with a proposed deep cut to the agency's budget.

Rep. Ed Whitfield, R-Ky., chair of a House subcommittee on energy and power, said that "Congress intends to reassert itself" in the regulatory process at EPA and the Clean Air Act. He spoke at the start of a hearing Wednesday on a bill that would curtail the EPA's powers. At the same time, the GOP proposed a 17 percent cut in the EPA's budget for next year.

The following editorial appeared in the Los Angeles Times on Sunday, Feb. 6: Conservatives have been attacking the Clean Air Act since its passage in 1970, continually claiming that federal efforts to fight air pollution would wreak economic ruin. As congressional Republicans prepare to fire their latest broadside at the law, it's worth remembering how inaccurate these predictions have proved.

By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer H. Josef Hebert, Associated Press Writer Wed Nov 25

WASHINGTON – Putting his prestige on the line, President Barack Obama will personally commit the U.S. to a goal of substantially cutting greenhouse gases at next month's Copenhagen climate summit. He will insist America is ready to tackle global warming despite resistance in Congress over higher costs for businesses and homeowners.