Censor - an official who examines books, plays, news reports, motion pictures, radio and television programs, letters, cablegrams, etc., for the purpose of suppressing parts deemed objectionable on moral, political, military, or other grounds.
"Might make it tougher to avoid regulating greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere." Can't make Bush & Cheney's motives any clearer than that. The article goes on to say: "The White House, at the urging of Cheney's office, "requested that [Burnett] work with CDC to remove from the testimony any discussion of the human health consequences of climate change... "
"CEQ contacted me to argue that I could best keep options open for the (EPA) administrator (on regulating carbon dioxide) if I would convince CDC to delete particular sections of their testimony," he wrote."Burnett also described in greater detail than previously reported the White House's refusal in December to accept a draft EPA finding concluding that carbon dioxide, the leading greenhouse gas, is endangering human health. "
The article concludes: "More than a year ago, the Supreme Court directed the EPA to determine whether carbon dioxide emissions endanger human health and welfare and, if so, begin to regulate it under the Clean Air Act. That process is not likely to continue until the next administration."
The fact that Bush & Cheney could not provide legitimate counter arguments, but had to (and still do) resort to censorship and the covering up of scientific evidence, illustrates the weakness & nonexistence of the denialist's assertions.
Meanwhile, Bush's version of an "ambitious" goal is to reduce gas emissions by 50% by 2050, when there is no agreement and no "agreement on additional specific numerical targets". In other words, there was no agreement and no one committed themselves to do anything. Perhaps that was Bush's ambitious goal? Too bad Bush couldn't have applied the same "ambitious" timetable to his invasion of Iraq.