>>>> More significant than the practical pollution issue is the political power change as "America First" increasingly is causing politicians here to stop regarding the US as having a leading role.
>>
>>"Leading role" has come to mean first to shoot, first to spend and first to die.
>>If Trump leaves office tomorrow if he got rid of the crazy notion that this country is responsible for what happens outside its borders when it can't handle what's going on inside them he'll have accomplished a lot.
>
>Want a good laugh? Go read some of the drivel on Twitter about Trump walking away from the Paris deal (as well he should have). There are tweets out there about Trump wanting to kill the country, and tweets about how our grandchildren will never forgive us for voting Trump in. It is FUD to the 10,000th degree. They are hysterical.
>
>Here's an except from Trump's speech. If he could stay focused on this - and stop all the foolishness - we'd all be better off.
>
>"There are serious legal and constitutional issues as well.  Foreign leaders in Europe, Asia, and across the world, should not have more to say with respect to the U.S. economy than our own citizens and their elected representatives, thus, our withdrawal from the agreement represents a reassertion of America's sovereignty. Our constitution is unique among all nations of the world. And it is my highest obligation and greatest honor to protect it. And I will[.] ... It would once have been unthinkable that an international agreement could prevent the United States from conducting its own domestic economic affairs, but this is the new reality we face if we do not leave the agreement or if we do not negotiate a far better deal.""
>
>I love it. Let's hope we see more of it, and less of the garbage that has come out of his mouth (and his Twitter account).

So if he negotiates a better deal will that be an " international agreement that could prevent the United States from conducting its own domestic economic affairs"

maybe he missed the fact that the Paris Deal was not binding

"The specific climate goals are thus politically encouraged, rather than legally bound. Only the processes governing the reporting and review of these goals are mandated under international law. This structure is especially notable for the United States—because there are no legal mitigation or finance targets, the agreement is considered an "executive agreement rather than a treaty". Because the UNFCCC treaty of 1992 received the consent of the Senate, this new agreement does not require further legislation from Congress for it to take effect "

So no UN gunboats where not about to land and take you freedoms away.I'm not sure what point he was trying to make by leaving it. Apart from the usual "Make America Great again" drivel