Pope and Rauber’s introductory "Ten Commandments for the Hard Right," suggest some general ordering principles behind the Bush administration’s environmental strategy. Are they unique to the Bush administration? What would further commandments look like?

The authors see Bush breaking a national consensus on the environment that developed during the 20^th century. Is this president really different in kind, or just in degree? How is he different from his father? Is Bush different from other conservative presidents—Ronald Reagan, for example?

Chapter 4 describes "the right’s romance with risk." Do Americans worry too much about the wrong things? How safe should modern life be?

How is it that a very small number of skeptical scientists have been able to forestall action on global warming? What will it take, short of climatological disaster, for the United States to take strong action on this issue?

Many of the Bush administration’s environmental positions are espoused (and staunchly defended) on talk radio. How has that medium changed the environmental debate in this country?

What is the proper role of the United States in the international community? To what extent should we be governed by international agreements?

In their closing chapter, Pope and Rauber offer a number of "commonsense solutions for the next 20 years." Are they too radical, or not radical enough?