When people make claims and leave out few "minor" details or is missing some facts for the sake of hyperbole, it becomes less important to agree or disagree wit

When people make claims and leave out few "minor" details or is missing some facts for the sake of hyperbole, it becomes less important to agree or disagree with them, rather you point out what's wrong. How can you argue against someone that doesn't present facts? That's not a strawman attack, that's just someone pointing out your mistakes. As for your question: is Bush undermining the rejection of the Kyoto Protocol? I'll point this out: The US has neither ratified to nor withdrawn from the Kyoto Protocol. Maybe the question you should be asking is: why isn't the US ratifying to the Kyoto Protocol.