It really doesn't matter whether or not the US Senate and or Congress ever saw the document, signed it, or even ate lunch off it.
What matters is that pollution is a severe problem. (Those who decry "Global Warming", per se, have evidently never tried to breath pea-soup smog, during a temperature inversion. To make claims about one aspect which may - or may not - prove true is to ignore the issue, in favour of banner-burning.)
What matters is that the US President signed the accord and he, not the Senate, not Congress, not the dog down the street, is the duly-elected representitive of the United States, on International affairs.
What matters is that US technology and industry will suffer. Nobody is going to buy newer, cleaner technology, if they can get away with the old stuff. Nobody is even going to make such technology in the US, with no market. And that means that overseas trade will suffer. It means American goods won't be sellable in any country in which the accord is enforced. And it means that the American economy (currently shaky) is likely to go into a depression.
What matters is that, as fuel requirements drop elsewhere, fuel costs will rise. (The profit margins will be sustained.) As the pollution is a function of fuel efficiency, reduced pollution means greater efficiency. If you reduce emissions by 50%, you're going to have to reduce fuel consumption by 50%. And that means fuel prices will double. Won't affect those who're only using half as much, but - boy! - it'll just about kill any American car owner. Especially those who own SUVs.
Those applauding George Bush's stance are forgetting these points, too busy arguing over global warming to see the economic and health impacts of efficiency.
You can argue all you like, one way or the other. It doesn't matter. If global warming's real, sea levels will rise in the order of hundreds of meters, putting much of the industrialized world under water. Nothing you or I can do can stop it. If it isn't, the impact of forced technological improvement will put those countries which take the perceived threat seriously WAY ahead of those that don't.
Either way, the skeptics are screwed. And screwed is screwed. The reason doesn't matter.
Tell you what. I'll have a LOT more sympathy for the skeptics, if they can (hand-on-heart) say that, if the economy DOES collapse, or the sea levels DO rise, or the weather systems DO change catastrophically,or gas prices hit $5/gallon, or the US becomes economically and politically isolated, or deaths from pollution-related illnesses become too great to ignore, they will NOT whinge, they will NOT complain, and they will NOT beg others to pull them out of the mess.
You up to the challange?