Over the last year or so, probably the biggest addition to the fight for comprehensive clean clean energy and climate legislation has been the business community.

One of the leadings coalitions, We Can Lead, is helping to bring business into the climate realm, as each company learns and prepares for the effects of climate change. Many of these leaders also see the opportunities in clean energy, to save money and create jobs.

At the same time, business after business is joining the parade to announce their stance on climate change is at odds with that of the leading business trade group, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

The latest to take such a step happened last week, when Best Buy released a statement in support of the Chamber, but against its climate policy.

Best Buy has stated that we are supportive of comprehensive climate change legislation and working to move toward a low carbon economy. With regard to the Chamber’s climate initiatives, the Chamber has not spoken for Best Buy on these issues. We have shared our views with the Chamber and will continue to do so. Best Buy’s commitment to sustainability aligns with global interests in addressing climate change. Best Buy is an innovator in offering our customers products and services that enable them to live more sustainably. At the same time, Best Buy is addressing our own carbon footprint resulting in a positive impact on the economic, environmental and societal well-being of the planet.

The statement went on to name several groups Best Buy is a part of, including Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy (BICEP). That group was founded by companies like Levi Strauss & Co., Nike and Starbucks.

Best Buy becomes just the latest in a lengthy record of embarrassments for the Chamber, which spent $123 million lobbying in 2009. The list of businesses that have either back out or scolded the Chamber over climate should no longer be considered growing, but fully grown. It includes the likes of Best Buy, Nike, Apple, Microsoft and several energy companies.

Despite the wishes of its biggest members, the Chamber, led by Tom Donahue, has refused to change its position, only saying it believe in legislation, yet clearly showing that anything meaningful would draw their opposition.

The day after she blew by student organizers on her way into a $2,500/plate fundraiser with energy lobbyists, Lisa Murkowski suddenly expressed her new found appreciation of protestors.

On a Chamber of Commerce conference call, Senator Murkowski responded to a compliment from coal baron and noted asshole Robert Murray* by boasting about her very “own group of protestors”:

I actually had an event here in Washington last night and I had my own group of protestors show up, and I guess you know you’ve arrived in politics when you generate your own group of protestors against you.

Listen to the audio for the full effect:

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

In case you missed it yesterday, here’s the video of Murkowski “meeting” her “fan club” before heading to meet her actual biggest fans, lobbyists representing Big Oil and Dirty Coal:

* In addition to his general disdain for our planet and all that inhabits it, is it possible that Mr. Murray’s current antipathy to the EPA is related to its opposition of his recent proposal to build a new toxic coal slurry impoundment?

This is one of those times where the numbers speak for themselves.

In 2008, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce spent $62 million lobbying Congress. In the fourth quarter of 2009, Oct. 1 through Dec. 31, the Chamber spent $71 million.

Total for 2009: $123 million spent on lobbying.

In a recession.

While the Chamber, and its climate denying president and CEO Tom Donahue, continue to call comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation too expensive, the “world’s largest business federation” doled out $123 million to lobby in 2009. That is enough to cover

For all of 2009, the Chamber fought against legislation, with one official calling for a “scopes-monkey trial,” on the science behind climate change.

It paid the price too, losing many large businesses for its stance on the legislation. But it hasn’t stopped the spending. And that is just lobbying, which doesn’t include advertising or campaigning.

Now, it is about to get worse. Donahue announced earlier this month that the Chamber will not hold back in its spending on the 2010 midterm elections, while today, the Supreme Court ruled to end restrictions on how much groups like the Chamber can spend on their own campaigns.

As one of the biggest opponents of comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation and the representative of many major corporations, this means the Chamber can wield significant financial influence.

At least that won’t be a new development.