A Soothsayer in our Midst

This entry may be a few years late - but, after all, I was the tender age of five when this clip originally aired on CSPAN, and hadn't quite entered the blogging world yet.

<;

Damn, he's good. I don't think even the best of us could have read the tea leaves as well as ol' Dick Cheney in April 1994.

A Spectacular Read

"How to Argue with a Conservative," published in 1965:

Some excellent excerpts from conservative thought, provided in the text:

 "Peaceful coexistence is impossible.  It is nothing more than  a piece of  Red propaganda, swallowed hook, line and sinker by gullible liberals."

"'Government planning' and 'government regulation' are just other names for state control and socialism."

"The United Nations is in the hands of an international gang of soft-headed neutralists who play right into Red hands."

Note: Conservative thought has changed today - for a new interpretation, you can generally replace Reds and Commies with terrorists. 

Bush "eager" to veto Iraq withdrawl plan

Does anyone else find it strange how excited Bush appears to be to veto the bill passed by Congress that requires that withdrawl begin by October 1? It seems to be one of those things that one should not get overly excited about...

That aside, I find it unacceptable that Bush is still saying that a timetable for withdrawl from Iraq is not good policy. At this point, the situation in Iraq is only getting worse and worse, and I am afraid there is no good solution. However, withdrawl is a better solution than remaining continually in the country without an exit strategy. Our presence is only inciting more terrorism and causing more anti-American sentiment. Withdrawing from Iraq will not result in it immediately becoming a peaceful, democratic country, but it is a better solution that just continuing on our present path of failure.Congress is representing the will of the American and Iraqi people by demanding a prompt timetable for withdrawl. it is a shame that Bush is ignoring the will of the people in his excitement to veto any solution to the current debacle.

(Check out the NYT article: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/01/washington/01cnd-policy.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin)

A Ruling Against Women

Earlier today, the Supreme Court upheld a ban on partial-birth abortion 5-4, reflecting the new conservative majority on the Court.  This is one step along the slippery slope of allowing the government to make choices about women's bodies without their consent.  Politicians are creeping into the sphere of doctors more and more, and making decisions that cannot be intelligently made by politicians and judges.

What are some of the ramifications of today's decision?  It first sets a precedent that Washington can dictate the choices that women are allowed to make in regards to their bodies and their health.  Furthermore, as Justice Ginsburg pointed out in her dissenting opinion, young and poor women often have trouble obtaining an abortion at an earlier time, and the ruling puts them at the greatest disadvantage.

No one likes the fact that abortion happens.  No one likes to think about what a partial-birth abortion looks like.  But we live in a society where these operations will happen, regardless of whether they are legal or not.  It's up to our representatives and judges in Washington to decide if they want these procedures to be performed safely and legally or if they want to push them into back alleys and dark rooms, putting America's women at risk.

Surprise, Surprise

Oh! Look!

The Americans and Europeans are screwing over Africa and other developing nations!  Well, that's a first...

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/science/earth/01climate.html 

My favorite quote is:

 “Like the sinking of the Titanic, catastrophes are not democratic,” said Henry I. Miller, a fellow with the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. “A much higher fraction of passengers from the cheaper decks were lost. We’ll see the same phenomenon with global warming.”

If only the Titanic had set sail a while in the future, when there might be no icebergs. 

Liveblogging Faust at the UC!

7:00
Let the liveblogging of Faust's appearance at the Sunday evening UC meeting begin!
No sign of Faust yet, although there is word that she is outside the door, listening in.

7:03
Ryan Peterson announces that Faust isn't coming until 7:10. The lights are dimmed - we need flattering lighting for our new president.

Read more »

Vilsack: The Money Primary

This afternoon, Tom Vilsack officially withdrew from the 2008 presidential race. Although I am not sure that he would have been the best candidate for the Democrats, his statement of withdrawl is quite interesting.

According to the New York Times:

'But Mr. Vilsack, 56, conceded he was unable to compete in a contest where the ability to raise money trumps all. In recent weeks, officials said, his campaign has been unable to meet payroll, with some aides taking pay cuts and others being turned away for jobs.
“The reality is that this process has become to a great extent about money — a lot of money,” Mr. Vilsack said, lamenting the fact that today’s presidential campaigns are “simply about a money primary.'

The amount of money spent in campaigns is obscene. We are creeping closer and closer to a government where elections are bought and sold. Just take a look at Ross Perot's 1992 presidential campaign - apparently, all it really takes to become the most successful independent candidate in American history is having a ridiculous amount of money to burn.

The idea of democracy is that it is open to the masses, that the best and the brightest will rise to the top and become the visionary leaders of the state. But we are still stuck in a world where the vast majority of politicians are independently wealthy white men.

Rather than attempting to violently advance democracy around the world, why don't we try to better our own democracy through dramatic campaign finance reform. Not a symbolic reform about the number of dinners a lobbyist can buy a candidate, but a reform that puts a strict cap on the amount of money that can be spent on a campaign.

Buying elections was so last century. Let's start a new trend in politics.

It's a Moral Issue

Recent flooding in Jakarta, Indonesia has resulted in mass evacuations, and today around 220,000 people in the city are still homeless, some being forced to live in makeshift, often unsanitary camps.

Some flooding happens in the city every year, but this year has been some of the worst flooding that has even been seen.  This is another instance of the trend we are seeing worldwide: more dramatic weather patterns and extreme storms with much greater frequency.  According to the IPCC Report that I mentioned before (and, for that matter, according to some basic common sense), the new intensity and frequency of these storms in very likely caused by greenhouse gases emitted through human activity.

I've mentioned all of this before.  But the thing that is really getting me this time is these two lines from today's NYT article about the disaster:  

"Much of the flooding was concentrated in low-lying parts of the city populated mostly by the poor. But well-to-do residents were also affected, and the city’s major hotels were overbooked with five-star refugees."

Worldwide, it is mostly lower-income families who live in low-lying coastal areas.  These are the families that will be most affected by extreme storms and higher ocean levels.  These are the families that cannot just hop on over to the nearest five-star hotel and wait out the storm and the flooding.  These are the families that are now living in graveyards in Jakarta because they "have no other place to go" and are forced into "sleeping with the dead."

In the U.S., massive racial and economic inequalities were dug up because of Hurricane Katrina.  But Hurricane Katrinas are happening all around the world now, and we are seeing more and more how global climate change is disproportionately affecting the poor.  This isn't just obscure science anymore - it's a moral issue.      

Stuck in an Environmentally-Friendly Rut

I just got back from a lecture at the Graduate School of Design, with the stated subject, "Living on a Shrinking Planet: Challenges for a Sustainable Future." But I kind of feel like I just got back from a presentation called, "A Summary of 'An Inconvenient Truth' in Some Different Words."

I am in no way declaring the Death of Environmentalism, although it seems that many people have. But I'm sick of every presentation about sustainability saying more or less the exact same thing and showing the exact same graphs that Al Gore showed in his film. Don't get me wrong, those of you who know me know that I love Al Gore (I mean, who wouldn't?) but, even though he has gotten everyone talking about global climate change, no one seems to be saying anything.

So let's move on past the talk about the basics of global climate change - if someone hasn't gotten it yet, they probably won't get it anytime soon. The IPCC is going to come out with their report on global climate change tomorrow, and various news sources have obtained early drafts and reported on some of the findings, including:
-global climate change is "very likely" (over 90% certainty) caused by humans and the combustion of fossil fueld
-the increase in hurricane number and strength is caused by global climate change and there will continue to be an increase in violent storms worlwide

There were also some leaks from the report due out in April, which mentioned things such as (from Reuters):
-Higher temperatures will leave millions starving and cause critical water shortages in China, Australia, parts of Europe and parts of the United States by 2080.
-By 2100, a lack of water will affect between 1.1 and 3.2 billion people due to temperatures being 2 to 3 degrees Celcius higher
-200-600 million people will face food shortage and 7 million homes will be affected by coastal flooding in the next 70 years

We obviously need to continue fighting the good fight against climate change through reduction in carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions. But I think that two things are clear now:

-Spreading the feel-good message that you can stop global climate change by turning off the lights isn't going to cut it. Individual contributions make a difference, and it is every individual's responsibility to reduce their impact on the environment, but we need to start seriously demanding that our government strictly regulates the industries that can largely affect our country's carbon emissions, like car manufacturers.

-Some dramatic warming is inevitable, regardless of our actions now. We need to start planning for the new environmental era into which we are entering. How exactly? To be honest, I'm not sure. But let's move past the basic all-about-global-warming conversation to the one that we all need to be having - what are the absolutely necessary measures that we need to be taking?

The United States is at a moral crossroads now. Our consumptive and irresponsible lifestyle is leading to destruction, starvation, coral reef bleaching, and flooding across the globe. Let's start talking realistically - about industry regulations and innovations that will actually make a difference and about what we are going to do, internationally, when our carbon emissions cause seven million families to lose their homes to coastal flooding.

Oops

The UN estimates that 34,452 Iraqis were killed in 2006 as a result of the Iraq War.  Over 470,000 Iraqis have abandoned their homes since February.

What have we done?

And there goes Greenland...

It amazes me that people can still believe that global warming is a scam.

Scientists observing Greenland have been amazed to find new islands - islands that were assumed to be attached to the mainland, but are now appearing due to the rapid melting of ice sheets. The scary part is that, until very recently, climate scientists did not think that ice sheets would be greatly affected by warming in this century, but now are realizing that more than eighty cubic miles of ice could be melting off of Greenland per year. The effects of this could include a foot or two sea level rise in just a few decades - a catastrophic event for the population centers in low-lying areas.

What more evidence could you want? As many other countries around the world are debating about the best ways to adapt to warming, some Americans are still quibbling over "scientific falsities" that are being diffused by the "liberal media."

Ridiculous. It is high time that the "skeptics" admit that global climate change is no joke, and start their reform by trading in their tanks for earth-friendly transportation options.

Monkey See, Monkey Do

Sometimes you gotta wonder about the kids today.   There have been three reported self-hangings in "imitation" of Saddam's execution - in Texas, India and Pakistan.  The only problem, is that it's kind of hard to imitate a hanging without actually hanging yourself.  Hmm.  Maybe it wasn't the best idea to distribute video and photos of his execution through all major media outlets. 

A New Low of Optimism

The ridiculous, unjustified public optimism of the Bush administration never ceases to amaze me. From Newsweek:  According to Bush homeland security advisor Frances Fragos Townsend, the fact that the U.S. government has not found Osama bin Laden should not be seen as a failure but rather, "It's a success that hasn't occurred yet."