« Desensitization and GITMO-ization | Main | March Forth and Move 'Em for Molly »
Stern is Stern on Climate Change at Senate Hearing
Climate report author Sir Nicholas Stern laid down the law at a U.S. Senate hearing: the costs of inaction on climate change will be far higher than the costs of acting today. No more excuses.
DCP co-founder Richard Bell wrote about Stern's appearance on Capitol Hill for the Global Public Media website. The following is a condensed version of his report.
Yesterday was another climate change trifecta at the U.S. Congress, with one hearing in the House on “Addressing Climate Change,” and two in the Senate, one on the "U.S. Climate Action Partnership Report,” and one featuring Sir Nicholas Stern, author of the last fall’s highly influential Stern Review of The Economics of Climate Change. All three hearings went off at 10 A.M.
I decided to bet on Sir Nicholas, and headed to the Senate Energy and Commerce Committee hearing, where Committee Chair Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) cited the trifecta as evidence that the “ground in the U.S. [on climate change] has shifted substantially… I believe there is an opportunity to move forward this year.”
In listening to the exchanges between the Senators and the three witnesses (Stern and two academic economists), three points stand out:
First, both Republican and Democratic Senators raised questions about whether we should be spending more time worrying about adapting to climate change than mitigating it.
Second, members from both parties suggested that China and India were irresponsible members of the global community because they were not taking climate change seriously, a reason to question whether the U.S. should take any major steps to reduce carbon emissions without the participation of the world’s two largest nations (by population).
Third, the Congress of the United States, with its multiple overlapping committee jurisdictions and two very different bodies is going to be sorely pressed to come up with legislation that will create the innovative, flexible, dynamic framework that Stern says is needed to deal with climate change.
The Stern Review -— Inaction Costs Much More
Sir Nicholas Stern’s report, the Stern Review of the Economics of Climate Change, broke new ground by making the best possible estimate of two critical costs:
What will it cost to deal with climate change now?
What will it cost if we do NOT deal with climate change now?
The Stern Review concluded that the cost to the world economy for dealing with climate change now would be 1% of the global domestic product.
But the cost of NOT dealing with climate change now was considerably higher, at least 5%, and perhaps as high as 20% of the global domestic product.
For opponents of action, Stern’s findings (which coincide with those recently released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) show a nasty paradox: far from choking off economic growth, the failure to deal with global warming now will, in and of itself, cause a much greater decline in economic growth in the future.
"The biggest market failure the world has ever seen"
One of the most striking phrases in Stern’s presentation was his description of climate change as “the biggest market failure the world has ever seen.”
Committee Chair Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) asked Stern to lay out the case for this categorical claim. How was this failure different from previous market failures? Stern noted that the range of consequences of this market failure involved every industry and every person on the planet. And the potential scale of damages for inaction was so huge.
Needless to say, conventional economists were less than pleased with Stern’s effort, since he was willing to bring into his analysis many “non-market effects” that conventional economists ignore, like the loss of endangered species. The two economists who testified today were both distressed with various aspects of Stern’s economic methodology, although not to the point of throwing the whole Review out the window.
It’s true that Stern’s results are based on a series of complex models in which his assumptions about key indicators would shift the final results.
But as Stern noted, all of his assumptions are out on the table for economists and others to challenge and debate. In the meantime, his work is the most comprehensive to date, and there was little doubt that his conclusions were pointing in the right direction, despite squabbles over the exact numbers. (One of the witnesses quipped that Stern’s Review had created “a full employment policy for economists” writing critiques.)
Adapting to Climate Change?
Both Republican and Democratic Senators raised the question of whether we should be paying more attention to adapting to climate change. Republican Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM) touched on the issue in his opening remarks, and returned later on to note:
“I am very pleased to see that you have talked about adaptation….I believe an adaptation policy is in order.”
There is a very slippery slope here. Stern agreed that because the climate is already warming, and will get warmer still, we will have to develop methods for adapting to the changes that we have already induced. But adopting adaptation could also become an excuse for giving up on serious efforts to reduce carbon emissions. Stern emphasized over and over the importance of what he called “ambition” as the key to success in implementing carbon reduction policies. As for adapting to ever increasing temperatures, Stern said assuming humans could make such changes was “reckless.”
Coal, Coal, and More Coal
Stern, the other witnesses, and the Senators of both parties were all in agreement that we would be relying more and more on coal as an energy source. This conclusion rests on a rather frail assumption: that we are going to quickly discover low-cost methods for sequestering carbon from coal-burning processes, piping the CO2 to some underground cavern where it will remain and not leak out into the atmosphere.
Senator Dorgan talked about a plant in North Dakota that makes synthetic natural gas from lignite coal. The CO2 from this process is piped to oil fields in Alberta, Canada, where it is injected into marginal oil wells, increasing the flow of oil from those wells while isolating the CO2 underground.
But as Stern noted, we need far more research and development on carbon sequestration. At this point, no one knows whether it will be possible to develop such technology.
Can Congress Write a Dynamic Law?
The Senators spent a fair amount of time reviewing various options with the witnesses. In an almost plaintive way, they kept asking about this option or that, as if there were a single policy. Stern and the two economists, on the other hand, emphasized over and over again that the best approach would combine regulations with carbon taxes with cap-and-trade markets in carbon. Both economists emphasized how unfortunate it was that Congress was so tax-averse, given that carefully targeted taxes were a great fiscal tool for steering investments.
The witnesses also emphasized the importance of having a policy in the first place, any policy almost, in order to create the kind of stable, medium-long term time frame which businesses need in order to make substantial investments. But even here, Stern noted that it was impossible to write climate policy in 2007 that would be valid for a whole century. Whatever Congress did would have to allow for regular course corrections, as we learned which policies worked well, and which did not.
Stern also strongly urged the Senators to write legislation that would allow whatever the U.S. did to link up with similar mechanisms in the EU, and eventually with China and India. The EU already has a cap-and-trade system in place.
In conclusion, Stern said he never intended his report to be the last word, and welcomed the questions and attacks that the release of the report had generated. At the start of the hearing, Bingaman said he was optimistic that Congress would pass climate change legislation this year. After listening to this hearing, I feel less certain that Congress can meet such a challenge.
C-SPAN 1, House debate on the NON-binding resolution.
Amazingly, Ron Paul (R-TX) is urging people to vote against the supplemental spending bills coming up....
Can Congress Write a Dynamic Law?
Posted by Rick Albertson at February 14, 2007 12:05 PM
In a word? No.
No 'dynamic law' regarding the environment - or anything else, for that matter - will be able to be accomplished until corporations are kicked out of our political processes. Right now they are writing the legislation and the only thing they are worried about or thinking about is the bottom line: money. They do not even care whether or not they or their families have a healthy environment; they only care about money. Period.
Good thread header.... I had to snarkily snort about the "adapting" to climate change. What the heck is Pete Domenici thinking?!?
Now, if we only knew how to get corporations out of our government....
Wow. I'm sitting here amazed. There have been a series of 'Publicans speaking out against the escalation in the last little while in the House.
Did they have brain transplants?
MSNBC.com headline...
Bush insists Iran is arming Iraq
‘I’m going to do something about it,’ president says
MSNBC staff and news service reports
Updated: 4 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - President Bush said Wednesday he’s convinced that the Iranian government is supplying deadly weapons to fighters in Iraq, even if he can’t prove the orders came from the highest levels in Tehran.
More important, Bush said in his first news conference of the year, is protecting U.S. troops against the lethal new threat. “I’m going to do something about it,” Bush said.
more...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17146548/
CNN.com headline...
Bush: 'Do not know' if Iran leaders tied to Iraq weapons
President Bush said today he doesn't know if orders to use Iranian-made weapons to kill U.S. troops came from the highest levels of Tehran's government, but he's certain Iran's Quds Force is involved. "I do not know whether or not the Quds Force was ordered from the top echelons of government," he said.
more on...
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/14/bush.conference/index.html
Democrats' New Strategy: Force Slow End to War
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/021407L.shtml
Top House Democrats, working in concert with anti-war groups, have decided against using congressional power to force a quick end to US involvement in Iraq, and instead will pursue a slow-bleed strategy designed to gradually limit the administration's options.
Excerpt:
Pelosi and other top Democrats are not yet prepared for an open battle with the White House over ending funding for the war, and they are wary of Republican claims that Democratic leaders would endanger the welfare of U.S. troops. The new approach of first reducing the number of troops available for the conflict, while maintaining funding levels for units already in the field, gives political cover to conservative House Democrats who are nervous about appearing "anti-military" while also mollifying the anti-war left, which has long been agitating for Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to be more aggressive.
"What we have staked out is a campaign to stop the war without cutting off funding" for the troops, said Tom Mazzie of Americans Against Escalation of the War in Iraq. "We call it the 'readiness strategy.'"
~~~~~
If the Senate does not approve these new funding restrictions, or if Senate Republicans filibuster the supplemental bill, Pelosi and the House Democratic leadership would then be able to ratchet up the political pressure on the White House to accede to their demands by "slow-walking" the supplemental bill. Additionally, House Democrats could try to insert the Murtha provisions into the fiscal 2008 defense authorization and spending bills, which are scheduled to come to the floor later in the year.
{{{HUH?!? IMHO, this looks like they'll continue to fund the war, no matter what, and that stupid illegal war will still be going on in '08. "Slow end" to Georgie's war is not what the vast majority of people want...!!! What didn't the Congress Critters understand about the fact that a Dem majority was elected in Nov...? We want SOMETHING done, and done SOON, to STOP THE WAR!!! We want the top crooks IMPEACHED!!! [Hitting head on keyboard!]}}}
http://www.americanprogress.org/cartoons/2007/02/021407_iraq.html
If You Question Us...
U.S. General: No Evidence of Iran Giving Arms to Iraqis
A top U.S. general said today there was no evidence the Iranian government was supplying Iraqi insurgents with highly lethal roadside bombs, apparently contradicting claims by other U.S. military and administration officials.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article17046.htm
{Gee, I wonder if Georgie has seen this...?}
David Swanson | Sex and Torture in America
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/021407M.shtml
David Swanson writes, "How does sex differ from torture? The one is good and the other bad, might be your immediate reply. But were I to describe an act of torture, this would be taken as a serious article. Were I to describe an act of sex, then political publications wouldn't publish it, spam filters wouldn't allow you to receive it, and if you did receive it, you might turn away. In fact, we have set up numerous mechanisms, external and internal, to protect you from sex that just don't exist for torture and should possibly be considered."
Army Giving More Waivers in Recruiting Ex-Cons
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/021407O.shtml
The number of waivers granted to Army recruits with criminal backgrounds has grown about 65 percent in the last three years, increasing to 8,129 in 2006 from 4,918 in 2003, Department of Defense records show.
{{{IMHO, this is NOT going to bode well for the reputation of the US military....}}}
Schwarz Jr. and Huq | No King Please, We're Americans
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/021407N.shtml
"Throughout history, the task of keeping this republic has fallen not just to the three branches of government, but also to 'We the People of the United States,'" write Frederick A.O. Schwarz Jr. and Aziz Huq. "The Framers knew that maintaining the Constitution's system of checks and balances would not be easy. Stepping into Philadelphia sunlight in 1787, Benjamin Franklin was asked by an eager passerby what he and his fellow delegates had wrought — a republic or a monarchy. 'A republic,' replied Franklin, 'if you can keep it.'"
Framing global warming in terms of effect on the market is probably the only way to make corporations listen. If they think they're lose market share or have costs associated with climate change, they may make changes. Otherwise, they'll only be thinking in the short term.
I don't think it's true that China and India aren't doing anything about the environment. I heard a broadcast with someone from Greenpeace China, for instance. They have huge populations but alot of them are still rural and don't drive or use appliances. Still, they all want to move in the consumerist direction.
Places like Bangkok and Mexico City are horrendous for pollution. & it's true that if you look at an infrared world map, India still has alot of dirty more primitive forms of energy.
Great article, Richard - very thought provoking and glad Washington is listening more.
As for Bush "doing something about" Iran - that's a joke. Too bad he hasn't sent his twins over there. Or his nephew - the one that was on Good Morning America. He's about the right age to serve his country, I'd think.
The borders with Iran are being closed, as alot of those interviewed in the middle aast recommended, during Congressman McDermott's listening tour. Only for 3 days though - strange.
NPR has a several day history on the middle east - today they went through the history of animosity between the Arabs and Persians. It took us all the way up to the increase in sectarian violence in the middle east since we invaded in 2003. Everything that went on between about 1980 to present is just mind-boggling to hear summarized (Afghanistan war when we supported Bin Laden, Iran/Iraq war when we supported Saddam, etc.)
We have just messed up so badly. Even if we left Iraq today, we would have profoundly changed the destiny of the middle east for the worse with out foreign policy decisions of the past. I can hear a Republican asking what we should have done instead and I would truly like to run into someone like that so I could let them have it.
I can hear a Republican asking what we should have done instead and I would truly like to run into someone like that so I could let them have it.
Posted by: DiAnne at February 14, 2007 02:54 PM
Wouldn't we all?!?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070214/ap_on_re_eu/britain_court_martial
War crimes charges tossed for 5 soldiers
LONDON - A judge dismissed charges Wednesday against five British soldiers accused of mistreating Iraqi civilian detainees but said the court-martial would continue against two other servicemen. The trial has tarnished the image of Britain's military because it marked the first time a British soldier pleaded guilty to a war crime under international law. Cpl. Donald Payne, 35, admitted he inhumanely treated Iraqi civilians in September. He has not yet been sentenced on the charge.
{More on link.}
California and Iowa Approve Resolutions Against Iraq War
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/021407C.shtml
The California Senate approved a resolution Tuesday calling for a halt to boosting the number of troops in Iraq or spending any more taxpayer dollars on the war without explicit approval from Congress. In a similar move, the Iowa Senate approved a resolution that says troops in the region have served bravely but are burdened with the flawed policy.
US Military Tells "24": Cut Out Torture Scenes ... or Else!
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/021407F.shtml
The hugely popular television series "24" draws millions of viewers but it appears some people are becoming a little squeamish. The US military has appealed to the producers of "24" to tone down the torture scenes because of the impact they are having both on troops in the field and America's reputation abroad. Forget about Abu Ghraib, forget about Guantanamo Bay, forget even that the White House has authorized interrogation techniques that some classify as torture. It is 24 that is giving us a bad name.
Chrysler to Cut 13,000 Jobs in North America
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/021407A.shtml
DaimlerChrysler said today that it was leaving all options open for the future of its struggling Chrysler Group, which announced a plan to close all or part of four plants and eliminate 13,000 jobs in North America.
Gareth Porter | US Briefing on Iran Discredits the Official Line
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/021407D.shtml
"The administration suggested that there could be no other explanation for the presence of Iranian-made weapons than official government sponsorship of smuggling them into Iraq," writes Gareth Porter. "But in doing so, they had to ignore a well-known reality: most weapons, including armor-piercing projectiles, can be purchased by anyone through intermediaries in the Middle East."
Chrysler to Cut 13,000 Jobs in North America
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/021407A.shtml
DaimlerChrysler said today that it was leaving all options open for the future of its struggling Chrysler Group, which announced a plan to close all or part of four plants and eliminate 13,000 jobs in North America.
Posted by: NonnyO at February 14, 2007 03:10 PM
Tell Chrysler (and Ford and GM) to start building REAL cars, not a choice between shoddy disposable pieces of junk and gas guzzlers.
I had a disposable Ford piece of junk, and Ford lost me as a customer for life.
And while at it, tell them to stop blaming union workers for the management and marketers' mistakes.
We have just messed up so badly. Even if we left Iraq today, we would have profoundly changed the destiny of the middle east for the worse with out foreign policy decisions of the past. I can hear a Republican asking what we should have done instead and I would truly like to run into someone like that so I could let them have it.
Posted by: DiAnne at February 14, 2007 02:54 PM
Good point. Again, we are creating villains to fit our agenda, and we are creating enemies faster than we can destroy them.
As NonnyO likes to say, the media needs to stop regurgitating all the false info on Iran. It is precisely because of our unnecessary saber-rattling that Iran chose to become a hardline country again and challenge us.
"But in doing so, they had to ignore a well-known reality: most weapons, including armor-piercing projectiles, can be purchased by anyone through intermediaries in the Middle East."
Posted by: NonnyO at February 14, 2007 03:10 PM
Not to mention that many of these weapons are American in origin.
Asked by an ABC reporter whether he thought Iraq was roiled by civil war, Bush said, "It's hard for me living in this beautiful White House to give you an assessment, a first hand assessment. I haven't been there. You have, I haven't. But I do talk to people who are and people whose judgment I trust and they would not qualify it as that. There are others who think it is."
http://www.rawstory.com//news/2007/Bush_says_Iran_supplying_weapons_to_0214.html
On March 18, 2003, two days before her son launched the invasion of Iraq, Barbara Bush appeared on Good Morning America. Our nation's "First Mother" asked Diane Sawyer, "Why should we hear about body bags and death and how many? . . . Oh, I mean, it's not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that."
By Bill Schneider
CNN Senior Political Analyst
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Americans are getting frustrated over the Iraq war -- and not just with the Bush administration.
Nearly a third of Americans said in a CBS News poll that Iraq is the most important problem facing the country. No other issue was in double digits.
That's the main reason why President Bush's job approval remains low -- 32 percent. Congress isn't doing any better. Its approval rating was just as low, at 32 percent.
The CBS poll was conducted February 8-11 and had a margin of error of plus-or-minus 3 percentage points.
The public is as frustrated with Congress as it is with Bush for failing to start bringing the war in Iraq to a close.
What does the public want Congress to do -- vote against a troop increase? Yes.
In a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll last month, respondents by a margin of nearly two to one -- 64 percent to 32 percent -- said they wanted Congress to oppose sending more troops to Iraq.
And in a USA Today/Gallup poll, 57 percent favored limiting the number of U.S. troops serving in Iraq, and 63 percent wanted Congress to set a timetable for withdrawing all U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of next year.
The margin of error for both of the CNN and USA Today/Gallup polls was plus-or-minus 3 percentage points. The USA Today/Gallup poll was conduced February 9-11.
The public's increasing frustration with the war helps explain why the leading Democratic presidential candidates are putting forth proposals meant to hasten the war's end.
-snip-
The people elected a Democratic Congress to stand up to Bush on the war. The people are waiting, and they're getting frustrated.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/14/schneider.frustrated.public/index.html
I would truly like to run into someone like that so I could let them have it.
Posted by: DiAnne at February 14, 2007 02:54 PM
I want a seat for that. In fact, I'd PAY for a seat for that. When are you coming to DC again???
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/02/14/its-official-al-franken-is-running-for-senate/
It’s Official: Al Franken Is Running For Senate
Includes link to video announcing why he wants to run for Senate.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200702140007?src=item200702140007
Fool me twice? -- NY Times, CBS, NBC report Bush allegations about Iran without context, skepticism
Summary: In reporting on the Bush administration's allegations about Iran's role in Iraq, media outlets have covered the matter in a muddled, incomplete manner, omitting any skeptical or critical analysis of these allegations, which suggests, in the words of washingtonpost.com's Dan Froomkin, that "the lessons we should have learned from Iraq may not have been learned at all."
{One video clip included.}
Environmentalists Warn, Plan to Ease Wetlands Rules Is Not Enough
http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/021407EB.shtml
Responding to an outpouring of complaints, federal officials have dramatically scaled back a proposal to speed up development in wetland areas along the Mississippi Gulf Coast.
{Why do wetlands have to be 'developed?' It's my understanding that when they are left alone they are a buffer against the severity of hurricanes.... Besides which, if the seas rise as a result of global warming, those lands will be underwater anyway.... Duh.}
Green Light for Greenhouse Gas Burial at Sea
http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/021407EC.shtml
International rules allowing burial of greenhouse gases beneath the seabed became effective on Saturday in what will be a step toward fighting global warming - if storage costs are cut and leaks can be averted.
{Raise your hand if you also think this is a really bad idea....}
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070214/ap_on_go_ot/merck_irs
Merck to pay $2.3B in IRS dispute
WASHINGTON - Merck & Co. Inc. agreed Wednesday to pay $2.3 billion to resolve several tax disputes, the Internal Revenue Service said.
The drug company's payment includes taxes, interest and penalties stemming from the disputes, which cover the tax years 1993-2001, the IRS said. The IRS said the disputes arose in part from Merck's use of minority equity interest financing transactions.
"This settlement resolves all of the issues that were in dispute," the Whitehouse Station, N.J. company said in a statement.
The company said the settlement is not expected to have an effect on its 2007 earnings because it previously reserved funds to cover the payment.
~~~~~
Merck said in a statement that the IRS settlement was in the company's best interests given the uncertainty and cost of potential litigation. The Canadian claim remains unresolved.
The Merck settlement relates to a partnership deal set up in 1993. The Wall Street Journal reported in September on how Merck, in partnership with a British bank, set up a subsidiary with an address in tax-friendly Bermuda.
Merck then transferred patents on some of its blockbuster drugs to that subsidiary, later paying it for use of those patents, the newspaper reported. The deal allowed the company to shave its tax bill to the tune of $1.5 billion over roughly a decade, according to the Journal report.
Merck's November SEC filings refer only to a 1993 partnership transaction in discussing its then-potential liabilities to the IRS.
The Canada Revenue Agency still seeks U.S. $1.76 billion in taxes and interest from Merck "related to certain intercompany pricing matters," according the company's November SEC filings. The company has said the Canadian agency's claims are without merit.
Another drug company, GlaxoSmithKline PLC, agreed in September to pay the IRS $3.4 billion in what was the largest tax settlement ever.
{Link-more.}
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/02/14/daily-show-douglas-feith-has-huge-balls/
Daily Show: Douglas Feith Has Huge Balls
Skepticism over Iraq haunts U.S. Iran policy
Administration tries to deal with credibility gap
By Karen DeYoung
The Washington Post
Updated: 28 minutes ago
The specter of the war in Iraq -- a war the Bush administration denied it was planning, supported by evidence that turned out to be false -- looms large over administration policy toward Iran.
Skeptical members of Congress have questioned administration charges of Tehran's support for Iraqi insurgents and President Bush's insistence that his plans for dealing with Iran remain purely diplomatic. The administration, conscious of its low credibility, believes it has gone out of its way to convince doubters that Iran is not Iraq all over again.
"No, no, no, no," White House spokesman Tony Snow said Monday in response to questions about whether the administration embellished evidence against Iran in a U.S. military briefing in Baghdad the previous day. "I'm almost ready to hit my head on the microphone."
Much as the Vietnam Syndrome dogged the foreign and military policies of a generation of U.S. presidents, the Iraq Syndrome has become an ever-present undercurrent in Washington. "Everyone is reliving the whole thing again in everything we do," said one administration official, referring to the tumultuous months surrounding the U.S. invasion in March 2003.
"In the old days, if the U.S. government had come out and said, 'We've got this, here's our assessment,' reasonable people would have taken it at face value," the official said of the Baghdad briefing. "That's never going to happen again."
more...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17142302/
Found this interesting article about Michigan's ban on gay marraige that you might find interesting.
"A gay marriage ban that hurts conservatives.
Spouse Abuse"
by Jonathan Cohn
http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=w070212&s=cohn021507
Hey monkey, have you weaned yourself off the hair of the dog that bit you last weekend yet?
Right now I don't have internet access except very briefly at work. My home time clock is set to 12/31/1968 on the computer at home! So will peep in when I can.
Karen
As for DC, I'd love to catch a "red eye" for one of the next big events! Also have a convention in November in Boston & could probably extend the trip.
Military Justice
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=156666
Local analysis of the implications of the decision on the Ehren Watada case.
This case has gotten alot of local press because of Seattle's proximity to Ft. Lewis. Ann Garrels reported on NPR this morning that the "surge" by the Stryker Brigade already started 6 weeks ago, & that the Iraqi Police force itself turned out to be threatening, due to links with Shi'ia militias, in addition to the Sunni insurgency.
I remember when we had a huge antiwar rally and at the same time, a couple thousand Guards and Reserves were saying goodbye to their families, shipping out from Ft. Lewis. There is a local link also, because Cindy Sheehan's son left from there, and they spent a final day in Seattle at the Pike Market. I think of it every time I am there.
Posted by: madame defarge at February 15, 2007 10:49 AM
Just Barely.
Central Command’s war plan for invading Iraq postulated in August 2002 that the U.S. would have only 5,000 troops left in Iraq as of December 2006,” according to newly released documents. “Completely unrealistic assumptions about a post-Saddam Iraq permeate these war plans,” said an official from the National Security Archive, which obtained the documents.
Center for American Progress
http://news.bostonherald.com/politics/view.bg?articleid=183088
Kerry legislation would punish profiteers in Iraq rebuilding
With millions already wasted in the Iraq reconstruction effort, Sen. John F. Kerry will push today for federal legislation to punish war profiteers, root out cronyism in post-war contract awards and give new protections to whistleblowers.
“America’s sons and daughters are asked to make the greatest sacrifice in Iraq, but the administration asks nothing of their friends at Halliburton and other big corporations,” Kerry said in a statement to the Herald. Halliburton has come under fire along with other corporate general contractors for inflating the costs of their services in the Iraq rebuilding effort.
The legislation will be introduced by Kerry and Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) at a noon press conference in Washington, D.C.
(more at link)
On Topic. This is cool. It's probably talked about at JK's site. Haven't time to go there now. Just think - he was at the lst Earth Day in 2000. If you combine the passion & expertise of JK & THK for the environment .. if you consider the contribution of Al Gore .. it's mind boggling to think "what" (not "who") we have in office!! (Locally we are working on impeachment & eliminating paperless voting, as fast as we can, but it's a race against time, just like working for peace & to save the environment! Working against time, uphill!)
Kerry Addresses Global Climate Change Conference
WASHINGTON, DC – Sen. John Kerry addressed the GLOBE International Washington Legislators Forum on Climate Change today, highlighting the urgent need for action to reverse global warming. Kerry, who is a former president of GLOBE U.S., called for a sustained series of actions not just here in Washington but around the world to reverse the destructive impact of climate change. He said that world leaders “can no longer sit around and talk while the earth’s temperature increases.”
I want to start today by thanking GLOBE International for providing this important forum for legislators, business leaders and others to discuss global climate change. I understand much of the discussion – for obvious reasons – has been focused on the United States’ role in meeting this challenge. And as someone who has been working on climate change in the US Congress for more than a decade, I’m both frustrated by our lack of progress to date and encouraged by our resolve to finally get something done.
We all know that for far too long, in the Senate and elsewhere, this issue has been neglected or pushed aside as unsolvable, incomprehensible, or simply someone else’s problem. But the stakes could not be higher, and the reality could hardly be more stark.
The issue of global warming has finally reached critical mass in America’s public discussion. Suddenly, on a variety of fronts, it’s moving toward its rightful place: front and center in the dialogue about our environment, our security and our economy.
From the State of the Union to states across this country, from the Academy Awards to the National Academy of Sciences, people are finally waking up to see that we’re in the middle of a crisis– and we have ten years to put our country on a different path before its too late.
It was 1987—1987!— when we first started talking about climate change. The Commerce Committee, under Senator Al Gore of Tennessee, held the first congressional hearings that year. And I’ve been working on this issue ever since. In June 1992 I was part of a Senate delegation to the Earth Summit in Rio where I met with leaders from across the globe and discussed various ways to tackle this problem.
At the time, there was a ray of international hope as well as a promise. The hope stemmed from a sense of relief that we had recognized the problem of climate change in time, and the promise was that as members of the global community we would commit ourselves to efforts to address it. The hope was translated into the Framework Convention on Climate Change, a treaty we adopted after the summit outlining how participating countries could stabilize greenhouse gas. The Senate approved it unanimously, and we all thought we were on the way to an unprecedented bipartisan implementation of visionary, responsible policy. That was fifteen years ago.
Unfortunately, from a policy perspective little progress has been made. Instead we entered a period of procrastination and evasion. And more recently, under President Bush, of stonewalling unilateralism, of energy policy made by secret CEO task forces and trumped-up industry funded “studies” that challenge the ever-growing scientific consensus that the threat is real.
Recently, however, the American people have begun demanding better, and politicians are actually listening. States are taking action--- California passed a landmark bill that establishes a first-in-the-world comprehensive program of regulatory and market mechanisms to achieve reductions of greenhouse gases. And my home state of Massachusetts—under the leadership of Deval Patrick—has rejoined the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, now an eight state effort to reduce global warming pollution from power plants. Across the nation, 376 mayors from 50 states have signed onto the US Mayors Climate Protection Agreement, an initiative to advance the goals of the Kyoto Protocol. And even President Bush finally saw fit to mention “the serious challenge of global climate change” in his State of the Union address.
What’s driving this sea change? On nearly a weekly basis, we see mounting scientific evidence highlighting the need to act. Just last week we read a report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change—written by more than 600 scientists, reviewed by another 600 experts, and edited by officials from 154 governments – which raised the alarm bell. The fact of global warming is ``unequivocal.'' The certainty of the human role is now somewhere over 90 percent. Which is about as certain as scientists ever get.
Everyone in this room knows the basic facts:
· At both poles and nearly all points in between, the temperature of the Earth’s surface is heating up, and at a frightening and potentially catastrophic rate.
· Global temperatures have increased an average of 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit during the twenty-first century.
· The Earth is hotter today than at any time in at least the past thousand years.
Science tells us that this heating is the result of human activity.
As much as science tells us about the current state of the planet, science also helps us identify the solutions. In order to minimize large scale adverse impacts to humans and the environment, we must adopt a long-term objective of CO2 concentration of about 450 parts per million. Senator Snowe and I have introduced bipartisan legislation to achieve that goal. Our bill establishes an economy-wide cap and trade program to reverse carbon dioxide emissions starting in 2010—and mandates a 65% cut in emissions by 2050. And, knowing that we will need help transitioning to a green economy, our plan uses tax incentives and increased research funding to protect affected workers, communities, companies, and consumers from energy cost shocks.
In doing so, the United States will be positioned as the world leader in reducing the risk of potentially devastating and wide ranging impacts associated with climate change and in developing and implementing low carbon energy technologies and strategies.
Key features of our bill:
· Vehicle greenhouse gas emission standards for cars and light-duty vehicles as well as medium and heavy-duty vehicles.
· Research and development program on global climate change, ocean acidification and abrupt climate change research.
· A renewable portfolio standard requiring a minimum annual percentage of 20 percent renewable electricity by 2020.
· Contains a standard that 50% of fueling stations contain at least one E85 pump by 2016.
· Tax incentives for advanced technology vehicles by both providing consumers with additional advanced technology vehicle purchase incentives and manufacturers with credits for building advanced technology vehicles.
This is one of the great challenges of our times. Failing to even acknowledge it publicly for years, the Bush administration of course failed to see that, as with any kind of change, there is an opportunity. As a result of this myopia, the United States is ceding its leadership in developing the new technologies that will undoubtedly be a significant economic driver for America’s 21st century economy. Other countries are happily filling the void. By abandoning the playing field, we are disadvantaging ourselves economically. In stark contrast to some of our government leaders, many prominent business leaders— the CEOs of Dow, Alcoa, and BP among them—have long accepted the facts about climate change and have pursued visionary policies to match the nightmarish threat of catastrophic climate change.
Rather than arguing against the supposed economic turmoil that will befall our nation, we should be embracing what these business leaders have accepted long ago: There is huge economic potential in the response. The new technologies required to reduce emissions, and the means of remedying the harm we have already done, should be viewed as a key part of our economic future. Every schoolchild learns that the history of this nation has been written through a spirit of innovation—from the Wright Brothers to Henry Ford to Bill Gates, from the Model T to the iPod. I ask you this: why would we stop now?
This is the new frontier for America’s technological ingenuity. If we rise to meet this challenge, we stand to gain whole industries of new, high-value jobs, leading to better quality of life, better technical assistance to the world, and a competitive edge in a new marketplace. Some businesses across the globe and here in the United States are already proving that there are enormous profits to be made in developing technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. And just as it makes economic sense for individual businesses, tackling this problem makes economic sense at the government level as well.
Heads turned last fall when Sir Nicholas Stern, a distinguished development economist and head of the Government Economics Service for the United Kingdom, issued a report on the economics of climate change. It was the first comprehensive, serious cost-benefit analysis of such change. His findings were dramatic and unequivocal. His fundamental conclusion said this: “This Review has assessed a wide range of evidence on the impacts of climate change and on the economic costs, and has used a number of different techniques to assess costs and risks. From all of these perspectives, the evidence gathered by the Review leads to a simple conclusion: the benefits of strong and early action far outweigh the economic costs of not acting.”
So prompt and strong action is clearly warranted.
Stern, like many of the world’s leading scientists, identifies the next ten years as our last best chance to tackle global warming and to avoid the scenario in which our children and grandchildren are left with a global catastrophe. That is not the future we want them to inherit.
It is time to stop debating fiction writers, oil executives, and flat-Earth politicians and address, in a very real way, what can rightly be called a mortal threat to America.
There are clear principles that should drive and shape our action.
The challenge will become more difficult the longer we wait. The problem and the solution are global, but it is better that we begin locally rather than not at all. Sound domestic policies will contribute to the strength of our economy, our security, and the environment. And at least for now, Washington is far behind the American people when it comes to understanding and meeting this challenge.
Increasingly, homegrown efforts by concerned that citizens are outpacing political “leaders”—many of whom have done precious little leadership on this issue-- in forcing change. From school kids engaging in local activities to spread awareness steps their fellow students can take; to dedicated professionals in government agencies like Jim Hansen; to creative business leaders like Jeffrey Immelt of General Electric; to powerful activists like Laurie David, who produced Al Gore’s documentary and has founded the StopGlobalWarming.org Web site; to longtime, dedicated environmental leaders -- there is a growing awareness that the clock is ticking and that showing responsibility is imperative.
As Teddy Roosevelt once said, “Great thoughts speak only to the thoughtful mind, but great actions speak to all mankind.” As imposing as the facts of climate change may be, there are countless practical actions that each of us can take to make a difference. The single most significant thing all Americans can do is elect leaders who understand that there is only one course of action that will truly solve this problem: an innovative and strategic national energy policy.
SORRY LONG - I have no link, just press release.
I think we have room here. ;)
Posted by: madame defarge at February 15, 2007 10:49 AM
Pardon the kibbitzing...
Actually madame, the weekend was stellar, huge success. Indy had to cancel last second due to work in NOLA, so that was a drag, but otherwise, wowsers.
The topper to the weekend was Sunday afternoon, one of my buddies in the monkeykrewe got married, and basically everyone from said krewe attended, including the wedding band... The Radiators.
Was great to see everyone who was so "defiled" the night before all cleaned up and in suits & gowns at this stuffy country club the next day.
Anyway, the live recording of the wedding band can be streamed or downloaded here --> http://www.archive.org/details/Rad2007-02-11.flac
(yes, only my friends would post the setlist to their wedding! Great Ring of Fire too, madame)
Love Was In The Air
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/2/15/151310/116
Peeps, this just went up. Please help me not let it die! Thanks!
What do you think would happen if there was an attack on Iran?
It would be the best thing for the most conservative forces within the clergy. The Islamic revolution is 27 years old. It is trying to make itself relevant for this generation, but is running out of steam. An attack on Iran would destroy all the young voices. Who is going to applaud an attack on their country? It would be a shot in the arm for the hardliners and that's why you will find people like Shirin Ebadi, the Nobel peace laureate, and Akbar Ganji, the political prisoner, going around Washington urging anyone who will listen to prevent an attack.
(from a very interesting interview with a documentary film maker - at http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,,2013401,00.html)
Posted by: monkey at February 15, 2007 03:26 PM
A Rad wedding? That's one to tell the grandchildren! Very cool.
Thanks for the link. I listened to the intro & am downloading some of my favorites (Do You Wanna Dance, C'est La Vie, and of course, Ring of Fire among others). I might just have me a (Brothers) Malone-a-thon this weekend.
Hmm.
(a) TXU's plans to build 11 eco-unfriendly coal-fired power plants in Texas is attracting all kinds of political controversy.
[citation: http://tinyurl.com/2pgh84 ]
(b) Mega-corp investment banking firm Merrill Lynch is underwriting TXU's efforts to build 11 eco-unfriendly coal-fired power plants in Texas.
[citation: http://tinyurl.com/2lh79g ]
(c) And now Merrill Lynch has announced that it has hired former Tennessee Congressman Harold Ford to be its "vice chairman and senior policy advisor, effective March 5. Mr. Ford will advise senior management on domestic policy issues, serve as a member of the firm's public policy and social responsibility management committee, and support a variety of business development initiatives in the institutional and retail markets."
[citation: http://tinyurl.com/366pt3 ]
Hmm, hmm.
Coincidence? You make the call.
Online Poll:
How much of a role do you think Iran is playing in the Iraq insurgency?
http://www.pbs.org/now
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070215/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush
Bush tells NATO to reinforce Afghanistan
Excerpt: (more on link):
Several countries have offered recently to provide additional support to the 35,500-strong NATO force, but it remains to be seen whether coalition commanders will get the troops, equipment and rules of engagement they say they need.
The Pentagon announced Wednesday that about 3,000 soldiers who had been scheduled to go to Iraq would be sent to Afghanistan instead. That puts the U.S. presence there at about 27,000 — the highest of the war — with 15,000 serving as part of the NATO-led force and another 12,000 special operations forces and trainers.
The president is asking Congress to provide $11.8 billion over the next two years for operations, military and otherwise, in Afghanistan.
Bush said the need for others nations to step up is great as spring comes, bringing an expected new offensive by the Taliban.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070215/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq
Pelosi: Bush lacks authority to invade
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record) said Thursday that President Bush lacks the authority to invade Iran without specific approval from Congress, a fresh challenge to the commander in chief on the eve of a symbolic vote critical of his troop buildup in Iraq.
Pelosi, D-Calif., noted that Bush consistently said he supports a diplomatic resolution to differences with Iran "and I take him at his word."
At the same time, she said, "I do believe that Congress should assert itself, though, and make it very clear that there is no previous authority for the president, any president, to go into Iran."
{More on link.}
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070215/ap_en_ot/gore_concerts
Gore announces climate change concerts
Woolsey, Lee and Waters | Congress Must Act on Iraq
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/021507A.shtml
Representatives Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee and Maxine Waters write: "The political battle lines are clear: On one side, we have a bipartisan Congressional majority; roughly two-thirds of the American people; the Joint Chiefs of Staff; the Iraq Study Group; and former military leaders such as Colin Powell. On the other, an unpopular, lame-duck president; too many Congressional Republicans; and the editors of The Weekly Standard - all of whom are willing to accept more American casualties in the name of a policy that is making us less secure and damages our standing in the world."
{Two stories on this link. The second one indicates that 12 'Pulicans have broken ranks....}
Carl Bernstein on Nixon vs. Bush
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/021507E.shtml
Carl Bernstein tells Frontline: "First, Nixon's relationship to the press was consistent with his relationship to many institutions and people. He saw himself as a victim. We now understand the psyche of Richard Nixon, that his was a self-destructive act and presidency. I think what we're talking about with the Bush administration is a far different matter in which disinformation, misinformation and unwillingness to tell the truth - a willingness to lie in the Oval Office, in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, in the office of the Vice President, the vice president himself - are such that I have never witnessed before on this scale."
{Two stories on this link, too, but the first is the most interesting.}
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17168554/
Keith Olbermann, NBC agree on 'second term'
‘Countdown’ host extends through 2011; will contribute more to network
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2007/02/15/breakdown_at_the_iraq_lie_factory.php
Breakdown At The Iraq Lie Factory
Bush is discovering that boldly lying about Iran isn't enough. He needs his chorus of liars behind him ... and they're gone.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2007/02/15/a_specter_haunting_america.php
A Specter Haunting America
"Our one and only option is to defeat them," the top House Republican says. But who is "them"?
How Feds' Top Environmental Prosecutor Built Home With Big-Oil Lobbyist
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/021507S.shtml
A House committee will investigate and request documents on a real estate deal involving the government's top environmental prosecutor and ConocoPhillips's top lobbyist, and also legal agreements between the government and the oil company. The inquiry by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee was announced hours after The Associated Press reported that the prosecutor, Sue Ellen Wooldridge, bought a $1 million vacation home with ConocoPhillips Vice President Donald R. Duncan, nine months before agreeing to let the company delay a half-billion-dollar pollution cleanup.
Richard, Congratulations on an excellent article and diary. The issue crosses all political ideologies and philosophies. If not for the Iraqi war, climate change would be the issue that America would be most focused upon.
On another tack. My wife's family is engaged in an electronic discussion via e-mail about the issue of Hillary Clinton and if she should admit she made a mistake voting to support the Iraqi war resolution.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/02/15/stopping-the-man-in-his-tracks/
Stopping The Man In His Tracks
{Video of an Iowa state legislator speaking included. Click on link to get to links embedded in text. If perchance you have nothing better to do on Saturday, perhaps the Senate vote would be interesting to listen to...??? I plan to listen to more House commentaries today; I think the full House votes on the resolution today, too.}
As the House continues their speechifying on the escalation, and the Senate Democrats rub their bruised egos from the Republican and Lieberman parliamentary gamesmanship preventing a vote, states have taken it upon themselves to (wait for it….gasp!) represent their constituency and speak out in a manner not seen inside the Beltway:
On Thursday, February 15, the Iowa Senate approved, on a voice vote, a resolution in opposition to President Bush's surge in Iraq. Iowa is the third state in the nation to pass such a resolution.
At this point, there's no indication that these resolutions will fall on anything but deaf ears, but there's no denying that a momentum is growing that will hopefully pull those in Washington from their inertia into doing something to stop the war machine.
BREAKING UPDATE: Harry Reid has called a Saturday Senate vote to condemn the escalation:
Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) this afternoon announced that the Senate would take a rare Saturday vote on whether to consider the House resolution, which is expected to pass that chamber Friday, with some Republican support.
If the Saturday vote succeeds, Reid said he may cancel the upcoming week-long recess, scrambling campaign plans for at least six presidential candidates.
http://www.iowasenatedemocrats.org/iraq/
Iowa State
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2007/02/14/MNGEVO47I31.DTL&type=politics
State Senate OKs resolution opposing troop increase
Excerpt from the SF article:
The liberal grassroots group MoveOn.org and other progressive political organizations are pushing statehouses across the country to approve resolutions opposing the proposed troop surge.
Resolutions have been introduced in about 20 states.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-williams/what-bush-hears_b_41351.html
What Bush Hears
{Also appropriate cartoon to go with what's written....}
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/02/08/house-dems-plan-simple-n_n_40775.html
House Dems Plan Simple "No" To Bush On Iraq
House Democratic leaders said today that the Iraq war resolution scheduled to be debated next week would be limited to President Bush's plan to dispatch more troops to Baghdad, leaving any controversial decisions over war spending for a later discussion.
~~~~~
The three-day debate is set to begin next Tuesday.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-geiger/kerry-feingold-demand-ac_b_40445.html
Kerry, Feingold Demand Action On Forgotten War In Afghanistan
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:s.res.00034:
S.RES.34
I'm against this. IF/When there's any adequate intelligence regarding the whereabouts of Osama Bin Laden, then send law enforcement agencies after him to capture him. Sending a military force after one criminal and his little gang is overkill; collectively, they are not an army, and they do not represent any country. Besides which, this plays right into the first AUMF Georgie was granted which led him to believe he could act outside the Constitution and declare war on his very own without Congress voting on it - which then eventually led him to believe he could be the dictatorial decider per the Military Commissions Act of 2006 which decimated our Constitution, the Bill of Rights the Geneva Conventions, and US law (specifically, Title 18 having to do with war crimes) - that whole thing needs to be repealed in its entirety, not just the reinstatement of habeas corpus which has been around since June 1215. The Congress Critters should also repeal the Patriot Acts and the other bad legislation they passed in record time since Georgie was appointed to his post in Dec. 2000 by SCOTUS. Congress also needs to repeal the same bad legislation in the same record time the previous Congress Critters passed those pieces of horror.
Additionally, we had some kind of UN approval to go to Afghanistan when it was known OBL was there, so the UN does need to send or keep peacekeepers to Afghanistan. OBL may not be there any longer, so without adequate intelligence to pinpoint his location, sending more military personnel (and more mercenaries from Halliburton, subsidiaries DynCorp or KBR, or mercenaries from Blackwater, et al., who have already raked in record profits from US taxpayers) to Afghanistan is a waste of more lives and money and puts us further into debt. Before any more money is wasted in the insane pursuit of war anywhere, we need an accounting of the monies wasted in Iraq first, and Congress Critters need to punish the people who have ravaged our treasury and handed out $8.8 BILLION in CASH in Iraq, and we need to stop torture, close Gitmo, and send the innocent people to their home countries. Too much money has already been wasted in war in both Afghanistan and Iraq, and I'm tired of hanging my head in shame because Georgie sanctioned torture in our names. Enough already!!! I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired of war, war, and more war. When will people - Bu$hCo AND Lamestream Media warmongering propagandists - advocate PEACE?!? Better yet, when will Lamestream Media wake up to the fact they have participated in Georgie's war crimes by not presenting FACTS about Georgie's and Dickie's war crimes...? Spinmeisters have spun us to death in presenting only Bu$hCo propaganda and lies.
WHEN will Congress do what the American people want and start IMPEACHMENT proceedings...?!? Invading Iraq based on lies for oil was a war crime...! That simple FACT alone is more than enough grounds for impeachment proceedings to be introduced in the House....
Time for the fundies to pitch in...
Incentives used to counter chaplain shortage
GIs may have to deploy without religious leaders if bonuses fail to work
DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) - Some Army National Guard units may have to deploy overseas without a chaplain if recruitment incentives, including $10,000 signing bonuses, don’t work to fill hundreds of vacant positions.
Some chaplains have served repeated overseas tours to help take up the slack.
“We’re all concerned that we don’t wear the guys out — there is a limit,” said Chaplain Lt. Col. Randall Dolinger, a spokesman for the Army Chief of Chaplains Office in Arlington, Va.
The Army National Guard has 310 chaplain vacancies. That’s 40 percent of its authorized level, but so far the Guard has not been forced to deploy units without a chaplain, Dolinger said.
Vacancies soared after 2001, when many chaplains moved to active duty in the Army. Filling the openings has been difficult because faith leaders have been deterred by the likelihood of long and repeated deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan, Dolinger said.
more...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17164334/
Show us some of the fake-based love.
I am once again listening to the House speeches on the non-binding Iraq resolution.
This feels like an exercise in switching back and forth between reality and delusion.
I keep being struck with the extreme xenophobia and even the repetition of well-known lies (long since proved as lies!), and wonder if so many of the neoCons have ever read their emails or even the few newspapers who have printed articles mentioning truth vs. the endless series of lies that got us into his illegal war in Iraq. Amazing. Truly amazing.
Then there's the reality-based speeches by Dems and a very few 'Publicans who seem to have had brain transplants and know reality from the attempted brainwashing regarding Bu$hCo delusions. The stark contrast is the difference between waking knowledge and nightmares.
Amazing.
I heard the Greens are running Nader for President in 2008. Will have to reconstitute One Voice for Change, to get 3rd party supporters to plug their noses & vote Democrat or maybe try another lawsuit. This is tiring.
NonnyO
I heard Senate comments this morning (radio) about how they failed to get a real debate or vote and Republicans are insisting they will block debate and vote if the House sends them a vote. Then as the commentator said, the "surge" troops continue to head over there.
Heard the continuing saga on NPR about the history of 14 centures in which Shiite/Persian forces could not occupy the middle east. Yet now we are simultaneously condemning Iranian expansian and weaponry while befriending Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, Egypt, Jordan. All have Sunni heads and oppose the growth of Iranian/Iraq Shia influence in the middle east. So we are technically in the middle, fighting everyone. They played a little sound clip of Bush and he pretty much said that Sunnis and Shiites are both evildoers out to get America.
It would be nice to wake up one morning and it's all over and a new day and the tide has turned, but not likely.
Read my right wing stuff - NewsMax. They had "breaking news" where Al Gore was going running somewhere warm while the NE was all iced up and deep in snow. They followed that with a couple of articles about how global warming isn't real but just a conspiracy by scientists trying to get famous. After that, they had ads for equipment for dealing with extreme weather. I have to spy on the right, after all!
Way-hey offtopic, but this is an incredible story...
Paraglider survives after soaring to 32,000 feet
Woman awakens encased in ice after going higher than Mount Everest
CANBERRA, Australia - A German paraglider was encased in ice and blacked out after being sucked into a tornado-like thunderstorm in Australia and carried to a height greater than Mount Everest. She survived.
“The glider kept climbing, climbing and I couldn’t see anything," recalled Ewa Wisnerska. "Then it got dark."
The 2005 World Cup winner was lifted 32,612 feet (9,940 meters) above sea level by the storm near Manilla in New South Wales state while preparing for the tenth FAI World Paragliding Championships next week.
A 42-year-old Chinese paraglider, He Zhongpin, was killed by the same weather system, apparently from a lack of oxygen and extreme cold, the organizers said. His body was found on Thursday 47 miles from his launch site.
“You can’t imagine the power. You feel like nothing, like a leaf from a tree going up,” Wisnerska told Australian Broadcasting Corp. radio on Friday.
“I was shaking all the time. The last thing I remember it was dark, I could hear lightning all around me.”
Wisnerska, a member of the German team, had been carried to a height greater than the 29,035-foot Mt Everest -- an area known to mountaineers as the death zone for its extreme cold -- in just 10 minutes and was rendered unconscious for almost an hour.
She encountered hailstones the size of oranges, and the temperature plummeted to minus 58 Fahrenheit.
more...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17185299/
Haywood Jablowmy reporting.
Hopefully, this resolution to oppose the troop escalation is only the first step.
Congress cannot oppose the war and continue to vote to fund it. We need to get them to vote down the $100 billion Supplemental Appropriation.
Call your senators & representatives to tell them to stop funding the war.
Also call senators & representatives on the Appropriations Committees.
Senate Appropriations: http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/committees.tt?commid=sappr
House Appropriations: http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/committees.tt?commid=happr
I heard the Greens are running Nader for President in 2008. Will have to reconstitute One Voice for Change, to get 3rd party supporters to plug their noses & vote Democrat or maybe try another lawsuit. This is tiring.
Posted by: DiAnne still w/o internet access at home at February 16, 2007 10:35 AM
In that case, we need to make sure that the Democratic message is loud and clear, and that the party is showing some backbone - and actually caring for the average American.
As long as many Dems act like Republicans Lite, defection of voters to the third parties is inevitable.
They played a little sound clip of Bush and he pretty much said that Sunnis and Shiites are both evildoers out to get America.
Posted by: DiAnne at February 16, 2007 10:41 AM
Divide and Conquer is the theme here. Let the Sunnis and the Shiites kill each other off, so that the modern-day American Crusaders can march right in.
The 20th Century was a war of ideologies. The 21st Century will be a war of religions, and will be far uglier. Protecting American freedoms - especially freedom OF and FROM religion - is more important than ever.