Politics — Mitt Romney
Politics — Ron Paul
- Ron Paul and Libertarianism’s Dirty Secret — Pandering to Racist “Rednecks” to Get Ahead | News & Politics | AlterNet
Courtesy of Saint Louis Today: It is a fact that in the 1990s Ron Paul sold a newsletter in which a bunch of racist comments were published under his byline. We now also have evidence that Paul is lying when he claims not to have read the racist newsletters, which were most likely written by Lew Rockwell.
Here’s Paul on C-SPAN in 1995, talking about his newsletters:
The fact is, Paul has lied like a very old-fashioned sort of politician about these newsletters, and he has been lying for years. He has gone through the motions of public regret about their contents, but has never acknowledged knowing who wrote the offensive material or even being aware that offensive material went out under his name. That’s bullshit. Now he ducks questions on the subject entirely (and his supporters complain that it’s “old news,” because they have no serious defense of the comments or Paul’s responsibility for them).
- Who Wrote Ron Paul’s Newsletters? – Reason Magazine
- Ron Paul Dead Wrong about Charity Covering Medical Costs for Uninsured « Robot Pirate Ninja
- Ron Paul’s Charity: Libertarian Views Fail Reality Test
- Fascist Ron Paul and Christian charity is a scam to kill the poor – YouTube.
- Tea Party Express’ Amy Kremer Parrots Ron Paul on Charities Taking Care of the Uninsured | Video Cafe
- Ron Paul woos religious conservatives as he pushes hard for win in Iowa – The Hill’s Ballot Box
- Ron Paul is dangerous
- Little Green Footballs – Ron Paul Was Scheduled to Appear on a White Supremacist Radio Show in 2006
- If Corporations Have Rights Like People, Shouldn’t Animals? | Activism & Vision | AlterNet
- Did House Republicans Sandbag John Boehner? | Crooks and Liars
- Donald Trump Bolts Republican Party, Eyeing Other 2012 Options – ABC News
- Herman Cain Makes Anti-Politico Vow
- Liar! Liar! David Brooks Bids to Win Politifact Truthiness Award | MyFDL
Paul Krugman has been warning us for weeks, and now it’s happened. Citing Greg Sargent and others, Krugman has been lamenting how frequently politicians — Mitt Romney in particular, but he’s hardly alone — engage in complete whoppers and no one in the media calls them on it.
As Sargent illustrates, its hard to read a single speech or interview from Mitt in which he doesn’t fabricate a vicious lie about something Obama neither said nor did. And the result of this unchecked permissiveness towards lying, Krugman predicted, would be more and more political dishonesty.
Sure enough, I turned on PBS News Hour in time to catch David Brooks’ opening comments in response to the ever credulous Judy Woodruff. She wanted to know how much the House GOP hurt the Republican image by its behavior on the payroll tax bill this week. Now, the correct answer should have been: none. That’s because their image should already be destroyed. Everyone with any sense already knew that this group is a bunch of vicious clowns who would, if allowed, destroy government, dismantle essential public services and cheerfully screw the victims of the current economic crash to teach them a lesson.
But Brooks, who must privately detest these clowns, apparently thought his job was to help cover for them. So instead of telling the truth — that a group whose mission is to destroy much of government has no business representing the public within that government and just got handed their hats — Brooks said he was somewhat “sympathetic to the principle” they tried to defend. Principle? What principle?
- Alan Grayson, moneybomber – POLITICO.com
- The Christmas War on Atheism: What’s the Religious Right Whining About When It’s Really Non-Believers Who Are Under Attack? | | AlterNet
- Why it’s hard to be Christian at Christmas – Guest Voices – The Washington Post
- The Immoral Minority: I am not sure how much this helps President Obama, but it certainly made me feel better about supporting him.
Energy & The Environment
- Kolskaya Oil Rig Sinking Sparks Doubt Over Arctic Plan
The sinking of a floating oil rig that left more than 50 crew dead or missing is intensifying fears that Russian companies searching for oil in remote areas are unprepared for emergencies – and could cause a disastrous spill in the pristine waters of the Arctic.
Only four months ago, Russian energy giant Gazprom sent Russia’s first oil platform to the environmentally sensitive region, and industry experts and environmentalists warned it is unfit for the harsh conditions and is too far from rescue crews to be reached quickly in case of an accident. They are demanding Russia put Arctic oil projects on hold.
Climate & Climate Politics
- The Immoral Minority: Kathleen Parker reminisces of her bonding with Christopher Hitchens over their mutual dislike of Sarah Palin.
To say I was a friend of Hitchens would be an exaggeration, though I did enjoy the pleasure of his company on several occasions. But one needn’t have known a writer to mourn his passing or to feel profound sadness about all the silent days to come. No matter what the topic, I always wanted to know what Hitchens thought about it and, lucky for the world, he seemed always willing to end the suspense.
- There was just one Hitch – The Washington Post – Kathleen Parker
- And what might arguably be the very best postscript I’ve read on Christopher Hitchens to date: News Desk: Postscript: Christopher Hitchens, 1949-2011 : The New Yorker
- Thank you Christopher – YouTube.
Climate & Climate Politics
- This one from the really stupid, whoop-dee-doo, no big deal, much-ado-about-nothing category: Lead global warming author quits IPCC project « Don Surber
The UN’s global warming unit, IPCC, is so discredited that “it is not clear how much additional benefit there is to having a huge bureaucratic scientific review effort under UN auspices” said Ken Caldeira in announcing that he is resigning as one of its leading authors on the next IPCC report.
The previous one won a Nobel Peace Prize in 2007.
Outside of a few skeptical bloggers, you will not see this story anywhere else.
If anyone doubts there is a bias in the media for the bright and shiny object called Global Warming (aka Climate Change, Climate Disruption and Global Cooling) which of these headline is not like the others:
Now I will grant you that the first two headlines are by skeptics, Anthony Watts and Tom Nelson, respectively. But the third one is by Andrew Revkin of the New York Times. Shouldn’t journalists be skeptical? Isn’t Doubting Thomas the reporter’s role model?
This is the pseudo skeptic climate change denier ploy to make a big deal out of nothing as part of their propaganda and disinformation program to try and sow doubt amongst the general public. Anthony Watts calls this a shocker? Why? Why is this a big deal? Its not. It’s nothing. Calderia in his statement about why he’s moving on said:
…my resignation was a vote of confidence in my scientific peers, not a critique. It is just not clear to me that, at this point, working on IPCC chapters is the most effective use of my time.
I can not say specially with any kind of authority but it sounds to me like Calderia might feel he wants to devote his time to research rather than the administrative politics of writing and editing IPCC reports. I once resigned from the board of a community theatre group I was a part of because I felt my time was better spent designing and building scenery and lighting.
No Big Deal. These pseudo skeptic deniers are on a fishing expedition. Anthony Watts really needs to get a life. Shocker indeed.