So, on the biggest issue we can deal with in this Congress, President Obama just weighed in big-time: "There's been some good work done by John Kerry and Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham. Let's go. Let's not wait. Let's show the American people that in the midst of this crisis, all of us are opening our eyes to what's necessary to fulfill the promise to our children and our grandchildren." That's right -- the President is pounding the bully pulpit to pass comprehensive climate and energy legislation.
But, ahh, Washington -- if you want a peek at why important statements like this get lost and why the 24/7 cable coverage turns into food fights sadly removed from the reality of real problems, look no further than the garbage churned out on a near daily basis by big monied interests dressed up to look like "think tanks," which publish pieces to distort the debate.
We get a great example today in the Hill, where a William Yeatman from the Competitive Enterprise Institute takes a big nothing-burger off the grill to muddy up my argument that climate change endangers our national security.
Reading his words, you'd think I was the only guy in America who sees the link between the dangers of climate change and our security. He conveniently ignores that I base my argument on the words and findings of the Pentagon, the CIA, analysts in the Bush Administration, generals like Anthony Zinni, Admirals like William Fallon, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and, oh, gee, literally hundreds of other national security experts. Against that, we have someone from the Competitive Enterprise Institute, an organization bankrolled by those trying to hold onto the status quo that has Americans sending $100 million a day to Iran for oil.
Now, let's look at the facts used by Mr. Yeatman, because they're a great example of what we're up against. He says that a single glacier area in Pakistan is getting larger and that anti-mosquito campaigns and sleeping nets help stop the spread of malaria. That's it. Well, of course mosquito nets help stop malaria. It's a complete non sequitur to the point that an unstable, warming climate will foster more disease and pandemics.
As for his other point, it's a textbook tactic from climate change deniers. They point to one localized event to try to discredit the global trend. It's true that a single glacier complex in Pakistan is growing, but that doesn't change the fact that globally, we're losing glacier mass at an alarming rate. This is exactly like the people who claim that a couple of snow storms in Washington, DC mean the climate isn't changing in dangerous ways.
The reality is that climate change is extremely dangerous in the very region Mr. Yeatman uses to make his point. India and Pakistan, two nuclear-armed nations, share the waters of the runoff from the glaciers of the Himalayas, glaciers that are, over all, melting. The World Bank reported last year, "High population densities, a large concentration of poverty, and the region's climate variability have all combined to make South Asia especially sensitive to the consequences of climate change." And Reuters quoted last month, "High levels of poverty and population density also render both countries particularly vulnerable to climate change-related water shortages, said Munawar Saeed Bhatti, of Pakistan's ministry of foreign affairs."
So, you can believe Mr. Yeatman, or you can believe the World Bank and the Pentagon: instability will cause more pandemics, drought and famine, and will cause upheavals in societies around the world. These are the breeding grounds of extremism and terrorism, and they accelerate threats to our national security.
We could let that happen, or we could pass the American Power Act. Mr. Yeatman's last point is that our national security is dependent on a strong economy. On this, I couldn't agree more. That's why the American Power Act -- according to a study out today from Third Way -- cuts down on our imports foreign oil, creates 1.9 million jobs in just the first ten years, lowers energy bills for Americans, and finally starts to wean us off our oil addiction. Just ask anyone on the Gulf Coast how important that last point is.
Look, it's no surprise that these are the tactics they are using. I had my staff build a website, TruthFightsBack, just to fight back against this nonsense. Here's a page on TruthFightsBack pushing back on this specific distortion:
http://www.truthfightsback.com/distortions/entry/national-security-and-climate-change/
Cut and paste that link into your Facebook page, use the Twitter tool on that page to write a tweet on it, or email this page to anyone you think should hear this. Only by pushing out the truth can we beat back the well-funded distortions of the other side.
Now let's get at it.
Follow John Kerry on Twitter: www.twitter.com/JohnKerry
Until we stop the ability of the giant corporations to line our rep.'s already wealthy pockets this sort of behavior will continue forever and forever and...
Ofcourse, we do know this will require amending our constitution.
In addition, in a timeline of "major" oil spills put out by the NY Times, there were 10 or 11 listed in the last 43 years, where my sources show 36 "major" oil spills in the last 43 years.
It appears there is a lot of pressure on our reps and media to downplay the long-term effects of this spill. I'm guessing b/c there are promises already made about offshore drilling. WE DON'T WANT THAT.
DO NOT TRADE POLLUTION, it would create the largest new bankster derivatives playgr4ound in history, more crashes and roller coaster of costs, all funneling into a few luck, probably dishonest, gamblers.
Tax Industrial level pollution: radiation created or emitted, heavy metals emitted, toxic emissions of any kind
That will make Fossils and Nuke power more expensive, we can ramp it up to give time for the people and the markets to adjust to it, but we should stop all fossil and nuke help from the republic and we put all that money and more into green energy: Solar, Wind and Waste Bio Fuels.
Specifically, Rooftop PV Solar, Offshore wind, and Waste Bio char, can supply the worlds energy and fuel needs: cleanly, safely, Forever, within 12 years and cheaper in the long run 2-6 cents now, and 26$ per barrel bio oils.
http://www.ecobusinesslinks.com/solar_panels.htm
about 1$ per Wp solar panels, new.
install solar plants for about $1.30 per watt, compared with an industry average of about $1.75, according to Hardy." http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20602099&sid=a7K1FZoNgJ0w
Wind: “between two and six cents today, depending on location.12 Wind power approaches competitiveness with conventional generation at this price point. “
http://www.repp.org/articles/static/1/binaries/wind%20issue%20brief_FINAL.pdf
http://www.css.cornell.edu/faculty/lehmann/publ/BiofBioproBioref%203,%20547-562,%202009%20Laird.pdf
26$ per barrel bio oil from waste bio char.
They each just have different talking points for doing nothing or passing ersatz reform.
Why don't you find some compromise measures that Republicans can support? Otherwise this is just another PR exercise.
If bad laws are passed, or allowed an undeserved continuance, it's because the majority in congress puts their own "special interest" above the needs of the public in general.
"Special interest" groups can offer all the bribes they want. Unless someone is on the receiving end, and acting according to the special interests wants, it's of no avail.
"It takes two to tango". Congress is just as much to blame as the industry "special interest" groups that they ridicule in public, and sleep with in private.
Nobody likes it when their own tactics are used against them.
On climate change, you have my total support. Our fragile planet is feeling worse every day. And, it is doing so because of greed and its twin addiction.
I know that to change this addiction will be hard - all addictions are hard to break. And, I know that society will have to change to break this addiction. But, count me ready to help.
-More spending on War
-More contractors in Iraq
-More military in Afghanistan
-NO public option/NO single payer
-More drone attacks in Pakistan
-Americans targeted for assisination
-More offshore oil drilling
-Fewer Americans with Miranda rights
-Fewer abortion rights for women
-Absolutely NO Gay Marriage
-Increased Corporate power
-More military on American Borders
-Mandated Corporate Insurance payments
-Increased Surveilance of Americans
-Fewer privacy rights
-Increased extraordinary rendition
-Escalation of the failed drug war
"Wow, this list would make Richard M. Nixon Blush. Nixon's presidency would seem to be our last great liberal President. We are the new Americans: Afraid of everything that goes bump in the dark - giving up our freedoms for security and getting neither."
http://www.openleft.com/diary/18864/on-the-argument-about-whether-obama-is-progressive-enough-or-not
You have no idea what a right wing country this is, how bad things were in the past.
Like war. Over 100,000 Americans were killed in Vietnam, and you think war is bad now.
BTW Obama did not increase the war budget; it's declining.
You're not counting all the "special appropriations" bills Bush passed as part of his war budget.
Obviously you're listening to Republicans; that's their trick, not counting that.
Also note: liberal hero Clinton signed the repeal of Glass/Steagall in 1998.
That caused the housing meltdown and the Wall St bailout.
Obama de-privatized student loans. Now college kids will get grants and loans directly from the government, instead of from corporations, from Wall St.
That was a big, big deal - which Republicans carefully made you ignore.
Bill Clinton didn't do that. Obama did.
This progressive hatred of Obama is mainly Republican propaganda. Maybe your post is.
I strongly suspect the overall war budget under Obama is higher than under Bush. We now have more guys "over there" than we've had before, and more are in Afghanistan than in Iraq, and because of complicated logistics, it costs more to keep troops in Afghanistan than in Iraq.
Repeal of Glass-Steagal may have contributed to housing bubble and meltdown but there are many other causes as well, not least of which is role Wall Street played in getting lenders to "close the affordability gap" as housing prices skyrocketed while wages stayed stagnant (thanks Mr. Bush!) by making loans they knew could never be repaid.
I don't "hate" Obama. But I'm very disappointed in him.
By the end of next month, we could very well pass an important milestone: more American troops will have been killed in Afghanistan by hostile action under President Obama (around 17 months) than during the entire 88 months of war while Bush was president.
424 Americans killed by hostile action under GW Bush.
383 Americans killed by hostile action under Obama.
If wanna make progress on any, tackle on single or a few specific problems instead of everything.
For all of you out there in America and across the globe who have fought so hard to tackle the hideous enemy of our planet, namely carbon emissions, that bogus god you worship named "Climate Change" or "Global Warming", there is some really bad news that will be very painful for you to process. But it is my duty to pass it on to you anyway.
Are you sitting down?
Okay, here's the bombshell. The current volcanic eruption going on in Iceland, since it first started spewing volcanic ash a week ago, has, to this point, NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you have made in the past five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet. Not only that, this single act of God has added emissions to the earth estimated to be 42 times more than can be corrected by the extreme human regulations proposed for annual reductions.
So?? Do you have any point here?
Regarding CO2 emission from “Uncontrollable Factors†such as volcanic eruptions, human beings may not be able to do anything to counteract it "UNDER" “the Limitation of Current Technologies.†That’s why it is called “UNCONTROLLABLE†factor.
Does this enforce human being into completely giving in and doing nothing to control CO2 emissions from “CONTROLLABLE†factors? Like emissions from burning fossil fuels? Why are you so pessimistic? You almost sound like, you may have given up your life when you were bone.
Even the so called "climate change" scientist's admit they fudged the numbers to make climate change look real.
When Katrina hit, they all said, climate change is to blame, but we have not had a hurricane like it since then.
Climate change theories suggest the _probability_ of powerful Katrina-like hurricanes are increased as a result of global warming. It does not suggest there will be a steady stream or a predictable stream of such storms, only that they are becoming significantly more likely. The fact that there has not been another Katrina like storm to hit the U,S. (although I think there was one that ripped through other Caribbean countries) does not disprove that there is an increased chance of one occuring.
HuffPo's word limits do not allow me to give thoroughly detailed analyses of these points. Hopefully it is enough information to guide your own research, if you choose to try to understand the perspective of the other 99% of the population.