One America News Network (OAN) makes absolutely no attempt to any semblance of fairness or honesty as a “news” outlet. They happily present total ultra-right-wing hog**** that even the editors at Fox News would toss in the trash. (more…)
There are no approaches to climate change mitigation and other forms of environmental protection that are truly consistent with unbridled free enterprise and small government. What Inglis is proposing is simply a revenue-neutral carbon tax, which is something essentially everyone, liberal or conservative, understands to be necessary to hasten the reduction of carbon emissions.
Now, one can say that the basic idea of making progress in this arena without raising taxes is a “conservative” concept. Say what you will. Maybe that’s why Inglis is no longer in congress, because voters don’t buy that. Conservatives believe that any manipulation of the free market is unacceptable, especially if its purpose is to advance “liberal” ideas like climate stability.
Last January, somewhere in Michigan, a bunch of Republicans decided, “Let’s create some documents to the effect that we, not those who represent the true winner, are the legitimate voices on which the outcome of the presidential election is to be based.”
Wow, that’s just an amazing stunt to pull.
This is another good example of the fact that, the more outrageous the claim, the more likely it is to be believed.
A spokesmen for the Kremlin was on Sunday morning television today, explaining that the Russian aggression, which became a threat to world peace only within the past few months, actually began with the re-unification of Germany more than 30 years ago. He never really got around to explaining why this is happening right now.
Let me advance another possible explanation, and I ask you to choose between the two propositions. (more…)
The photo here offers a full and complete explanation of how the United States found itself teetering on the edge of losing its democracy.
I don’t understand spoken Spanish well enough to offer a translation, but seriously, would that add any value to this guy’s presentation? He’s scolding “anti-vaxxers,” referring to them as “morons”; that’s all I can tell you.
Not a bad time to review the Freedom to Vote Act.
If this happens, the people of the United States will actually have a powerful voice in the way they are governed.
It will be a true catastrophe for all the forces of corruption and hate.
Always good to see things like this, but remember, this is Georgia, the state in which the most senior election official recorded a call in which the then-president threated criminal charges unless he was (somehow) awarded an extra 11,780 votes.
We don’t want him “blasted,” we want him indicted.
Sci-fi great Robert Heinlein has put his finger on something that may help us understand how it was possible for the Republican party in the United States to squirt so far and so fast to the ultra-right. Does all this racism, hate, exclusion, cruelty, lying, cheating, and denial of science make any rational sense? Can arguing against these people be effective? Of course not.
But as Heinlein put it, all these positions appeal to their “prejudices.”
Bob Inglis is one of the more interesting characters in American politics. A moderate Republican from South Carolina who served six terms in the House before the Tea Party removed him from office in 2010, Inglis was perhaps the only person in his party who embraced the science of global warming and overtly wanted to make climate change mitigation an important part of his platform.
Cleverly dubbed “the Al Gore of the Republican Party,” he stood no chance against his opponents who easily convinced voters that Inglis has simply flipped to the other side.
Now that Inglis is no longer in politics, he’s taken to promoting what he claims to be addressing climate change with conservative business principles, as expressed in the podcast linked here.
Do I agree that this is possible? If I answered that question in this space, readers would have no reason to listen to the podcast, and so I’ll “hide” my response here.
