19 September, 2009

Happy Hour Discurso

Today's opining on the public discourse.

My darlings, I bring you the non-wit and non-wisdom of Rep. Joe Barton:

Kate Sheppard reported today on some recent Barton comments about climate change and wind power.

"Wind is God's way of balancing heat. Wind is the way you shift heat from areas where it's hotter to areas where it's cooler. That's what wind is. Wouldn't it be ironic if in the interest of global warming we mandated massive switches to energy, which is a finite resource, which slows the winds down, which causes the temperature to go up? Now, I'm not saying that's going to happen, Mr. Chairman, but that is definitely something on the massive scale. I mean, it does make some sense. You stop something, you can't transfer that heat, and the heat goes up. It's just something to think about."

Something to think about, indeed.

Barton is, of course, the same lawmaker who recently suggested that humans will "adapt" to climate change because we can "get shade."

If you should have doubts that anyone, even a Con, can be this absolutely fucking stupid, well, one of Steve's readers can set your mind at ease:
A sharp reader emails, "I had doubts Barton could possibly be as stupid as that quote made him look, so I checked the hearing transcript and sure enough, he is that stupid."
Recall that when Cons were in power, this dumbfuck was in charge of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. 'Nuff said.

Elsewhere on the environmental front, Cons are still lying about cap-and-trade costs, although they've decided their original idea is too much to swallow. They're only exaggerating the cost by a factor of ten now. I suppose it's an improvement.

When cap-and-trade legislation comes up for a vote, Conserva-Dems will attempt to claim that due to the perilous nature of their seats, they must needs eviscerate it. Feel free to remind them of some inconvenient truth:

It’s become a Beltway article of faith that Blue Dog and conservative Dems have to tread really carefully on health care because their vote on cap and trade earlier this year was tremendously risky in so-called “marginal” districts.

But is this really true? I’ve obtained a new poll done for the Environmental Defense Fund which found that in three conserva-Dem districts, backing cap and trade vote may not be a huge risk, after all. The poll, done by respected Dem firm Garin Hart Yang, found:

* In Blue Dog Dem Heath Shuler’s North Carolina dictrict, cap and trade is supported by 55% of voters, versus 29% opposed.

* In Blue Dog Dem Baron Hill’s Indiana district, cap and trade is supported by 45%, versus 30% opposed.

* In Dem Rep. Tom Perriello’s conservative Virginia district, cap and trade is supported by 42%, versus 25% opposed.

“We went into three districts where conventional wisdom held that Demorats took a tough vote on cap and trade,” Allan Rivlin, a partner with Garin Hart Yang, told me. “The poll shows that it didn’t hurt these members in these districts. It actually helps them. Even in districts that are represented by moderate or conservative Democrats, supporting action on climate change is the popular position to take.”

They'll have to come up with a different excuse for their fuckery. Not that they will.

As for Faux News' environmental expertise, take a look at what happened to Sean Hannity when he tried to bemoan the fate of the San Joaquin Valley, and keep it handy for those moments when you need to educate confused Faux News viewers. Throw in Juan Williams' utterly gorgeous pwning while you're at it:

Every once in a while Juan Williams almost gets one right on ClusterFox. While discussing whether the government should be cutting off funds for ACORN, Juan Williams asks Hannity why he's not concerned about the billions of dollars we've been ripped off for by private contractors and our defense department. Of course Hannity has no problem with that since they're "keeping us safe".

HANNITY: And we continue now with our "Great American Panel." Should ACORN lose all federal funds? Juan?

WILLIAMS: Well, yes, if they are guilty of this corruption, yes, they should, you can't have federal money going into a corrupt organization.

Now, I will say this, Sean. Exactly how serious do you think this is? Because the way you play it...

HANNITY: Extreme.

WILLIAMS: ... you would think that this is the basis of all corruption, going to take apart our great country. And you know what? This is miniscule. And most of what ACORN does is help poor people.

HANNITY: Getting tens of millions, getting $8 billion.

WILLIAMS: Forget that. They got about $5 million.


But I will say something to you. You're a big guy. How come you're not going after people who take billions of dollars? Why don't you go after Blackwater? Why don't you go after the defense industry that rips off our country? You know, these are people...

HANNITY: The industry that keeps us safe.

WILLIAMS: Why don't you go after Wall Street?

HANNITY: Look, how about we go after the corrupt radicals in the Obama administration?

Note how Williams reduces Hannity to sputtering talking points and conspiracy theories by asking honest questions. It's truly a thing of beauty.

Speaking of ACORN, Bobby Jindal jumps on Tim Pawlenty's bandwagon and cuts off state funding that doesn't exist. Sadly, I'm sure many right-wingers will be mightily impressed by gestures about as meaningful as a firm statement that the state will discontinue funding alien invaders immediately. This is indeed becoming modern-day McCarthyism, only dumber.

Let's have a quick roundup of media assclowns, shall we? Bill O'Reilly says media not welcome during his acceptance speech for his Media Courage Award. David Brooks thinks that despite all the racist signs, Teabaggers aren't racists:

No, it's not about race, he declares.

The proof, he tells us, is that there was also a small group of African-Americans holding a different event at the same time, and white folks gladly purchased food from their lunch stands and paid good money, without actually burning them down or lynching them. Of course, the lunch stand folks probably had the good sense not to say they, too, hoped to be President one day.

He then goes on to completely misunderstand what a Jeffersonian democrat is.

And Tammy Bruce proves the O'Reilly Factor is still the same ol' purveyor of shit:

Tammy Bruce, last night on The O'Reilly Factor:

Bruce: But ultimately, it comes down to his inability to govern, and the fact that he seems to have, it seems to me, some malevolence toward this country, which is unabated.

Where does Fox News dig these characters up? Really. They never cease to amaze.


Telling people that the president hates the country -- that's just plain ol' depraved. It's sick. These people are sick, sick, sick.

What else can you expect from a network so far gone that they treat bogus polls as gospel truth and advertise blatant lies about their competitors?

And, finally, the latest gem from the Texas Board of Education:

First up, board member Don McLeroy explains the importance of recognizing how "the majority" has helped "minorities" like African-Americans and women. "For instance, the women's right to vote. ... The men passed it for the women."

(An incredulous female board member can be heard asking in the background, "How many years did it take?")

What. A. Dumbfuck. Ladies: I suggest you use that right to vote to kick Don McLeroy right off the Board.

1 comment:

John Pieret said...

Re Barton:

"I believe that Earth's climate is changing, but I think it's changing for natural variation reasons. And I think man-kind has been adopting, or adapting, to climate as long as man has walked the Earth. When it rains we find shelter. When it's hot, we get shade. When it's cold, we find a warm place to stay. Adaptation is the practical, affordable, utterly natural reflex response to nature when the planet is heating or cooling, as it always is."

Hmmm ... uh ... we have a word for that ... evolution. Unfortunately, evolution doesn't care whether we or any species survives and it especially doesn't care if we live in poverty, suffer from disease (which mostly involves other organisms adapting) or die in large numbers from famine. We're the only ones who care about that and our elected leaders, having some control over it, are especially supposed to care.

Evolution is only "the practical, affordable, utterly natural" solution to the problem of what we are doing to the planet because it will automatically eliminate the source of problem and will (eventually) clean up the mess we've made once we have been removed or rendered harmless.

I wonder if his constituents know that Barton is such a raving "Darwinist"?