Thoughts About Mike Huckabee

I'm not going to pull a full blog post out of it, but here are some thoughts I just Tweeted after watching Katie Couric's 45 minute interview with former Governor Mike Huckabee. (The reason, btw, that Huckabee is a FORMER Governor is because he didn't run for re-election in 2006, not because he quit in the middle of his term.)

"I'm glad Mike Huckabee is neither my president nor my governor, but I bet he'd make a good pastor. I'm not a supporter, but I am a fan.

"He doesn't have a good grasp of public policy, but I do think he has keen insight into day-to-day life, human psyche, & spiritual desires.

"I won't vote for him in 2012, but I did really enjoy this interview with @katiecouric. http://bit.ly/5zqj6b

"He also has a deep and sincere respect for all Americans, regardless of whether or not they share his politics. I love this quote:

"'"Hes the CINC. Hes the POTUS and I want 2 respect him as president & I think I can argue with him on policy w/out questioning... his motive'

"And because of that quote, I think John Shadegg and Eric Cantor might very well claim that Mike Huckabee is an enemy of freedom. #tcot"


Watch CBS News Videos Online

A Skeptic and an Activist Discuss Global Warming

I posted a link on Facebook today from environmental scholar and activist Bill McKibben, who argues that President Obama has not been as outspoken about the urgency of climate change as he should be: "[Obama] has acted; in fact, he's done more than his three predecessors combined... But doing more than George W. Bush on global warming is like doing more than George Wallace on racial healing."

A conservative friend of mine replied, arguing that "the world will fix itself...there is no such thing as global warming caused by man." I in turn made some brief arguments and referred him to some scientific sources. Here is our conversation, as well as a video from one of those sources that actually proves some of my comments to be a little off-base, but does back-up the basic argument that global average warming is real and that we humans do have an impact on our atmosphere. I have fixed both our punctuation and capitalization. Otherwise they are as posted.

My friend's three successive comments:

[comment 1] And in about 10 years the headlines will be... "GLOBAL COOLING" Did we cause it? hahaha

I think it's a big waste of time to spend all this money and effort on the so called Global Warming... we can't do anything else with this money and effort?

[comment 2] Nathan - have you seen the headlines of the past? We used to think that there was going to be a new ice age! Haha! The world will fix itself... there is no such thing as global warming caused by man. What are you thoughts... and your proof/evidence for such ideas?

[comment 3] A link from the Heritage Foundation.

My reply, also in three successive comments:

[comment 1] So called "global cooling" is junk science. The "headlines of the past" were not backed up by serious scientists. There was never broad discussion of cooling from peer-reviewed journals or major institutions like there is warming. [NOTE: I was a little wrong on this, as the below video shows, but my basic point was true.]

It is possible that global warming could cause regional cooling by changing air and ocean currents - that's why the shift toward the name "climate change," to avoid linguistic confusion - but that would come from an *average* rise in temperature.

It is true, as your conservative think tank link points out, that the earth warms and cools on its own and that we don't completely understand those cycles (or how ocean currents work). However, it's also true that our current warming trend is far greater than any previous recorded cycle, and that it corresponds almost exactly with greenhouse gas output, especially carbon.

I can't tell who authored the Heritage post, but I looked up the two names it quoted. There was nothing new about Wallen on the first page of Google results. Calder is a science journalist - but not an actual scientist himself. (To be fair, that's also true of the man who wrote the link I posted above.) He is also not an example of changed "headlines" or opinions - he is still a warming denier.

[comment 2] I'm a political process junkie and an environmental justice advocate, not a scientist, so I won't dig too deep into the evidence here. What I can do is point you to three sources more articulate on the subject than I. For starters, here is a web-page not from journalists or a think tank with an agenda, but from non-political climate scientists at NASA, Penn State, U. Mass Amherst, and others: Real Climate.

(In fact, they even wrote a brief post about Calder once: Real Climate: "Nigel Calder in the Times".)

Here's another good link, aimed at warming skeptics such as Calder and yourself, with some videos about the science: Greenfyre's intro tab.

And here's a book that, while I haven't read it yet (it's on my nightstand), was recommended and loaned to me by my geologist dad: The Long Thaw.

[comment 3] I would say two final things. First, yes, you and the Heritage Foundation are both absolutely correct, addressing climate change will come with a heavy short-term price tag. I do think that, through energy job creation and new energy sources, there's money to be saved and taxes to be lowered in the long term, but yes, there are high start up costs. However, all good things come with sacrifice and a price, but more importantly, if one believes what the scientific method is telling us, the high price of inaction is even greater than the high price of action.

Finally, thank you for not bringing up Al Gore. It ticks me off when skeptics and deniers try to make this about him or other activists even though their names aren't to be found anywhere in the relevant journals or papers. I appreciate that.

My Keyboard Supports Sarah Palin

I was working on a pretty good post about the right-wing’s obsession with accusing the media of treating Obama like a Messiah while themselves treating Sarah Palin the same way. I had transcribed a quote from today's Morning Joe and excerpted a Denver Post column.

And then my computer ate it. GRRRRRR.

I don’t know why, but it’s very easy to do stupid things with my new computer – accidentally hit a button without realizing it and thus keep on typing anyway – but that button took you away from your text and to a menu and so your keyboard strokes accidentally open a new window or, in this case, delete everything.

DAMMIT.

I don’t know if I’ll retype the piece later or not.

Separated at birth?

Gene Hackman and Bill O'Reilly. Seriously, am I the only one who thinks so?

Dogs & Kids Welcome Home Their Soldier Dads

No commentary is needed for this moving video. I haven't seen anything this touching in a long, long time.



I found this clip at the end of a page of clips of dogs welcoming home their owners after tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. My favorite:


H/T my friend Anna.

Who do you remember on this Veteran's Day?

O'Reilly: Let's Win Muslim Hearts & Minds, But Only Because It's Unpractical To Kill Them All

Here's a pretty startling quote from tonight's O'Reilly Factor: "Barack Obama wants to win hearts and minds in the Middle East, in the Muslim world, which is a good thing. And you know that, as a soldier. We can't kill all the Muslims, so we want to win as many hearts and minds of good, moderate Muslims as we can."

You've got to love Adrian Chen of Gawker.com's reaction: "Bill O'Reilly: Always good for a laugh, followed by a long period of reflective silence, followed by a little more laughing, then a bit of weeping, then silence again, then some more weeping, and, finally, a week-long bout of problem drinking."

Matt Dunne for Governor

Let's hope Vermont gives itself what it deserves next year:

Charge Your Phone By Walking

Now here's a driveway moment if ever there was one. This All Things Considered story explores a new technology: the ability to charge your cellphone or MP3 player by walking. The article seems to suggest that the biggest benefit to this device is that you can charge your electronic device when nowhere near a plug - like when hiking - and exercise at the same time. For me, the big plus is the "green" factor, replacing coal or oil with the most renewable source of energy of all: your legs.

Health Care Reform Passes The House!

The vote is closed! Health care reform has passe the U.S. House at a vote of 220-215, with one Republican even voting aye! As Craig Ferguson says each night, "It's a great day for America, everybody, yes it is!"

Jon Stewart's Style Parody Of Glenn Beck

I s**t* you not, this is the Daily Show's greatest moment ever, certainly one of its top five. It really takes off about 1:50 in. Wow, amazing, awesome, genius.



You know who else didn't answer medical questions? Hitler.

My Faith Statement On Clean Energy

As I mentioned on Saturday, Repower America has a way cool new media project called the Repower Wall, documenting videos from thousands of Americans from all walks of life explaining why they support clean energy. I shot my two-minute video for that project today. You can read about the project and watch clips from Wesley Clark and Bill Nye here, watch my faith-based video below, and watch an even shorter video about the larger project below that.

The Repower Wall

Repower America just launched a really cool new media project call the Repower Wall, showcasing thousands of videos of people, from famous to not, explaining why they support clean energy legislation. It's basically a video montage where you see thumbnail clips of the videos and can roll over them to see who they are and click to watch. I wrote all about it on MyDD; my post is here and the wall is here. To wet your appetite, here's Bill Nye the Science Guy and a good friend.

Is Walt Minnick Worth Supporting?

If Rep. Walt Minnick (D-ID) loses his re-election bid next year, it won't be because he's too liberal, it will be because he is too conservative. This most conservative of the Blue Dog Democrats, from my old home district in North and western Idaho, is most likely losing his Democratic base while failing to pick up Republican support. We Democrats are told to grin and bear it because it's better than we'd get from any Republican, but that may not be the case anymore. Charles Lemos at MyDD had this little gem yesterday about Minnick's conservatism that I had not seen before:

Minnick may actually be the most conservative member of Congress from the Northwest... Vote View, a ranking done by the Political Science Department at UCSD, found Walt Minnick to be more conservative than Idaho's Mike Simpson or Washington's Dave Reichert, Doc Hastings or Cathy McMorris-Rodgers.

When we north Idaho Democrats complain about Minnick's votes and consider not voting for him again, we are often told by independents and moderate Republicans to stop whining because he's with us more than anyone else who would win the seat. But maybe not - think about what Vote View is saying: eastern Idaho's Mike Simpson, a veteran Republican, is more liberal than the freshman Democrat Walt Minnick.

Minnick has voted against President Obama's budget proposal, the stimulus, and cap-and-trade all. He will probably vote against health care reform and the final versions of climate change and health care legislation. He even abandons his party on the smaller issues when no one else does: according to the Idaho Statesman, "When a House committee last week passed legislation to create a federal watchdog agency to oversee home loans and other consumer credit, Rep. Walt Minnick of Idaho was one of only two Democrats to vote against the beefed-up regulations sought by the White House." We all expected Minnick to be a conservative Democrat who would break from his party from time to time, but no one expected the "D" after his name to be quite this misleading.

If Minnick's conservatism is from his heart, than I can respect it, but he shouldn't think that it will help him politically. As this CNN roundtable in St. Maries, Idaho shows, even those Republicans who do like Minnick don't like him enough to vote for a Democratic majority. Anything they can do to take a vote for Speaker away from Nancy Pelosi, they will do. Which is to say, Walt Minnick can stand with the Republicans all he wants, but he won't get their support. What he will do is lose Democrats he can't win without.

If Minnick really is more conservative than even Mike Simpson, I can't support him. The reason I'm a Democrat isn't because I like the word "Democratic," but because I tend to take the same positions the party does. I don't care what letter follows Minnick's name; if he won't take at least some of those positions, than no, he is no different than most competent Republicans (I throw in the word "competent" so as to exclude ex-Rep. Bill Sali). And if Minnick can't count on even moderate Democrats like me, than he has no base left and is all but a goner come November 2010. I hope he votes for at least one of the final big conference bills - health care or cap-and-trade - because if not, then while I do want to support him, I will almost have to stand up and cheer when he is defeated by a Republican veteran with Hill experience. Vaughn Ward may be a Republican, but his votes probably won't be much different from Minnick's, and if that's the case, his biography becomes a major factor.

Obama vs. Bush

Politico led off this morning with the headline, "What if Bush had done that?"

A four-hour stop in New Orleans, on his way to a $3 million fundraiser. Snubbing the Dalai Lama. Signing off on a secret deal with drug makers. Freezing out a TV network. Doing more fundraisers than the last president. More golf, too.

President Barack Obama has done all of those things — and more.

What’s remarkable is what hasn’t happened. These episodes haven’t become metaphors for Obama’s personal and political character — or consuming controversies that sidetracked the rest of his agenda.

It’s a sign that the media’s echo chamber can be a funny thing, prone to the vagaries of news judgment, and an illustration that, in politics, context is everything.

The author, Josh Gerstein, made the point that frameworks decide which stories are relevant, and the Obama framework is more positive than was the Bush framework. I agree with the first half of that part, but not so much the second. Bush didn't get hammered nearly as much in his first year as President as he did his second term, and Obama received quite a bit of negative press in the campaign for his lack of experience, in August for his slipping poll numbers, and now in October for his perceived lack of accomplishments. Here's what I wrote to a friend who posted this article on Facebook:

I read this article earlier today too. I think it makes a very good point, one I've seen made before: we come up with narratives, and then obsess about the stories that fit into those narratives. Gore as untrustworthy robot; Kerry as liar; Bush as dumb businessman surrounded by corrupt cronies; Obama as hopeful change agent but one who lacks wisdom or experience.

Some of the things the right demands Obama receive more criticism for wouldn't have been bigger issues under Bush; but indeed, some would. At the same time, Bush lacked political experience (the Governor of Texas has no real power and is little more than a figurehead), and yet didn't receive the pounding for that that Obama's gotten, so it goes both ways. We're also comparing the criticism of Bush's second term to Obama's first year, and Bush didn't get it quite so bad his first year, either.

This is an interesting issue, but not one worthy of partisan anger or finger-pointing. It's more about about the errant pack-mentality of journalism than it is the bias of journalists. (End FB comment.)

It's a darn shame, though, that Politico has to give the story that kind of a headline, fanning ideological hatred where it need not be fanned.

New Computer!

First my schedule got busy. Then my computer caught a virus. Then my computer died. Then I caught the swine flu.

BUT, now I'm getting used to that new schedule, I have a new computer, and my health is all better! Which is to say, except for Wednesdays, blogging should resume now. :D

John McCain Tweets About "Wasteful Spending"

John McCain is back on the pork barrel war path again, because apparently when you have a $1.8 trillion deficit, focusing on a cause that (by even the most outlandish definitions) has cost a grand total of $0.1 trillion over the last 18 years is clearly the most fiscally responsible thing a U.S. Senator can do. (To be fair, McCain used the phrase "wasteful spending," not the word "pork." So okay, it's really more about labeling anything he opposes as "wasteful" rather than finding projects that meet set criteria. Completely different, right?)

McCain Tweeted this morning, "Wasteful spending continues in Washington…so I’ve decided to resume the Top 10 earmarks of the day, starting w/ the DHS Appropriations Bill". Here are just some of his entries:

#1. $325,000 to study seismic activity in Memphis, TN

#2. $125,000 to replace a generator in La Grange Park, IL

#3. $130,000 to relocate the residents of 130 homes in DeKalb, IL...

#5. $4 million for the Fort Madison Bridge in Fort Madison, WI

#6. $3.6 million for Coast Guard Operations Systems Center in West Virginia

#7. $900,000 for the City of Whitefish Emergency Operations Center in Whitefish, MT (Population: 6700)

#8. $300,000 to build a pier at the Coast Guard Academy in CT

So, according to the Republican Party's most recent presidential nominee, funding the U.S. service academies, ensuring fire and border safety in the the American west, expanding the branch of our military that performs S&R and stops drug runners, researching the potentially dangerous fault lines beneath the South and Midwest, and repairing our nation's crumbling infrastructure - even after the Minnesota bridge collapse - all count as "wasteful spending."

Calling his number 1, 5, 6, 7, and 8 projects "wasteful" is absolutely ridiculous. As for numbers 2 and 3, I need more information. Where is his generator? At a hospital? At a federal office building? Wouldn't those warrant replacing? And if elsewhere, why didn't McCain say so? And as for those 130 DeKalb homes, what's the reason for the project? Is this repayment for some sort of federal eminent domain? "Relocation" in and of itself isn't enough to get my hackles up...

At this rate, I'm surprised the number one project on McCain's list wasn't port security or defense satellites. John McCain and the new GOP: saying no to infrastructure, weather safety, and the U.S. service academies. Being the party of no only takes you so far when over half the true/false answers are actually "true."

Picture credit.