…
But the situation is more delicate for those who gained their notoriety, made their reputations, and received their government funding on the old “sky is falling” model. For them acknowledging new facts means admitting the major possibility they were wrong. This includes conceding policy prescriptions based on their work may be draconian, counterproductive, and in the end vastly harmful to poorest of the world’s population. The ethanol disaster is but one example of “consensus” science taking food off the table for no discernible reason. These admissions would be a tough pill to swallow but ones a true scientist would embrace.
Watchdog.org reports:
Virginia gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe and three top GreenTech advisers met with the key White House aide responsible for helping bankrupt solar-panel maker Solyndra win federal loans and high-profile presidential support, a Watchdog investigation has revealed.
What they discussed in the Oct. 12, 2010, meeting with Obama “green energy” aide Greg Nelson is a mystery – the White House visitors log offers no details. But the confab came seven months after a stock transfer made McAuliffe a GreenTech majority owner and company chairman.
h/t to Junkscience.com
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Time to start the betting pool on how many hours until he threatens to sue!! Get the popcorn…
Lady in Red says:
August 7, 2013 at 5:54 pm
The Obama Machine’s plan is to strip off otherwise conservative women to vote for them or stay home or vote for hopeless third party candidates by waving the bloody banner of abortion.
But with Roe against Wade the law of the land, there is very little that a state governor can do. Even in Texas, going from 24 to 20 weeks, favored by most Americans, was a struggle. So IMO realistically there is very little that Cuccinelli could do to change VA abortion law.
Is this issue really so important to you that you’re willing to help elect the egregiously corrupt, slimy Democrat operative TM to the highest office in your great state?
Lady in Red: I keep hoping that the GOP will one day realize that their backing of candidates that insist on forcing their religion down other’s throats is no better than the Taliban, and no more deserving of any thinking person’s vote. If they would rein this particular stupidity in, they would own the government for the next 50 years.
Philip Peake says:
August 7, 2013 at 6:35 pm
It’s not the GOP, but a segment of its base that is as extreme as its Indiana & Missouri Senate candidates in 2012. The latter was chosen in a three-way race.
Romney & McCain, both moderate to liberal on abortion, won the nomination. It’s wrong to tar the whole party on the basis of its fringe, IMO. There’s little that a president or senator can do to change the law as interpreted by judges. Despite many GOP appointees on the USSC, the Roe decision hasn’t been overturned.
IMO it should be, not because abortion should be outlawed in all cases, but because the definition of murder should be left up to the states. Roe was legislation for the whole country by five appointed officials, not jurisprudence. Even Ginsburg now recognizes that it would have been better to leave abortion policy to the states. No girl or woman would ever be more than a short bus ride from a state in which abortion was legal to nine months, but citizens who consider it murder even at less than five months then would not have to pay for the procedure.
Philip Peake, you are right. This Cuccinelli guy could win this election EASY, any Republican in Virginia can. Against McAuliff there really shouldn’t be any problems at all. But the GOP is obsessed with running dumb candidates who turn off so many people. The liberals don’t win because the people want MORE liberal policies, the liberals win because the Republicans run the most wretched candidates and then we get those liberal policies anyway.
milo, it’s not really about abortion as a whole. I think the partial birth abortion issue is one the GOP could win. it’s the cutesy dishonest way they go about it. Not much different from the global warming alarmists. If you want to have an honest debate, have it. Be upfront. Say what you just said. But the GOP, especially in Virginia, always do these runarounds of the truth that hurt them in the end.
Philip Peake says:
August 7, 2013 at 6:35 pm
Lady in Red: I keep hoping that the GOP will one day realize that their backing of candidates that insist on forcing their religion down other’s throats is no better than the Taliban, and no more deserving of any thinking person’s vote. If they would rein this particular stupidity in, they would own the government for the next 50 years.
==========================
Exactly. They fall for the fake-left wing tricks every time:
Fake left wing: We’ve got gay marriage, whooo hooo
Republicans: Screw you, we’ve got abortion, ner ner ne ner ner
Wake up – it’s 2013, not 1913
Re: Lady in Red says August 7, 2013 at 5:54 pm
If I may say, a little short-sighted and presumptuous on your part? Of ALL the options available, and I mean ALL the options (re contra .. tives), to focus on that which is the latest in term and last as well, is, short-sighted!
Respectfully submitted, of course.
.
Jorge says:
August 7, 2013 at 6:44 pm
The execrable candidates in some recent elections have been chosen in primaries dominated by Tea Party activists, with sabotaging Democrat cross-over voters thrown in for good measure, then bogus third party stalking horses in the general. The Tea Party started out as an economic protest movement, but got hijacked by social conservatives.
The GOP would control the Senate right now but for bad candidates in DE, CO & NV in 2010 & IN & MO in 2012, plus the Democrats’ backing a third party candidate in MT & pouring money into ND, while Romney idiotically blew the get out the vote ground game.
But what can you do with a primary system instead of party bosses picking the most electable candidates?
Not to mention massive vote fraud in OH, VA & FL, admitted to by the participants but not prosecuted by Holder.
To be fair Philip, there’s plenty of “religion” being forced down throats by Dems. It’s just not the Judeo-Christian-Muslim-etc variety. You’ve got Reverend Al Gore, for example. And those that preach about the “97%,” more extreme weather events, etc, the sorts of things that the unwitting take on faith.
And while the exact figure depends on which study you go by, roughly 75% of the US population identifies themselves as Christian. Exactly how would dropping traditional Christian values in politics improve the election chances of GOP politicians?
Jorge says:
August 7, 2013 at 6:47 pm
You may know more about the situation in VA than I. Even if the sneakiness level is as high as you suggest, may I respectfully ask, so what?
The fact remains that abortion law can’t be changed in VA or any other state without the legislature, so the governor is only one part of the equation. If the voters return a legislature willing to make the narrow kinds of changes allowed under federal constitutional proscription, then that is their will & so be it. Restricting infanticide & maintaining clinics healthy for the women who seek treatment there are well within state purview, IMO.
But the changes that any state can make are severely constrained by Roe.
My point is that with so many other important issues at stake, why vote based upon this one issue over which a governor has so little control in any case?
Phillip Peake…. Oh! how I agree. Beyond the GOP, conservatives, Constitutionalists — folk who believe in fact, science, truth! — could own the gov’t, I suspect. But, the fact that the McAuliffe/Mann clowns have made it as far as they have — that Obama can still pontificate about saving the world’s climate and have millions and millions of folk believe he’s Christ, or somesuch — is a sign of where the country is.
I ask friends to read WUWT, Climate Audit, Judith Curry and I’m met with a snarky, “Let’s just agree to disagree and leave it to the experts.” These minds will not save America.
And, looming over the horizon, is the American Taliban-like mentality which believes that their personal beliefs about the world, life and women (as forced incubating ovens) should be the law of the land. They are very self-righteous.
Long ago, I voted for Ross Perot. And believed. Perhaps, one day soon, a Libertarian will win. In any event, the Libertarian candidate in Virginia is the smartest and the most politically pure. That’s reason enough to shake up the mix. I am not ashamed of the vote to be. I even sent money. …..Lady in Red
Lady in Red says:
August 7, 2013 at 7:08 pm
Your vote for Perot gave us the Clintons.
Perot made a corrupt bargain with Clinton that he would get back into the race & throw it to Clinton in exchange for the government buying software from him when Hillary’s health care system was adopted. Oops! That didn’t pan out for Perot, but saddled the US with the most corrupt power couple in US history.
Libertarian candidates elect Democrats, as in the MT senate race. Why not just vote for Terry? The practical effect is the same. “Shaking up the mix” is exactly what the Democrats want you to think you’re doing.
The Obama administration brilliantly picked a fight with the Catholic Church on purpose in order to convince voters like you to support them. Tar the GOP’s extreme base with the brush of religious fundamentalism but please recognize that your buying into that ploy opens the door to the the Democrats’ extreme socialist base.
Practically there is little that social conservatives can do. Interestingly, what both radical pro-abortion & anti-abortion activists agree is that the issue should be nationalized. Both sides want victory at the federal level, rather than having to fight it out in the states. Moderates prefer that the USSC had not co-opted the issue, finding justification in “emanations from the penumbra” of one of the Bill of Rights.
The saying goes, it is better to remain silent and be thought an idiot than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt.
The abstract above says “made McAuliffe a GreenTech majority owner and company chairman”, but the linked article says “made McAuliffe a GreenTech minority owner and company chairman”. So which is it?
Two thoughts:
1) Both the political left and right play the same games:
On climate, we don’t want to do anything more than, simply, be good stewards of our planet earth, preserve it for our grandchildren….
On guns, we don’t want to take away everyone’s guns, we just want to make guns safe, protect children, etc. etc.
And, on abortion, we don’t want to force women to birth against their will, we just don’t want an innocent little fetus to suffer pain, etc.
It is the “how many hairs make a beard” argument, all ’round. The movement is incremental, but the end objective is always there. Not pretty. Absolute.
2) I crave smart, thinking people to advance candidates with sensible positions on climate, taxes, immigration, foreign policy, etc. and whose personal religious beliefs about abortion and homosexuality are not a thumping back-beat to their political refrain. Sadly, I have never been to a candidate’s night for conservatives, tea party folk, etc. where the stealth issue (regardless the immediate unliklihood of turning women into burka-wearing incubators) was not forced birthing, above all others. That is sad. And scary. It’s, still, far out on the horizon, but it doesn’t bode well at the other end of the spectrum of the progressive’s non-thinking agenda. ….Lady in Red
Perhaps it is time you guys scrapped your current system and tried democracy. Hint for the clueless: They had elections in East Germany and the USSR too. Democracy requires more than meaningless elections.
milodonharlani… The question, perhaps, reduces to:
Would I prefer to face a firing squad of fascists or communists? (I’ve actually thought about that.)
I don’t reckon it makes much difference.
I am not ashamed of thinking, caring, advocating. In time, truth will out itself, altho the truth candle seems to be quashed for long periods, as well. I only hope those gutsy ones in the mainstream climate community, the brilliant “citizen scientists” who are so much fun to watch running circles around the bloviating Michael Manns, and others — scientists, journalists, statesmen — win, in my lifetime.
After the firing squad, I won’t be able to help much. ….Lady in Red
bushbunny says:
August 7, 2013 at 6:19 pm
You remember that saying “‘Tis better to say nothing and be thought an idiot, than say something and everyone knows you are an idiot..” something like that.
“It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool,than to speak and remove all doubt.”
Note that the so-called progressives are now simply bought-and-paid-for puppets of high tech billionaires. The puppet running for Senate in New jersey does not even hide that his phony company is a gift to enrich him for his political efforts.
McAuliffe, no matter how slick his packaging, is nothing more than a political prostitute seeking to fleece the public.
It is no surprise Mann would choose to endorse who he has endorsed.
David Appell is in fine form tonite in the following the Daily Caller article. Makes an entertaining read.
“Charlatan” — my, my. Think he’ll sue for slander?
The Civil War should have never been fought. Let the Red Republicans (bad color choice) have the southern states. Let the Blue Democrats have the nawth. Us independents have the middle and all sides just shut the hell up and leave each other alone!
milodonharlani says:
August 7, 2013 at 7:19 pm
Lady in Red says:
August 7, 2013 at 7:08 pm
“Your vote for Perot gave us the Clintons.
Perot made a corrupt bargain with Clinton that he would get back into the race & throw it to Clinton in exchange for the government buying software from him when Hillary’s health care system was adopted. Oops! That didn’t pan out for Perot, but saddled the US with the most corrupt power couple in US history.”
This is Bull Snip, BS in capital letters! Perot, a Navy man and honorary Green Beret, wouldn’t do something like that. Besides, he pulled 38% of the Bush vote and 38% of the Clinton vote, if you done some homework you’d know that he did not affect the election outcome one bit.
Here is another problem for the Republicans. Immigration is changing demographics in the USA.
“To flip Texas in their favor, Democrats must first find a way to get millions of Hispanics who’ve never voted to the polls. Hispanics make up about 38 percent of the population in the state but cast only 22 percent of the ballots in 2012, Jones says. An estimated 2.2 million Hispanics who were eligible to vote sat out the election. “It is a problem that Democrats have been talking about for a decade and a half at least,” says James Henson, who directs the Texas Politics project at the University of Texas at Austin. “The burden is on the Democrats to demonstrate that they can do more than talk about the problem.”
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-04-11/texas-election-battleground-democrats-aim-to-mobilize-the-hispanic-vote
The British Labour Party has admitted that they approved of unfettered immigration into the UK from the poorer parts of the globe, in order for them to gain socialist votes from multiculturalism.
Here is a link that historically details a previous race change in Europe.
http://www.askelm.com/people/peo011.htm
All the best.