Uncategorized

Conservative talkshow host Tucker Carlson thinks bombing Greenpeace’s Rainbow Warrio was just peachy

Twenty years ago, photographer Fernando Pereira was killed when the Greenpeace boat Rainbow Warrior was bombed in Aukland Harbor by French secret service agents, in retaliation for Greenpeace protests of French nuclear testing. The plan to sink the boat was later traced to the very top levels of the French government.

On June 22, on his MSNBC show The Situation, conservative talkshow host Tucker Carlson had this to say:

CARLSON: Actually, I am objectively pro-France. You know, France blew up the Rainbow Warrior, that Greenpeace ship in Auckland Harbor in the '80s. And I've always respected them ...

RACHEL MADDOW: That made you like them?

CARLSON: Yes. Yes. It won me over.

Mr. Neal Shapiro
President
NBC
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY 10112-0002
neal.shapiro@nbc.com

FAX: 212-664-2264

Mr. Rick Kaplan
President
MSNBC
1 MSNBC Plaza
Secaucus, NJ 07094-2419
rick.kaplan@msnbc.com

(via tpmcafe)

SCOTUS update

Bush will announce his Supreme Court nominee in a live, prime-time Tuesday night address.

The fact that this will distract media attention from Karl Rove is, of course, entirely coincidental.

Update [2005-7-19 11:27:7 by Dave Roberts]: Speaking of SCOTUS picks, the Center for American Progress has started a blog devoted to the topic. Check it out.

Cooperation versus antagonism in environmental activism.

Perusing AlterNet's headlines today, I noticed the new EnviroHealth article expands on a subject covered in both Daily Grist and Gristmill. Zack Pelta-Heller discusses the the pros and cons of different approaches to environmental activism. Case in point: The Sierra Club uses positive reenforcement and collaboration to get Ford to alter its modus operandi, while the Rainforest Action Network is much more confrontational and antagonistic, running an ad in The New York Times comparing Ford CEO Bill Ford, Jr. to Dick Cheney and the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia. RAN justifies its methods with the following anecdote:

There's a story about a guy with a mule. He couldn't get the mule to move. His friend says, "You've just got to whisper 'Move' in his ear and he'll move." So the first guy whispers into the mule's ear. Nothing. He says louder, "Move!" Nothing. Eventually the friend says, "Here, I'll show you." He takes a two-by-four and whacks the mule on the head. Then he whispers, "Move" into the mule's ear, and the mule moves. The first guy is shocked by the violence. "What was that about?" "Well," says the friend, "first you have to get his attention."

So my question is this: Is the "two-by-four" method necessary to make the "whisper" method effective? I'm tempted to say Yes, because large corporations are quite good at being deaf when it serves their financial interests. However, as per the recent Gristmill discussion about the value of eco-sabotage, antagonism has a way of boomeranging and estranging people that aren't already singing in the choir...

The Winner of Your Discontent

Grist reader who’s not you headed to Iceland Have you been waiting anxiously by your email, clicking the “get messages” button, unable to sleep or even look away, hoping and praying that you’re the big winner of Grist‘s Great Ice-Scape contest, headed on a carbon-neutral eco-tourism adventure to sunny Iceland? Well, um, sorry. You’re not. […]

Oh, I Thought You Said Non-Profiterole

Bush breaks long-standing policy, offers India nuclear-energy technology President Bush has pledged to let India obtain nuclear reactors and fuel, potentially reversing a decades-long U.S. policy on limiting India’s access to nuclear technology and continuing the post-Cold War warming trend in U.S.-India relations. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh hopes civil nukes will help India meet skyrocketing […]

Cliffs Hanger

The skinny on energy-bill dealings in House-Senate conference committee You may recall from, oh, the 5 zillion times we’ve written about it that a massive energy bill is currently wending its way through Congress. The House has passed its version, and the Senate has passed its version, and the two versions are far, far apart. […]

Mad in China

Chinese villagers riot to keep polluting pharmaceutical plant closed Thousands of Chinese protestors battled police for hours on Sunday night in an effort to stop a polluting plant from resuming operations. Villagers in Xinchang, China, 180 miles south of Shanghai, say corrupt local officials have refused to do anything about chemical wastes from the Jingxin […]

The latest on energy bill wrangling.

The real work of the Energy Conference gets underway today, and you can watch it live starting at 11 am EST (20 min. ago!). Behind the scenes, Senate and House staffs have been working to hammer out some compromises. That language will be the baseline that conferees work from today. The conference plans to cover the titles dealing with energy efficiency, coal, nuclear power, DOE management, vehicles and fuels, and hydrogen. These are the less controversial titles of the bills so fireworks may be kept to a minimum, although Sen. Wyden (D-Ore.) promises to cause some explosions by offering an amendment to increase fuel economy standards by 1 mile per gallon per year. Since the bill currently does nothing to increase fuel economy, this would be an improvement. Unfortunately, the only question is how lopsided the vote will be that defeats it.

But for you lovers of summer, you aficionados of efficiency, the language expanding Daylight Saving Time to the first Sunday in March to the last Sunday in November continues to survive.

The pseudo tax

I've said before that if the government is going to tax or subsidize something, there had better be a really good reason.

However, the one tax that has the best reasons going for it is the gas tax. Five minutes in a room with James Howard Kunstler will convince most people of this, provided they don't walk out. I'm sure most readers of this blog don't need to be told in detail of the myriad benefits that come with less automobile use: more demand for walkable cities and suburbs, decreased carbon emissions, decreased dependence on foreign oil, less need for offshore and arctic drilling, and so on.

But the federal gas tax isn't really a tax at all. It's not a tax in the sense that a tax is usually thought of: a tactic employed by the government to influence behavior. The gas tax is not a "sin" tax, but a user fee. The majority of the federal, (18.4 cents/gallon) gas tax goes to pay for federal highways. More money to federal highways pays for smoother, less congested highways that in the end lead to more driving, offsetting the effects of the increased price of gasoline.

It's easy to say from the sidelines that there needs to be a "sin" style gas tax -- much harder for a politician whose job rides on the performance of the economy to muster the courage to actually enact one. Especially when public opinion polls come back looking like this, as Lisa tells us. I hope that people maybe looked at this as a choice between replacing a $1,600 computer or a $16,000 car; but for the record, I'm with Lisa on this one.

Will you scrutinize us?

Ever since I heard about Chevron's big "Will You Join Us?" shtick, I've been meaning to look into it more closely -- see if I can figure out whether it's a genuine attempt to open a dialogue on our post-oil future or ... a bushel of bullshit.

Joel Makower had the same idea. He says: