Articles by Brad Johnson

Nearly $200 million spent on energy ads since Obama’s inauguration

Cross-posted from Wonk Room. Politico reports that interest groups and corporations have spent nearly $200 million on TV ads since President Obama’s inauguration to manipulate American energy policy reform. According to an analysis by the Campaign Media Analysis Group, $199.5 million was directed from January 20th to March 31st to television issue ads on energy, […]

On cap-and-trade, Evan Bayh follows Smokey Joe Barton’s and Rupert Murdoch’s agenda

Originally published on the Wonk Room. On Hardball yesterday, Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) worried that a cap-and-trade system to prevent catastrophic global warming and drive green economic development might “suck money” and jobs away from coal-intensive states: Cap and trade, you’ll probably need 60 votes because it affects so many states economically that if you […]

Glenn Beck attacks smart grid as socialist plot to steal our thermostats

This post originally appeared at the Wonk Room. Glenn Beck, the conservative ideologue whose show is mocked by fellow Fox News anchors, recently attacked plans to modernize our electric grid. After Carol Browner, President Obama’s climate and energy adviser, said that a smart grid means “we can get to a system where an electric company […]

Wolf Blitzer parrots right-wing talking points on global warming

Originally posted at the Wonk Room.

Last week on the Situation Room, CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer parroted right-wing talking points on global warming. His program emphasized that Monday's climate crisis protest took place in the cold -- a talking point pushed by Sen. Jim Inhofe's (R-OK) office and global warming deniers from Glenn Beck to Nancy Pfotenhauer. He then followed the Heritage Foundation's reasoning to challenge Tony Blair on the urgency of establishing a cap on carbon pollution, asking if it is "wise" to "effectively impose a new tax on consumers" instead of dealing with "bread-and-butter issues":

At a time of this extraordinary economic distress, not only here in the United States but around the world, why go forward right now as a priority with all of these global warming related projects? It seems there are so many other key bread-and-butter issues literally on the table. ... Is it wise to go ahead, effectively impose a new tax on consumers right now, an energy-related tax, this uh, uh cap-and-trade if you will, to try to reduce carbon emissions right now? In effect that's going to be higher costs on consumers who use either gasoline or other electricity, forms of energy. Is that wise at a time of economic distress?

Watch it:

Blitzer summarized: "You say do it now despite all the economic issues."

Blitzer is missing a few key facts: