Skip to content
Grist home
All donations doubled!

Articles by David Roberts

David Roberts was a staff writer for Grist. You can follow him on Twitter, if you're into that sort of thing.

All Articles

  • Uh oh

    Dover, PA's in big trouble!

    On today's 700 Club, Rev. Pat Robertson took the opportunity to strongly rebuke voters in Dover, PA who removed from office school board members who supported teaching faith-based "intelligent design" and instead elected Democrats who opposed bringing up the possibility of a Creator in the school system's science curriculum.

    Rev. Robertson warned the people of Dover that God might forsake the town because of the vote.

    "I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover. If there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God, you just rejected Him from your city. And don't wonder why He hasn't helped you when problems begin, if they begin. I'm not saying they will, but if they do, just remember, you just voted God out of your city. And if that's the case, don't ask for His help because he might not be there."
    (Via Pharyngula)

  • House moderates: Little, late

    Lest you start feeling twinges of fondness for Republican moderates thanks to their recent move to save the Arctic Refuge, remember that a) they've been totally passive in the face of five years of monstrosities, and b) the very legislation they've stripped refuge drilling out of itself remains a monstrosity. Sam Rosenfeld puts it well:

    The House leadership's decision to rescind the ANWR drilling measure from the reconciliation bill is being spun as a sign of the new power of the erstwhile pitiful Republican moderates. There's a tiny bit of truth to that. But really, the fact that enough of them are now saying explicitly that removing that provision is sufficient to ensure the bill's passage is more pathetic than impressive. The ANWR provision is in the Senate version of the spending bill; leadership assurances to the House moderates that the measure won't return in a conference report should be taken with a grain of salt. Much more importantly, the rest of the bill is nearly unchanged, and is loaded with atrocities that moderate Republicans have spent plenty of time wringing their hands over but show little inclination to take action against.

    This is another example of what I was talking about yesterday: For some reason it's become safe or convenient for righties to start making concessions or taking stands on the environment. But this budget reconciliation bill still contains drastic spending cuts for kids and poor people. Do greens stand down now that they got what they wanted? Or do they continue to fight on behalf of other elements of the progressive coalition?

  • Editorial hope springs eternal

    What's with the editorial writers at the New York Times and the Washington Post? What does it take for political reality to sink in?

    An unsigned NYT editorial bashing Bush on global warming -- particularly for his opposition to mandatory emissions limits -- says this:

    Meanwhile, Mr. Bush's staunch and patient friend, Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain, has once again - this time in The Observer - appealed to the president to join in a global effort to limit greenhouse gases.

    Well, not exactly. Blair's Observer editorial is notable precisely because it marks his rather conspicuous break from the Kyoto (read: mandatory emission limits) crowd. He's pleading with Bush to join a worldwide effort to develop clean-energy technology. His "staunch and patient" friendship continues to consist entirely of him attempting to accommodate Bush in exchange for ... nothing.

    The WaPo editorial board thinks, well gosh, here's the chance Bush has been looking for to abandon his retrograde position on climate change and hop aboard the multilateral train:

    What is clear is that Mr. Blair's initiative offers an excellent opening for Mr. Bush. The president, who has benefited from Mr. Blair's support, should say he supports the prime minister's initiative, wants to leave the Kyoto dispute behind and is ready to address climate change issues, actively and enthusiastically, in an international forum once again.

    They argue earnestly that this is the right thing to do, because climate science has made it indisputable that warming is a problem.

    Bush should reciprocate Blair's friendship. He should join a multilateral agreement. He should admit he's been wrong about climate change.

    Meanwhile, back on planet earth ...

  • King Coal’s beheading of Appalachia

    I keep meaning to say something about this excellent NYT op-ed on mountaintop-removal mining, but I never seem to have time, so ... just go read it.