[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LT9kUslHfBY]
Jason Alexander plays Rovemort, showing the plot to bury progress.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LT9kUslHfBY]
Jason Alexander plays Rovemort, showing the plot to bury progress.
After years of defending George Bush regardless of how much harm he has done to the country, we thought the right might have gotten as low as they could. It appears we were wrong. It was bad enough that they got in bed with George Bush. Now they are willingly jumping into bed with the former KGB on the subject of freedom of expression and criticizing government leaders.
The Wall Street Journal carries an op-ed from a former KGB agent which discusses how the KGB tried to discredit former American presidents. The message is that criticizing the president is unpatriotic and helps the enemies. This is part of the mind set which contributed to both the tyranny seen under the USSR, and to its ultimate demise.
This is exactly the type of message that we’d expect to hear from the KGB. What is shocking is that so many right wing blogs are echoing this message, just as they echo the talking points of the right wing extremists who control the Republican Party.The freedom to criticize our leaders is a fundamental principle upon which this nation was founded. While liberals fight to defend out civil liberties, apparently the right wing sees the KGB as a better model for the type of country they are fighting for.
The editorial page editor for The State (South Carolina) writes that John Edwards is a big phony both on the editorial page and his blog. He provides three examples. They aren’t the three worst things about John Edwards, but they do go along with everything I’ve disliked about his type of slick politician.
Edwards’ campaign has been struggling so hopefully we avoid having him on yet another national ticket, but at this point in the race there is plenty of time for things to change. Edwards is a masterful politician who puts on a great act, arguing his case to the voters on the stump just as he argues before a jury. He almost has the Bill Clinton act down, but he is not as smooth and, unlike Bill Clinton, has no qualifications to justify placing him on a national ticket. As Bob Shrum has written, Edwards is a “Clinton who hadn’t read the books.”
Edwards’ smile and campaign style might win some votes, but we should take the advice of a Republican here. “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.”
John Edwards represents the reasons why people distrust and even dislike politicians, independent of ideology.
Following the recent cover story in Newsweek regarding global warming deniers, Al Gore has addressed the topic again today:
Research aimed at disputing the scientific consensus on global warming is part of a huge public misinformation campaign funded by some of the world’s largest carbon polluters, former Vice President Al Gore said Tuesday.
“There has been an organized campaign, financed to the tune of about $10 million a year from some of the largest carbon polluters, to create the impression that there is disagreement in the scientific community,” Gore said at a forum in Singapore. “In actuality, there is very little disagreement.”
Gore likened the campaign to the millions of dollars spent by U.S. tobacco companies years ago on creating the appearance of scientific debate on smoking’s harmful effects.
“This is one of the strongest of scientific consensus views in the history of science,” Gore said. “We live in a world where what used to be called propaganda now has a major role to play in shaping public opinion.”
The misinformation campaign from the energy industry fits in well with other misinformation campaigns from the right wing. The anti-science right is easily deceived into ignoring the scientific consensus as conservatives have become adept at ignoring facts which contradict their beliefs. It is no coincidence that there is such a tremendous overlap between the people who believe the claims of the global warming deniers and those who believe in iintelligent design, that there was WMD in Iraq at the onset of the war, or that Saddam was involved in the 9/11 attacks.
The New York Post reports that The New York Times plans to stop charging for access to material such as their columnists. So far there’s no confirmation from the Times.
The New York Times is poised to stop charging readers for online access to its Op-Ed columnists and other content, The Post has learned.
After much internal debate, Times executives – including publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. – made the decision to end the subscription-only TimesSelect service but have yet to make an official announcement, according to a source briefed on the matter.
The timing of when TimesSelect will shut down hinges on resolving software issues associated with making the switch to a free service, the source said.
Times spokeswoman Catherine Mathis would only say in an e-mailed statement, “We continue to evaluate the best approach for NYTimes.com
Now I hope that 1) Rupert Murdoch removes the subscription fees to the web version of The Wall Street Journal, and 2) that he leaves enough of the WSJ intack for it to remain worth reading.