The Great Climate Change Distraction, part 3

Feb 17th, 2011

First, I stipulated that the debate over climate change was actually a tool that benefits polluters. The next day, Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) lent vulgar credence to my thesis. Today, I argue with humor.

Copyright © Joel Pett 2011 

Victoria Jackson Is Nuts

Feb 11th, 2011

To put it more succinctly, Victoria Jackson is batshit crazy. In the clip she says, "Fox News is everything. It's our only channel of truth."
Uh huh. Since when is thew only bastion of truth a place where "stuff is just made up"?

The Great Climate Change Distraction, cont...

Feb 10th, 2011

by F. Grey Parker

Yesterday, I published a piece arguing that the climate change "debate" has effectively neutered the environmental movement. 

We aren't talking about childhood leukemia and it's links to air pollution anymore. We aren't discussing industrial toxins and their direct correlation to neurodevelopmental disease. Instead, we are listening to Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) calling global warming a "hoax" and not only arguing against EPA regulations on that basis but hyping his new book on the subject before a house subcommittee.

From Tulsa World:

"I won’t tell you what it’s about, but the name of the book is 'The Hoax,'?" he said during testimony before a House subcommittee. 

"I did finish it last week." 

Just five days ago, the findings of yet another study proving a correlation between airborne toxins and childhood respiratory illnesses was published. 

From Environmental Technology:

"Childhood exposure to air pollution, particularly during pregnancy and in the first year of life, has been positively linked to the development of asthma by scientists in Canada."

The GOP doesn't care. More importantly, they have ensured that we don't publicly review the findings because the "climate" arguments take all of our time.

More from Tulsa World:

"Inhofe and House Republicans on the subcommittee focused on what they consider the enormous costs of EPA’s efforts to regulate greenhouse emissions, the jobs that could be lost and the questions that, in their view, continue to surround climate change science. 

Science is mixed, Inhofe said, but the economic impact is not."

As we all have now been trained like obedient little poodles to obey them when they start down this path, we followed the Republicans again into the trap of not discussing any other possible reasons for slowing the steady and intentional poisoning of ourselves.

Why Extending The "W Tax Cuts" Was Nonsense

Dec 20th 2010

A MAJOR HAT TIP TO GEORGE STOCKER FOR GRAPHIC ASSISTANCE WITH THIS

I have said for several years that the "W Tax Cuts" were a bona fide disaster. There is no legitimate argument to the contrary. We now live in a state of permawar on 2 fronts, we have radically expanded corporate welfare in as many other ways as possible and our infrastructure is collapsing. We need to invest in America on a level not seen since... well, frankly, on a level not seen.

The chart and figures posted below are from The Wall Street Journal

The single argument for extending this failed policy has been that it will create JOBS.

The Heritage Foundation:

"Pro growth tax cuts... always create jobs."

Except they didn't. Under George W. Bush, we added 7.5 million fewer jobs to the economy than we did under 4 years of Jimmy Carter. It's worth noting that the American population was roughly 80 million fewer people in the Carter Era. When viewed per capita, this is beyond poor; It represents the fundamental collapse of job creation as we used to know it. There is much to learn from these numbers and others we will be publishing using them as context.

When? For the love of God, are these tax policies going to start "stimulating?"

President	Jobs created	Jobs at end of term	Jobs at start of term	Payroll expansion	Jobs created per year in office	Population growth	Percent change in population
George W. Bush	3.0 million	135.5 million	132.5 million	2.3%	375,000	22.0 million	7.7%
Bill Clinton	23.1 million	132.5 million	109.4 million	21.1%	2,900,000	25.2 million	8.9%
George H.W. Bush	2.5 million	109.4 million	106.9 million	2.3%	625,000	12.5 million	4.8%
Ronald Reagan	16.0 million	106.9 million	90.9 million	17.6%	2,000,000	17.3 million	7%
Jimmy Carter	10.5 million	90.9 million	80.4 million	13.1%	2,600,000	9.8 million	4.3%
Gerald Ford	1.8 million	80.4 million	78.6 million	2.3%	745,000	5.1 million	2.3%
Richard Nixon	9.4 million	78.6 million	69.2 million	13.6%	1,700,000	12.3 million	5.7%
Lyndon Johnson	11.9 million	69.2 million	57.3 million	20.8%	2,300,000	11.3 million	5.6%
John F. Kennedy	3.6 million	57.3 million	53.7 million	6.7%	1,200,000	8.2 million	4.3%
Dwight Eisenhower	3.5 million	53.7 million	50.2 million	7%	438,000	23.3 million	12.8%
Harry Truman	8.4 million	50.2 million	41.8 million	20.1%	1,100,000	N/A	N/A

The Murdoch Device's Ongoing Scheme

Dec 15th, 2010

The Murdoch Device continues it's partisan crusade against, well, knowledge and language.

From HuffPo:

"A top Fox News editor sent an email to staffers and journalists questioning the science behind global warming and directing them to always point out on air that the theory has its skeptics.

Media Matters obtained the memo. It is the second such email the organization has released in as many weeks. Like the last one, the global warming memo came from Bill Sammon, Fox News' Washington managing editor. Sammon was also the author of an email directing journalists to use the phrase "government option" instead of "public option."

The Murdoch Device

Nov 6th, 2010
by F. Grey Parker
It's unstoppable. It rends and tears at civility. It devours truth. It lays waste to decency. We call it... 

The Murdoch Device








From this point forward, I will refer to FOXNews in most posts, during all conversations and often on my blog as "The Murdoch Device." 

Like a twisted and villainous entity in some futuristic/dystopian Ridley Scott movie, we all must fight...
The Murdoch Device