Arianna Huffington: Will Rick Perry’s Extreme Views Make Him Unelectable? What History Shows Back in the middle of August, just after Rick Perry tossed his cowboy hat into the ring, anonymous White House and Obama campaign aides were quoted saying that they welcomed the Texas governor into the race because they assumed that, given his radical positions, he would be easier to beat. After all, the man does have more than his share of extreme positions. But history shows that in times of fear and uncertainty, people don’t always vote on the logical consequences a candidate’s positions would have on policy — and on their lives. It’s not about the left or the right or the center. And it’s not about being smart or being reasonable. It’s less about the brain and more about the lizard brain. President Obama is likely to keep on winning the “Who Is The Most Reasonable Person In The Room?” contest. But that’s not the same thing as winning the election.
Peter Smirniotopoulos: Has the President Turned the Corner? When the Wednesday morning of Nov. 7, 2012 begins, we may look back on the week of Sept. 19, 2011 as a turning point in the presidency of Barack Obama and his candidacy for re-election.
Jeffrey Shaffer: Get Ready for the Poverty Deniers There is indeed an attitude problem in this country. It’s the kind of attitude that encourages sweeping, simplistic generalities like, “Anybody living in the USA is not poor.”
Fox’s Peter Johnson Jr. distorted recent comments by President Obama, falsely claiming that “[i]n effect, the president is saying that the American people are a stupid, dissatisfied electorate who are poisoned and brainwashed by Fox News.” But Obama said that supporters should “push back” on Fox’s “inadequate information” — a statement that is justified by Fox’s regular distortions.
Fox’s Johnson: Obama Said People Were Being “Brainwashed” By Fox
Johnson: “In Effect, The President Is Saying That The American People Are” Being “Brainwashed By Fox News.” On the September 26 edition of Fox News’ Fox & Friends, Johnson claimed, “In effect, the president is saying that the American people are a stupid, dissatisfied electorate who are poisoned and brainwashed by Fox News.” From Fox & Friends:
BRIAN KILMEADE (co-host): The president attacks the GOP and lashes out at Republicans — so is the president spending more time on job creation or his re-election? Let’s ask that to Fox News’s own legal analyst, Peter Johnson Jr., with his take.
JOHNSON: Good morning. In effect, the president is saying that the American people are a stupid, dissatisfied electorate who are poisoned and brainwashed by Fox News and The Wall Street Journal. Are you? So that’s what he’s basically saying. And so, he’s saying to these certain red meat audiences that I’m really disgusted by the reaction to the Republican electorate to the debate, I’m disgusted by their policies. [White House adviser] David Plouffe is talking about the tea party taking the Republican Party hostage. And so we’re hearing a lot in terms of attack mode and negative comments about the American people themselves. But very little about how he’s going to form consensus on job creation. [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 9/26/11]
In Fact, Obama Told Supporters To “Push Back” On Fox’s “Inadequate Information”
Obama: Supporters Should “Push Back” On “Inadequate Information” Advanced By Fox. In comments during a September 25 fundraiser — to which Johnson presumably referred — Obama told supporters to “push back” on the “inadequate information” being promoted by right-wing media outlets such as Fox News. From the White House:
OBAMA: And this is a choice about the fundamental direction of our country — 2008 was an important election; 2012 is a more important election. (Applause.) Now, in order for us to be successful in this 2012 election, I’m going to need all of you.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: You got it!
OBAMA: I’m going to need you to be out there talking to your friends, talking to your neighbors, talking to your co-workers. And I’m going to need you to be advocates for what we believe in. It’s not enough just to support me. I need you to go out there, and if other folks have been reading the Wall Street Journal editorial page or watching FOX News, and they’re full of inadequate information — (laughter) — I need you to push back. I need you to push back. [White House, 9/25/11]
Obama Is Right: Fox News Regularly Pushes “Inadequate” Or False Information
Fox Has Repeatedly Pushed False And Misleading Information On Obama’s Economic Policies And Record. Fox regularly promotes the claim that the stimulus failed and that the Obama administration is primarily to blame for the nation’s debt and economic problems. [Media Matters, 6/17/11]
For the truth about Obama’s economic record, click here.
Fox Regularly Misleads On Health Care Reform, Including Pushing “Death Panel” Myth. During and after the health care reform debate, Fox News regularly promoted false and misleading attacks on Democrats’ health care reform law, including promoting the myth that the bill will introduce “death panels.” [Media Matters, 3/23/11]
For the truth about the health care reform law, click here.
Fox Repeatedly Hosted “Birthers” And Otherwise Cast Doubt On Obama’s Birth Certificate. Fox News regularly hosted so-called “birthers” to cast doubt on Obama’s nationality. Fox figures also promoted the claim that Obama had not produced a valid birth certificate. [Media Matters, 4/20/11]
For the truth about Obama’s birth certificate and nationality, click here.
Fox Has Pushed The False Claim That Social Security Is A “Ponzi Scheme.” Fox has continually promoted the false comparison between Social Security and Ponzi schemes. [Media Matters, 9/14/11]
Fox Promotes False, Misleading, And Slanted Coverage Of Immigration and Immigration Reform. Fox News has regularly promoted misleading information on immigration and immigration reform and has distorted Obama’s record on border security. [Media Matters, 6/22/11]
For the truth about Obama’s record on immigration and border security, click here.
Fox Regularly Attempts To Cast Doubt On Scientific Consensus Behind Climate Change. Fox News has regularly attempted to cast doubt on the scientific consensus behind climate change. [Media Matters, 6/21/11]
Polls Have Shown That Fox Viewers Are Consistently Misinformed
Stanford University Poll: “Frequent Viewers Of Fox News Are Less Likely To Accept Scientists’ Views Of Global Warming.” A December 2010 report conducted by Stanford University and supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation “explores whether the flow of doubt-arousing messaging might have persuaded Americans who watch Fox News to reject the views espoused by many mainstream natural scientists on the issue.” The outcome of the study was that “exposure to skeptical views about global warming can be effective at changing the opinions of viewers.” The report was titled, “Frequent Viewers of Fox News Are Less Likely to Accept Scientists’ Views of Global Warming.” [Stanford University Research Study, December 2010]
Fox Viewers Are More Likely To Be Misinformed On Health Care Reform. A Kaiser Family Foundation poll conducted in February regarding the public’s understanding of the health care reform law found: “There were also differences by where people get their information with higher shares of those who report CNN (35 percent) or MSNBC (39 percent) as their primary news source getting 7 or more right [questions on a quiz about the health care law created by Kaiser], compared to those that report mainly watching FOX News (25 percent). Again, these differences may be related to whether or not people more generally favor or oppose the law.” [Kaiser Family Foundation, “Assessing Americans’ Familiarity With The Health Care Law,” February 2011]
For more research showing how Fox has misinformed its viewers, click here.
Supreme Court Could Hear Health Care During Election Bloomberg reports that the Department of Justice has announced that it will “forgo further review at the federal appeals court” that ruled the health care reform law unconstitutional, instead seeking an appeal before the Supreme Court.
“A Supreme Court ruling striking down parts of the law would transform the campaign, forcing the candidates to refashion their messages… A decision would probably come in late June, at the end of the court’s nine-month term.”
James Hohmann: “It is a contrast both sides will welcome. A decision by the Supreme Court to uphold the constitutionality of an individual mandate before the fall campaign would undercut a central conservative criticism of the landmark legislation and give Obama freedom to tout his law’s benefits without the cloud of an impending legal challenge. If the court ruled the mandate unconstitutional, it would unravel Obama’s signature domestic achievement and remind voters of the White House’s overreach in the first two years.”
Said Paul: “I think that once you get to 10%, you have the number. We’re 10%, 14%, 15%, so I think we very well could be, and most likely are on the verge of an explosion of interest in this country.”
What’s With Fall TV’s Vagina Obsession? For now, "vagina" is still the Voldemort of prime time, a word that has been unspoken for so long that it has a mystical, fearsome ability to shock.
Great Orations vs. Great Obfuscations I often enjoy and benefit from Maureen Dowd’s columns, but today she’s fallen off the wagon of arch and noble punditry into the smallish world-view, or Beltanschauung, of the Washington Beltway’s sophisticated chattering classes. These worthy purveyors of Capitol-corridor realism…
Obama Administration Taps The Gas On The Affordable Care Act Litigation Today was the deadline for the Obama Administration to seek something known as en banc review — a procedure allowing an entire court of appeals to review a three-judge panel’s decision — of the Eleventh Circuit’s erroneous decision striking down part of the Affordable Care Act. The Administration has decided not to seek this review. […]
Today was the deadline for the Obama Administration to seek something known as en banc review — a procedure allowing an entire court of appeals to review a three-judge panel’s decision — of the Eleventh Circuit’s erroneous decision striking down part of the Affordable Care Act. The Administration has decided not to seek this review.
This is significant not because the full court is likely to reverse the panel’s error — the Eleventh Circuit is a notorious hotbed of far right conservatives — but because it reflects the Administration’s understanding that it has little to gain from delaying this case’s ascent to the Supreme Court. One effect of an en banc petition is that it significantly extends the amount of time DOJ can wait before it has to seek review of the court of appeals’ decision in the Supreme Court. Because DOJ did not ask the full court of appeals to weigh in, it is now exceedingly likely that the Supreme Court will consider this case during its 2011-2012 term.
It is not the least bit surprising that the Obama Administration passed up this potential opportunity to delay the case until after the next Supreme Court term. For one thing, the Administration has consistently chosen not to engage in delay tactics throughout this litigation. Most recently, DOJ refused to argue that the courts lack jurisdiction to hear the case until 2015 despite the fact that one court of appeal concluded that they do lack jurisdiction and another expressed sympathy with that view. More importantly, the Administration should be eager to get this case in front of the justices since they are overwhelmingly likely to win once the case gets there.
The biggest loser in the Administration’s decision not to file are the handful of right-wing commentators who have claimed — despite no evidence to that effect — that DOJ would seek en banc review as part of some nefarious plot to delay the litigation. The most prominent of these commentators was former DC Circuit nominee Miguel Estrada, who touted this theory at a recent panel hosted by the American Constitution Society:
The strategy of the Administration is to do cartwheels to keep the case out of the Supreme Court so as not to have a ruling before the 2012 election. I mean, they take every extension. They do everything they can to stretch it out . . . . I will bet you any amount of money that the Administration is going to seek en banc in the Eleventh Circuit.
Watch it:
Estrada is one of the nation’s top appellate litigators, so he knows better than to make this kind of claim despite the vast wealth of evidence to the contrary. In 2003, Senate Democrats blocked Estrada’s nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit because they were concerned that, despite Estrada’s significant legal talent, he would be unable to ensure that his legal analysis on the bench is untainted by his own desire to see the law through a conservative lens. That decision is looking pretty good today.
World’s Engineers: ?The Technology Needed to Cut the World’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions by 85% by 2050 Already Exists? The technology needed to cut the world’s greenhouse gas emissions by 85% by 2050 already exists, according to a joint statement by eleven of the world’s largest engineering organisations…. The statement says that generating electricity from wind, waves and the sun, growing biofuels sustainably, zero emissions transport, low carbon buildings and energy efficiency technologies have […]
The technology needed to cut the world’s greenhouse gas emissions by 85% by 2050 already exists, according to a joint statement by eleven of the world’s largest engineering organisations….
The statement says that generating electricity from wind, waves and the sun, growing biofuels sustainably, zero emissions transport, low carbon buildings and energy efficiency technologies have all been demonstrated. However they are not being developed for wide-scale use fast enough and there is a desperate need for financial and legislative support from governments around the world if they are to fulfil their potential.
That’s the news release from the UK’s Institution of Mechanical Engineers (IME), one of the 11 signatory groups. The groups explicitly call for a peak in global emissions in 2020 and an intensive effort to train workers for green technology jobs.
Dr Colin Brown, Director of Engineering at the IME, says bluntly:
“While the world’s politicians have been locked in talks with no output, engineers across the globe have been busy developing technologies that can bring down emissions and help create a more stable future for the planet.
“We are now overdue for government commitment, with ambitious, concrete emissions targets that give the right signals to industry, so they can be rolled out on a global scale.”
It’s worth pointing out that a 50% cut in emissions from current levels is typically considered to be what’s needed for stabilization at 450 ppm or around 2°C warming (see also “The full global warming solution: How the world can stabilize at 350 to 450 ppm“). An 85% reduction would be the path for closer to 350 ppm.
Here’s what the engineering organizations call for in their statement:
A global commitment at Durban to a peak in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, followed by substantial reductions by 2050;
Governments to ensure that green policies do not unfairly and unintentionally act to the detriment of one particular industry or country;
Intensive effort to train and retrain workforces to ensure we have the right skills for the new industries that will spring up around green technologies;
A heavier emphasis to be placed on boosting energy efficiency, which is the best available measure to bring down emissions in the short and medium term.
The eleven organisations include the Danish Society of Engineers (IDA), India’s Institution of Engineers (IEI), Germany’s Association of Engineers (VDI), Australia’s Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers (APESMA) and the UK’s Institution of Mechanical Engineers (IMechE). Collectively they represent over 1.2 million engineers spanning four continents.
Yes, the U.S. is missing. Go figure.
Technology Review, one of the nation’s leading technology magazines, also argued in a cover story five years ago, “It’s Not Too Late,” that “Catastrophic climate change is not inevitable. We possess the technologies that could forestall global warming.”
In its 2007 synthesis report on the scientific literature, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded that using existing technologies and those expected to be commercialized in the foreseeable future:
In 2050, global average macro-economic costs for mitigation towards stabilisation between 710 and 445ppm CO2-eq are between a 1% gain and 5.5% decrease of global GDP. This corresponds to slowing average annual global GDP growth by less than 0.12 percentage points.
So global GDP drops by under 0.12% per year — about one tenth of a penny on the dollar — even in the 445 ppm CO2-eq case (through 2050, see Table SPM.7). And this is for stabilization at 445 ppm CO2-eq, which is stabilization at 350 ppm CO2 (see Table SPM.6).
The Hollywood Liberal is an anti-war, anti republican, from right here beautiful Hollywood California.
This site was originally started to help get The Worst President Ever G.W. Bush Jr. Out of office. Now that we have accomplished that
the goal is to get Obama to start acting like a Democrat, and not an butt kissing Republican Wannabee. We will continue to fight for that goal
. Thanks H.L.
Today was the deadline for the Obama Administration to 
