Tag Archives: democrats

A Push to Save Cambodia’s Tonle Sap Lake

by Myrna Posted on June 9, 2014

Scientists are digitally tracking the links between human activity and the fragile ecosystem of Cambodia’s great lake. See original article:  A Push to Save Cambodia’s Tonle Sap Lake ; ;Related ArticlesOff the Shelf: Review of Smaller Faster Lighter Denser CheaperFuture Fossils: Plastic StoneBattle Over Fracking Poses Threat to Colorado Democrats ;

See original article here: 

A Push to Save Cambodia’s Tonle Sap Lake

Posted in alo, Citadel, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, Monterey, ONA, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on A Push to Save Cambodia’s Tonle Sap Lake

Obama’s EPA Regs Reward Republican Obstructionism

by KiraRosales Posted on June 4, 2014

Mother Jones

Jamelle Bouie thinks Republicans are shooting themselves in the feet with their mindless obstructionism:

If Republicans are outraged by the announcement, they only have themselves to blame….In 2009, President Obama threw his support behind climate legislation in the House, and the following year, a group of Senate Democrats—including Kerry—began work with Republicans to craft a bipartisan climate bill. The process fell apart, a victim of bad management from the White House, election year politics, an embattled and fearful Sen. Lindsay Graham—the South Carolina senator at the center of the negotiations—and the growing tide of Republican anti-Obama sentiment, which would culminate that fall with a huge GOP victory in the House of Representatives.

….With a little cooperation, Republicans could have won a better outcome for their priorities. They could have exempted coal from more stringent spectrum of regulations, enriched their constituencies with new subsidies and benefits, and diluted a key Democratic priority. Instead, they’ll now pay a steep substantive price for their obstruction, in the form of rules that are tougher—and more liberal—than anything that could have passed Congress.

I think this misreads Republican priorities. Sure, they care about the details of the regulations. And sure, they knew perfectly well that Obama had threatened to act via the EPA if Congress failed to pass a bill. But neither of those were things they cared all that much about.

Note the bolded sentence above. What Republicans really care about is winning elections.1 They were pretty sure that cooperating on a cap-and-trade bill would hurt them in the 2010 midterms, and they were probably right about that. It wasn’t a popular bill, and they would have been forced to take partial credit for it if it had passed. Instead, they were able to run a clean, rage-filled campaign against Obummercare, cap-and-tax, and the pork-ocrat “stimulus” bill. As I recall, that worked out pretty well for them.

And what price did they pay? Well, now the EPA is proposing regs that are….maybe slightly worse than the original cap-and-trade bill, but not all that much, really. Policy-wise, then, they’ve lost at most a smidgen but no more.2 And guess what? There’s another midterm coming up! This is all perfectly timed from the Republican point of view. They get to run hard against yet another lawless-Obama-job-killing-socialist-war-on-coal-executive-tyranny program. What’s not to like?

1Democrats too, in case you’re keeping score at home. Libertarians not so much.

2It’s worth noting that they have Obama’s relentless technocratic pragmatism to thank for this. If Obama had really wanted to punish Republican constituencies for opposing the cap-and-trade bill, he could have proposed a bunch of command-and-control mandates that would have hit red states and the coal industry in the gut. If Obama were truly the business-hating socialist tyrant of their fever dreams, that’s what he would have done. Instead, he proposed regulations that were as flexible and efficient as possible within the restrictions of the Clean Air Act. That’s why, in the end, Republican obstructionism didn’t really hurt them that much.

See original article: 

Obama’s EPA Regs Reward Republican Obstructionism

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Obama’s EPA Regs Reward Republican Obstructionism

Rich Doctors Like Republicans; Sorta Rich Doctors Like Democrats

by ElizaTSK Posted on June 4, 2014

Mother Jones

We jabber a lot these days about how the real action in income inequality lies in the 1 percent. That is, the big increases haven’t really been between the earnings of, say, teachers and computer programmers, but between computer programmers and Wall Street traders. And rising inequality is even more apparent within the 1 percent: The super rich in the top 0.1 percent are pulling away from the merely rich in the top 1 percent at an astonishing rate.

Today, Sarah Kliff points us to a kinda sorta related chart that’s pretty eye-opening. As high earners, you’d think that doctors would be more likely to contribute money to Republicans than Democrats. But it turns out that isn’t true. A new analysis in JAMA Internal Medicine shows that merely well-off doctors—your allergists, your pediatricians, your pulmonologists—favor Democrats. It’s only when you get into the territory of medical royalty—your surgeons, your urologists, your radiologists—that political contributions start to heavily favor Republicans. Even within one of the best paid professions in the country, there’s a class divide, with the haves favoring Republicans and the have-nots favoring Democrats. That’s fairly remarkable.

Original link – 

Rich Doctors Like Republicans; Sorta Rich Doctors Like Democrats

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Rich Doctors Like Republicans; Sorta Rich Doctors Like Democrats

Yep, Republicans Are Even Outraged Over the Release of a POW

by stevenjakoby Posted on June 2, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Republicans are upset over the release of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl. They have several complaints: the president “negotiated with terrorists”; the president broke a law requiring 30-day notice before prisoners are transferred out of Guantanamo; and among a few fringe types, a belief that perhaps Bergdahl was actually a deserter not worth rescuing.

Is there anything to any of this? Probably not. But it’s pretty much impossible to tell for sure. Republicans these days are so hellbent on finding reasons to be outraged over everything President Obama does, there’s no longer any way to tell whether their outrage over any specific incident is real or manufactured. And in this case, it’s probably not worth trying to find out.

As a rough rule of thumb, I figure that if there’s anything to these Republican complaints, there will be at least one or two Democrats from red states who join in. So far I don’t think there have been any, which is probably a good sign that this is just random partisan fulminating, not genuine outrage.

UPDATE: On a historical note, I guess it’s worth pointing out that prisoner exchanges—and the issues surrounding them—at the ends of wars have often been contentious, leading to partisan sniping. This is a tiny prisoner exchange, so maybe it’s normal that it’s leading to a tiny amount of partisan sniping.

Continue reading: 

Yep, Republicans Are Even Outraged Over the Release of a POW

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Yep, Republicans Are Even Outraged Over the Release of a POW

America Is Becoming a Bit More Liberal. That’s Pretty Unusual Six Years Into a Democratic Presidency.

by MargotBugden Posted on May 30, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Why are there more moderate Democrats than moderate Republicans? This has never been because Democrats are spineless wimps who won’t stand up for liberal values. The main reason is simple: there aren’t very many self-identified liberals in America. There never have been. Self-IDed conservatives have outnumbered self-IDed liberals by 10-15 percentage points for decades. This means that Democrats are forced to appeal more to the center than Republicans are.

But Gallup reports that this is changing. On social issues, the ID gap has narrowed to nearly zero. On economic issues conservatives still have a healthy 21 percentage point lead, but that’s way down from 2010. Here’s the chart:

In one sense, you should take this with a grain of salt. Sure, there are now more self-IDed liberals, but that’s compared to 2010, a high-water mark for conservative identification.

In another sense, this is pretty unusual. Normally, the country gets steadily more liberal during Republican presidencies and steadily more conservative during Democratic presidencies. This is, presumably, because voters get increasingly tired of whoever’s in power and more open to the idea that the other guys might have better answers. But this time that hasn’t happened. There’s too much noise in the Gallup chart to draw any definitive conclusions, but if you compare the numbers now to the average from the last few years of the Bush presidency, the country has actually gotten a bit more liberal. That’s something that rarely happens six years into a Democratic presidency.

The trend is more noticeable on social issues, which shouldn’t surprise anyone. On gay rights in particular, the country has plainly moved in the direction of more tolerance, and conservatives are just flatly out of step. As this trend continues—and it’s inexorable at this point—the conservative position strikes more and more people as not merely misguided, but just plain ugly. And you don’t self-ID with an ideology that you think is ugly.

It’s a funny thing. People say they don’t like President Obama’s foreign policy, but it turns out they approve of the specific things he’s doing. They say they don’t like Obamacare, but they like the things Obamacare does. They say they don’t like Obama’s economic policy, but they largely approve of his actual positions. You see this over and over. It doesn’t look like Obama is doing much to move the country in a more liberal direction, but in his slow, methodical, pragmatic way, he’s doing just that. A lot of people might not know it, but they’re attracted by his no-drama approach to incremental social change. It frustrates those of us who want to see things change faster, but in the end, it might turn out to be pretty effective.

View article: 

America Is Becoming a Bit More Liberal. That’s Pretty Unusual Six Years Into a Democratic Presidency.

Posted in ATTRA, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on America Is Becoming a Bit More Liberal. That’s Pretty Unusual Six Years Into a Democratic Presidency.

This Is How the Right Milks Benghazi for Cash

by KianBittner Posted on May 23, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

If you had any iota of doubt that the right’s never-ending obsession with Benghazi is not driven by its antipathy toward (or fear of) Hillary Clinton and by a desire to raise money for conservative outfits, then please see the fundraising email below that was sent out this week by the Stop Hillary PAC. Dispatched to conservative mailing lists, the solicitation depicts the Benghazi inquiry as all about Clinton, accusing her and her comrades of mounting a cover-up and successfully (apparently) neutering all previous congressional investigations.

The letter is not subtle:

As you know, previous attempts to uncover the truth were met with stonewalling by Hillary Clinton and Obama administration apologists.

Make no mistake: this stonewalling has EVERYTHING to do with protecting Hillary Clinton’s chances of becoming President in 2016. You could hear the desperation in Hillary’s own voice when she shrilly yelled, “WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE!!!!” at a fact-finding hearing.

Clearly, Hillary Clinton and those surrounding her think the deaths of 4 brave Americans makes no difference. Clinton simply cannot be troubled with anything that might stain the red carpet that has been rolled out for her Presidential run by the liberal elite and their accomplices in the media.

But now that Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) has been appointed by House Speaker John Boehner to run a select committee on Benghazi, the Stop Hillary PAC notes, there is finally a chance the truth will emerge. Unless, of course, Clinton and her henchmen destroy Gowdy. The Stop Hillary gang presents this as a real possibility:

Remember, those that dared to uncover the truth about the Monica Lewinsky/Bill Clinton affair and Clinton’s lies under oath about it? The Clinton’s methodically destroyed the careers and reputations of those that dared to lead the impeachment proceedings, including Congressman Bob Livingston, Bob Barr, Henry Hyde, Newt Gingrich, Helen Chenoweth, and Dan Burton.

Yet these supposed Clinton victims either were not undone by the Clintons or did not fare so badly. Livingston did resign from the House—but because of an extramarital affair. Gingrich was forced out of the House speakership by his fellow GOPers. Still, his career seems still to be kicking. Barr remains in the game; he ran as the Libertarian Party’s presidential candidate in 2008, and days ago he won enough votes in a Georgia primary to make it to the runoff for a GOP congressional nomination. Burton—who relentlessly pursued the conspiracy theory that Clinton White House aide Vince Foster was murdered (and did not commit suicide)—stayed in the House until 2012, when he resigned. Chenoweth, too, left the House on her own accord, sticking to a pledge to serve no more than three terms. Hyde carried on in the House until his 81st birthday in 2005, when he announced he would retire.

But the Stop Hillary PAC warns that Americans who want the truth about Benghazi ought to be worried about Gowdy’s fate. There is, however, a way for these Americans to help: They can sign the Stop Hillary PAC’s “statement of support” for Gowdy and, of course, send money to the PAC. If you cannot part with $50, $100, $250, $500 or more, the group suggests a symbolic donation of $20.16. “If Congressman Gowdy can finally uncover the truth, then, perhaps we can stop Hillary once and for all…because, she MUST BE STOPPED,” the group notes.

The letter, not surprisingly, does not say how the Stop Hillary PAC will use these contributions to help Gowdy—who with subpoena power shouldn’t need that much assistance. But the group’s filings with the Federal Elections Committee might cause a potential donor to be concerned. From the start of 2013 until the end of this past March, the group raised $462,749. In this time period, it spent $407,970. About $110,000 of that went straight to fundraising consultants. And most of the rest was paid out to direct mail, political consulting, and PR firms. According to Open Secrets, the PAC has devoted about 90 percent of its expenditures to fundraising overall. This stat gives the impression that the group exists largely to raise money for itself. (The honorary chairman of the Stop Hillary PAC is Colorado state Sen. Ted Harvey, a Republican who once claimed that California wildfires were set by Al Qaeda. They were not.)

Democrats who charge that the new Benghazi committee was established to allow conservatives to bash Clinton and keep milking their movement grassroots for cash need look no further than the Stop Hillary PAC. Its email ends with this enticement: “the first 2,500 patriots” who send $20.16 or more to the PAC to support Gowdy will receive “our extremely popular Stop Hillary window sticker.”

Here’s the full email:

DV.load(“//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1173348-stop-hillary-pac-email-solicitation.js”,
width: 640,
height: 800,
sidebar: false,
text: false,
pdf: false,
container: “#DV-viewer-1173348-stop-hillary-pac-email-solicitation”
);

Continue at source:

This Is How the Right Milks Benghazi for Cash

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Oster, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on This Is How the Right Milks Benghazi for Cash

It’s Time to Stop the Immigration Reform Charade

by KristopherMgw Posted on May 23, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

John Boehner says he’d really, really love to pass immigration reform, but darn it, President Obama’s arbitrary and lawless regulatory changes to Obamacare make that impossible. Republicans no longer trust Obama to enforce whatever law they pass, so they’re stuck.

This is a contrivance so obvious that I think most five-year-olds could see through it, but that’s Boehner’s story and he’s sticking to it. So Harry Reid has now made official what used to be merely idle chatter:

“Let’s pass immigration reform today. Make it take effect in 2017. Republicans don’t trust President Obama,” Reid said. “Let’s give them a chance to approve the bill under President Rand Paul or President Theodore Cruz. To be clear, delaying implementation of immigration reform is not my preference. But I feel so strongly that this bill needs to get done, I’m willing to show flexibility.”

….“If they don’t take our offer, then we’re going to have to go to the second step, which is not my preference,” Reid said. “Administrative rules cannot trump legislation but we’re going to have to do what we have to do as we proved with DACA,” he said, referring to Obama’s program to grant deportation relief and work permits to young illegal immigrants who came to the United States as children.

Look: immigration reform is dead. Republicans just aren’t willing to cross their base and pass something. The lawlessness story has never been anything more than a pretense, so Reid’s offer won’t change anything on that front. As for the executive action threat, Democrats have already tried that once before, when they were attempting to pass a cap-and-trade bill. If the bill didn’t pass, they said at the time, Obama would be forced to curb carbon emissions using executive actions. And he’s doing it! So it’s not as if Republicans figure he won’t call their bluff. They know he will. But that’s still not enough.

Nothing would be enough. The tea party has won. They don’t want immigration reform in any guise, and they control the Republican Party these days. That’s the reality, and I think by now everyone knows it. It’s time to stop the charade and move on.

Read More:

It’s Time to Stop the Immigration Reform Charade

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on It’s Time to Stop the Immigration Reform Charade

These are the states where climate hawk Tom Steyer will wage political war

by ChristianISMG Posted on May 22, 2014

These are the states where climate hawk Tom Steyer will wage political war

By

Fortune Live Media

Climate deniers, science haters, and planet degraders, here’s the latest on your newest and deepest-pocketed political foe.

As Grist’s Ben Adler told you in February, billionaire climate activist Tom Steyer is spoiling for an expensive battle against politicians who are standing in the way of climate action. Steyer plans to funnel about $50 million into campaigns this year to support climate-friendly political candidates and attack the climate-denying variety. His super PAC, NextGen Climate, expects to raise that much again from other like-minded donors, for a total war chest of $100 million – a vast amount that Adler pointed out will nonetheless pale in comparison to the fossil fuel industry’s spending on its candidates of choice.

The Washington Post reports on newly released details about Steyer’s plans for 2014:

The independent efforts run by his super PAC, NextGen Climate, will include television ads, on-the-ground field organizing and get-out-the-vote operations that seek to mobilize voters on the local impacts of climate change. The group plans to highlight issues such as drought in Iowa and the rising cost of flood insurance in Florida. It will also spotlight the climate-change skepticism of GOP Senate and gubernatorial candidates, and the campaign donations they have received from the fossil-fuel industry.

So far, the list of targeted Republicans includes Senate hopefuls Cory Gardner in Colorado, Terri Lynn Land in Michigan and Scott Brown in New Hampshire, as well as governors Rick Scott of Florida, Paul LePage of Maine and Tom Corbett of Pennsylvania. The group also plans to target the GOP’s Senate nominee in Iowa.

NextGen Climate said in a press release that it will use three main tactics:

Deploying climate as a wedge issue to turn out key voters — particularly persuadable voters and drop-off voters who are traditionally absent in mid-term elections.

Targeting extreme Republican candidates who deny basic science and are beholden to the special interests of the fossil fuel industry.

Providing significant resources to support candidates who are on the right side of climate policy.

Here’s a map showing the races into which NextGen Climate plans to pour its money:


Source
Billionaire Tom Steyer will use clout and cash to boost Democrats, environment, in key races, The Washington Post

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

,

Politics

View original post here:  

These are the states where climate hawk Tom Steyer will wage political war

Posted in ALPHA, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on These are the states where climate hawk Tom Steyer will wage political war

House Committee Votes Unanimously to Rein In the NSA

by OttoHaigler Posted on May 7, 2014

Mother Jones

It’s pretty hard to find non-depressing news out of Washington DC these days, but this genuinely qualifies:

The House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday voted 32-0 to approve an amended version of the USA Freedom Act, a bill that would require the National Security Agency to get case-by-case approval from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court before collecting the telephone or business records of a U.S. resident.

….The USA Freedom Act, introduced last October, would prohibit bulk collection under the business-records provision of the Patriot Act, the law cited by NSA and Department of Justice officials as giving them authority for the telephone records collection program exposed by leaks from former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.

The bill would also prohibit bulk collection targeting U.S. residents in parts of another statute, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which the NSA has used largely to target overseas communications. The bill would take the phone records database out of NSA control and leave the records with carriers.

Remarkably, support for this bill has stayed bipartisan despite the fact that President Obama supports it. And although it’s true that several provisions have been watered down a bit recently, the heart of the bill has stayed intact: a ban on bulk collection of phone records by the NSA. This is a pretty big deal, and it’s supported by Democrats, Republicans, and the president.

This represents the first time in decades that the national security establishment has been restrained in any significant way. And no matter what else you think of Edward Snowden, this never would have happened without him.

Read article here:  

House Committee Votes Unanimously to Rein In the NSA

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on House Committee Votes Unanimously to Rein In the NSA

Quote of the Day: Will Obamacare Deliver More Votes Than Medicare?

by MiquelCuriel Posted on April 21, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

From Jonathan Bernstein, questioning whether Obamacare will ever be a vote winner for Democrats:

After Medicare passed in 1965, voters “rewarded” Democrats for Medicare with big midterm losses in 1966 and then by putting Republicans in the White House in five of the next six presidential elections.

Actually, that’s….true, isn’t it? Even granting that there was a lot of other stuff going on in 1966, let’s hope that history doesn’t repeat itself.

See original article here – 

Quote of the Day: Will Obamacare Deliver More Votes Than Medicare?

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Quote of the Day: Will Obamacare Deliver More Votes Than Medicare?