Showing posts from May, 2006

Gore critiques the Bush Administration

There was a time when this rhetoric would have made me very uncomfortable. However, given the way things have gone since then, I actually find myself in total and utter agreement with Al Gore on this . Al Gore has made his sharpest attack yet on the George Bush presidency, describing the current US administration as "a renegade band of rightwing extremists". In an interview with the Guardian today, the former vice-president calls himself a "recovering politician", but launches into the political fray more explicitly than he has previously done during his high-profile campaigning on the threat of global warming. Denying that his politics have shifted to the left since he lost the court battle for the 2000 election, Mr Gore says: "If you have a renegade band of rightwing extremists who get hold of power, the whole thing goes to the right." The Administration IS extremist. Cronyism, scandal, assault upon civil liberties, gross expansion of executive power, re

Gored again

The Nazi reference attacks on Gore by "climate skeptics" just don't stop coming. Now, acclaimed skeptic Bill Gray, a cantankerous meteorologist who believes that global warming is a natural process and will reverse itself in twenty years, comes out with this gem (in a long article in the WaPo ): Somehow Hitler keeps popping into the discussion. Gore draws a parallel between fighting global warming and fighting the Nazis. Novelist Michael Crichton, in State of Fear , ends with an appendix comparing the theory of global warming to the theory of eugenics -- the belief, prominently promoted by Nazis, that the gene pool of the human species was degenerating due to higher reproductive rates of "inferior" people. Both, he contends, are examples of junk science, supported by intellectual elites who will later conveniently forget they signed on to such craziness. And Gray has no governor on his rhetoric. At one point during our meeting in Colorado he blurts out, " G

human rights and commitment

This is the summary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights : 1. All Human beings are free and equal in dignity and rights 2. All people are entitled to rights without distinction based on race, colour, sex, language, religion, opinion, origin, property, birth or residency. 3. Right to life liberty and security of person. 4. Freedom from slavery 5. Freedom from torture 6. Right to be treated equally by the law 7. Right to equal protection by the law 8. Right for all to effective remedy by competent tribunal 9. Freedom from arbitrary arrest. 10. Right to a fair public hearing by independent tribunal 11. Right to presumption of innocence until proven guilty at public trial with all guarantees necessary for defence 12. Right to privacy in home, family and correspondence 13. Freedom of movement in your own country and the right to leave and return to any countries 14. Right to political asylum in other countries 15. Right to nationality 16. Rig

A gallant experiment ends

Josh Trevino is leaving SwordsCrossed . I think that's terrible news. SC was a great experiment in genuine dialog and respectful debate. Regular Dean's World commentator TallDave will be one of the new writers there, and I wish him well. However with Trevino's departure I think that the diversity of disagreement is diminished - something is now lost that can't be regained. For what it's worth, I think that Obsidian Wings is still a good source of respectful cross-partisan conversing. Charles Bird in particular is a man I respect and who I'd even invited to guest post at Dean Nation on occassion. And John Cole's Balloon Juice is a duet, with John as the moderate conservative and his friend Tim as the moderate liberal. However, none of these sites quite fill the void left by SwordsCrossed - an actual debate on chosen topics, with responses in turn. I salute Armando and Trevino and hope that SC finds a life of its own. But I also hope that we see more exper

smeared Gore

In this video segment, Sterling Burnett smears Al Gore by comparing him to the Nazis. transcript: Burnett: That's the problem. If I thought Al Gore's movie was as you like to say, fair and balanced, I'd say, everyone should go see it, but why go see propaganda? You don't go see Joseph Goebbels’' films to see the truth about Nazi Germany. You don't go see Al Gore’' films to see the truth about global warming... watch the video for more - including how the host cuts off a rebuttal to Burnett pointing out that he's a paid lobbyist working for Exxon Mobil . via Crooks and Liars .

Al Gore warms up?

This is an excellent article in the LA Times about Al Gore's movie on global warming . But apart from the fascinating backstory about how the project got started, there's some rather poignant reminiscing on Gore's political fortunes: Throughout the movie, Gore's fall from politics is abundantly clear: Looking somewhat chunky and weary, he pulls his own bags through airport terminals, and takes off his shoes and empties his pockets at security checkpoints. Two months into the project, Guggenheim decided it was time to address the election. They were in a hotel room in Los Angeles, no camera, just recording sound. "There was this long, long pause. And then he says, 'Well that was a hard blow ... But what do you do? You make the best of it,' " Guggenheim recalled. "For a guy who is incredibly articulate and will find the nuance in everything, it was hard to find the words. You could feel how painful it was for him to remember that time. It was devast

Revenge of the Nerds: Al vs Newt

yeah it will never happen, but a Gore vs Gingrich run in 08 would just be so much fun for a change. Policy wonkery up the wazoo... substantive issues, monotones and earth tones. I mean it would be the ultimate geek fest. Imagine the televised debates. Charts and powerpoint slides! laser pointers! pocket protectors! Where is our technoracy that was prophesized? seriously, Newt vs Al. It's just too good. It has to happen. Is already taken? Tags: Al Gore , Newt Gingrich , Purple Politics , city of brass

A response to Chris Bowers and Anna

Chris Bowers has posted his rationale for why he not only feels that the Online Integrity campaign is superfluous, but also can be construed as a ploy with which to bash the left side of the blogsphere. In comments to that post, Anna Brosovic also makes some good points about the relatively restricted view of OI on privacy issues, and asks why racism was not included as well. Since I am one of the original signatory lefties of OI, I'd like to share my thoughts in response to Chris and Anna, both of whom I greatly respect - especially Anna, with whom I blogged alongside for two wonderful years at Dean Nation. I'd like to also appeal to my right-leaning peers to be patient with me, as I intend to unabashedly address these issues from within my lefty perspective, and sincerely mean no insult.   Superfluousness is desirable Whether OI is superfluous or not is not a theoretical debate - in fact, the question of whether the blogsphere is a civil arena or not greatly affects us all,

Online Integrity: A statement of Principles

I was honored to have had a role in drafting this: Online Integrity : A Statement of Principles Private persons are entitled to respect for their privacy regardless of their activities online. This includes respect for the non-public nature of their personal contact information, the inviolability of their homes, and the safety of their families. No information which might lead others to invade these spaces should be posted. The separateness of private persons’ professional lives should also be respected as much as is reasonable. Public figures are entitled to respect for the non-public nature of their personal, non-professional contact information, and their privacy with regard to their homes and families. No information which might lead others to invade these spaces should be posted. Persons seeking anonymity or pseudonymity online should have their wishes in this regard respected as much as is reasonable. Exceptions include cases of criminal, misleading, or intentionally disruptive b