Goodman on CNN on the Japanese Disasters

Tim Goodman, TV critic for The Hollywood Reporter, continues the discussion of how bad CNN’s Japan coverage has been: Japan disaster shows U.S. journalists unprepared.

Covering this trilogy of terror in Japan really underscores how much better prepared reporters and anchors need to be. The incessantly simplistic and embarrassing questions need to stop. Someone needs to tamp down runaway speculation. Also, the attention on the Middle East in past years has dulled producers’ sense of keeping experts from Asia on the source list.

It’s a shame that going online to watch videos from NHK, BBC and Al Jazeera English was far and away the best option for Americans.

85 Responses to “Goodman on CNN on the Japanese Disasters”

  1. shcb Says:

    A while back you guys asked why we spend so much money on our military, Libya is why. Look at what is going on there, the Euro-socialists that criticize us for spending too much don’t know what the hell to do without us, cause they don’t spend the money. Germany decided to split as soon as they heard NATO was going to take over, not the NATO that we usually see, but the NATO in an era of a very weak and indecisive American president. So now NATO is going to handle the no fly zone, after Libya has no air force left, without the Germans. But the wimps on the other side of the pond want nothing to do with anything that requires boots without the those overspending American soldiers doing it.

    Nobody seems to know what the mission is, the Americans want Gaddafi out of power, the Europeans don’t, the Brits want him dead at the hand of a sniper, the Young American President doesn’t want to kill him. Poor guy, he just wanted to socialize America, not be the commander in chief. So Osama’s going to give the tough calls to someone else, only problem no one else wants to make the tough calls, American presidents have done it for so long they have all forgot how. And even if they do make the call, they need the US machine ’cause they sold their machine for cradle to grave.

  2. Smith Says:

    Is this an example of the nice, intelligent conversations that you claim to be so skilled at having? Because it looks like your usual bullshit sloganeering to me.

    Far more this: “I haven’t seen anything beyond regurgitated slogans from anyone on this site in quite some time now. It seems to be the only form of discourse that can be sustained here. Attempts to diverge from this path are met with cries of “Islamofascisocialism” instead of rational debate, so why bother?” than this: “Actually, Smith, with the exception of you and Enky we have pretty decent discussions.”

    Death to browns, especially the BROWN guy in the WHITE House, am I right guys?

  3. shcb Says:

    Not at all, it is my opinion of what is going on, I never mentioned anything about race, you just injected it, an I right guys?

  4. Smith Says:

    I don’t know, “an” you?

  5. leftbehind Says:

    Both of you need to pipe down! John’s trying to pretend this Libya thing isn’t happening and neither of you are helping!

  6. knarlyknight Says:

    Surf’s up…

    http://www.dumpert.nl/mediabase/1416681/71a8dbc9/nieuwe_tsunami_footage.html

    As for Libya, sounds like shcb is mixing pain killers and bourbon again. Try this instead:

    “The Libyan War is 1 wk old. How ’bout we list the things we can all agree on whether we’re for, against or undecided about the intervention?”

    “#1. Qaddafi must go. A truly sick and evil man. Shoulda been gone a long time ago.”

    “#2. All the world’s dictators should go. Including the ones in Yemen, Bahrain, Jordan Syria & Saudi Arabia.”

    “#3. The French were right to take an immediate, specific and precise action to stop the Libyan army from advancing on civilians in Benghazi.”

    “#4. Obama was right 2go2 the U.N.&ArabLeague instead of acting unilaterally. He was right 2 say our lead in this would be ‘days, not weeks.’ ”

    “#5. We’re not quite sure who makes up the Libyan revolt, but in principle we should support all secular democracy movements in the MidEast.”

    “#6. We cannot fight a 3rd ground war in the MidEast. We need 2 go 2 the war time-out room. We can be supportive in other ways.”

    “#7. We have no credibility if we don’t immed. back the protesters in Bahrain/ Yemen/Jordan. And we must stop selling arms 2 guys like MQ.”

    “#8. Finally it is our DUTY as citizens 2 fiercely question our govt-&esp OUR gov cause its a gov run by corporations-when it takes us 2 war.”

    “Now the things we may not agree on, but I believe in my conscience: …”

    “A. Stop saying we’re part of a ‘coalition.’ We are THE war machine. Our mil budget is bigger than almost ALL the world’s countries COMBINED.”

    “B. Let the democracy movement in Libya & elsewhere conduct their own revolutions. There are ways to support (if asked) without military.”

    “C. The wave of democratic nonviolent revolution in MidEast was going just fine. We can support them by STOPPING our support of the regimes.”

    “D. I don’t believe anything a govt run by Wall St is telling me unless it can be proved. Sorry. Americans, let’s stop being played.”

    “E. GE, etc. pay no taxes. But they make huge profits off war. Meanwhile Detroit will have 62 students per classroom. They r taking us down.”

    “F. Finally & most importantly, we need our own pro-democracy movement here in the U.S. It started in Madison-lets make it happen everywhere.”
    - by MMoore.

  7. shcb Says:

    I think much of the left is trying to ignore this war. I don’t know if we should be there or not but we’ve went at it in such a disjointed fashion it is almost comical. I’ve been reading about Tom Donilon, sounds like this is just the way he works, kind of shoot from the hip and them bully anyone that criticizes his methods.

    I got a kick of Knarly’s list, although I hope this text messaging style won’t last. The problem with criticizing someone (Bush) when they are doing the right thing is that when your guy does the same right thing later you look silly. Same as if you don’t criticize your guy for doing something idiotic.

  8. shcb Says:

    Here is an interesting look at radiation by our old friend Charlie Martin

    http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/understanding-radiation/

  9. enkidu Says:

    didn’t I already link to that diagram?
    http://xkcd.com/radiation/

    Newt is that you?

    I think Obama basically did the right thing in Libya considering the situation. Built a coalition, got the Arab League on board/provide a flimsy pretext, engaged the Europeans and generally did all the things a leader is supposed to (well, at least for oil rich countries on the doorstep of the eurozone, also, run by a lunatic… but hey we could say as much for most of our ‘allies’ and oil men in the region.) Prevented a slaughter and most importantly prevented the death knell of an ‘Arab Spring’. He is on the side of change and regretfully, Q(whatisname) wasn’t amenable to a payoff and step aside deal like Mubarak. Hey wasn’t McCain shaking hands with Q a year or so ago? Who normalized relations? You know, for the oil? Oh, right, bush.

    Obama – cleaning up more messes than a teabagger’s Depends.

    Yup wwnj, text messaging won’t last. lol

  10. leftbehind Says:

    “Things we all agree on” points 1 -5, at least sound a lot like the excuses misinformed people such as myself were making to defend the Iraq war, but to be fair to Knarly, he is being consistent in that he is, ultimately, bashing Obama as harshly for Libya as he has Bush for Iraq and Afghanistan. That is a consistency that I applaud, and we are not likely to see from most of this crowd.

  11. leftbehind Says:

    Exchange the word “Libya” for Iraq” and “Bush” for “Obama” in Inky’s last post and he suddenly turns into me defending Bush in 2003. Saving civilians…blah, blah…advancing democracy…blah, blah, blah…attacking the previous administration for being “too easy” on the “evil” dictator…Newt, is that you?

  12. shcb Says:

    Boy, even the serious columnists are treating tonight’s speech like they are Jon Stewart.

  13. NorthernLite Says:

    “I don’t know if we should be there or not but we’ve went at it in such a disjointed fashion it is almost comical.”

    What’s really comical is someone who supported Bush’s reckless and wanton invasion of Iraq bitching about the world actually forming an alliance and taking action to stop a massacre by a madman in Libya.

    I know you might not recognize what you’re seeing, but what you’re seeing is a well put together air campaign that stopped Gadaffi in his tracks and which is now allowing the freedom fighters to advance on him.

    He will be gone very soon without any troops on the ground. I hope you and Bush are taking notes.

    Basically Obama is doing the exact opposite of what Bush did in Afghanistan and Iraq.

    So obviously he’s on the right path.

  14. shcb Says:

    But that isn’t what is happening, the Germans just flat pulled out when they found out NATO was in charge and they may have to do more than drive boats around the Med, all the rest of Europe is willing to do is fly planes after all the planes that would shoot at them have been destroyed by the US. He doesn’t have a coalition any more than Bush did.

  15. NorthernLite Says:

    But that IS what’s happening.

    Canadian, French, American and British pilots have been dropping bombs since the start. A Canadian is leading the NATO mission. The UK, France, USA and Canada (let’s face it, the muscle of NATO) is front and centre.

    What, exactly, is your problem?

    “He doesn’t have a coalition any more than Bush did.” – That is just 100% wrong.

    And just a reminder: Because this mission doesn’t look anything like the Iraq mission, that’s a great thing.

  16. enkidu Says:

    Actually, in a Wingnutoverse way, the wwnjs are correct. Obama has built the same sort of coalition that Bush did. George Herbert Walker Bush. Just like in Gulf War I, most of the Arab countries and indeed the world are united. Let us hope that this time we finish the job. I’d love to see those old A10s in action. We built a ton of them and never had to try them on the Soviet armor, well, other than in Iraq. There is talk of providing attack helicopters… you can bet the US will be flying those things, with whatever the Brits and French can muster as well.

    I don’t like being the world’s cop on the beat, but I bet they gamed out what happens if we stand by and let the Arab Spring die out, or if we take sides and do the right thing. He did the right thing. I think it hilarious to watch the partisan tools baying for brown mudhut folk blood, then when Obama acts, suddenly they can’t stand that he’s doing anything.

    This mission looks a heck of a lot more like the early stages of the Afghan war. With local forces providing the boots and we provide the (aerial) bombs. I will predict that Obama doesn’t screw it up (certainly not like bushco did – hey where IS that Osama binWhatsisname feller? boo!) At this point Qwhatsisname needs to go (exile or 6′ under)

    Anyone remember candidate Obama’s line about war?
    “I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.”
    So far, so smart, but the game aint over yet.

  17. NorthernLite Says:

    Great points enk.

    Further to your point about wwnj’s getting all up in a hissy fit, and equally hilarious, is Sara Palin whining about how since it’s a NATO mission now American troops are going to be comanded by foreign leaders, and she’s outraged…

    Yes, the woman who aspires (and was almost a heartbeat away from becoming) to be your commander in chief has no idea how the NATO alliance works, or command chains in general.

  18. knarlyknight Says:

    Thanks NL, that’s exactly what I was thinking.

    Enk, I’m not following this closely but I don’t believe we’re involved in a war in Libya, so far it is just supposed to be an enforcement of a no fly zone, protection of civilians and arms embargo/asset freeze. No ground forces are allowed. Just wondering, has congress approved this war? (At least Bush II went through the steps to deceive/manipulate for Congress’ approval. Did Bill Clinton get Congress’ approval for Kosovo?) )

    My regret is that the delay in launching the no fly zone nearly made MoreDaffy victorious before the waters receded in Japan.

    Anyway, Libya is # 3 on the American list of nations to invade, so all is going according to plan, except the timing is a little delayed… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8H6RomGjJM

  19. enkidu Says:

    Don’t worry lads, Libya is just a “squirmish” according to the quitter from twitter
    you betcha!

    http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/sarah-palin-wonders-aloud-if-libya-squirmis

    Anyone want to take bets she – like rush – thinks there was no oil in the BP oil spill. Anyone? No? Safe bet, since wwnjs live in a bubble of bullsh… ooops! nearly made a naughty word!

  20. NorthernLite Says:

    LMAO wtf is a “squirmish” and just where does this diva get off acting like an expert in this area?!

    She needs to go back up there to Alaska and update her facebook status or do something a little less complicated than having a logical and rational discussion about Libya.

  21. knarlyknight Says:

    LMAO too, “squirmish” is probably how she felt acting as McCains right hand in the last election…

    “Squirmish: showing signs of restlessness resulting from feelings of discomfort or distress”

  22. leftbehind Says:

    Knarly – to answer your earlier question, which no one else here seems to want to sully themselves with, no, Congress was not given an opportunity by the Obama administration to say no to this operation. So far, so smart.

    Has anyone been keeping track of the Rolling Stone article regarding the Kill Squads? Of course Abu-Ghraib was far worse because there was a Republican in the White House when that happened, but this is still a pretty shocking story. Good thing the administration has such a tight grip on the Afghan situation. Civilians are being murdered in cold blood now, but at least they are dying with all their clothes on, and without the further indignity of having panties put on their head.

  23. leftbehind Says:

    I like the way Inky defends the Libyan operation by noting how, so far, its been so similar to the beginnings of the Afghan War. Wow, what a success that has been – how foolish I’ve been to be so concerned. And Inky’s right, where is Osama B-what’shisname? I never really expected Bush to find him after he bumbled away the first year or so, but super-sleuth Obama’s been on the case since 2008 and we still don’t have so much as a footprint. I thought we were supposed to find him, now that we had a real leader running things. I thought Obama was going to end the war in Iraq to concentrate on Bin Laden in Afghanistan. I thought we were supposed to do something constructive in Afghanistan, period – or come home. To be fair, Afghanistan was looking a lot like Vietnam before Obama was elected, but come on – Bush has been gone nearly three years and not only has nothing changed under Obama, but now we’ve got our own My Lai, years after we were told the Afghan war would be a manageable situation.

    And why should we have to kill Gadhafi, Inky? Why can’t we just lock him away in Gitmo? Good thing Obama still hasn’t closed it like he said he would by 2009.

    I don’t oppose all wars. … What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by…armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne…I also know that Gadhafi poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Libyan economy is in shambles, that the Libyan military is a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

    Hold on a second…I think I’ve heard that one before…

  24. shcb Says:

    You’re on a roll LB so I’ll be brief, well, as brief as I get. These things happen in every war, you mentioned My Lai, and there was Malmédy in WW II and on and on. The test is how does the country the offending soldiers come from treat the situation, not only how are they punished but how truthful is the event recorded.

    These things seem to happen about this stage of any war, I think it is a combination of the an ever lessening quality of soldier as the better men are either promoted, killed or have honorably served and left service and the strain of too much time in the field. Unfortunately I think the only solution is to lessen the length of wars, and the best way to do that is be ruthlessly brutal from the very beginning, which of course would be an even worse option in the type of wars we are now fighting.

  25. NorthernLite Says:

    GE has a sweet deal: they get paid to make the engines to carry the bombs and don’t pay any taxes. None.

    Gawd bless Captialism.

    http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/31/news/economy/ge_jeffrey_immelt/index.htm?hpt=C1

  26. shcb Says:

    You understand the reason the didn’t pay taxes this year is they didn’t make any money, right? The money they made was overseas where the taxes were lower. When you raise taxes too high the taxes take the jobs somewhere else.

  27. enkidu Says:

    You understand the reason they are still in business is because of government bailout money, right? The money they made was overseas where the costs of production and environmental protections are lower. When you allow corporations to run amok, they’ll just take the jobs somewhere else.

    But why use reason, logic, math, facts or reality when engaging in an-oh-so-stimulating ‘conversation’ with wwnjs. Up is up. 2+2 = 4 The sky is blue. wwnj is full of woo.

    Hey didn’t Obawhatsisname just appoint lil Jeffey Immelt to his Merkin Jobs n Stuff Council? good grief Charlie Brown

    Well, at least I still have Canada!

  28. shcb Says:

    You are right Enky. Fits in with what I said.

  29. shcb Says:

    “when you allow cororations to run amok, they’ll just take the jobs somewhere else” not sure what you are saying there, do you want to force companies to stay in this country? how would you do that?

  30. knarlyknight Says:

    “forcing” (I take that to mean “strongly encouraging”, but to each their own…)

    shcb, you know there is no simple answer to that, every means of “forcing” domestic investment must be considered in light of, and balanced against, what other countries are doing, existing health of the industries and current programs, and the industry/products in question.

    China and the former soviet union had many failed models for “forcing”, and there are ample examples of the counter-productive impacts of protectionist measures by more capitalist countries. However, there are also successful “forcings” on the economies in some countries with mininal disruptions to other economies.

  31. shcb Says:

    Knarly,
    Agreed, I think Enky is confusing a couple concepts and mixing them together into a sort of Yogism.

    Start off with the first part of that statement “when you allow corporations to run amok”. Stop there. You can fill in the blank with any of a number of bad things, which is why we have labor laws, why we don’t allow monopolies without being under special constraints, environmental regulations etc.

    Now “they’ll just take the jobs somewhere else” that is more accurate if the first part of the statement were “when you allow governments to run amok”

    The only way you are going to stop corporations from moving jobs is to force them at gun point, in which case they will just stop making the product, then government takes over the industry and we have the former Soviet Union… communism. What you are talking about is more of a competition of countries. There is a natural taxation level that is needed for various functions and countries are in a completion with each other to get corporations to bring the company taxes to one country instead of another just as Coke wants you to not drink Pepsi.

    What Enky wants is to tax corporations higher than that market clearing rate, then when they decide to use their options he wants to strongly encourage them to not move, probably by invoking an even higher penalty targeted at only companies that move. At some point someone else will take them in because the other country would love to have the money the US is turning down.

  32. knarlyknight Says:

    shcb,
    I like your description above, it fairly sets out the conventional wisdom (at least what I was taught in my first year in Econ.) Yet speaking in extremes where tax levels are taken too far and there are no offsetting tangible or intangible benefits of operating in Amerca being considered is just as misleading as you are suggesting of Enk. A simple example: People like to live in sunny, environmentally sound and crime-safe areas, companies can use such a home base location as a perk to bring in good people, thus prettier places can have higher tax rates. Plus real life has turned me into a skeptic and I’m now certain there are plenty of exceptions where the opposite of basement level tax rates and the opposite of complete deregulation has brought about better results.

  33. enkidu Says:

    I find it endlessly amusing that when I use wwnjs very same words suddenly things are all up is down, blue is orange, 2+2=taxamagical nonsense. Woo. lol

    You’ve read a ton of very hilarious wwnj ‘thinking’ into a very few words that I actually used. Sadly very little has any relation to any objective reality. Where did I say I wanted higher taxes on corps? you just make up more sh!t than a busload of teabaggers with a costco megapack of Depends.

    Governments didn’t run amuck and cause a financial meltdown: banksters and unregulated shadow market trades brought us to the brink of worldwide economic collapse. Our government stepped in and did what they had to stop the bleeding.

    wwnjs seem to have a very special partisan Dunning-Kruger/pareidolia: no matter what happens, everything is always the dang libs fault.

  34. knarlyknight Says:

    actually, Enk, your government did run amok with deregulating financial industry – … Canadian politicians have been gloating over how they kept to stringent standards and thus avoided a similar greed induced ponzi-like mega bubble swindle & collapse…
    Perhaps shcb should admit you have a point about him saying raising taxes, I plead distraction as I’m not paying much attention to this thread or discussion.

    I have only two more things to add. 1. as much as this is just as fascinating as seeing ones reflection for the first time or experiencing liftoff in a helicopter for the first time, the Japanese really, really, should be directing their clean-up efforts to more significant matters:

    http://www.wimp.com/messyspills/

    And 2, this is Fukishly very not bad:
    http://www.wimp.com/unusualdance/

  35. knarlyknight Says:

    NL, this is for you… http://www.wimp.com/onlyindia/

  36. knarlyknight Says:

    shcb – recent NASA study admits sunspot plays a significant role in GW, but NASA still maintains that humans are at least as significant to GW.

    http://www.dailytech.com/NASA+Study+Acknowledges+Solar+Cycle+Not+Man+Responsible+for+Past+Warming/article15310.htm

  37. knarlyknight Says:

    LIES
    -Obama the candidate vs Obama the POTUS:

    In 2008, candidate Obama was skeptical about nuclear power, telling NBC Meet the Press host Tim Russert on January 15, 2008:

    Unless a “safe way to produce (and store) nuclear energy (is found), then absolutely we shouldn’t build more plants.”

    At a January 13, 2008 town hall meeting, he said:

    “Nuclear is bad because we don’t know how to store it. And it poses security hazards.”

    On December 30, 2007, he said:

    “….(N)uclear energy is not optimal so I am not a nuclear energy proponent….I am much more interested in solar and wind and bio-diesel (to produce) clean energy and (new) jobs….I have not ruled out nuclear (but) only so far is it is clean and safe.”

    And Obama the POTUS:

    Today, Obama supports the NRC, the same agency Karl Grossman calls “an unabashed promoter of nuclear power,” the one candidate Obama called “moribund, (a) captive of the industries it regulates.” The one with a perfect record – never having denied applicants new plant licenses. The one now dangerously extending operating lives of aging, poorly maintained plants with deplorable safety records to 80 years, assuring multiple likelihoods of trouble.

    It now says no new regulation or oversight is needed. No moratorium on new construction or old plants will be instituted, and, in fact, Vermont’s trouble-plagued Yankee plant (using the same type Fukushima reactor) got a 20-year extension instead of being shut down.

    That in spite of recent reports highlighting serious industry “near misses,” safety violations, failures to reveal legally-required information regarding defective equipment, electrical supply system inadequacies, and other examples of industry mismanagement and criminality, risking an American Fukushima disaster.

    http://www.rense.com/general93/apoc.htm

  38. shcb Says:

    So let’s see Knarly, NASA says sunspots have about a 0.1c and they say man has had at least the same effect. In the last 30 years we have had a little over 1 degree variation. So if sunspots have had a 10% effect does that mean man has had a 10% effect? What are the variables that have made up the other 80%? Now of course man could make up the other 90% and those statements would still be true, but we all know there more than 2 variables.

  39. knarlyknight Says:

    Good point. HAARP might make up the other 80%, why don’t you ask Lefty about that?

  40. shcb Says:

    My money is on tides, the earth’s orbit, the wobble on the axis, natural glacial cycles, and most importantly, things we don’t understand… yet.

  41. enkidu Says:

    so wwnj thinks climate change is caused by…. tides
    what else is there to say?

    bonus question: are you aware of what makes the tides?
    Bilious O’Reilly isn’t.
    http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/370183/january-06-2011/bill-o-reilly-proves-god-s-existence—neil-degrasse-tyson

    extra credit question: what has changed about the moon since the industrial revolution started? (no, that we went there doesn’t count, even taxamagically)

  42. knarlyknight Says:

    :-)

  43. knarlyknight Says:

    Okay, “tides” is a pretty crazy theory. Makes me feel safe in that my pet theory cannot possibly be more ridiculous. My bet is that latent heat within earth’s core, which is 99.9999999% (approx.) of earth’s volume, seeps into the upper crust and atmosphere at different rates across different times (decades and centuries). Apparently it is HOT in there, I’ve seen the lava to prove it. But I have never heard scientists saying that the rate that heat gets squeezed out of the earth’s core as being a factor. I’ve wondered for years why it is never mentioned and have just guessed that scientists do not know if the rate is constant or variable and therefore simply assume it is a constant. So it may fit within the “things we don’t understand… yet” category. (If there is any science on that, please set me straight before I embarass myself with a verbal comment in the real world.)

    But tides? Might as well suggest that climate change is caused by comets or the wind.

    This is good for the music alone:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAE7GLE_cOc

    JBC, this is for YOU: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_iQxXWsfu4&feature=player_embedded

  44. knarlyknight Says:

    and this is for anyone who hates Fox idiots (Jesse makes him leave the set) but is worthy simply for the telegenic blond sitting on the couch. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9mbotpeuJM&feature=related

  45. shcb Says:

    I’m in Vegas this week without a computer so this will be short. Tides don’t cause global warming, only the sun gives us heat. Water holds heat (and cold) much longer than air, tides move that heat around. So while tides don’t cause global warming they may be the reason for much of the evidence of AGW.

  46. shcb Says:

    I don’t think TJ said distention is the highest form of patriotism, i think that was Howard Zinn in the early 1970s. I appreciate what Jessie has done for this country but his a little kooky

  47. enkidu Says:

    http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-climate-berkeley-20110404,0,772697.story

    I’ve met Rich at various lectures and a very good friend has had lunch with him a few times. He’s a climate change skeptic and set out to prove that anthropogenic climate change is bunk. So he used the same input data (and included more ground stations and the kitchen sink) to disprove ‘the climate consensus’ analysis. One of the big funders is the Koch Brothers of WI infamy.

    Only problem, he can’t disprove it. The problem is real, we are causing it and denial doesn’t help.

    OK lets say wwnj is right (in this [far fetched, I know] hypothetical case right being “correct”) and climate change is real but isn’t caused by fossil fuel burning dumping gigatons of CO2 and other GHGs into our atmosphere… in this hypothetical it is some natural process… like say, tides (laughable I know). So if the Earth is warming wwnjs seem to think doing nothing is the best course of action. Huzzah! drill baby drill! But even if it isn’t caused by all the GHGs we’re mixing in, should humans do something to ameliorate the worst of the effects? What levers can we pull on to alter the temperature trajectory? CO2 and other GHGs are an obvious choice – ignoring for a moment the socio-political costs of buying lots of oil from people who hate us, fanatical religious crackpots in far off lands, like Alaska (ht to Bill Maher)

    We went thru this same argument before with CFCs and SO2. Each time the wwnjs said it would be a huge burden, the end of civilization, doom, gloom, it may eat into the great and holy Profits! Yet in both of these previous examples the actual costs were much lower than projected and the final net costs if you include the environmental costs probably work out to a nice tidy societal (sociamalisticalnazi!) net plus. That is a profit I can believe in.

    This isn’t about me, or you. It’s about what kind of world we leave our children and grandchildren. You can drink the woo -lade, pull the woo down over your eyes and believe fauxnewts nonsense, but the plain fact of the matter is we have a problem bigger than planned parenthood or the NBPP and it isn’t that young man (read: boy, read: π!@@#&) in the white house.

    You can’t power a 21st C civ on burning rocks. Wake (the f!ck) up.

  48. enkidu Says:

    distension – bloating, swelling as from internal pressure (perhaps from being so full of bullsh… whooopsie! ahem)

    dissension – strong disagreement; a contention or quarrel; discord. difference in sentiment or opinion; disagreement.

    lolz

  49. knarlyknight Says:

    More dissention – this time it’s 3 vs 1 and the 3 have notes plus earpieces in their best attempts to spin the facts to fit into officially sanctioned fables:
    http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/bestoftv/2011/04/05/exp.cnn.intv.ventura.cnn

    People like Ventura is why America deserves respect.

  50. shcb Says:

    Goodness, he is a kook.

  51. knarlyknight Says:

    A perfect projection.
    It’s almost unanimous that shcb is the kook.
    Elizabeth can’t even handle him.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=mV784UEGWHY

    My forecast is that JV is going down in flames soon, or will quickly develop a radiation induced sickness, but for my children’s sake I hope I am wrong.

  52. shcb Says:

    This is the problem with these kooks, they make a good point and then extrapolate it to unreasonable extremes. For instance, the government has bla bla million documents each year they don’t let us see, then the populist tug “I’m a tax payer, I have a right!!!”. So Jessie, you never had a document while governor you didn’t want someone to see? That is just unreasonable. Yes, you are a tax payer, yes, you should be able to see most of what the government does, but no, you don’t get to see everything. He was all proud that he has security clearance in the other video, but now he wants everyone to see everything. But he can say these things without getting arrested, good for us.

  53. shcb Says:

    By the way, he has already gone down in flames, he’s just standing in the meadow shaking his fist at the Red Barron as he flies by now, and selling some books.

  54. enkidu Says:

    http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/04/glenn-beck-fox-news-brain-chart

  55. shcb Says:

    I’m sure he’s leaving to “spend more time with his family”

  56. knarlyknight Says:

    16 million “top secret” documents, likely hundreds of millions of pages.

    The point is American covert operations are vast beyond your comprehension shcb.

    So people like shcb make silly little false remarks like “but now he wants everyone to see everything.” They say stupid things like that in part because they utterly cannot comprehend the significance of such vast secret operations, let alone bring themselves to read “63 Documents the Government Doesn’t Want You to Read” but which are declassified.

  57. shcb Says:

    I’m sure the covert operations are vast beyond my comprehension, just as what I do is way beyond what most people can comprehend, they just want their toaster to make toast in the morning and their car to start. They don’t care what goes into the design and manufacturing of the things they use. Similarly most of us don’t care what happens in the shadows as long as everything keeps working, to a point of course. Do you watch “Dirty Jobs”? Most people don’t care what goes into the sausage or what is left on the floor, they enjoy finding out a little but only as a passing interest. Now that doesn’t mean that people don’t understand there is a lot going on out there, we know people are killed and assassinations happen, we also know it is necessary.

    The problem I have with people like Jessie is he takes little tidbits, like the government knew they were going to crash planes into building months before they did, and turn that into the government maliciously did nothing to prevent it. That is just BS, fact is we got beat, the Arabs the deed before we could figure out which plane they were going to be on.

  58. knarlyknight Says:

    Fact is your governmnet told outrageous lies about their knowledge of plans to crash planes into buildings and people are still trying to unravel culpability against enormous official roadblocks.

    You might not want to know how your hamburger is made either, but you will want to be sure it doesn’t contain your neighbors children.

  59. shcb Says:

    I know I’m going to regret this but what lies did they tell of thier knowledge of plans to crash planes? Yes they knew it was a possability but they didn’t know when or who.

  60. ethan-p Says:

    I just watched the JV videos. He actually has a few valid points…but he’s definitely nuts. I guess that’s how conspiracy theories work: Here is a strange-but-true fact, here is a mystery, here is another strange fact, therefore – this preposterously convoluted hypothesis must be true!

    On another track, am I the only one who feels that the idea of not keeping secrets from Americans is insane? Certain things need to be kept secret, and expecting 300 million people to keep said secrets is (I’m not quite sure how to put this in a delicate way – I’m gonna go with) dumb.

  61. shcb Says:

    You’re exactly right Ethan, hell I keep some things secret from myself.

  62. knarlyknight Says:

    shcb, Not “some secrets”. That is a straw man. The point is 16 million documents, classified = a vast black ops almost beyond comprehension.

    ethan-p, I’d be interested which points of JV’s you think are valid. And less interested, but still interested, in the ones you think are not valid.

    Also, I’d agree that some secrets are a necessary evil, as such they need to be minimized otherwise you end up living in a society like Egypt under Mubarek – where you do not get hired for some silly jobs because someone in government phones the employer and tells them that you attended a rally for the wrong political party and to stay clear of you. True story our of Egypt, reams of files where people were denied employment due to political leanings, if not taken to jail and beaten.

    The shock I feel is no-one argued with shcb when shcb said assassinations are just part of the job of governing. Assassinations = 1st degree murder, if a leader agrees to undertake assassination it is an admission that the legal process is non-functioning.

  63. shcb Says:

    Good point Knarly, as you can imagine I have many friends and family that are not only pro life (I hate that term) but militantly so. I always tell them, murder is a legal term, killing is a technical term. To say the assassination of someone is murder may not be correct, just as abortion may or may not be murder, it depends on the law of the land at the time of the event. If the state determines someone should die, whether that is through the court system (capital punishment) or through the executive branch (assassinations) or through the military (war) the state has the right to take a life. Sorry, it’s just the way it is.

  64. knarlyknight Says:

    A friend of mine has a T-shirt that says:
    “Kill a Queer Fetus for Jesus”

    That T-shirt makes as much sense as allowing the most powerful people to also have the right to kill people as they choose.

    Still waiting for ethan-p, might be a while…

  65. shcb Says:

    Not as they choose, that is why we have laws and constitutions

  66. knarlyknight Says:

    Aaah, I see your Wingnuttery “explains” it…

    Not as they choose, I guess they assassinate people by lottery then. Never mind that…

    Please advise where in the Constitution it is intended that the leaders of your great country are supposed to execute people without trial?

    Or maybe assassinations are covered by your Bill of Rights?

    Maybe your Declaration of Independence was written to get out from under Britains soft-hearted liberal Rule of Law under the King and prepare the way for the executives Bush and Obama to execute assassinations?

  67. shcb Says:

    In times of war… if they are going too far they should be stopped.

  68. knarlyknight Says:

    “In times of war…” ? !

    Nice one! Define the ever-present fight against terrorism as “war” and then loosely define “terrorism” to cover a wide variety of crimes and you allow government, forevermore, to assassinate just about anyone accused of being a “terrorist”, without having to actually prove anything.

  69. shcb Says:

    Yup, that’s the situation we find ourselves in. We could more closely define this war if we weren’t so politically correct, but that too is the situation we find ourselves in.

  70. knarlyknight Says:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/apr/11/nuclear-apologists-radiation

  71. ethan-p Says:

    Sorry Knarly – I was away for a few days. Perhaps I was a little off by saying that he has some valid points. I actually agreed with one.

    JV’s point that I agreed with (and I’ve always felt this way); in my opinion, a secret military tribunal for Kahlid Sheik Mohammed (spelling? sorry) is a little goofy. I understand that there are military secrets would be at risk, and there are some who believe that “they” would use our justice system against us. However, I believe in America. Our justice system is far from perfect, but it is one of (if not the) best in the world. 9/11 was not perpetrated by a government, and was on American soil. This should not be a military matter. If we truly believe in our freedom and our system, let’s not try to have it both ways. I hope that I’m not being too short-sighted on this. Maybe there just are too many secrets that would be exposed in the criminal court. Maybe the military knows that he did what he did, but our methods of obtaining this knowledge are unkosher by criminal justice standards (but perhaps acceptable by military standards).

    Where I think he’s nuts on this – I don’t want JV to sit on the tribunal. I think that there shouldn’t be a tribunal at all. Use the court system.

    I kind of like his qualms with DHS, although (just like with everything else) – he takes it a little too far. I’m also not so sure that I have a problem with DHS itself: just some of the asinine travel restrictions, the reactive mentality, the security theater, and the name itself.

    Lastly, where I really agree: Stop voting for Democrats and Republicans. Now I know that this isn’t the answer for everything – politics will always be politics. And the career politicians will always be asshats. Multiple parties would create a party for every fringe interest group out there – and it’s still really unlikely that someone would start a party that I would join. However, I’d love to see a credible threat to the 2-party system.

    Also, just about everything else that he said was nutty (in some fashion or another).

  72. knarlyknight Says:

    thx ethan. To clarify, if you look at JV’s point about sitting on the commission in context, he was not serious at all. The point is that he wants to konw the information that you are told if you sit on the commission, just like any other thinking person would want, so obviuosly the military commission is the wrong vehicle since not everyone can be on the commission. So a real trial is the right vehicle.

  73. shcb Says:

    Here’s a real world example. My debit card was compromised yesterday, the system caught it and canceled my card in minutes. Only one small transaction went through. Now I would love know how they did it out of idle curiosity but I also know it would make harder for the card people to do their jobs, so I make the rational decision to be Anthe dark about the details

  74. knarlyknight Says:

    So you are saying that the example works because cancelling your card is the same as executing an accused person?

  75. shcb Says:

    No of course not, you’re using Enky tricks again. I’m referring to the broader should the public be privy to nearly every detail. I don’t have a problem putting this guy on trial in a civilian court as long as we wait until the war is over and the information divulged no longer does harm.

    Knarlyknight says:
    “But Shcb, the war may not be over for a hundred years, we all will be dust by then”

    Shcb says:
    “There you go!”

  76. ethan-p Says:

    Knarly: Gotcha – not really serious.

    SHCB: By that logic, we’ve got a Catch-22, no?

    Here’s my thing. This really is a criminal justice issue. This involves an attack that happened entirely in America, and it happened to a civilian structure. It was not perpetrated by a sovereign government. We went over there and brought this guy to American soil. He is being subjected to our rule of law – and I do believe in our rule of law (warts and all).

    For me, by trying him in a secret military tribune, it says a two things:
    1. His actions are so bad that he doesn’t deserve the protections afforded to him under our justice system.

    This bugs me in and of itself. I know that our justice system far (I mean, FAR) from perfect, but it’s pretty damn good compared to what’s out there. It plays a huge role in defining us a free country. These basic legal protections are given to anyone in America. He didn’t just show up here waving an AK-47 – he was taken here by Americans. Do we not believe in our justice system? If if’s too good for him, why couldn’t that exception be made for anyone? (This is kind of scary for me) Doesn’t this make us look a little hypocritical?

    2. This suggests that the case against him is unlikely to hold up against him in a proper court of law.

    The prospect of this guy going free is horrible – but why not build a proper case? There is certainly time to do so.

  77. shcb Says:

    At the very core of these discussions is, are we in a war or a series of criminal actions? That was never really defined at the beginning, bad Bush. We were fighting the Evil Axis, we were going to invade multiple countries and force our form of government on them but we weren’t really at war with them, we certainly didn’t mean any harm to the people of the country, only a few bad apples. We weren’t at war with a religion, but everyone we were fighting was a staunch supporter of that religion. See where I’m going with this? I don’t think we are in so much of a catch 22 as just a mess because we pussy footed around, of course a Sherman’s march to the sea has negative consequences as well.

    The other problem is we are fighting this war with the last war’s rules, this confuses things. The Geneva conventions don’t work when you are at war with a religion, not a nation, same is true with sanctions. But this is more than a police issue, this is more than a bunch of morons in Montana with a grudge against the government, or a bunch of environmentalists that hate corporations. This has the qualifications of a war but we have to be honest about it, it isn’t your grandfather’s war, so maybe we need new rules, understanding the enemy isn’t going to follow any of them.

    My opinion… don’t take any prisoners. If they are worth pointing a gun at, pull the trigger. At least until the world figures out what to do with these guys.

    I know that doesn’t really answer your questions or comments but I don’t think there is an answer, give him cable tv and a maid on Wednesdays in his jail cell for the rest of his life, he is in the crack of justice and there is no way out now.

  78. knarlyknight Says:

    ethan – yea right.

    Now that Glenn Beck has been certified, we have Coulter making this statement that screams: “never, ever take anything I say seriously again for I am a complete idiot”

    http://nation.foxnews.com/ann-coulter/2011/03/16/glowing-report-radiation

  79. knarlyknight Says:

    comments are good tooo…

    http://gonzalolira.blogspot.com/2011/04/burning-candle-at-both-ends-raising.html

  80. ethan-p Says:

    Knarly – not sure I’m reading you there.

    SHCB – I think that we’re looking at this in a similar way. This is different. And we’re not really at war. We’re not using the war-on-terror rhetoric anymore, and Congress hasn’t declared war on anyone – after all, only the Congress has the power to declare war, right? (yeah, I know that this is semantic bullshit – we have people fighting and dying for the country, war is war and I’m not going there). The point is – yes, rules have changed and we’re dealing with a situation of asymmetric warfare.

    My point is that our justice system has been able to evolve to stand the test of time. Why can’t it stand up to this? If it couldn’t stand up to this challenge, why the hell wasn’t this guy “disappeared”? If Americans (we) capture Osama Bin Laden (assuming it hasn’t already happened), would the same apply to him? Would he be disappeared? Would he stand before a military tribunal? Would he stand before a federal court in an open and fair trial?

    In the latter case, I suspect that there is sufficient “legitimate” evidence for a conviction, and it would not necessitate disclosing any secrets. If Bin Laden gets a trial, but Khalid Sheik Mohammed doesn’t – why?

    Anyway…I’m not really arguing – just speculating at this point.

  81. shcb Says:

    Yeah, I’m not really arguing either, I think it is an interesting discussion. I think we are where we are, what I would like to see us do is figure out where to go. This is probably going to be the future of warfare and conflict for some time to come so the international community needs to decide how to deal with it. But I don’t think they will because so much of the world is so pacifistic they want to just ignore war and let the Americans handle it, and then criticize us for the way we are doing it.

    From a perspective of current law for lack of a better word I think we are at war with the religion of Islam and the Arab counties of the middle east. Forgetting how we got into this conflict, 911 being on American soil etc our present actions are acts of war. For instance, if we were to capture OBL in Afghanistan, we would take him somewhere and he would be under our control, period. You can only do that in a war situation, if we would capture him in France, the French police would do the arrest, there would be extradition etc. because we are not at war with France.

    After 911 I remember a speech Bush gave where he said this war would be fought with both military and police actions and I thought this is going to get messy, and it has. That is what I meant when I said we are making a mistake by pussy footing around. We never should have let those two lines cross, we should have declared war against Radical Islam and named 4 or 5 countries and went after it. But the lines are crossed and I don’t know what to do to fix it.

    I’m going to give your last point some thought, there is something percolating in my head but I don’t have it in order yet.

  82. NorthernLite Says:

    Hola amigos, just got back from Cancun and have been helping my local progressive cadidate a lot over the past little while, we’re in the middle of a Federal election…

    But I couldn’t help but notice that the House GOP just passed a budget bill that guts Medicare.

    So I gotta ask: Where are those tea-bagging patriots with their outrage that the government is (for real this time) putting their hands on Medicare? What, no FreedomWorks buses are available to take them to Washington?

  83. shcb Says:

    It really wouldn’t gut it, just privatize it sometime in the future, with the government paying the premiums. At least that is how I understand it.

  84. knarlyknight Says:

    There are other priorities:

    Expressing his exasperation, he said: “Come on, guys. I’m the president of the United States! Where’s the fancy buttons and stuff and the big screen comes up? It doesn’t happen. I always thought I was going to have like really cool phones and stuff.”

    Mr Obama was the latest high profile figure to be caught out by an open microphone, which was not switched off after media were ushered out of the event. The comments were piped back to surprised reporters in a briefing area.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/8454647/Barack-Obama-White-House-technology-30-years-behind.html

  85. knarlyknight Says:

    Cancun… sweet.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.