PDA

View Full Version : BUSHCO - Mother Nature, The Hate Crime More than 60 world-class scientists agree



Balloonknot
11th March 04, 03:31 PM
by Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist
SF Gate
February 27, 2004

Today's question: What do you get when more than 60 of the world's top scientists, 20 Nobel Laureates among them, get together and write one of the most scathing, damning reports in the history of modern science, aimed squarely at BushCo's thoroughly atrocious record of cover-ups and obfuscations and outright lies regarding the health of the planet?

What do you get when those very scientists, a highly respected, nonpartisan group called the Union of Concerned Scientists, go on to claim that no other president in modern history has so openly misled the public or been so flagrantly disrespectful of scientific fact and mountains of irrefutable research, deliberately and systematically mutilating scientific data in the service of its rather brutal, pro-corporate, antienvironment agenda?

If you answered, "Why, you get even more painful polyps of sadness and disgust on your soul due to the BushCo onslaught," consider yourself among the millions who are right now rather horrified and appalled and who are wondering just what sort of human -- not what sort of politician, mind you, not what sort of power broker, not what sort of failed Texas oilman corporate lackey -- but what sort of human being you have to be to enact such insidious ongoing planet-gouging legislation, smirking and shrugging all the way.

It is not an easy one to answer, as you can only wonder what has gone so horribly wrong, what sort of line has been crossed so that not even the basic dignity of the planet, not even a modicum of respect for it, is the slightest factor anymore in modern American right-wing politics. What, too extreme? Hardly.

The story about the scientist's report is here. It was broadcast over many major media channels, somewhat loud and mostly clear, though most media was far more eager to bury it under all those more hotly controversial pics of happy gay people smooching on the steps of S.F.'s city hall than they were to trumpet the dire claims of a bunch of boring genius scientists.

Such is the national priority. After all, no one wants to hear how badly we've been duped by this administration, again. Given the nonexistent WMDs and the complete lack of Iraqi nukes and the bogus wars and manufactured fear and a galling budget deficit and nearly 3 million lost jobs and a raft of BushCo lies so thick you need a jackhammer to see some light, no one wants to know that even the world's top scientists are disgusted with our nation's leadership.

We can, after all, take only so much abuse, can be only so karmically and ideologically hammered, before we become so utterly exhausted that we just stop caring.

And, in fact, BushCo would love nothing more than to cripple our outrage and deflect attention away from all the dead U.S. soldiers in Iraq and his overall atrocious record on the war, jobs, the environment and foreign policy, and center it all on divisive issues of God-centric moral righteousness, like all those sicko gay people trying to dignify their sinful love.

This is a president, after all, who truly believes he is doing God's will by turning this country into the most lawless, internationally loathed aggressor on the planet, something I'm sure is very reassuring to those countless thousands of dead Iraqi civilians.

Does it really matter anymore? After all, as any child can tell you, politics has always been a wildly corrupt and slimy profession, valued somewhere between professional wrestler and professional baby-seal clubber on the moral and spiritual scale o' delicious karmic significance.

And, yes, it must be noted that there isn't a U.S. president on record who hasn't somehow deliberately mangled scientific data and covered up important reports during his term in order to further favored policies. Goes almost without saying.

But, as the Union of Concerned Scientists point out, never has the oppression of fact been so systematic, so widespread, so repulsive as that which Bush has wrought. Never has the abuse been so flagrant, the border marking what's morally acceptable so shamelessly crossed.

Maybe you don't believe the hippie environmentalists who are always spouting off about saving the whales and protecting the forests. Maybe you like to hiss at and dismiss, say, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s outstanding, powerfully researched articles in the recent issue of Rolling Stone and the latest issue of The Nation that carefully delineate just how Bush's enviro record is the worst in history, and call Kennedy just another typical left-wing liberal. You wish to be that small and boorish? Fine.

Not so easy, however, to dismiss a small army of nonpartisan, internationally respected scientists as just more agenda-thick political BS, as BushCo has done. To do so reeks of something far beyond mere name calling and dumb party maneuvering. It reeks of sheer heartlessness regarding the planet. It reeks of abuse. It reeks of hate.

This, then, is the gist of the BushCo attack on the planet: a hate crime. An intentional, ferocious dismantling of protections and guidelines, a view that Mother Nature is nothing but a cheap resource to be exploited, a giant oil can to be suckled, a hunk of toilet paper for Dick Cheney to -- well, let's not imagine.

Look at it this way. It's like music videos. Over and over again, endless droning shots of gyrating sweating booty-pumping faux-sexy bodies pretending to writhe in bogus orgasmic bliss, video after video and hour after hour where you watch and watch and go slowly numb and say, Jesus with a skimpy thong and a spray bottle of baby oil, how much further can they go?

How much more naked and sexist and overblown and abusive can they get before they say oh screw it and just strip down and have sex with a live chicken as 50 Cent downs a bottle of Crystal and grins maniacally?

This is like the saturation level of BushCo. Something's gotta give, you say. Surely some sort of ugly orgiastic critical mass has been reached wherein Bush and his planet-reaming policies simply cannot go any further without some sort of meltdown, some sort of massive international cosmic recoil whereby we finally see the Bush admin for what it is, quite possibly the most self-serving, egomaniacal cluster of enviro thugs in modern history.

But with the Union of Concerned Scientists report, this sentiment goes one step further -- this is not just hate for the planet, not merely a blatant right-wing revulsion for those much-loathed intangible New Age-y touchstones like earthly vibration, energy, true spiritual connection and a deep veneration and sense of profound awe for the raw divinity of nature.

This is more sinister, and more disturbing. BushCo's ugly rejection of not merely the "liberal" environmental politicking but also of the factual science of the natural world is, ultimately, a form of self-loathing. It is a snide and self-destructive rejection of the human-nature connection, of the very real and very direct correlation between how we treat our world and how we view ourselves, between what we choose to celebrate/annihilate in nature and what we venerate/devastate in own spirits. After all, the less regard you have for one, the less you care about the other. Simple, really.

Look. We reflect the planet. The planet reflects us. And 60 out of 60 scientists agree: BushCo's time of reflecting nothing but cruel blackness and abuse needs to come to an end, right now.

kismasher
11th March 04, 03:42 PM
less on rhetoric more on factual examples

Balloonknot
11th March 04, 03:55 PM
The point is, Bush thinks he knows better than 60 top scientists. It's all part of his Christian agenda. Christians hate scientists. They just might prove God doesn't exist. We wouldn't want that now would we?

Dochter
11th March 04, 04:49 PM
How many anti-everyone else threads are posted by Kungfools and CaptSyady?

A lot more I'd bet, BaloonKnot hasn't been around much lately. Seems what you wrote would be more true for them.


Also doesn't change the fact that people are more concerned about two men boinking each other than they are about the complete destruction and prevention of any rational environmental policy.

Omega
11th March 04, 04:54 PM
Wow, I actually agree with the hippie.

Deadpan Scientist
11th March 04, 05:16 PM
How many nobel prizes have been given for environmental research?

Deadpan Scientist
11th March 04, 05:29 PM
Originally posted by Balloonknot
The point is, Bush thinks he knows better than 60 top scientists. It's all part of his Christian agenda. Christians hate scientists. They just might prove God doesn't exist. We wouldn't want that now would we?

1) That's crazy. Who do you think he pays to develop new weapons and SDI?

2) Why didn't you come to the McThrowdown?

Balloonknot
12th March 04, 10:13 AM
I assure you I am no paid operative. If you read one of my previous posts, I mentioned that this is the first time I EVER registered to vote. I'm simply so upset by Bush's arrogance and everthing that he stands for I feel the need to share some articles. Don't shoot the messenger. Whether I put my own personal prose into it or not makes no difference. Besides, there really hasn't been many new topics on this forum for quite some time. I thought this was a off-topic forum, why the rub?

If I were a betting man, I'd bet DRD is a Bush supporter.

Dochter, nice one!!! Brand, what throwdown??

Deadpan Scientist
12th March 04, 10:17 AM
The Boston one that we had 4 threads anbout and was stickied in the throwdown forum :(

And please try to write some of your own commentary(add it on to the end to the article). It's a discussion forum, not google news.

Balloonknot
12th March 04, 10:18 AM
Omega, are you referring to me as a hippie? I assure you I'm not. Although I love my Tai Chi Chuan, and I care about my environment. I'm far from becoming a tree-hugger. Besides, I have a shaved head and look like a mean mutha-fukkkkkker!!!!

Balloonknot
12th March 04, 10:20 AM
OK, Brand. I'll take that into consideration.

As far as the mcthrowdown goes, don't you know that TCC practictioners can't fight?? Maybe next time though.....

Omega
12th March 04, 11:25 AM
So basically you look like your avatar!!!!

Te No Kage!
12th March 04, 11:44 AM
Specifically speaking, how has Pres. Bush negatively effected the environment in the form of the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act. I haven't seen anything and I deal with these issues everyday. Some people claim that they are environmentalists but what do they actually DO about it? I personally am responsible for the control of pollution in my neck of the woods and I can tell you that nothing has changed since Bush has been President. If you don't want any pollution then turn off all your electricity, and live in a cabin without running water or fire for heat. To be so far off in the deep end is hypocrisy.

patfromlogan
12th March 04, 12:07 PM
Originally posted by DRD
Thats why you get your opinion and I get mine. I think they are all just here to stir the pot. Notice none of them support the site, just use it for their little rants.

Oh goody, since I support the site (like really support it, like really really) I can rant some more??

I'll make it easy.

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0316-08.htm
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=3369
http://www.history.navy.mil/wars/index.html#anchor13254
http://www.thetip.org/art_Bush_Crime_Family197_icle.html
http://www.wage-slave.org/archives/00000026.html
http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/bushcrimefamily.htm
http://search.freefind.com/find.html?id=2557452&pid=r&mode=ALL&query=wolfowitz&SUBMIT=Find%21&t=s
http://zainabia.net/ground_zero.htm
http://www.nathanielblumberg.com/neil.htm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,925140,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,925140,00.html

KC Elbows
12th March 04, 07:58 PM
Originally posted by Te No Kage!
Specifically speaking, how has Pres. Bush negatively effected the environment in the form of the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act. I haven't seen anything and I deal with these issues everyday. Some people claim that they are environmentalists but what do they actually DO about it? I personally am responsible for the control of pollution in my neck of the woods and I can tell you that nothing has changed since Bush has been President. If you don't want any pollution then turn off all your electricity, and live in a cabin without running water or fire for heat. To be so far off in the deep end is hypocrisy.

That's a gross oversmplification there. One can have electricity without:

1) Making flammable creeks
2) Making flammable lakes

When I was a kid, the nearest creek and lake, which did not meet up with each other, could both be lit on fire with a bic lighter. The reason thay are no longer so toxic is directly because of environmental policies of democrats, and a very small minority of republicans who actually recognize that yes, there are environmental issues in the world.

As for "since Bush has been president", your narrow range of responsibilities must not include any of the land that Bush would like to or has opened up for exploitation. Or does it?

Jenfucius
12th March 04, 08:05 PM
Originally posted by Balloonknot
Omega, are you referring to me as a hippie? I assure you I'm not. Although I love my Tai Chi Chuan, and I care about my environment. I'm far from becoming a tree-hugger. Besides, I have a shaved head and look like a mean mutha-fukkkkkker!!!!

everything you have said about yourself leads me to conclude that you are indeed a liberal gay tree-hugger. the weight of the evidence is against you, pinko.

Zub-Zub
12th March 04, 09:47 PM
Hows about Bushy withdrawing the U.S. out of the Kyoto Pact?

snuffles
13th March 04, 12:11 AM
what's so bad about being a tree-hugger?

Te No Kage!
13th March 04, 07:42 AM
KCElbows: Could you be a little more specific? And how did your local lakes become flammable? I'd like to think that those responsible were probably breaking the law. And what lands are being exploited for what? My line of work has to do with power generation and the effect it has on water and air.

Zub-Zub: Withdrawing from the Kyoto Pact may or may not have a direct impact on our environment. It definitely doesn't weaken our existing laws. I believe we can create legislation to protect our environment ourselves--we don't need people in foreign countries telling us what we need to do.

Balloonknot
13th March 04, 09:31 AM
Jenfucius said:
Everything you have said about yourself leads me to conclude that you are indeed a liberal gay tree-hugger. the weight of the evidence is against you, pinko.

Jenfucius, you damn Xing Yi types are nothing but frustrated TCC practioners - LOL. Get a job you F'n Commie and start contributing to society will ya?

punchingdummy
13th March 04, 11:59 AM
Originally posted by Jenfucius
everything you have said about yourself leads me to conclude that you are indeed a liberal gay tree-hugger. the weight of the evidence is against you, pinko.

LOL. Is that Jenfucious or the Gunny talking - I'm not sure.

Freddy
13th March 04, 07:12 PM
Originally posted by Te No Kage!
KCElbows:
Zub-Zub: Withdrawing from the Kyoto Pact may or may not have a direct impact on our environment. It definitely doesn't weaken our existing laws. I believe we can create legislation to protect our environment ourselves--we don't need people in foreign countries telling us what we need to do.

Question is does the existing environmental laws actual protect the enviroment.
Its not foregn countries telling anyone what to do. What they want is an International agreement. Its not a dictate its an agreement. The concerns of other countries were prompted by numerous scientists. No nation on earth is an Island. To think otherwise is living a delusion. We all breath the same air and drink the same water regardless.

Jenfucius
13th March 04, 11:36 PM
Originally posted by Balloonknot
Jenfucius said:
Everything you have said about yourself leads me to conclude that you are indeed a liberal gay tree-hugger. the weight of the evidence is against you, pinko.

Jenfucius, you damn Xing Yi types are nothing but frustrated TCC practioners - LOL. Get a job you F'n Commie and start contributing to society will ya?

i never practiced tai chi because tai chi sucks. in six months of xing yi you can learn more than 60 years of tai chi.

i work harder than you ever will, pussy. go shove a redwood up your ass, you turd-burglar.

Jenfucius
13th March 04, 11:38 PM
Originally posted by Freddy
Question is does the existing environmental laws actual protect the enviroment.
Its not foregn countries telling anyone what to do. What they want is an International agreement. Its not a dictate its an agreement. The concerns of other countries were prompted by numerous scientists. No nation on earth is an Island. To think otherwise is living a delusion. We all breath the same air and drink the same water regardless.

go back to france, pinko. this is america.

http://www.rocpoint.com/03profiles/khall/cartman.gif

I DO WHAT I WANT, BITCH!

Te No Kage!
14th March 04, 07:39 AM
Originally posted by Freddy
Question is does the existing environmental laws actual protect the enviroment.
Its not foregn countries telling anyone what to do. What they want is an International agreement. Its not a dictate its an agreement. The concerns of other countries were prompted by numerous scientists. No nation on earth is an Island. To think otherwise is living a delusion. We all breath the same air and drink the same water regardless.

Where I live, the answer is yes, and probably a little bit of overkill as well (just here in Florida). Where are people being hurt by pollution, specifically? Our laws are great-- in most cases when people are getting sick, it is because a company has broken the law.

Zub-Zub
14th March 04, 06:15 PM
Because such laws are hardly enforced in most cases. Any group of beaurucratic bone-heads can cook up laws, the matter is effectively enforcing them, which is the very thing the Bush Admin. has failed to address.

Dochter
14th March 04, 07:27 PM
Originally posted by Te No Kage!
Where are people being hurt by pollution, specifically? Our laws are great-- in most cases when people are getting sick, it is because a company has broken the law.

Long-term environmental effects ring a bell?

Increased asthma and breating disorders in urban areas?

Oh wait everything is still peachykeen, keep burning that oil.

Dochter
14th March 04, 07:33 PM
Freddy makes an important point, environmental issues are international in nature. To claim that "we'll take care of it ourselves" ignores a majority of the problem. Additionally the withdrawl of the US from Kyoto signifies a lack of concern for environmental issues on the part of the US and weakens any international legislation. By excluding itself from the process there is an additional weakening of ability to go after pollution in 3rd world nations, where many significant problems abound.

Zub-Zub
14th March 04, 08:13 PM
Thank God, I'm not the only one who sees it like that.....

Te No Kage!
15th March 04, 05:14 AM
Originally posted by Zub-Zub
Because such laws are hardly enforced in most cases. Any group of beaurucratic bone-heads can cook up laws, the matter is effectively enforcing them, which is the very thing the Bush Admin. has failed to address.

I tend to disagree as in my personal experience laws ARE enforced whether it be by the EPA (national and state level) or OSHA. On another note, when have environmental laws been broken and not prosecuted during the Bush Admin? And if a company decides for some reason to break the law, why is that the President's fault? We might as well blame him that people are speeding. Unfortunately, our law enforcing arms are reactionary as we only can prosecute law-breakers after they have broken the law. As tax-payers it's not feasible to put government regulators everywhere looking over everybody's shoulder.

Te No Kage!
15th March 04, 05:30 AM
Originally posted by Dochter
Long-term environmental effects ring a bell?

Increased asthma and breating disorders in urban areas?

Oh wait everything is still peachykeen, keep burning that oil.

"Long-term environmental effects" -- I'm not sure specifically what you're talking about but I'm sure that they are a result of actions that took place more than just three years ago.

Asthma and breathing disorders--Science has shown that childhood asthma in the USA can be tied to the lack of Turberculosis in our population. Also due to the fact that our houses are so airtight. As far as the bad air in urban areas--pollution from automobiles when you live in a valley. I can't say that I'm a big fan of petroleum resources either but what else are you going to do right now? Buy an electric car? I wish we could get ethanol and biodiesel into the mainstream but that's just for selfish reasons since my dad's a farmer. I also don't get a good feeling about driving around with a f'in hydrogen recombiner in my car. And also, where are you going to get the hydrogen? Two ways: refining petroleum or nuclear power. Which one do you like? I pick nuclear but that's a topic for another thread.

Regardless, I don't think energy-producing companies (utilities) have that much ill-effect on the environment with the current laws we have.

kismasher
15th March 04, 09:20 AM
ummm, pfisteria anyone?

look it up.

Shuma-Gorath
15th March 04, 10:03 AM
I don't like Bush either, but do you ever post about... oh I don't know... martial arts?

patfromlogan
15th March 04, 10:17 AM
Originally posted by Te No Kage!
I tend to disagree as in my personal experience laws ARE enforced whether it be by the EPA (national and state level) or OSHA. On another note, when have environmental laws been broken and not prosecuted during the Bush Admin? And if a company decides for some reason to break the law, why is that the President's fault? We might as well blame him that people are speeding. Unfortunately, our law enforcing arms are reactionary as we only can prosecute law-breakers after they have broken the law. As tax-payers it's not feasible to put government regulators everywhere looking over everybody's shoulder.

Here's an article that looks good to me about Bushco and law. Here in the Intermountain States the head of the US Forest Service was fired by Bushco. Brave woman went down in flames.

http://www.rollingstone.com/features/nationalaffairs/featuregen.asp?pid=2154

paste, I know you're not suppossed to just paste, but read the article To Ne Kage and see if you change your mind...


George W. Bush will go down in history as America's worst environmental president. In a ferocious three-year attack, the Bush administration has initiated more than 200 major rollbacks of America's environmental laws, weakening the protection of our country's air, water, public lands and wildlife. Cloaked in meticulously crafted language designed to deceive the public, the administration intends to eliminate the nation's most important environmental laws by the end of the year. Under the guidance of Republican pollster Frank Luntz, the Bush White House has actively hidden its anti-environmental program behind deceptive rhetoric, telegenic spokespeople, secrecy and the intimidation of scientists and bureaucrats. The Bush attack was not entirely unexpected. George W. Bush had the grimmest environmental record of any governor during his tenure in Texas. Texas became number one in air and water pollution and in the release of toxic chemicals. In his six years in Austin, he championed a short-term pollution-based prosperity, which enriched his political contributors and corporate cronies by lowering the quality of life for everyone else. Now President Bush is set to do the same to America. After three years, his policies are already bearing fruit, diminishing standards of living for millions of Americans...

...Under the White House's guidance, the very agencies entrusted to protect Americans from polluters are laboring to destroy environmental laws. Or they've simply stopped enforcing them. Penalties imposed for environmental violations have plummeted under Bush. The EPA has proposed eliminating 270 enforcement staffers, which would drop staff levels to the lowest level ever. Inspections of polluting businesses have dipped fifteen percent. Criminal cases referred for federal prosecution have dropped forty percent. The EPA measures its success by the amount of pollution reduced or prevented as a result of its own actions. Last year, the EPA's two most senior career enforcement officials resigned after decades of service. They cited the administration's refusal to carry out environmental laws.

The White House has masked its attacks with euphemisms that would have embarrassed George Orwell. George W. Bush's "Healthy Forests" initiative promotes destructive logging of old-growth forests. His "Clear Skies" program, which repealed key provisions of the Clean Air Act, allows more emissions. The administration uses misleading code words such as streamlining or reforming instead of weakening, and thinning instead of logging.

In a March 2003 memo to Republican leadership, pollster Frank Luntz frankly outlined the White House strategy on energy and the environment: "The environment is probably the single issue on which Republicans in general and President Bush in particular are most vulnerable," he wrote, cautioning that the public views Republicans as being "in the pockets of corporate fat cats who rub their hands together and chuckle maniacally as they plot to pollute America for fun and profit." Luntz warned, "Not only do we risk losing the swing vote, but our suburban female base could abandon us as well." He recommended that Republicans don the sheep's clothing of environmental rhetoric while dismantling environmental laws.

I prosecute polluters on behalf of the Natural Resources Defense Council, Riverkeeper and Waterkeeper Alliance. As George W. Bush began his presidency, I was involved in litigation against the factory-pork industry, which is a large source of air and water pollution in America. Corporate pork factories cannot produce more efficiently than traditional family farmers without violating several federal environmental statutes. Industrial farms illegally dump millions of tons of untreated fecal and toxic waste onto land and into the air and water. Factory farms have contaminated hundreds of miles of waterways, put tens of thousands of family farmers and fishermen out of work, killed billions of fish, sickened consumers and subjected millions of farm animals to unspeakable cruelty.

On behalf of several farm groups and fishermen, we sued Smithfield Foods and won a decision that suggested that almost all of American factory farms were violating the Clean Water Act. The Clinton EPA had also brought its own parallel suits addressing chronic air and water violations by hog factories. But almost immediately after taking office, the Bush administration ordered the EPA to halt its Clean Air Act investigations of animal factories and weaken the water rules to allow them to continue polluting indefinitely.

Several of my other national cases were similarly derailed. Eleven years ago, I sued the EPA to stop massive fish kills at power plants. Using antiquated technology, power plants often suck up the entire fresh water volume of large rivers, killing obscene numbers of fish. Just one facility, the Salem nuclear plant in New Jersey, kills more than 3 billion Delaware River fish each year, according to Martin Marietta, the plant's own consultant. These fish kills are illegal, and in 2001 we finally won our case. A federal judge ordered the EPA to issue regulations restricting power-plant fish kills. But soon after President Bush's inauguration, the administration replaced the proposed new rule with clever regulations designed to allow the slaughter to continue unabated....

patfromlogan
15th March 04, 10:19 AM
Originally posted by Shumagorath
I don't like Bush either, but do you ever post about... oh I don't know... martial arts?

At least he's not kicking his grandma!

Shuma-Gorath
15th March 04, 12:45 PM
Originally posted by patfromlogan
At least he's not kicking his grandma!

I wouldn't be surprised if that was in his next thread about Bush.

EuropIan
15th March 04, 01:04 PM
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by patfromlogan
At least he's not kicking his grandma!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

He (bush) does that you know? He still does it, though the commute to the graveyard is killing him.

Oh and nice article, very informative pat.