Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Wednesday, October 26, 2016

“If we destroy creation, creation will destroy us. Never forget this!” — Pope Francis

Last week, weather forecasters once again issued flash-flood warnings for the Deep South’s coastal areas — as governments were still working to repair the damage wrought by flooding a month ago. In California, meanwhile, authorities are struggling to handle the consequences of a historic drought, a water shortage that has choked agriculture, created a tinderbox and wreaked havoc on the economy.

Oddly, the crises brought on by water — either too much or too little — may have the same cause: climate change. Scientists have said that increased temperatures will lead to more severe weather of all kinds, including searing droughts. Though it may be counterintuitive, global warming will also cause the atmosphere to hold more moisture, resulting in heavier rainfall. Add to that rising oceans, fed by melting polar ice, and coastal areas are in for catastrophe.

President Obama has vowed to do everything he can to mitigate the global threat. His latest move is to rein in power plants; power generation is responsible for roughly 40 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. New regulations from the Environmental Protection Agency will aim to reduce those emissions from power plants already in operation.

Obama had already insisted on increased fuel economy standards for cars and trucks. Though the automotive industry and its toadies fought him fiercely, he prevailed; during his first term, he issued new rules requiring automakers to nearly double fuel economy in new cars and trucks by 2025. The president completed that phase by calling for tougher fuel economy standards for big rigs, to be issued before he leaves office.

Taken together, the new rules for fuel economy and power plants suggest that Obama has done more than any president to face squarely the compelling moral issue of our time. And he has done so in the face of corporate lobbyists who don’t care what they do to the planet, not to mention a science-denying political opposition that would oppose elementary school recess just to defy the president.

Once upon a time, Republicans respected science. President Richard Nixon created the EPA and championed the Clean Air Act. Sen. John McCain campaigned for the presidency as an advocate of a “cap-and-trade” plan that would have limited carbon emissions from industry. Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, among his 2008 primary opponents, emphasized “clean coal” and alternative energy sources. All three acknowledged global warming as a threat.

But that was in a galaxy far, far away. Since then, the GOP has morphed into a flat-earth society, a small tent of ultra-conservatives who mock the science of climate change, resist any government regulation and champion Big Business, no matter its demands. Oh, yes — they also fight anything the president proposes.

In the case of the new regulations on power plants, Democrats from coal country — states such as West Virginia, Pennsylvania and Kentucky — will join Republicans in their resistance. As just one example, Alison Grimes, who is running against Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, is campaigning as a “pro-coal Democrat.”

“I don’t agree with the president’s war on coal. I think it’s wrong for Kentucky,” she said after her recent primary win. “I will fight to make sure that coal has a long-term place in our national energy policy. I won’t answer to the president.”

So look for an all-out war against the new EPA regulations. Lawsuits have already been prepared, marketing plans worked up, political campaigns financed. Indeed, conservatives have been battling the EPA for decades now, trying to turn back rules that have already made the air cleaner in major industrial hubs.

The pushback to the new regulations will garner some sympathy among American voters, who are less concerned about climate change than citizens of other affluent countries, polls show. That indifference is a victory for the corporate czars who have spent hundreds of millions of dollars to downplay the consequences of their carbon spewing.

That means Obama’s big push to mitigate climate change has little political upside for him. It’s just the right thing to do.

(Cynthia Tucker, winner of the 2007 Pulitzer Prize for commentary, is a visiting professor at the University of Georgia. She can be reached at [email protected])

Photo: Takver via Flickr

  • Dominick Vila

    Better late than never. If the melting of the polar caps and glaciers are not enough to convince people of the need to curb carbon emissions and save our environment, perhaps they should take a look at the pictures of people in many Asian countries wearing masks to avoid breathing the heavily polluted air in the cities where they live, they should take a look at the thousands of indigenous people in countries like Brazil whose habitat is being destroyed by greed and ill-advised policies.
    Protecting our environment, and what we inherited from our elders, is not only common sense, it must be a national priority and something that we must pursue, regardless of ideological leanings.

    • babby660

      Not only is it common sense to reduce our part in climate change, it’s our moral imperative!

  • howa4x

    The right’s movement against environmental regulation can be traced directly to the Koch bros. They were the original funders of the tea party and gave it it’s anti regulatory trajectory. They have interests in coal and oil so they don’t want to see any infringement on their business interests. Lucky for them they found a group of Americans that weren’t too bright, don’t understand science and are hostile to it, and is very willing to vote against their own interest and that of their children and grand children. Also they were able to hook on to the GOP better known as the Greedy Oil Profiteers to fight their battles against a President that is trying to do everything to save our children. The Koch bros are so greedy and cynical that they have lobbyists that run around the country talking to republican state elected officials and telling them that global warming and climate change are actually good, though they still question the science. Maybe it is going to take an environmental catastrophe to wake even the stupid tea party up to the danger. Short of that I don’t know what’s going to do it

    • babby660

      By then, it will be too late. In fact, it may already be.

    • FredAppell

      It comes as no surprise that the Koch brothers are going around telling republican officials that global warming is good. As a matter of fact they’re banking on it. They can’t wait for all that pesky snow and ice to melt so they can get at the natural resources trapped under neath it. Too bad that they are leaving out the “cause and effect” portion of they’re bogus disinformation.

  • LeftInTheWest

    Much of the reason that American Conservatives are vocal against the idea that long term Climate Change is harmful is that they live in the middle of the country – Heartland. Indeed, it is the Heartland Institute that is leading the charge against any momentum that may come from this new EPA regulation. They don’t live near a coast that my go underwater. They would like warmer winters. They also practice willful ignorance of scientific conclusions that may be considered uncomfortable.

    This is a democracy and if we are to move forward as a country/planet, these ostriches with their head in the sand must be dealt with.

    My two cents.

  • itsfun

    Yep: Lets shut down all coal using plants. How many jobs will that cost. How many other countries are going to stop using coal? Lets raise every ones electric bill by 50% or more. That will really help our economy. Lets just go back to horse and buggy (can’t do that, they crap on the road). We could back to using candles to light our homes. We could hire people to go around and light candles for street lights. We can go back to covered wagons to travel in and go on vacation with. Lets get rid of electric stoves and refrigerators.

    • JPHALL

      Why do you Conservatives always look to the past. You lack vision. It is always we can’t do this or that. Our ancestors always looked to the future. If I fail today, I will get better tommorrow. If I fail here, well lets move west and try again. Only a old-timer ready to die or loser lives in the past. Every day things are changing. In most cases getting better. Join the future or join the dust heap.

      • itsfun

        speaking of the past, liberals are still blaming George Bush after 5 years into the failures of Obama.

        • babby660

          That’s because of his penchant for starting wars without paying for them, among other idiosyncrasies.

        • Independent1

          Let’s see you list those failures evil one.

          Is it a failure that the stock market is at record highs and millions of retirees such as myself have recovered much of the pension monies that last GOP administration lost for us?

          Is it a failure that there have been more than 50 months of steady jobs growth with twice as many jobs being created per month over the past 5 years than either Bush could create during their disastrous12 years in office??

          Is it a failure that Obama got us out of Iraq as he promised, saving untold American lives and billions in deficit spending and is now winding down

          Is it a failure that deficit spending has gone down faster over the past 5 years than at any time since Truman cut spending after WWII and Obama kept his promise by cutting deficit spending in half in his 1st 4 budget cycles?

          is it a failure that the our GDP has gone up over the past 4 years faster than at any time in the past 50 years?

          Is it a failure that more problem illegal aliens have been deported over the past 5 years than during any other 5 year period?

          is it a failure that more oil and gas are being pumped out of the ground than under any previous president such that America may be the world’s largest energy producer soon (over taking Russia)?

          Is it a failure that more college kids are able to get loans at a cheaper rate than at any time in history?

          Is it a failure that manufacturing companies are actually bringing their work back to America for the 1st time in decades?

          Is it a failure that the past 4 years have been the safest for America’s overseas offices in the past 40 years with lest than 1/2 a dozen attacks and only 4 Americans dying when during each of the past 3 GOP presidencies there were more than triple the attacks and at least 60 dying under each president (with more than 3,000 dying under Bush)?

          Is it a failure that Obama didn’t give up like Bush did and America actually brought justice to the man who planned the attack on America that Bush allowed to happen?

          Come on, I could continue listing fake failures, so let’s see you list those failures you keep trying to point out – worthless one!!!!!

          • itsfun

            lies lies and more lies. fascist

          • itsfun

            Is that why our economy is so “great”? His deficit is more than all the previous administrations together. We now have more people on food stamps than the entire population of Spain. How about Benghazi, IRS scandal, fast and furious, VA health care failures. How about “if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor and if you like you health care plan you can keep your health care plan” How about a President that won’t even show his college transcripts? Is that because he went to college on a foreign student only scholarship?

          • Independent1

            As usual, EVERYTHING YOU SAID is pure HOGWASH!!

            Let’s start with the deficit. The reason deficits continued to run up under Obama WAS NOT because of spending, but rather because the Great Recession that BUSH allowed to happen, threw so many on unemployment and trashed so many companies, that government receipts were down almost 1 trillion/yr. So even though Obama brought spending down, the government wasn’t getting enough money coming in BECAUSE OF BUSH!!!

            See this from the Motley Fool (from April 2013):

            Many have pleaded with the government to cut spending. Far fewer, I think, know that the government spent less over the last 12 months than it did during the same period two years ago. Adjusted for inflation, the government spent the exact same amount over the past 12 months as it did during the same period five years ago, before the current administration came into office.

            If you just look at the first three months of the year, which is guided by the most recent deficit-reduction policies, the numbers are even better for deficit hawks. Compared with the first three months last year, federal spending is down 9%, tax receipts are up 14%, and the deficit is down 32%.

            The federal deficit continues to shrink. Through the first six months of the fiscal year, revenues have come in higher than expected, while spending has come in lower than expected. As a result we are lowering our deficit forecast for the current and next two fiscal years.

            I’m back, as Obama’s policies stopped the trashing of jobs and spurred the GDP tax receipts started increasing sharply, the GDP grew sharply and the deficit fell sharply.

            As usual YOU LIE!!!!!!!!

          • Independent1

            And let’s talk about food stamps and welfare.

            The main reason food stamp usage increased so sharply right after the Great Recession IS BECAUSE OF THE GOP!!!!!

            Yup!! Idiot GOP legislators in red states rushed to do everything they could to trash the economy by doing exactly the wrong thing, not only historically, but also logically during a recession – they sharply cut spending in red states during a recession – which is stupidity in and of itself, (but obviously done to try and make Obama a one term president); which of course, threw millions of red state residents onto unemployment and welfare AND OF COURSE FOOD STAMPS!!

            More than 75% of food stamp users live in idiot red states. Of the 456 counties in America that suck the most food stamps and welfare dollars, 421 of them (more than 90%) voted for Mitt Romney in the 2012 election. And of the 15 states that suck the most food stamps and welfare dollars from Washington, 12 of them are red states.

            More distortions and lies from you!!!!!!

          • itsfun

            Come on fascist: Quit making up your numbers. Do you really expect anyone to believe that the folks living on food stamps, welfare, free housing actually voted for the terrible rich Mitt Romney? You are saying they voted for a hard working American that headed corporations and worked every day instead of a community organizer that promotes welfare, food stamps, free housing.

          • Independent1

            Wow!! Now your resorting to fantasies!! Mitt Romney hasn’t worked an honest day in his life. If DADDY hadn’t bank rolled him into starting Bain Capital, he’d probably be on skid row. Mitt Romney is the most worthless human being on the planet next to George Bush and Dick Cheney.

            After proving clearly that he’s the countries biggest American job destroyer, he had the gall to try and run for president where he could turn America into the first country on the planet run by CORPORATIONS!!!

            I don’t make anything up!! Sorry to bust your bubble!!

          • itsfun

            Not busting my bubble. You just hate successful people. I can’t believe you say he hasn’t worked a honest day in his life, when you support a tax payer paid community organizer.

          • Independent1

            Like God, I hate people who will take advantage of others in order to benefit themselves. Like God said: You can’t love God and Mammon (money and other worldly things) above Him.

            So you’re right: I hate a man who has amassed millions of dollars at the expense of millions of other people. A man who has deliberately done leverage buy-outs of countless companies just so he could destroy them here in America while pocketing millions of dollars while throwing hundreds of thousands of Americans out of jobs and forcing hundreds of thousands to endure reduced retirements because he pocketed their pension monies while dumping their retirements onto the federal government – us taxpayers.

            Not only that, but he is also the man that tried to con Obama into letting our auto industry go bankrupt, just so he and his cronies could buy GM & Chrysler for a song, destroy those companies in America like he and his cronies did to Delphi (what was Delco), and ship all their jobs to China like he did with Delphi’s 25,000 union employee jobs. Leaving all the American workers on unemployment and many of them with reduced or no pensions.

            And you show just how devious and corrupt you are yourself by worshiping this obviously corrupt, devious human being. He couldn’t be more like Satan if he worked at it – when he apparently does.

            And where do you come off denigrating someone who was willing to put working for the betterment of the people of Chicago, than going out making millions being a lawyer which he obviously had the credentials to pursue given that he graduated from Harvard Law School Magan cum Laude???? Only a lowlife like yourself would stoop so low!!!!!!

          • Independent1

            Just in case you doubt my assertion about Romney trying to con Obama into letting the auto industry go bankrupt just so he and his hedge fund buddy singer could buy GM and Chrysler, here’s the link to an article on that:

            Mitt Romney’s Bailout Bonanza


          • itsfun

            How much is this bailout costing taxpayers? GM will never pay us back. Remember the Romney family has a history in the auto industry. Maybe he could have made it profitable without taxpayer money.

          • Independent1

            Sorry, but you’re wrong again. When the Feds sold the last of the GM stock, the net cost of the INVESTMENT in the auto industry ended up to be a little less than 10 billion; But, over the past 5 years, the treasury has collected more than 100 Billion in tax revenues from auto industry related companies and their employees which would have been lost had GM and Chrysler gone belly up.

            AND!! our government didn’t have to payout billions upon billions of unemployment benefits to an estimated 1.5 million more workers who would have arguably lost their jobs had GM and Chrysler gone bankrupt. The 10 Billion was BY FAR the best 10 Billion America ever spent.

            And, When you take into account all the bailouts that Obama followed through with, through the paybacks and investment returns, including dividends and interest, our government earned 30.6 Billion dollars for its investments.

            And as a parting gift, because I’m really tired of running a discussion with someone as delusional as you are, here’s an article you should find fascinating – one which proves that you and the rest of your right-wing nut cases does nothing but love to worship the worst president America EVER HAD!! Good ole Ronnie the terrible Reagan!!

            See this:

            So what’s the verdict? Conservatives love affair with Reagan and their hate affair with Obama seems to be bassackwards.

            I submit it was REAGAN who was the illegal amnesty-supporting, gun control loving, deficit spending, tax raising, terrorist coddling coward. (As for support of “traditional family values”, Obama has a great relationship with his family–Reagan was the first divorced president and was estranged from his children.)

            Challenge a conservative to disprove anything I mentioned here. I supported it with the facts. Just be prepared for all kinds of name-calling.

            And just to turn the screws… presidential scholars think Obama outranks Reagan as president. So in a few years I expect to be flying into Obama National in DC! Oh, it is going to happen.

            Have fun! Here’s the link to an article you may not want to read but should:

            Obama v. Reagan: Fun Comparison I Did To Piss Off Wingnuts on Reagan’s B-day


          • Independent1

            And just in case you don’t believe my comment about the various bailouts, I’m giving you a link here so you can see that everything Obama followed through on has worked out to our governments advantage:

            Last update: May 29, 2014

            Altogether, accounting for both the TARP and the Fannie and Freddie bailout, $611B has gone out the door—invested, loaned, or paid out—while $387B has been returned.

            The Treasury has been earning a return on most of the money invested or loaned. So far, it has earned $255B. When those revenues are taken into account, the government has realized a $30.6B profit as of May 29, 2014.

            Here’s the link:


          • Independent1

            And what is it about you anti-Obama types that you just can’t see the forest for the trees and have to constantly harp on so many things that are nonsense – like trying to put down Obama’s education.

            Here’s something that was printed a few years ago by a Harvard publication (keep in mind that at the end it says that Obama graduated from Harvard law school Magna Cum Laude (with high honors) – while in contrast George Bush graduated from Yale with a mid C average (around a 74 average):

            Although Obama generally refrains from discussing his time at Harvard Law School, the president blossomed into a leader and teacher during his three years in Cambridge. “Harvard was, for Barack, a place to reflect, to learn and to reinforce his already very considerable skills and insights,” Law School Professor Laurence H. Tribe ’62 said during the presidential campaign four years ago. “He was definitely one of the
            leaders and shining lights in our year,” Adkins said. “He knew exactly what he wanted and went about getting it done,” Law School professor David B. Wilkins ’77 said during Obama’s first campaign for president. “He was the kind of person who you knew was destined for greatness.”

            Adkins describes Obama as a bright, engaged
            student with impressive intellectual ability. .During an introductory constitutional law class taught by professor Kathleen M. Sullivan, who now teaches at Stanford, Obama would consistently engage Sullivan with clear, pointed questions that challenged her interpretations. Students, therefore,
            dubbed the course “the Obama-Sullivan Debate Class,” Adkins said.

            “He was clearly an enormously bright fellow, who
            wasn’t arrogant,” Miner said. In fact, Obama was eager to share recognition with his fellow students and strove to include his fellow students in dialogue, instead of merely showing off his
            superior knowledge. Obama “wanted faculty and other students to see that other people in the classroom had good and interesting and provocative ideas,” Ogletree said. Obama felt that other students contributed to a collective answer, formulated from the layered input of all the class members. “He was as much a teaching assistant as he was a student,” Ogletree said. Obama could have pursued a career in academia had he not chosen to dive into politics, Olgetree said. Obama graduated from Harvard magna cum laude.


          • Independent1

            Anb by the way: “His deficit is more than all the previous administrations together” – is just one more of your evil DOWNRIGHT LIES!!!!

            NO PRESIDENT has run up deficits like George W Bush!!!!!!! Chalk up more than 10 trillion of them to good old Georgie!!!!!!!!

            In fact, hardly more than 1 trillion in deficits can be attributed to Obama, the majority of that being the Stimulus which kept America from falling INTO THE GOP’S 2ND CREATED WORLD-WIDE DEPRESSION!!!!!

          • Independent1

            I’m not even going to respond to most of your idiot non-scandal BS, but let’s talk about Bengazi even though it’s just one more fabricated non scandal.

            How do GOP sheeple such as yourself even have the gall to bring up Benghazi, when there were 13 attacks during Bush’s 8 disastrous years, virtually all of them far worse than Benghazi (including a diplomat being killed in the 3rd attack in 4 years against 1 consulate – in Karachi)??

            From PolicyMic:

            Donald Rumsfeld tweeted this missive shortly after the Benghazi incident last year: If one is to judge “American weakness” by Rumsfeld’s standards, then he and President George W. Bush are the exemplars of failure in protecting our embassies.

            The Daily Banter’s Bob Cesca produced this astounding timeline of 13 separate incidents where U.S. consulates were attacked during President Bush’s, and then Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s, tenure.

            The incidents below include all kinds of attacks — gunmen on bikes, suicide bombs, car bombs, gunmen shooting outside, and terrorists storming Consulate compounds similar to what happened in Benghazi. During each of those incidents Fox News was only supportive of the adminsitration’s reactions and there were no calls for the removal of Secretary Condoleeza Rice.

            The GOP and Fox’s fixation on Benghazi is partisan propoganda. In some of these attacks the State Department had been forewarned about potential threats, unlike Benghazi. Instead of reporting the incident and the recent allegations from a whistleblower, Fox News is hacking together their own version of the events to further convolute the story’s reality.

            Check out the timeline of attacks on embassies and consulate compounds during Bush’s tenure that received no similar fine-toothed-combing from Fox.

            1. Jan. 22, 2002: Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami Attacks Indian U.S. Consulate

            Five policemen were killed and 16 injured in the eastern Indian city of Calcutta because of an attack on the U.S. consulate by militant group Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami. American employees including the consul-general in Calcutta, Christopher Sandrolini, were unscathed, and those injured and killed were all Indians.2. June 14, 2002: Suicide Car-Bomb Outside U.S. Consulate in Karachi

            Twelve people died in an attack outside the U.S. consulate in Karachi when militants exploded a car bomb. A Taliban splinter group referred to as Al-Qanoon, or “The Law,” claimed responsibility for the attacks that also injured 51 people. Two hired guards, a Marine, and five Pakistani staff members were among the injured in the attack that followed then Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s visit to the country.3. Oct. 12, 2002: String Of Bali Bombings Included U.S. Consulate

            The U.S. consulate in Indonesia was attacked as part of the ‘Bali bombings’ on a devastating October night. While there were no fatalities at the consulate, seven Americans were among the 202 dead at the coordinated blasts inside a bar and outside a nightclub.4. Feb. 28, 2003: Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, Attacked For the Second Time in One Year

            Gunmen rode up on a motorbike to the U.S. consulate’s security checkpoints and rained gunfire killing two Pakistani police officers. One gunman arrested by paramilitary officers was found to have several rounds of ammunition prepared for what could have been a far more devastating attack.5. May 12, 2003: 36 People Including 9 Americans Die After Terrorists Storm U.S. Compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

            The State Department had warned of a potential strike against the Saudi days before gunmen infiltrated the Al Hamra Oasis Village and two others killing 36 people and wounding 160. This was the most devastating attack on a State Department employees to occur under Bush. The Saudi government cracked down on terrorists group but that did not prevent another attack to occur a year later in Jeddah.6. July 30, 2004: Islamist Attacks U.S. Embassy in Tashkent, Uzbekistan

            Two Uzbek security guards died in a bombing on the U.S. embassy in Tashkent days. Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan claimed responsibility of the bombing after 15 alleged Islamist militants went on trial.7. Dec. 6, 2004: Five Staff and Four Security Guards Die in U.S. consulate attack in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

            Gunmen fought their way into the complex, reportedly taking 18 staff and visa applicants hostage for a short time before Saudi security forces stormed the building. The final dead counted four security guards, five staff, and three attackers. No Americans were among the dead.8. March 2, 2006: Third Attack on Karachi U.S. Consulate Killed U.S. Diplomat

            U.S. Diplomat David Foy was specifically targeted in the third attack in as many years on the Karachi consulate compound. He was one of four people killed. The bomb occurred two days before President Bush was to visit Pakistan and also targeted the Marriot hotel in an upscale neighborhood of Karachi.

            This was a planned and coordinated attack that nobody covered as more than a news item.9. Sept. 12, 2006: Four Gunmen Stormed the U.S. compound in Damascus, Syria

            Gunmen yelling “Allahu akbar ” – “God is great” – fired on Syrian security officers guarding the U.S. embassy. The gunmen used grenades, automatic weapons, car bombs, and a truck bomb and killed four people and wounded 13 others. Condoleezza Rice, then Secretary of State praised the Syrians that defended the U.S. employees: “the Syrians reacted to this attack in a way that helped to secure our people, and we very much appreciate that.”10. Jan. 12, 2007: Greek Terrorists Fired a Rocket-Propelled Grenade at the U.S. Embassy

            An antitank grenade was fired into the empty consulate building by leftist terrorist group Revolutionary Struggle angry at American foreign policy. Even though nobody was in the building at the time the attack was a blatant breach of security and showed enormous security loopholes.11. March 18, 2008: A Mortar is Fired at the U.S. Embassy in Sana’a, Yemen

            Similar to the Greek attack, a mortar was fired at the U.S. embassy building killing 19 people and injuring 16. This was the second attempt at a similar mortar attack on the embassy. The first one missed the embassy and hit a girls’ school next door.12. July 9, 2008: Three Turkish Policemen were Killed When Gunman Fired on the U.S. Consulate Istanbul, Turkey

            Four attackers drove up to the high-walled compound of the U.S. Consulate and started shooting the security guards. The gun battle took the lives of three of the attackers but the fourth one drove off. No Americans were injured or killed.13. Sept. 17, 2008: 16 People Including 2 Americans Die in an Orchestrated Attack on the U.S. Embassy Sana’a, Yemen

            An arsenal of weapons including rocket-propelled grenades and two car bombs were involved in the second attack on the embassy in seven months. Eighteen-year-old American Susan El-Baneh and her husband of three weeks died holding hands.

          • itsfun

            Are you now blaming George Bush for Benghazi?

          • Independent1

            And let’s talk about the “if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor” nonsense.

            Obama didn’t lie, it was the insurance companies that lied. When ACA was being developed, a number of the CEOs from the bigger insurance companies met with Obama and pledged to support the new legislation and do everything they could to make it work.

            But even though ACA “grandfathered in” existing policies, when ACA became close to going into effect, the insurance companies started cancelling policies, as they always had done in the private market, while letting ACA haters claim that it was because of Obamacare. And I believe some even sent out cancellation notices suggesting such a thing – when it was a lie.

            And just to show you how devious the insurance companies have been, here’s some excerpts from a few articles on that:

            Executives of three of the nation’s largest health insurers told federal lawmakers in Washington on Tuesday that they would continue canceling medical coverage for some sick policyholders, despite withering criticism from Republican and Democratic members of Congress who decried the practice as unfair and abusive.

            The hearing on the controversial action known as rescission, which has left thousands of Americans burdened with costly medical bills despite paying insurance premiums, began a day after President Obama outlined his proposals for revamping the nation’s healthcare system.

            An investigation by the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations showed that health insurers WellPoint Inc., UnitedHealth Group and Assurant Inc. canceled the coverage of more than 20,000 people, allowing the companies to avoid paying more than $300 million in medical claims over a five-year period. It also found that policyholders with breast cancer, lymphoma and more than 1,000 other conditions were targeted for rescission and that employees were praised in performance reviews for terminating the policies of customers with expensive illnesses.

          • itsfun

            What world are you living in? Obama admitted he knew not everyone would be able to keep their doctors or heath plans. You just make up things to prove your points. You are definitely a fascist.

          • itsfun

            Praising employees for terminating policies sounds like the VA health care system and the IRS scandal.

            All the government had to do to help those with existing conditions was to make them eligible for either Medicare or Medicaid. This would fix that problem. The government just had to make a law saying insurance companies could not terminate policies of sick people. Instead the Government decided to screw everyone and completely take over the best health care system in the world. Just wait until the huge increase in insurance premiums come this fall, or the tax increases because Obama is going to bail out the insurance companies because his law will ruin their business. All the costs will sooner or later end up on the laps of tax payers. You have seen how good government agencies are with health care.

          • Allan Richardson

            But the Republicans would not vote for such a fix, because they do NOT want to fix the problem of uninsured people (except those who complain about phony cancellation scandals); they do not consider YOUR lack of insurance, or inability to get it, to BE a problem unless you are one of their donors, it is their GOAL.

            Today’s Republicans do not want to fix PROBLEMS, they only want to fix ELECTIONS.

        • JPHALL

          Most of what Obama gets blamed for had it star in that administration. It is hard to do anything without Congress since 2010. Many in the Republican party are living up to their campaign pledges to stop Obama.
          Subject: Re: New comment posted on Climate Change Deniers Push Back On Environmental Regulation

    • Bobnstuff

      I’ll tell you what why don’t you move next to a coal power plant and see how you like it I understand that fly ash in your ground water isn’t that bad. Maybe you could mover into coal country where they take the top off of mountains to get the coal and in doing so put heavy metals in to the streams. I’m named for a dead miner but after human life is cheep if we have low cost electricity.

    • babby660

      If you can’t breathe the air due to its foul quality, you won’t have to worry about heftier electric bills. The dead don’t pay bills.

      • itsfun

        First the US has no foul air compared to China and other developing nations. Are you going to tell them what to use for energy too.

        From NCPA:

        Global Warming Facts versus Claims

        April 23, 2014

        Claims that tackling climate change would be cost-effective are
        nonsense, says Bjørn Lomborg, director of the Copenhagen Consensus

        Politicians routinely point to global warming as the world’s greatest
        challenge, simultaneously promising that they can solve it with
        low-cost solutions.

        U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry recently called climate change
        the “greatest challenge of our generation,” with catastrophe sure to
        ensue if the world fails to address the problem.

        In Europe, a 2006 report commissioned by the British government,
        the Stern Review, insisted that global warming damage was the equivalent
        of 5 percent to 20 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), but
        promised cures that would cost just 1 percent of GDP.

        And politicians have promised not just low costs to fix the problem, but an abundance of green jobs and energy security.

        Unfortunately, this narrative is mostly wrong.

        The latest report from the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel
        on Climate Change (IPCC) confirmed that global warming has slowed, even
        stopped, over the last 15 years, and that climate models far exaggerate
        temperature trends.

        The IPCC puts its latest temperature rise cost estimates at just 0.2 to 2 percent of GDP.

        Notably, governments tried to strike this finding from the report,
        with British, Belgian, Norwegian, Japanese and American politicians
        wanting it rewritten or deleted altogether.

        Officials had similar reactions to the IPCC’s admission that
        climate policies would actually be more expensive than previously
        claimed (costing up to 11 percent of GDP by 2100), again seeking

        Experts have known these truths, but politicians and the media have
        used exaggerated warming claims to promote poor policies, subsidizing
        green power with little actual benefit.

        Source: Bjørn Lomborg, “Global Warming’s Upside-Down Narrative,” Project Syndicate, April 17, 2014.

    • Independent1

      If you didn’t have your head so far up the Koch’s butts, you’d realize that alternative energies are rapidly becoming cheap enough to make coal obsolete. What America needs is for the corrupt Koch Bros. to stop trying to obstruct progress and allow alternative energies to get the monies and focus that they need to get us out of this global warming mess.

      See this:

      The decision by Warren Buffett’s utility company to order about $1 billion of wind turbines for projects in Iowa shows how a drop in equipment costs is making renewable energy more competitive with power from fossil fuels.

      Turbine prices have fallen 26 percent worldwide since the first half of 2009, bringing wind power within 5.5 percent of the cost of electricity from coal, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co., a unit of Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Inc., yesterday announced an order for 1,050 megawatts of Siemens AG wind turbines in the industry’s largest order to date for land-based gear.

      And even the cost of producing power via Solar is becoming cheap enough that it’s not long before fossil fuels will be a thing of the past:

      Solar: More than 100x cheaper in 35 years!

      The graph shows the price per watt, starting in 1977 at over $76/watt all the way down to $0.74/watt in 2013. While already competitive with dirty energy in many areas of the world, just a few more years will show solar taking over the world!

      See the graph on the sharp decrease in the costs associated with solar:

      This graph shows why solar power will take over the world

      And they’re even getting very close to being able to produce electric power using Plasma. That’s the stuff the sun is made off. A company in New Jersey is getting very close to where they can but the Sun in a Box cheap enough to make producing electric power via oil and coal totally obsolete:

      Plasma fusion becomes a reality?

      Scientists in a New Jersey laboratory say they are close to a major breakthrough in the field of fusion that they predict will soon allow for an unlimited source of the cheapest, cleanest and safest energy ever.

      The world doesn’t need to return to the past, it just needs to be let to move into the future without people like you and the Koch Bros trying to stall the process via your corrupt ways.

      Do you even realize that the country of Germany gets more than 76% of its energy needs from renewable sources?? Anybody that’s putting money into fossil fuels IS AN ABSOLUTE FOOL!!!

  • ps0rjl

    I am not a chicken little predicting the end of the world but I think we should try to take little steps to reduce our carbon footprint. After all if the climate change people are right we should not destroy our planet for short term gains. I look at making small changes just in case climate change predictions are real like putting on my seat belt when I get in the car. I don’t intend on getting in an accident but I put it on just in case.

  • babby660

    Right wingers — even if you doubt the warnings of the large majority of scientists who have been worried about humanity’s role in climate change for decades now, you really should give it some thought. Aren’t your children’s & your grandchildren’s lives worth it? Mine are.

  • Duckbudder

    Hey National Memo, could we please get a moderator?

  • Allan Richardson

    If a hostile extraterrestrial species were consciously PLANNING to trick us into making our planet uninhabitable so that we would die off and they could remake our planet for themselves, those aliens would do EXACTLY WHAT the Koch brothers and other climate change denial supporters are doing! They might even plant those false beliefs in their brains. They might even disguise themselves as humans and take the place of those people. Would these deniers be willing to take a DNA test to prove they are human? 😉

  • TMZ1928

    To the Democrats, it’s all about doing the bidding of Tom Steyer in exchange for his $100M campaign contribution, not what’s good for the country.