Another excellent video by Peter Sinclair, the guy who proved former TV weatherman Anthony Watts knows as much about copyright laws as about climate science.
More “Climate Crock of the Week” videos here.
Volunteering with a Purpose
Volunteers paint a mural of Dr. Martin Luther King and President Barack Obama as part of a National Day of Service on January 19, 2009 in Houston, TX. Volunteering projects that help communities and the climate are available across the country. This is a CAP repost.
Last year almost a million Americans answered President Barack Obama’s call to serve their local communities during Martin Luther King Day. It’s that time of year again, and the occasion offers an opportunity to do something for your community and the environment. Below are some tips to help you get involved and show your green colors:
Coakley
I’ve been avoiding hopping on the “Martha Coakley is a terrible candidate” bandwagon since (a) I’m reasonably confident she’s going to win and (b) it reeks of somewhat lame precriminations spin. The reality, though, is that the substantive consequences for the progressive agenda of Massachusetts electing a Senate who’s sworn to oppose the main progressive ideas on health care and climate change are so dire as to render spin about the “meaning” of the election irrelevant.
Dana Goldtsein has a great column on the subject of Coakley’s weak campaign and the larger context of women’s groups needing to recruit candidates who have more of a flare for the game.
James Dobson to start new nonprofit and radio show, giving him ‘greater leeway to hold forth on politics.’
Last year, Focus on the Family founder James Dobson announced that he would be stepping down from his organization but would “continue to host Focus on the Family’s flagship radio program, write a monthly newsletter and speak out on moral issues.” The group had been suffering from financial troubles, laying off more than 100 staffers. However, Dobson recently announced that in March, he and his son will instead be launching a new nonprofit and radio show called “James Dobson on the Family.” While the current Focus on the Family President has insisted that Dobson just wants to “share his life’s work and passion with his only son,” the New York Times notes that the new venture will allow Dobson “greater leeway to hold forth on politics.” The Colorado Springs Gazette also reported:
Dobson’s departure from Focus only to start a similar ministry has some outside obervers speculating that Dobson was forced out of Focus and that a bitter Dobson decided to create a competing organization. Dobson, they say, may also feel that Focus’ kinder and gentler approach under CEO and president Jim Daly is not doing the trick, motivating Dobson to start a family nonprofit where fiery rhetoric is the norm. Both Focus and Dobson deny these reasons.
As Steve Benen has noted, “Few modern figures on the political scene hate quite as many people, with quite as much intensity, as James Dobson. Gays, minority faiths, the First Amendment, Girl Scouts, SpongeBob Squarepants…if you don’t think, act, or believe as Dobson does, you’re an enemy. (One of my personal favorites is when Dobson insisted that gay marriage ‘will destroy the Earth.’ He wasn’t kidding.)”
Update
Meanwhile, Focus on the Family is reportedly planning to run a 30-second, anti-choice TV ad during the Super Bowl featuring Florida Gators star quarterback Tim Tebow. The Denver Post reports:
Tebow and his mother will share one of their many positive personal stories, Schneeberger said, but he wouldn’t reveal which one. One contender is Pam Tebow’s decision to carry her son to term despite a life-threatening pregnancy in the Philippines, where she and her husband, Bob, were serving as Christian missionaries.
Birds of a Feather
Robert Farley’s account of how national security hawks around the world re-enforce each other’s position, with each country’s version of Charles Krauthammer insisting that one more demonstration of implacable will can scare the other guys off, is a must-read. It’s also a reminder that there’s really nothing that’s “neo” about neoconservative foreign policy thinking.
Obviously, as a matter of historical fact it’s the case that a certain number of former liberals reacted to the dovish turn of the post-Vietnam Democratic Party by adopting more conservative ideas. But there’s nothing actually new in “neoconservative” thought. Their take on China, or their take on Iran, or their take on the Soviet Union, or their take on Saddam Hussein, is all the same and the same as the general take that the nationalistic right has in all countries—the enemy du jour is uniquely awful and compelled toward irrational and aggressive behavior, therefore we ourselves must behave in an irrational and aggressive manner lest we be overrun.
