The unheralded significance of the Audi ‘green police’ ad 38 Posted 1 day, 12 hours ago
Four stories that should have changed the media narrative ... but didn’t 19 Posted 23 hours, 14 minutes ago
Walking: A simple focus for the Smart Growth movement 2 Posted 1 day, 2 hours ago
Bill Richardson, who aspired to be the "energy president," has endorsed Barack Obama. In his endorsement letter, he cites race and this stuff:
To reverse the disastrous policies of the last seven years, rebuild our economy, address the housing and mortgage crisis, bring our troops home from Iraq, and restore America's international standing, we need a President who can bring us together as a nation so we can confront our urgent challenges at home and abroad.
Notice anything missing?
David Roberts is staff writer for Grist. You can follow his Twitter feed at twitter.com/drgrist.
You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.
Palin bashes ‘cap and tax’ and commends Obama on nuclear
Obama talks about ‘clean coal’ and solar during YouTube Q&A
Comments
View as Flat
bigTom Posted 11:00 am
21 Mar 2008
Permalink
petertauch Posted 11:14 am
21 Mar 2008
It's not just the fact that 20-30 million illegal aliens will become full fledged american citizens with no desire to assimilate as americans, but the trainwreck of a stampede to cross the border will not only destroy what they have not already destroyed in our deserts but our entire envionmental situation will worsen. Water shortages, pollution, garbage, and the strain on our infrastructure will be a total disaster. the impact this will have on our economy will be devastating. The new slave market will be here for good. Rich and poor no mor middle class.
But I think Obama has killed his chances with his latest comments. Himslef calling his mother a "TYPICAL WHITE WOMAN" might just help end his run for the presidency. Thank you lord!
Secure our border, enforce our laws!
Permalink
JMG Posted 3:01 pm
21 Mar 2008
Save the world: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions 5% annually.
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 4:29 pm
21 Mar 2008
But sadly, that is not how democracy works.
At least, it seems to be true that all the presidential candidates, both those still in and those who have dropped out, are aware of global warming as an issue. And those who are still in, passingly acknowledge that the issue is serious.
But their job right now is attracting voters; and if not many voters are majorly interested in global warming, biodiversity, and other environmental and animal-related issues, then of course even intelligent and thoughtful people such as Bill Richardson (whom I supported, second to John Edwards) will prefer to spend their time talking about something else.
JMG is no doubt right, that Richardson "mentioned" that he expects Obama to "work on" renewable energy, etc. But it does not seem at all to be the case that Mr. Energy Expert endorsed Obama, and not Hillary, for that reason. Certainly the pundits have not interpreted the endorsement as in any way reflecting on Obama's positions on global warming, energy or the environment.
If the point is to become big actors in a very big democracy, we need to evolve into an environmentalist version of the National Rifle Association: we need to be deadly serious about a narrow range of issues; we need to express those issues in terms of both patriotism and personal dignity; we need to vote on those issues solely; and we need to use our funds to command media attention, thus killing the candidacies of unfriendly politicians.
I passionately hate the NRA. But they sure do have a magnificently successful organization, which one cannot help but admire.
Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 12:25 am
22 Mar 2008
For sure he will rally the latino vote.
We can't take victory for granted because McCain is a doddering old fool, look at the shaved ape Rove beat us with twice.
Hillary needs to call off her Rove-clone, incompetent campaign staff now. Jobs are no doubt waiting for them at foxnews. McCauliff, Wolfson go work with Dick Morris, show your true colors.
You did your work, killing off the chance for the first woman president by ignoring the caucus states. Good job boys, Rupert will welcome you to the fold now.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog
Permalink
GreyFlcn Posted 5:08 am
22 Mar 2008
Richardson is certainly going to have some good things to say about electric transportation.
Permalink
Hal 9000 Posted 6:17 am
22 Mar 2008
Bill Richardson has probably not felt this much political love in a long time. There was a several minute standing ovation before he could even start his speech. The crowd was wildly enthusiastic for Richardson. How significant the endorsement turns out to be in the long run is anyone's guess, but it was a huge boost to the Obama campaign as far as the crowd was concerned. This was so not because Governor Richardson and Senator Obama have policies and priorities in common but because, as Richardson put it, Barack Obama has once in a generation leadership qualities. For an ex-Clinton administration cabinet member to state this so forcefully is the takeaway from the event to me.
Senator Obama's speech touched on many (all?) of his campaign themes. Based on crowd response this election is about the economy, health care, and about bringing back trust and pride in government by pulling back from the abyss of the Bush adminstration's disasterous response to terrorism (the Iraq War, extraordinary renditions, Guantanomo, warrantless wiretaps, etc.). Obama and Richardson both mentioned increasing CAFE standards, renewable energy and other environmental initiatives. However, even in Portland this clearly received a less enthusiastic response than his remarks on the war, health care, the economy, and the follies of the Bush administration.
Senator Obama and Governor Richardson both appear to be ahead of the electorate on climate change. This is actually heartening to me because, again based on crowd response to both speeches, most of the electorate is caught up in day to day struggles--making ends meet--and not thinking long term thoughts about the environment. To bring the public along, we need effective and focused leadership that is committed to building new political majorities in new and positive ways. The politics of personal destruction and focus group incrementalism aren't going to cut it anymore.
Woe to us if we don't change course in our approach to politics. Senator Obama is the only candidate left who can steer us in the right direction.
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 6:57 am
22 Mar 2008
It would be a lovely irony, or bit of poetic justice, if after eight years of Bush's VP being put in charge of energy policy and stifling it, President Obama's VP too would become Energy Tsar, with much much happier results.
Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.
Permalink
petertauch Posted 8:30 am
22 Mar 2008
God help us. A vote for Obama is a vote for the end of the U.S.A. and a vote for the N.A.U.
If you want a Socialist government/society then Obama is your man.
Obama like many a politician will tell anyone what they want to hear and act like they know what they are talking about. Just to get support.
Obama is nothing more than another version of a preacher. Great speaker, I'll give him that.
He consistently has ignored anything the American people, especially those in Illinois, have had to say about just about any subject. Especially the immigration issue. He has his mind set on giving up our country. Change? Yep there will be change allright.
Remember the President is not there to direct us.
The President is there to work for the people.
The President is there to represent the People.
Bush of course has failed miserably.
Obama will lead us into a socialist society.
Obama will proudly help finish off the U.S.A. and make way for the North American Union.
Sorry but that is not for me.
Permalink
Tasermons Partner Posted 9:49 am
22 Mar 2008
And if you're gonna tout how the issue of immigration or NAFTA is linked to the environment, then please at least do some reasearch instead of just forming vague statements/personal rants without sources or backup.
Permalink
GreyFlcn Posted 5:59 pm
22 Mar 2008
What does the boogeyman of "socialism" even mean to these people?
Frankly, deficit spending is just as much a tax as conventional taxes, if not more so.
As such one doesn't see Republicans lowering spending, or lowering taxes.
It really seems like "socialism", is merely a euphemism for organized labor, and support of social welfare programs.
Organized Limit Liability Business, and Corporate Welfare though, thats somehow is okay.
_
I'm really having a hard time translating what they actually mean by socialism.
I ask, because frankly I'd love to be able to translate it back, within their value structure, why they are wrong.
Simply calling them "stupid trolls" isn't going to get us anywhere.
Permalink