Boobs

On America’s political right, it’s all the rage these days to be deliberately stupid. Witness the many Republicans and tea party advocates who believe that Barack Obama is 1) a Kenyan; and/or 2) a Muslim. Village idiot Sarah Palin (she would be the idiot in pretty much any village in which she chose to live) made up a lie about "death panels" in Obama's health-care program, and the masses of blithering simpletons who see her as some kind of hero to the common man – rather than the pandering font of ignorance she is – slurped it up like manna from heaven. Now comes a new poll showing that a majority of Republicans – 53 percent – don’t think there’s any evidence – NONE – of climate change. That's just plain dumb. It was only three years ago that nearly two-thirds of Republicans believed in global warming. Why the change? It's pretty clear that it's politically driven. Obama is in the White House, and anti-intellectual dolts like Palin are now worshipped by a significant segment of our populace, so if scientists say something is true, they're not to be trusted because they are “elitists.” In real English, that means they're smart, and we sure don't want to trust smart people. The truth is, as long as the big energy companies own a fair number of our lawmakers, especially on the Republican side, there will be no shortage of climate change deniers. Some of them are smart enough to know that truth is not on their side, but some are just dumb sheep who believe anything they hear from serial liars like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Palin. Just for the record, about 80 percent of Democrats and a majority of independents still believe global warming is real. So, unless the Republicans and tea partiers want to admit that their ignorance is deliberate, I'll just have to assume that there are fewer brain-dead fools among the Dems and independents than among the GOP/teabagger crowd.

Health or dollars?

Can we start by agreeing that air pollution is bad? Probably. But where we'll disagree is on how much air pollution is acceptable and how much we're willing to spend to reduce it. The Environmental Protection Agency today proposed tougher smog standards, just a couple of years after President Bush ignored scientists’ recommendations and set a higher smog standard than what they proposed. Actually, ignored is probably not the right word. Bush heard what they said, but when electric utilities and other companies complained, he sided with industry over the health of Americans. The new, tighter standards are not cost-free, by any means. The EPA says it will cost tens of billions to meet the called-for smog reductions, but the agency says billions eventually will be saved in terms of avoided emergency room visits, premature deaths, missed work, etc. We can't control what other countries do around the globe, but we can, and should, do what we can to improve our environment. And that includes, for some people, admitting that climate change is real and that our actions are largely to blame for it. And admitting that we need to do more – much more – to develop alternatives to our current fuel sources.

Self-inflicted damage

We still have people among us who believe climate change is a hoax or some sort of natural cycle of the Earth, despite overwhelming and unrelenting evidence to the contrary. Another brick in the wall of reality was put in place this week with the release of a federal study showing that nearly half of the lakes and reservoirs across our country contain fish with potentially harmful levels of mercury, a metal that is toxic to us humans. An AP story notes that mercury is a pollutant "primarily released from coal-fired power plants." Coal is a valuable fuel resource in our country, and the industry is a provider of a great many jobs in this area, but it galls me that when someone suggests that we need to do more to control emissions from coal-fired power plants - at some additional cost to consumers - the climate change deniers and energy industry apologists start shrieking as if their hair were on fire. The new EPA study on lake and reservoir pollution is yet one more sign that we need to quit poisoning the world in which we live. It amazes me that with all the technological advances and brilliant minds we have in this country, we are still burning rocks for fuel, but if we are going to do so – and we clearly are for at least decades to come – we must find ways that do not kill us in the process.