All I can say is “huh?”. Somehow this writers’ Bush derangement syndrome draws a parallel…
When David Letterman apologized to the Palin family Monday night on his Late Show, he displayed humility and logic largely missing from his most fiery detractors in right-wing America.
He did something conservative icon George W. Bush couldn’t bring himself to do. In his admittedly “tasteless” joke about (pick which daughter) Palin, Letterman made a mistake that hurt feelings. For that he was sorry.
In starting a war under false pretences (remember when W. and Tony Blair could rarely sputter a sentence without mentioning WMD?) that killed tens of thousands of soldiers and civilians, and foolishly turned the focus of battle away from Afghanistan, the former president never expressed regrets, little less an apology.
With the help of his pal, Dick Cheney, the U.S.A. lost much of its lustre throughout the world. Truth, justice and the American Way were tarnished by the waterboards of Gitmo and the sexual sadists of al Ghraib.
Sorry?! for what?
Rather than being constructive, lefists are looking to further divide people into non-helpful left/right camps rather than just acknowledging that Letterman screwed up and leave it there…Suddenly, Letterman is a gentleman and Palin is the witch (and GWB the hoser). A gentleman is only partly known by what he says…and sometimes more by when he bites his tongue and doesn’t say what is tempting. Wouldn’t a gentleman have known better? Further, comparing Letterman to Bush is like comparing Gretzky to Ghandi…both great guys but also very different guys. Really. Columns like this are a waste of time. Mindless media comments once again…
GWB Erandgement has moved to Sarah Palin Derangement.
Announcing http://www.globalchange.gov in my email today:
As example of the kind of impacts we can expect in a warming world, the climate of Illinois could resemble the climate of Texas by the end of this century.
If you aren’t sure why global warming is our top priority, please read this email.
Moments ago, the White House released a detailed scientific report forecasting devastating impacts of global warming in the United States if we don’t take dramatic steps now to cut our global warming emissions.
The report, Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States, breaks down climate impacts region-by-region
Hartford and Philadelphia could average 30 days of 100+ temperatures per year while Boston could see more than 20 100-degree days per year;
Native maple, beech, birch, spruce and fir forests could be almost entirely lost;
The climate of New Hampshire could resemble the climate of North Carolina.
Much of Florida and southeast Texas could see more than 180 days in the 90s per year while other southeastern states could see more than 100 90-degree days per year;
Spring and summer drought has already increased by 12 percent and 14 respectively over the last 30 years. The frequency, intensity and duration of droughts in the region are likely to increase;
Sea level rise and stronger storm surges could inundate and ultimately flood coastal communities along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts.
The climate of Michigan could resemble the climate of Oklahoma and the climate of Illinois could resemble the climate of Texas;
Deadly heat waves like the one that killed more than 700 people in Chicago in 1995, will become more frequent. Under higher emission scenarios, Chicago could experience up to three such heat waves every year;
Higher emissions scenarios would cause a water level drop of 1-2 feet in the Great Lakes, threatening shipping, infrastructure, beaches and ecosystems.
The Great Plains:
Hotter, drier summers will threaten the already overused High Plains aquifer, which irrigates 13 million acres and provides water to 80% of the people in the region;
Increased temperatures and higher carbon dioxide levels will threaten farming activities with more drought, pest infestations, and faster weed growth;
Under higher emission scenarios, North and South Dakota, which currently see only a handful of 100-degree days, could see 50 or more days of 100+ temperatures per year.
Under higher emission scenarios, the southern half of Arizona, southeastern California and Las Vegas could see more than 120 days with 100+ temperatures;
Most of the region could see precipitation levels decline by more than 40%, pushing already water-strained areas over the edge;
Southwestern forests will be decimated with less water, more wildfires and more invasive pests. Under higher emissions scenarios, California’s mountain forests could decline by 60-90%.
Mountain snowpack runoff, critical water needs, could run 20-40 days earlier, threatening water resources in summer months;
Declining summer streamflows and warmer water temperatures could push salmon and other cold water fish species, already stressed by human activities, over the brink;
100-degree days are rare today in the Northwest. Under higher emission scenarios, much of the region could see 30-40 days of 110+ temperatures per year.
Without action, this is the future that awaits our children. We can’t let it happen.
The good news? The U.S. House could vote on a landmark energy and global warming bill as soon as next week. We’re doing everything we can to pass this bill and keep the pressure on the Senate to move a bill of its own.
Here are three things you can do now to help:
-Take action to urge passage of the bill in the House.
-Forward this email to all your friends and family.
-Share facts about your region on Facebook or Twitter. Please include a link to our action alert: http://support.edf.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=118
Thanks for all you do,
Environmental Defense Fund
P.S. In addition to the human toll, this report reinforces the dire threat American wildlife face in a warming world. Go to our Warming and Wildlife campaign to meet and see seven “ambassador” species that face a bleak future in a warmer world.
Environmental Defense Fund
1875 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 600
Washington, DC 20009
Just what we needed – now they can loot in the name of Global Warming.
This is the most delusional rant I’ve ever heard…
Ed Schultz completely misses the point. He reaches to extremes to justify the theft from secured shareholders, and the backroom handover of these companies to corrupt unions. Sorry GM and Chrysler workers – I will never spend a dime on anything you make from this day forward. And I’m sure over half of North America feels the same.
The new “owners” have destroyed the lives of dealers (and their thousands of employees) that chose to donate to Republicans. They broke the law and stole the investments of creditors and shareholders. To buy from them is to support and condone the Chicago looters.
Buying a GM or Chrysler now is the worst decision you could ever make, regardless of the bribes they’ll throw at you.
Anyone that believes that Obama’s theft and nationalization of the car companies (soon to be followed by a looting by the unions) deserves to end up with a car they’ll never be able to sell. GM and Chrysler vehicles will redefine depreciation.
If you really want to support American cars – BUY FORD.
But don’t listen to me - I am out of my mind according to General Electric’s propaganda machine over at MSNBC.
What do you drive Ed?
I haven’t been able to say I admire George Bush without getting a stern lecture. The George Soros angle was to scream that George Bush’s Middle East plan was a disaster… We lost… There were no WMDs.
It worked so well that it cost the Republican’s power in all levels of Congress.
Strategy is a funny thing… it takes balls. It’s hard and a teleprompter can’t mask the absence.
Bush had something Obama will never have – a STRATEGY. Not an agenda.
George Bush’s strategy was to give the Middle East a beacon of freedom they could relate to, and the people would want it. They’d eventually rise up fight for it. This area of the world has been ruled by vicious dictators for a couple of generations. They have used Islam to control their subjects, and used the terrorism as the way to deflect the blame of the hopelessness of the Islamic life. They made people believe that America was the reason they were failures.
The Democrats chose to be partners in this charade – they vilified George Bush and took the low road to power. Hate Bush – Love Us.
When was the last time you read anything about Iraq? Good or bad? Because they knew the truth was plain to see, their only hope was to bury it. Great to have the media in your corner.
Look at what Bush’s strategy caused in Iran… click here. They can’t hide or take credit for this.
I’ll say it now.. lord knows others are too intimidated to mention it…
Thank you George Bush. Iran is about to thank you.
You’ve created real hope and change. The Iranian people have seen what freedom is – and now they are finally brave enough to fight for it.
Obama… take note. America has nothing to apologize for.
Now the Iranian government declared President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the winner, riot police have attempted to suppress protest, and shut down YouTube, Facebook and cellphone use.
The election data from Iran’s Interior Ministry shows a perfectly linear relationship between President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s votes and those of challenger Mir Hossein Mousavi — a statistical impossibility. The link above may be dead as they are shutting down things against the government… so I grabbed the article:
In the chart below, compiled based on the data released by the Ministry and announced by Iran’s national television, a perfect linear relation between the votes received by the President and Mir Hossein Mousavi has been maintained, and the President’s vote is always half of the President’s. The vertical axis (y) shows Mr. Mousavi’s votes, and the horizontal (x) the President’s. R^2 shows the correlation coefficient: the closer it is to 1.0, the more perfect is the fit, and it is 0.9995, as close to 1.0 as possible for any type of data.
Statistically and mathematically, it is impossible to maintain such perfect linear relations between the votes of any two candidates in any election — and at all stages of vote counting. This is particularly true about Iran, a large country with a variety of ethnic groups who usually vote for a candidate who is ethnically one of their own. For example, in the present elections, Mr. Mousavi is an Azeri and speaks Turkish. The Azeries make up 1/4 of all the eligible voters in Iran and in his trips to Azerbaijan province, where most of the Azeri population lives, Mr. Mousavi had been greeted by huge rallies in support of his campaign. Likewise, Mr. Karroubi, the other reformist candidate, is a Lor. But according to the data released by Iran’s Interior Ministry, in both cases, Mr. Ahmadinejad has far outdone both candidates in their own provinces of birth and among their own ethnic populations.
Let’s see how the Iranians react over the next few weeks.. I have a feeling that this fraud may be the breaking point, and give courage to the youth of Iran to stand up to this nut.
Let’s see how long it is before Mahmoud starts either shutting down, or taking over talk radio, internet, media, colleges, businesses and appointing Czars.
Obama Administration Silent As Iranian Students Are Slaughtered in Streets– Announce They Will Negotiate with Fraudulent Regime
How Jennifer Lynch is set remove both from Canadians…
Hate speech: This debate is out of balance
Freedom of expression is a fundamental right in Canadian society. So is the right to be treated with equality, dignity and respect. Our report, while proposing amendments to the act, rejects the notion that human-rights legislation, and the processes used to enforce it, are an unreasonable restraint on freedom of expression. Support for this view was articulated by the Supreme Court of Canada, which concluded in a 1990 decision that hate propaganda presents a serious threat to society:
“It undermines the dignity and self-worth of target group members and, more generally, contributes to disharmonious relations among various racial, cultural and religious groups, as a result eroding the tolerance and open-mindedness that must flourish in a multicultural society which is committed to the idea of equality.”
Tolerance and open-mindedness are ideals to which Canadians have subscribed, and are part of the quest for equality that has come to define our country all over the world. They are the foundation of the Canadian Human Rights Act, whose promise is to give effect “to the principle that all individuals should have an opportunity equal with other individuals to make for themselves the lives that they are able and wish to have” without discrimination.
Some who disagree with this notion would have Canada weaken its human-rights system, taking the view that freedom of expression is the paramount right in Canadian society, over and above the right of all citizens to be protected from the harm that can be caused by hate messages.
In fact, there is no hierarchy of rights with some rights having greater importance than others. They work together toward a common purpose.
It is up to legislators and courts to find the appropriate balance that best protects the human rights and freedoms of all citizens. Canada has an enviable track record in this regard, and our Charter of Rights and Freedoms is viewed as a model for other free societies to emulate. Human-rights commissions and tribunals provide access to the justice system and remedies for those who believe they are the victims of discrimination. As is the case with all administrative law bodies, they ensure that all parties are protected by the rules of natural justice, and that frivolous complaints are efficiently disposed.
Canadians expect fairness and efficiency from their human-rights system, and we must continue to offer both.
However, I believe critics of human-rights commissions and tribunals are manipulating information and activities around rights cases and freedom of expression to further a new agenda. This agenda posits that rights commissions and tribunals, and the attendant vigilance over all the rights and freedoms Canadians now enjoy, no longer serve a useful purpose. In this way, the debate over freedom of expression has been used as a wedge to undermine and distort our human-rights system.
Ironically, a debate about balancing rights has not itself been balanced. One can only surmise that if these critics succeed, thus would begin a broader assault on freedoms they would subordinate to absolute freedom of expression.
Ensuring the promotion and protection of human rights is a responsibility that belongs to all of us. Our diverse and inclusive society was created through a commitment to equality, dignity and rights. We have come a long way, but we cannot afford to relax our vigilance or declare victory. Together, we must ensure that those who are the most vulnerable in our society are not further marginalized.
To be sure, the debate over freedom of expression and hate messages will continue. The commission welcomes that debate; it is a positive and democratic exercise. By presenting its special report, the commission’s aim is to contribute a balanced analysis for those interested in developing informed opinions on this passionate topic.
So if you are a critic of a corrupt commission that abuses its power and takes away freedom, you are guilty of a broad assault on freedom? Orwellian at best.
Jennifer misses the point of why Canadians are against her commission. The Human Rights Commission is actually the opposite – while trying to defend the rights of the minority they crush the rights of the majority.
Most Canadians are completely oblivious to who Jennifer is and what the HRC actually is doing to their rights – let’s hope Jennifer keeps writing and digging herself into a hole.
The comment section that follows her Globe and Pail rant is worth a read… a few highlights: More »
Now that Oprah’s followers and the media blitz have come and gone, is Twitter still “it”?
Here’s the stats from Is Twitter Dead? Who Killed It?:
• HubSpot says more than half of all people who signed up for an account never posted a tweet (55%), aren’t following anyone (56%) and have no followers themselves (53%).
• Nielsen Online notes that 60% of users bail on Twitter after creating an account.
• Harvard Business School says the average Twitter user tweets once and never again and 10% of Twitter users post 90% of the Tweets.
• Twitter’s meteoric growth came to a screeching halt in May. Mashable reports that during the month of May, Twitter’s visitor growth suddenly “flatlined,” growing only a 1.5%.
• TechCrunch says that the ol’ 80-20 rule is in full effect on Twitter: 20% of Twitter users are creating 80% of the activity.
• A survey from Pace University and the Participatory Media Network found that only 22% of people between the ages of 18 and 24 use Twitter (though nearly all have social networking profiles).
• Thursday is the biggest Twitter day.
Is Twitter the new cool?
Twitter is mostly a one-to-many medium. Young adults, who grew up with online communication, have no desire to talk to strangers. They love communicating with friends and acquaintances, which is why social networks like Facebook are overwhelmingly preferred.
Twitter is appealing to people with something to sell, or people who want to network professionally. It’s also a great way to follow a hobby or intellectual interest.
In other words, it’s for older people.
I’ve been asked my opinion by a lot of businesses on Twitter… and I compare it to the gold ads on TV; when something is sold as a no-lose proposition – you’ll lose. When Oprah encouraged her army of homemakers to get on it, you knew its time was passed. Worst of all, now that it has mass, it’s now becoming the new home for spammers.
This isn’t to say I say no to Twitter outright… it is a good way to keep your competitors and industry group informed of your latest exploits, your golf score, and your inner thoughts. But Twitter can eat up a lot of time and attention, and with the challenges most of us are faced with, you’re better off spending the time and effort on something that brings in a return.
When someone tells you that Twitter is working marvelously for them in business, ask them how and also for some proof. The beauty of the Internet is that almost everything is measurable. Unfortunately, I’ve only heard successful stories from people that are selling their Twitter marketing services.
If you are determined to try Twitter – look at @DellOutlet, @Zappos , @JetBlue and @WholeFoods. These have made Twitter work – they use it as a way to reach out to customers… and if you have a large customer base it is a good way to communicate specials, problems and news to a small segment of them.
… Next, the Facebook for business question. The reality of it is that if you want to find old friends, keep up with your current ones, use Facebook… you’ll find relatives you didn’t know existed. (I keep thinking I need to pay more attention to my list… it’s kind of creepy seeing my niece and nephews drunk college party pics showing up on my wall every Saturday morning.)
If you want to network at a higher level or use a social network for business development purposes - use LinkedIn. It has a professionalism that’s conducive to doing business, and I’ve met a lot of people there who have turned into great business contacts. I’ll never have 1,000 friends, so bragging rights don’t come with Linked in… only results.
Twitter for business, in 140 twitter characters:
Twitter will suck away valuable attention. Measure results and know the thousands of followers you think you have, have all gone back to work.
(P.S. LKG. This wasnt written with you in mind