Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
Green anti war liberal left leaning quasi libertarian (new age philosopher, universalist unitarian, anti-establishment conspiracy theorist and evolving consciousness).
Green anti war liberal left leaning quasi libertarian (new age philosopher, universalist unitarian, anti-establishment conspiracy theorist and evolving consciousness).
smiths wrote:personally i am a cautiously optimistic pluralist agnostic green, espousing balanced constructive and dynamic movements forward whilst adhering to classical sound moral core-concepts all the time aiming at a better future
smiths wrote:personally i am (a) cautiously optimistic
smiths wrote:pluralist
smiths wrote:agnostic
smiths wrote:espousing balanced constructive and dynamic movements forward
smiths wrote:adhering to classical sound moral core-concepts
smiths wrote:all the time aiming at a better future
Hammer of Los wrote:so sorry for the slight thread derailing.
Americans for Prosperity is a front for corporate interests
April 15, 2010
In about 30 seconds, thanks to sourcewatch.com, I found out that Americans for Prosperity, which is described as a "grass-roots, free market advocacy organization" by op-ed writer Dave Schwartz (Tea party, 1 year later," April 15), is nothing more than a corporate front group. Formerly called Citizens for a Sound Economy, AFP has a record of advocating for the tobacco industry to oppose cigarette taxes and indoor smoking bans and is largely funded by the Koch Family Foundations and Scaife Family Foundations. The Koch Foundations are funded entirely by the Koch Group, the largest privately owned energy company in the U.S. The Scaife Foundations funded most of the "Whitewater" harassment of Bill Clinton.
AFP is much like Tea Party Express, led by former House Majority Leader turned super corporate lobbyist Dick Armey. Both organizations would wither and die were it not for the financial lifeline they get from corporate interests who enjoy hoodwinking a gullible public.
Look at climate denial by talking points and you'll quickly stumble upon Koch money. Climategate? Check. "Polar bears are doing fine"? Check. The so-called Spanish study that, with bogus methodology, "proved" that green energy kills the economy? Check.
Think of climate denial in terms of obstructionist lawmakers and you'll quickly spot Koch money in their coffers. The brothers gave more than $10,000 each to James Inhofe (R-Ok.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Ak.), Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), Jim DeMint(R-S.C.), Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.), David Vitter (R-La.), John Boehner (R-Oh.), Eric Cantor (R-Vir.), and Joe Barton (R-Tex.).
Look at climate denial as a list of right-wing think tanks, and you'll also find Koch money in the safe: Americans for Prosperity, which funded this summer's astroturf "Hot Air" protests, got $5 million. The Cato Institute has been on the climate beat since the 80s. In recent years alone, it's gotten $1 million from the Koch brothers; ditto the Heritage Foundation.
So, if you're an environmentalist or you just support real science over junk science, think about crossing Brawny, Dixie Cups, Angel Soft and Quilted Northern off your shopping list for good.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/gre ... y_id=60886
‘Hitler Youth.’ At an Americans for Prosperity event in December 2009, guest speaker Christopher Monckton called youth climate activists “Hitler Youth.” He told a Jewish youth climate activist whose grandparents escaped the Nazis that he was “Hitler Youth,” and that “you people don’t care” that “millions are dying in third world countries.” Americans for Prosperity again featured Christopher Monckton at a regional summit in March 2010. [The Times, 12/11/09]
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/ ... er-debate/
Wintler2 wrote:...news on billionaire fascists subverting democracy
wintler2 wrote:Hammer of Los wrote:so sorry for the slight thread derailing.
I expect nothing more of you HoL. You had a go at derailing the thread on pg2, new page - new attempt to derail.
Anybody would think you wanted to distract from news on billionaire fascists subverting democracy and science. Who could possibly want to do that?
wintler2 wrote:It should be noted that RI's busiest resident AGW deniers (BenD, tazmic, Hammer of Los, sorry if missed anyone) are not interested in this story. Tazmic dropped by with a red herring, but apparently none of these brave seekers of truth are at all bothered or even surprised that they're pushing lies produced by fascists.
They depend on the memory hole, on the flood of trivia we have daily delivered, to wash away the appalling truth. It makes me sad for them, to be so lacking in love for their fellow humans and creatures.. what an abyss of loneliness.
wintler2 wrote:Hammer of Los wrote:.. can you please direct me to a single lie produced by a fascist that I have pushed on this board. Thanks. Or you might apologise for the needless slurs. Or a third option of your choice.
I'll take the first option, and have more than a single lie.
Fascists need to normalise what they do, so the rest of the populace doesn't impale them on pitchforks. This is you are doing their work for them:Hammer of Los wrote:I read the article you quoted Wintler2, but I didn't find it terribly revealing. I already know big corporations fund think tanks. Wintler, about all this funding by Big Oil et al. Lobbyists lobby and PR people do their PR schtick, ie lie, spin, obfuscate, omit, exaggerate, invent etc etc. It's what makes the world go around. Everything is advocacy. Every organisation needs good PR. Perhaps that is part of what is meant by "post-normal science."
Most of your lies are more discreet:False. Elsewhere in this comment you say you acknowledge reality of anthropogenic climate change and need to reduce emissions, but you are consistently anti-science and anti- any effort to adapt.Hammer of Los wrote:.. Mostly I have learned that the concensus is that they dont know enough about the climate to do much in the way of accurate modelling.Classic FauxNews generalisation, emerging unbidden from the uneasy consciences of the corrupted.There may be legitimate climate scientists who have no political connections somewhere. I'm not sure. I haven't found any yet.Nice use of the dogwhistle there...another preacher for the New Austerity they are currently advertising..False... But the understanding I drew from it was that climate science is essentially in its infancy, and basic assumptions are being challenged all the time.Curious how awareness of your own ignorance doesn't stop you committing yourself to the pro-polluter viewpoint. Again...Furthemore, such study of the climate is in its infancy, and therefore very much in flux as it ought to be. We know of the Greenhouse Effect, a well established scientific theory concerning the warming of the earth due to the accumulation of "greenhouse gases." Although to be honest I know little of the details of the theory, and ought to undertake a little further research. ..
What we don't know is how accurate our climate models are. I would suggest most of the evidence indicates they are less than reliable. Scientists essentially agree that the extent of the warming influence of a man-made greenhouse effect in the last 50 or 100 years is unknown.
You get points for subtlety HoL, and for occasionally acknowledging the most unarguable facts of AGW, but your consistent spin is there for all to see.
wintler2 wrote:TVC15 wrote:Goddam, that makes me mad...is anyone really trying anymore? Oddly, I am mad at Fox News for not perfecting the con; if you are gonna skew a 'survey', at least get your own broadcasted lie straight...I want the enemy to be formidable and...better at simple math, is that too much to ask?
Well here you come totin' it along , so I'd say the con worked a lot slicker than you realize.They depend on the memory hole, on the flood of trivia we have daily delivered, to wash away the appalling truth. It makes me sad for them, to be so lacking in love for their fellow humans and creatures.. what an abyss of loneliness.
Oh, if I could but touch the hem of your garment!wintler2 wrote:Have you got any interesting questions or answers on the Koch family, or will you just .. distract from the topic?
Hmm, that makes you the third AGW-denier to post to a thread on fascists funding AGW denial, and the third to make no reference to the topic and only attempt distraction.
Anybody else see a pattern here?
No_Baseline wrote:Bumping it bc I am grateful to Jack Riddler and Wintler2 (who I have disagreed with on this board btw) for being true to who they are and for furthering their truth;
I'm very glad this board allows all views, and users aren't afraid to call out the ones that may have a... what is the right word? sinister? propagantive? agenda
wintler2 wrote:Hammer of Los wrote:so sorry for the slight thread derailing.
I expect nothing more of you HoL. You had a go at derailing the thread on pg2, new page - new attempt to derail.
Anybody would think you wanted to distract from news on billionaire fascists subverting democracy and science. Who could possibly want to do that?![]()
barracuda wrote:Alright, here's a light touch, then: wintler and no_baseline, keep in mind that suggesting a poster is acting as a disinfo agent is not permitted on the board.
wintler2 wrote:I wonder how it would work if a thread author could ban specific posters from their thread, after providing as justification say a dozen examples of the kind of off-topic blathering they want to avoid.
JackRiddler wrote:It's called a blog, and they don't even need a justification.
wintler2 wrote:Any tips then on how to handle posters who repeatedly drag threads off-topic?
Is that something moderators have any interest in, or is it just survival of the most persistent?barracuda wrote:It's a tricky thing. Generally speaking, wintler, the breadth of the discussion allowed within the thread is up to the discretion of the OP poster, in this case nathan. Beyond that, you seem to have matters well in hand without resorting to the assistance of an admin insofar as the general thrust of the topic is progressing.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 170 guests