For something on the lighter side, Keith Olberman’s new column in Salon is beautiful. In other publications he seems to have been limited in what he could say. Salon, for as long as it stays afloat has really improved itself–Joe Conason’s weblog is first rate.
I can’t seem to muster much sympathy for either side in the whole ordeal, but the sheer keystone cops imitation by the owners never fails to provide great humor. This quote is the best reason why there will be no extended work stoppage:
” Cancel the World Series this year and you immediately owe Fox Television $300 million plus up to $230 million more in penalties to compensate the network for lost advertising revenue. ”
The owners ought to be thankful the players have moved at all with that guillotine over the heads of the owners.
Of course, I’m all for a strike. I’m a huge baseball fan and whenever they strike attendance goes down. Thus, ticket prices don’t go up as fast and there are more good seats to choose from.
I haven’t had time to comment on this recent article by Bjorn Lomborg. To start off on the picky level–not all environmentalists think alike and so the neat rhetorical trick in the title is telling of what Lomborg is trying to accomplish–getting lots of attention and selling lots of books.
Lomborg is essentially correct in arguing that development will lead to environmental awareness. Steve Chapman has made the point before, but Lomborg misses two critical points.
The United States isn’t advocating any serious solution to development or sustainability. While some environmentalists might be focusing on one side of the equation, the United States isn’t focusing on any portion of the equation and instead is avoiding the issue entirely.
Second, encouraging development isn’t an exclusive goal. One can encourage sustainability and development at the same time. Indeed (the most overused word on blogs–instapundit especially), technology transfers of cleaner energy sources and pollution reducing technologies encouraged by the 1990 Clean Air Act encourage development and sustainability.
In line with the above, he tries to use the Kyoto Protocol’s flaws to force a false choice. One can support taking serious action to mitigate global warming and argue that Kyoto was terribly flawed all at the same time–maybe even chew gum while doing so…
The problem with Bush choosing to walk away from Kyoto is his complete inability to offer an alternative of any substance. Reducing emission intensity is a joke–a cynical joke at that.
And with any mention of Lomborg or any other alternative science type, one should point out a reliable alternative source.
About time. Friedman does a bang up job on fundamentalist ignorance. It’s almost like he has been reading some Karen Armstrong. I’ll link to any letters to the editor in the P-D that show up to ‘defend creationism’ on blogsaintlouis. I expect they’ll pour in tomorrow.
Krugman (registration required) makes important points about the President’s, well, I guess we can call it a, plan for forests. I hesitate to call it a plan since it resembles his previous “plans” regarding the environment. Use it and subsidize those who use it the fastest…
Also, the Times runs a good article on the debates concerning the most effective way to manage fire risks here.
Another good column ran today in the Washington Post that points out the real problem.
Steve Chapman also did a good job on the issue here (registration required). Those who argue for government subsidies for those making dumb choices somehow seem to think that those who expect them to pay for their own choices are restricting freedom of choice. I could care less if people want to build in an area of high risk for fire or in a flood plain as long they pay for the natural consequences of their choices.
Neal’s Column today is a wonderful exercise in what if Da Speaker wasn’t really Da Speaker? So he works for his entire political career to have united Democratic control of Illinois government and he just steps down and admires his masterpiece? Sure. I have some MODOT bridges in Missouri to sell you Mr. Neal. They are in great shape! I guess one can say ‘wouldn’t it be nice if…,’ but it has no effect on reality.
Rich Miller makes an important point here that not all political scandals are equal. The end of this his column is a bit hard to figure though. We should be circumspect in calling for an investigation, but reporters should be reporting all of the petty garbage. Voters should know about it and use it to make decisions.
This ain’t your father’s Jerry Berger.