Tag Archives: kansas

Thomas Frank, Posterboy for Liberal Media Elitism, Ends Wall Street Journal Column

With the media elite once again reminding the unsophisticated rubes in flyover country of their intellectual and cultural inferiority as it pertains to sensitivities regarding Islam, it seems a good time to review the recent movements of one of the most condescending liberal elitists of the contemporary commentariat: Thomas Frank. The columnist recently left the Wall Street Journal for Harper’s Magazine. Frank, you may remember, penned the 2004 book “What’s the Matter with Kansas,” which explored the baffling (for Frank) tendencies of rural populations between the two coasts to vote Republican. By Frank’s account, their political views ran directly against the grain of their own interests. (Never mind that a very similar book could easily be written about wealthy professionals who, against their own interests, vote for Democrats seeking to raise their taxes and increase regulations on their employers.) Always teeming with a patronizing sense of moral superiority, Frank has characterized conservatism as “institutionally opposed to those baseline good intentions we learned about in elementary school.” Charles Krauthammer once said that conservatives think liberals are stupid, and liberals think conservatives are evil. Well Thomas Frank thinks the conservative elites are evil, and the conservative masses are stupid. Frank has dubbed ” demented logic ” the notion that Barack Obama – not George W. Bush – is responsible for the state of the economy, and has bemoaned the fact that, in his words “half our political system is dedicated to the destruction of the government.” That’s right. He fails to meaningfully distinguish between constitutional constraints on federal power and “the destruction of the government.” Frank’s seemingly willful ignorance on the intricacies of conservatism have irked a number of commentators, who note that he simply makes no effort to offer a nuanced argument. His ham-handed approach came under a good deal of fire after he released his book “The Wrecking Crew: How Conservatives Rule”. Reason’s Jesse Walker wrote of the book: Frank, formerly the editor of the radical journal The Baffler and currently the token lefty on the Wall Street Journal op-ed page, doesn’t just fail to distinguish between crony capitalism and free markets. He actively refuses to recognize the difference. “Laissez-faire,” he admits, “has never described political reality all that well, since conservative governments have intervened in the economy with some regularity.” Yet that doesn’t prevent him from declaring a little later that “what makes a place a free-market paradise is not the absence of government; it is the capture of government by business interests.” If you relied on Frank for your information, you would never dream that the idea of laissez faire initially emerged not as a defense against left-wing regulators, who were scarce in the 18th century, but as a critique of subsidies, government-imposed monopolies, and what Adam Smith called the “mean and malignant expedients of the mercantile system.” In other words, the “free-market paradise” was supposed to be an alternative to “the capture of government by business interests.” In other words, for all his pontificating on the horrors of the absence of government intervention in the economy, Frank seems to be quite confused about what exactly constitutes a free market. This is a fairly representative sample of the intellectual caliber of his arguments. Given all this blather and his consistently derisive – if often erroneous – criticisms of conservatives, it should not have been surprising when the Huffington Post penned a short piece on Frank’s move to Harper’s devoid of any ideological labels. That fact should also tell you pretty much all you need to know.

Visit link:
Thomas Frank, Posterboy for Liberal Media Elitism, Ends Wall Street Journal Column

MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan Dismisses Ground Zero Mosque Debate as a ‘Smokescreen’

MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan on Monday dismissed the controversy over the Ground Zero mosque as a “political smokescreen.” The liberal anchor derided opponents of the planned construction who live in other states, sneering that there are ” people in Kansas, California, Alaska, saying ‘Oh my God. The sky is falling. The Muslims are going to kill us! It’s all going to end!'” He compared, “But, the people in Tribeca and Soho who are just, kind of, getting a cup of coffee.” Earlier in the segment, Ratigan wondered, “But is all this back and forth just a political smoke screen? Polls show a majority of Americans struggling with the same conflict as the President’s statements and his expressions.” The co-host talked to Nate Silver of the website Fivethirtyeight.com. As he pointed out, while 61 percent of voters believe that the Muslim group behind the mosque has a right to put it there, 64 percent oppose the plan. Yet, Ratigan seemed to put all the responsibility for tolerance on those who oppose the construction. He again wondered, “But, doesn’t it strike you as funny that the people who would be killed by the theoretical Muslims that are not here are afraid of, the ones who would die as a result of that attack are the ones that are least concerned about an attack from Muslims in that mosque?” A transcript of the August 16 segment, which aired at 4:01pm EDT, follows: DYLAN RATIGAN: Meanwhile, the top Senate Democrat feeling the same way, apparently. Within the past hour, Majority Leader Harry Reid became the highest profile Dem, so far, to break ranks with the White House and publicly oppose the mosque. But is all this back and forth just a political smoke screen? Polls show a majority of Americans struggling with the same conflict as the President’s statements and his expressions. Can you have the legal right to do something and at the same time a moral obligation not to? And why is it that the people who that live the closest to Ground Zero seem to be the least resistant to the mosque? And those who may be the furthest away, maybe have never even visited New York City in their lives, are the most adamantly against it? Our first guest this afternoon, Nate Silver who has been crunching the numbers, a founder of 538.com. It’s a pleasure to see you again, sir. Your data basically falls into three categories in your poll. Tell us what you’ve come up with. NATE SILVER: Well, I mean, the distinction, like you said, that Obama was struggling with on Friday night is the same ones Americans struggle with themselves, right? Where about two thirds of people think they have the right to build the mosque. Not terribly controversial. About two thirds of those people also think it’s in poor taste. Right? So, you look at the overlap. And there’s this one third in between who thinks, “They have the right to do it. But, I’m not sure how I feel about it so much.” And especially with, I guess, with some of this hedging, or the some of the way the media portrayed it as hedging, Obama is in that middle camp, too, right now, but seeming to satisfy nobody in particular. RATIGAN: You say this falls politically into a similar category as flag burning. Can you explain what the parallels are? SILVER: Well, sure. Flag burning is something where if you ask people, “Hey, do you like flag burning, right?” I don’t think too many people would say- would yes. Or, “Hey, should they build a Hooters down at the shopping mall? You might say “No, I would rather they didn’t.” But they’re clearly within First Amendment rights. There’s not too much debate about that. I mean, you know, some people have said some groups have said, “No they actually don’t have the right.” Newt Gingrich said something along those lines this morning. But, for the most part, that’s not that controversial. I think Obama went a little bit far in saying “We not only look at the right, the First Amendment’s technicality. We should respect their ability to choose how they want to worship and not try and intervene and say, “No, I would rather you not believe a different thing.”  Or that you’d go worship at a different time or a different place. So, he did go a step further than just saying “Hey, it’s about the First Amendment.” But not quite saying, “Hey, I love this idea.” RATIGAN: What about the distinction between people like myself who have lived in lower Manhattan for many years and worked around Ground Zero, walking with past Ground Zero everyday to and from work for five years straight, who look at this as really not that big of a deal? We deal with a lot of other things. This isn’t that big of a big deal. Versus people in Kansas, California, Alaska, saying “Oh my God. The sky is falling. The Muslims are going to kill us! It’s all going to end.” But, the people in Tribeca and Soho who are just, kind of, getting a cup of coffee.” SILVER: Well, you know, I think part of it, it shows that polls it shows that people in Manhattan are supportive of the mosque- mosque. Not people in New York overall, but in Manhattan where it’s being built. I think it has to do with the geography of the city. I walked around Ground Zero when the controversy started and kind of scouted out the perimeter. And you would not see the mosque anywhere from the Ground Zero property. It’s not really on the way. It’s kind of on a side street where there’s a Burlington Coat Factory. It’s very dense. And it’s not like you’re on main street where there’s one road to Ground Zero. RATIGAN: But, doesn’t it strike you as funny that the people who would be killed by the theoretical Muslims that are not here are afraid of, the ones who would die as a result of that attack are the ones that are least concerned about an attack from Muslims in that mosque? SILVER: Well, hopefully some ambitious polls, do a poll of people in the financial district in Tribeca or do a poll of who were victims in 9/11. They’re the people who should have a larger say, frankly, than the former governor of Alaska, I think. It is a local issue.

Go here to see the original:
MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan Dismisses Ground Zero Mosque Debate as a ‘Smokescreen’

Water Scarcity Facing 1/3 of US Counties

One out of three U.S. counties is facing a greater risk of water shortages by mid-century due to global warming, finds a new report by Tetra Tech for the Natural Resources Defense Council. For 412 of these counties the risk of water shortages will be “extremely high,” according to the report, a 14-fold increase from previous estimates. In the Great Plains and Southwest United States, water sustainability is at extreme risk finds the report, which is based on publicly available water use data from across the United States. “This analysis shows climate change will take a serious toll on water supplies throughout the country in the coming decades, with over one out of three U.S. counties facing greater risks of water shortages,” said Dan Lashof, director of the Climate Center at NRDC. “Water shortages can strangle economic development and agricultural production and affected communities.” “As a result,” he said, “cities and states will bear real and significant costs if Congress fails to take the steps necessary to slow down and reverse the warming trend.” Counties shown in dark red are at greatest risk of water shortage by 2050. (Map courtesy Tetra Tech) The report, issued Tuesday, finds that 14 states face an extreme or high risk to water sustainability, or are likely to see limitations on water availability as demand exceeds supply by 2050. These areas include parts of Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. Sujoy Roy, principal engineer and lead report author, Tetra Tech, said, “The goal of the analysis is to identify regions where potential stresses, and the need to do something about them, may be the greatest.” “We used publicly available data on current water withdrawals for different sectors of the economy, such as irrigation, cooling for power generation, and municipal supply, and estimated future demands using business-as-usual scenarios of growth,” Roy explained. “We then compared these future withdrawals to a measure of renewable water supply in 2050, based on a set of 16 global climate model projections of temperature and precipitation, to identify regions that may be stressed by water availability,” Roy said. “These future stresses are related to changes in precipitation as well as the likelihood of increased demand in some regions.” The report also is based on climate projections from a set of models used in recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change work to evaluate withdrawals related to renewable water supply. Water withdrawal will grow by 25 percent in many areas of the United States, including the arid Arizona-New Mexico area, the populated areas in the South Atlantic region, Florida, the Mississippi River basin, and Washington, D.C. and surrounding regions, the analysis projects. added by: JanforGore

Juan Williams: Missouri’s Anti-ObamaCare Ballot Irrelevant – Only Old White People Voted For It

Juan Williams on Sunday said the passage of Missouri’s anti-ObamaCare ballot initiative last week is irrelevant because only older white people voted for it. Discussing the issue on “Fox News Sunday,” the liberal FNC contributor said, “As far as the Missouri vote, you get 70 percent inside an echo chamber of older white people, no not in St. Louis not in Kansas City, saying, ‘Oh yeah, we don’t like a requirement that everybody has to have healthcare even though the hospitals in Missouri say it’s gonna drive up our costs.'” Host Chris Wallace seemed somewhat stunned by this and asked, “What happened to respect for democracy?” When Williams elaborated saying that he believes this will eventually be decided by the courts, Liz Cheney rightly scolded her colleague, “I think it is stunning you and the White House are unwilling to heed the votes of the people in Missouri” (video follows with transcript and commentary): LIZ CHENEY: You’ve also got Robert Gibbs this week when asked about what does it mean that 71 percent of the people in Missouri said they don’t want any mandate for health insurance, he said, quote, “It means nothing.” Now when you’ve got a White House that is that unwilling to listen to what the people out there are saying, I think that you know, it causes some real concern about whether or not they are actually going to be responsive to the voters. But, I think, frankly it gives the voters much bigger impetus come November to elect some folks who will listen to him. CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Juan? JUAN WILLIAMS: I like George W. Bush, but the decider? I think, he’s the one that coined that phrase. He said he was the decider when he was president, so I guess President Obama can be the decider now that he is president. Isn’t that the deal? CHENEY: I don’t think Bush ever said he got to decide who had the keys to the scar. WILLIAMS: Look, I think this is, and as far as the Missouri vote, you get 70 percent inside an echo chamber of older white people, no not in St. Louis not in Kansas City, saying, “Oh yeah, we don’t like a requirement that everybody has to have healthcare even though the hospitals in Missouri say it’s gonna drive up our costs, everyone is just going to run to the emergency rooms when they have their accidents.” WALLACE: What happened to respect for democracy? WILLIAMS: I have tremendous respect for democracy, but as Ted Olson… WALLACE: The proposition was on the ballot… WILLIAMS: Yes. WALLACE: …and 71 percent voted in favor of it. WILLIAMS: That’s who’s energized. The unions didn’t participate and they didn’t get out there… WALLACE: Well, that’s their problem, isn’t it? WILLIAMS: Right, so because everybody knows, as Ted Olson told you in an earlier segment on the gay rights issue, the courts, the courts have said that federal law trumps state law in this area, or they will decide if it’s to be the case. WALLACE: That has to do with immigration, we are talking about healthcare. WILLIAMS: That is exactly right, Chris, on the issue, does, can a state say that we will not require our citizens to buy health insurance? That issue is right now being taken up by several attorney generals around the country in seperate states, and, they will eventually end up in the courts. I hate to inform you of this, you should know this as our anchor. (Laughter) CHENEY: It is a real constitutional issue whether or not the federal government has the right to force people to buy insurance, and I think it is stunning you and the White House are unwilling to heed the votes of the people in Missouri. Isn’t it wonderful how much race is now brought into every discussion about politics? I thought Barack Obama was going to change all that.

Original post:
Juan Williams: Missouri’s Anti-ObamaCare Ballot Irrelevant – Only Old White People Voted For It

Sum-41’s Deryck Whibley Hospitalized After Attack In Japan

‘We are waiting for results and we are hoping for the best,’ his bandmates posted online. By Kelley L. Carter Deryck Whibley Photo: MTV News Sum-41 frontman Deryck Whibley has been hospitalized after being attacked by three people in a bar late last night in Japan, his bandmates tweeted . He’s being treated for unspecified injuries. There isn’t much detail out there about the rocker — also the ex-husband of pop/punk singer Avril Lavigne — but Sum-41 posted a statement on their website for concerned fans: “It is unfortunate to say, but Deryck Whibley is still in the hospital. He was attacked late last night in Japan. We are waiting for results and we are hoping for the best. Thanks for your support.” According to E! News , Japanese police are investigating the incident, which comes on the heels of Sum-41 announcing Sunday they were forced to cancel three Warped Tour shows because Whibley contracted a bad case of bronchitis. The ailment threatens to mess up his voice permanently, the band said in a statement. “We have been ordered by a physician to cancel a few of our upcoming Vans Warped Tour dates — Chicago, Minneapolis and Kansas City. Deryck has been diagnosed with a serious case of bronchitis, and singing could damage his voice permanently,” the statement read. “The tour has been going amazing so far, and we wish Deryck a speedy recovery so we can continue rocking. We apologize to our fans in Chicago, Minneapolis and Kansas City, and we promise to return to these cities on our upcoming world tour.” No word yet on how this latest incident will affect those dates. Share your well-wishes for Deryck Whibley in the comments below. Related Artists Sum 41

Continued here:
Sum-41’s Deryck Whibley Hospitalized After Attack In Japan

Russian President: Heat Waves ‘Wake Up Call’ to Climate Change

Image via the Kansas City Star “What’s happening with the planet’s climate right now needs to be a wake-up call to all of us” That’s Dmitri Medvedev, the President of Russia, addressing the record heat waves that are currently devastating the largest nation in the world. Russia has seen crippling heatwaves and record-shattering temperatures all across the nation, and approximately 25 million acres (that’s the size of all of Kentucky) of crops have withered under widespread droughts. A wake-up ca… Read the full story on TreeHugger

Read more from the original source:
Russian President: Heat Waves ‘Wake Up Call’ to Climate Change

Drake Reveals His Biggest Thank Me Later Regrets

The rapper laments one early leak and two songs he wishes were on the album. By Jayson Rodriguez Drake Photo: MTV News One of the most ambitious tracks on Drake ‘s Thank Me Later is The-Dream duet “Shut It Down,” a sweeping number about seduction that clocks in at nearly seven minutes. Unfortunately for Drake, an unfinished version of the song leaked three months before the release of his debut album. The final product is a slow-grinding effort that comes to a climax with a Drake rap after the pair croon throughout their respective verses. A second leak, “Darlin’ ” featuring Lil Wayne, and the “9 AM in Dallas” freestyle, an urgent battle-style rap — both of which were recorded after Thank Me Later ‘s deadline — are pretty much the only faults Drake found with his debut. “The saddest part to me is that I would have made ‘9 AM in Dallas’ the intro for the album, but I did it the day of mastering, which is crazy, so it couldn’t make the album,” Drake told MTV News. “That’s probably my greatest upset, was the fact that it couldn’t be on the physical disc and be a part of that album. ‘Darlin’ ‘ was a loss just because it was never mixed, and every time I hear it in the club, you can never really hear the words. I think the words are the best part of that song. I think Wayne painted such a vivid picture. I tried to come in and add my little two cents at the end. “Most of the music made it,” he continued. “Most of the music we held for a long time, and the stuff that did leak, it was pretty good references. It wasn’t anything I was too upset about. ‘Shut It Down’ leaking early was painful. I think it could have been a bigger record had it not been out there so long. And ‘Fall for Your Type’ I wish was on there, but I have other plans for that record, so it’s gonna be good.” Despite records leaking and the Toronto lyricist’s album arriving online before its June 15 due date, Drake told MTV News on the day of Thank Me Later ‘s release that he never considered changing his plans for putting the project out. “They tried to force me into a situation — I’m not sure if it was the label — [but] somebody tried to force me into a situation and drop the album June 9,” Drake said. “I really was like, ‘June 9 isn’t enough time to let them digest all the leaked music. If they got the music already, let’s let them listen to it. Let’s give them that two weeks to ride around to it and talk to their friends about it.’ ‘Cause that way, when they show up to the store, there’s no pressure — you know what you’re buying. You’re just going to support an artist you love and music you believe in.” What do you think of Drake’s take on his debut album? Tell us in the comments, or tweet @MTVRapFix ! Related Artists Drake

Go here to read the rest:
Drake Reveals His Biggest Thank Me Later Regrets

Warped Tour Concertgoer Dies At Kansas Show

Bonner Springs, Kansas, venue identifies the late concertgoer as Curtis Alan DeForest. By Eric Ditzian A concertgoer died at Monday’s Vans Warped Tour stop in Kansas, according to a press release from the tour. The young man died during the all-day show, held at Capitol Federal Park at Sandstone in Bonner Springs, Kansas. Warped Tour officials are awaiting a complete report about the death from law enforcement and medical examiners. According to Sandstone’s website , the concertgoer was Curtis Alan DeForest, a 26-year-old Wichita, Kansas, resident. He was taken from the venue to Providence Medical Center, where he was later pronounced dead. The cause of death has yet to be determined, and Sandstone remains closed as authorities continue their investigation. Along with the announcement about DeForest’s death, Sandstone provided a statement about the venue’s policy regarding water bottles and access to its water facilities. “As is the standard practice at all shows that visit the amphitheater, patrons were allowed to bring in their own bottles of water,” the website’s statement said. “Once inside, the permanent water refill locations that are throughout the venue were in operation for all patrons throughout the day.” The statement from the tour offered “thoughts and prayers to the young man’s family and friends. Tour organizers are working closely with Capitol Federal Park at Sandstone staff and local officials to determine the actual facts surrounding this tragic incident and will make further details known as they become available.” Kicking off in late June, this year’s tour has featured bands like 3OH!3, the All-American Rejects, Sum-41 and Taylor Momsen’s the Pretty Reckless. Please share your thoughts for DeForest’s friends and family in the comments.

More:
Warped Tour Concertgoer Dies At Kansas Show

NAACP to condemn Tea Party for racism

Tomorrow the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) is expected to pass a resolution condemning racist elements of the Tea Party movement. The nation's largest and oldest civil rights organization will vote on the resolution Tuesday during its annual convention in Kansas City, Mo. http://www.examiner.com/x-4383-Portland-Progressive-Examiner~y2010m7d12-NAACP-to… added by: unimatrix0

"Fish Dependence Day" Arrives a Month Earlier for European Union & Its Troubled Fish Stocks

Photo via ezioman The title of a new report from the New Economics Foundation says it all: Fish Dependence: The Increasing Reliance of the EU on Fish from Elsewhere . There are very few places left on the planet where fishing is sustainably done, but Europe is showing some real signs that their industry is going too far. Europeans are eating more fish from other parts of the world as their own stocks deplete, and the day of the year that marks “fish depen… Read the full story on TreeHugger

More here:
"Fish Dependence Day" Arrives a Month Earlier for European Union & Its Troubled Fish Stocks