FROM MOJO (MOTHER JONES):

Shutterstock

Back in 2011, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) declared war on energy-efficient light bulbs, calling “sustainability” the gateway into a dystopic, Big Brother-patrolled liberal hellscape. When the lights went off during Beyoncé’s halftime set at the last Superbowl, conservative commentators from the Drudge Report to Michelle Malkin pointed blame (erroneously) at new power-saving measures at New Orleans’ Superdome. And one recent study found that giving Republican households feedback on their power use actually encourages them to use more energy.

Why do conservatives, who should have a natural inclination toward conservation, have a beef with energy efficiency?              It could be tied to the political polarization of the climate change debate.

A study out today in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences examined attitudes about energy efficiency in liberals and conservatives, and found that promoting energy-efficient products and services on the basis of their environmental benefits actually turned conservatives off from picking them. The researchers first quizzed participants on how much they value various benefits of energy efficiency, including reducing carbon emissions, reducing foreign oil dependence, and reducing how much consumers pay for energy; cutting emissions appealed to conservatives the least.

The study then presented participants with a real-world choice: With a fixed amount of money in their wallet, respondents had to “buy” either an old-school light bulb or an efficient compact florescent bulb (CFL), the same kind Bachmann railed against. Both bulbs were labeled with basic hard data on their energy use, but without a translation of that into climate pros and cons.

When the bulbs cost the same, and even when the CFL cost more, conservatives and liberals were equally likely to buy the efficient bulb. But slap a message on the CFL’s packaging that says “Protect the Environment,” and “we saw a significant drop-off in more politically moderates and conservatives choosing that option,” said study author Dena Gromet, a researcher at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business.

The chart below, from the report, shows how much liberals and conservatives value each argument for efficiency:

While liberals (gray) valued all three equally, conservatives (white), were significantly less moved by and most at odds with liberals over the carbon-saving argument.

Courtesy Gromet

Gromet said she never expected the green message to motivate conservatives, but was surprised to find that it could in fact repel them from making a purchase even while they found other aspects, like saving cash on their power bills, attractive. The reason, she thinks, is that given the political polarization of the climate change debate, environmental activism is so frowned upon by those the right that they’ll do anything to keep themselves distanced from it.

“When we’re given an option where the choice is made to represent a value that we don’t identify with or that our ideological group doesn’t value,” she said, “this can turn the purchase into something undesirable.

By making [the environment] part of the choice, even though they might see the economic benefit, they no longer want to put their money toward that option.”

This graph, lifted from the report (on the x-axis, -1 is liberal and 1 is conservative), shows the damage the wrong messaging can do: With no messaging, roughly 60 percent of all participants picked the CFL; a pro-environment message boosted support in liberals but cut it sharply in conservatives:

Courtesy Gromet

That gap could represent real lost opportunities in the private sector: the EPA’s Energy Star label, for example, perhaps the most prominent label for energy-efficient products, puts greenhouse gas savings front and center in its packaging, and proudly boasts that products with the label helps Americans “protect our climate.”

This isn’t just a problem for businesses trying to push energy-efficient products, but also for environmentalists and policymakers pushing to write efficiency or other climate-friendly policies into law, said Jessica Goodheart, director of RePower LA, which advocates for energy-saving practices in the Los Angeles power utility. Goodheart said while tackling climate change is driving force behind her lobbying, she more often finds herself talking about jobs and the economy, especially when addressing small business owners.

“It’s always important to speak to people where they are, and with energy efficiency there are so many positive messages you can use,” she said.

And there’s no shortage of opportunities to roll those messages out: Last week, Energy Department researchers found that rules requiring utilities to use renewable energy were under attack in over half the states they exist in; such laws might have better luck fending off Bachmann-esque fusillades if they re-focus their rhetoric around their cost-savings, energy independence, or other benefits, Gromet’s research suggests, especially in conservative states.

That doesn’t necessarily mean green advocates need to somehow cover up the environmental benefits of a policy or product: A study from Stanford psychologists released last December found that re-framing environmental messaging in terms of preserving the “purity” of the natural world resonated morally with conservatives.

“There’s not going to be a one-size-fits-all message that will appeal equally,” Gromet said. “It’s important to know the market you’re appealing to; there are some messages you may want to avoid.”

Tim McDonnell is Climate Desk‘s associate producer. For more of his stories, click here. Follow him on Twitter or send him an email at tmcdonnell [at] motherjones [dot] com. RSS | Twitter

==============

from material posted  on the Inner City Press website that reports from the UN Headquarters in New York City:

Taken in part from the Inner City Press – UNITED NATIONS, April 12 report — “The reopening of UN Headquarters after its $2 billion renovation.

  In the past, the Delegates Lounge had a big wooden bar, and a second floor loft serving coffee. Now, the loft is gone, and so is the wooden bar, replaced by one of black stone.The lobbyists for different causes used to sit in the upper level coffee shop and watch who comes in at the lower level, then do their business later at the bar. Also, Journalists would come after hours and meet delegates at the bar and get answers to traditionally unanswered questions while having a drink.

Delegates were sitting or snoozing all day – in  the hall itself – supported by warm color furniture. Now it seems that these activities of old will be interfered with by a much more rigorous structure, that to our amazement is colored a bright green.

Inner City Press – photo here and Photo here – show green colored tables and a kindergarten-style set-up.

The computers in the Lounge are now covered with plastic half-spheres, like in a women’s beauty parlor.

  Inner City Press on Friday asked Capital Master Plan chief Michael Adlerstein where the wooden bar has gone. He said he’d look into it, and let it be known that the designer of the new Delegates Lounge was none other than noted Dutch architect Rem Koolhaas.

  The chairs are on wheels; there are spindly rocking chairs reminiscent for those who’ve been there to those in the airport in Charlotte, North Carolina, writes Matthew Russell Lee – the Inner City Press coverage.

  Adlerstein explained the layout as based on Dutch berms around fields. An Inner City Press reader, seeing the Tweeted photo, chimed in that the “chartreuse tables actually look like my kids’ elementary schools. They still have 1960s Soviet liberation art, I guess.”

  Actually the art remains the same as before – donations from various countries Soviet-style art or not – this depends on the donor: the carpet or wall hanging of the Great Wall of China is back, returned from its sojourn in the UN’s North Lawn building.

We post this because of the green color that we are instinctively fond of – except when BP painted their oil tanks green in an attempt to tell us that they are a green company. WE ARE VERY MUCH AFRAID THAT THE UN GREEN IS INDEED OF THE SAME PHILOSOPHICAL CONCEPT LIKE THE BP OF OLD. This sort of green image does not sooth our nerves.

Saudi Arabia follows an ultraconservative – or should we say orthodox – interpretation of Islam, and bans women from driving. Women are also banned from riding motorcycles or bicycles in public places.

Let us see – AP relates from RIYADH, Saudi Arabia  —  that A Saudi newspaper today,  Monday April 1, 2013 -  said  -  “the kingdom’s religious police are now allowing women to ride motorbikes and bicycles — but only in restricted, recreational areas.”

CANADA – COURTESY OF THE TAR SANDS INDUSTRY.

Very Appropriate cartoon of the New York Times Cellebrating April Fools’ Day 2013.

April 1, 2013
	Rick Froberg

Our economist, Harry Langer, proposes the following US Senate Bill – that is a Cure-for-All. We suggest it be studied seriously in all of Washington’s Councils of Clowns. It is at least as valid as the suggestion proposed in the New York Times Op-Ed -
“A REAL CARBON SOLUTION.”

Would the New York Times Print this, though it has, I assure you, no Washington-Insider interest at heart?

————————————————————–

PROPOSAL FOR LEGISLATION

S.000: PROSPERITY THROUGH DEPORTATION BILL

 GOVERNMENT

1^st Session

S.000

To Establish the Department of Deportation and Prosperity (DDP)

THE GOVERNMENT

March 15, 2013

This Bill will be introduced, read twice, and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration

————————————————————————————————————————————-

A  BILL

To Establish the Department Deportation and Prosperity (DDP)

Be it enacted by the Government

SHORT TITLE.

Cited as the Deportation and Prosperity Act.

TITLE 1. DEPARTMENT OF DEPORTATION AND PROSPERITY

SEC. 101 DEPARTMENT MISSION.

(a) There will be established a Department of Deportation and Prosperity (DDP) as an Executive      Department within Title 5 of the Administrative Code.

(b) Achieve Recovery, Prosperity, Balanced Budgets and Debt Reduction.

(c) Take reasonable measures to accomplish these goals.

(d) Reduce the vulnerability of the United States to recession and depression.

(e) Set policy, implement, and enforce a program to deport Seniors instead of Illegals in order to save the economy by lowering Social Security, Medicare, Hospital, Nursing/Home Care, and Pharmaceutical costs and reducing roundup, deportation, and border security expenses since older people are easier to catch and won’t remember how to get back home. Every effort shall be made for their care, comfort, and social networking opportunities on the exit buses to Mexico.

(f) Authorize and incentivize the conversion of vacated nursing homes and senior citizen communities into affordable housing for the jobless and underemployed middle class and as domiciles for the poor and the homeless.

(g)  Propagandize the bipartisanship and political safety of this Bill since it is revenue neutral; helps balance the budget; reduces the debt; cures the housing, subprime and construction job crises; helps close the income gap; resolves the immigration issue; avoids tax reform; and  illustrates how government works for the taxpayers.

Starbucks’ company’s chief executive officer Howard Schultz, has asked his  baristas who work in Washington-area Starbucks, to scrawl “COME TOGETHER” on coffee cups for the rest of the week, to generate enthusiasm for a Congressional compromise on avoiding falling of the cliff or defaulting on paying the Nation’s creditors.

Finally someone is ready to scrawl a solution. Good he suggested using the Coffee cups and not the Tea cups. This is probably the deepest meaning of his suggestion at a time Senator McConnell has not yet promised to check in at the Senate’s door his filibuster fully automatic rifle.

Alternative Economics, Alternative Societies

{GREAT – BUT  WHEN LOOKING AT THE US – IT IS RATHER:    }

You Didn’t Build That – WE Did.

By Carl Gibson, Reader Supported News

29 August 2012

Reader Supported News | Perspective

id you hear the one about the guy who became a millionaire without anyone’s help? The guy who oversaw his own birth, who hunted, grew and gathered all of his own food since he was a baby? The guy who found teachers to teach him, and paid for them from his own pocket? The guy who went to work every day on roads he paved all alone, burning oil that he drilled and refined on his own, in a car that he built with his own hands?

You haven’t heard of that guy? I haven’t either.

Here in New Hampshire, a lot of the “free staters” who quote Ayn Rand novels say they don’t need government, equate taxation with theft, and believe they carry enough guns and ammo to defend their home from intruders to not have to pay taxes for police salaries. They even talk about mixing their own concrete and fixing the potholes on their own street instead of paying taxes for road repair.

A society like that exists already: Somalia.

Somalia is a libertarian paradise where nobody pays taxes because there are no national institutions or national infrastructure. Since there’s no police protection or gun regulation, guns are cheap and plentiful. There have been 14 different governments in a mere 18 years. According to UN data tables, Somalia’s average life expectancy is just 50.8 years, with only 1.8 years of school on average for each child. Famine has plagued the nation ever since Al-Shabab decided to block all humanitarian aid. In January 2010, instability in Somalia led to an outbreak of violence that killed 260, wounded another 250, and left 80,000 others displaced. But hey, I’m sure Somalis are looking on the bright side – there’s no big, bad government to steal tax money from them.

What the most selfish Americans don’t realize is that there is nothing stopping a large band of raiders from taking their property, other than groups of armed men and women paid for with their tax dollars, ready to respond with a phone call. They don’t realize the taxes that they consider theft already pay for prisons that would jail those bandits under charges of armed robbery, thanks to laws put in places by lawmakers who were paid for with the help of other people’s tax dollars.

In America, we all need each other. CEOs aren’t making 231 times as much as their lowest-paid employees because they work 231 times harder than those employees. The only reason the guys in suits have their jobs and their salaries is because ordinary people like us are patronizing that CEO’s business, giving him the money s/he needs to pay and train employees and buy raw materials.

Selfishly proclaiming “I built this” without acknowledging the vast network of people and infrastructure that helped make your success possible is both selfish and ignorant. The first step to America restoring her place in the world and pulling herself up by her bootstraps is Americans realizing that we all need each other to make that happen.

We assume that Reince Priebus did not lose interest in the Bible class and took notice of how unfair Abraham was to his son Isaac.

It is thus conceivable that Isaac will try to take his revenge someday and watching how unfaithful to climate change truth the Republicans are, taking revenge on them at the time of their 2012 National Convention, is a quite revealing opportunity. AMEN

Saturday, August 25, 2012 6:59:19 PM Saturday, August 25, 2012 6:59:19 PM National News Alert – Saturday, August 25, 2012 6:59:19 PM The Republican National Committee released a statement saying that due to concerns related to Tropical Storm Isaac, Monday events in Tampa are canceled. Party Chairman Reince Priebus said in the statement the convention will convene Monday and “immediately recess until Tuesday afternoon.” Republicans cancel Monday convention events Read more at: www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/08/25/republicans-cancel-monday-convention-events/ ========================================================================================================================== POLITICS THE CAUCUS Citing Weather, Republicans Cancel First Day of Convention By MICHAEL D. SHEAR The Republican National Convention will officially open on Monday but will immediately recess until Tuesday afternoon because of the expectation of bad weather in Tampa, Fla. Lessons Learned From ’08 Ticket, Romney and Ryan Present a United Front By TRIP GABRIEL and ASHLEY PARKER Unlike Sarah Palin, the Republican running mate in this election, Representative Paul D. Ryan, is staying in the background and giving ground on policy. For Big Givers, Cash and Clout Arrive Together By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE Lobbyists, corporate executives, trade associations and donors exploit legal loopholes, making each party’s quadrennial convention a gathering of money and influence unrivaled in politics. Libertarian Legion Stands Ready to Accept Torch From Paul By JOHN HARWOOD After a valedictory rally on Sunday in Tampa, Fla., supporters of Representative Ron Paul are eager to build on his electoral advances and youth support. G.O.P. Convention Will Include Video Tribute to Paul ================================================================ It seems that ISAAC is the climate Revenge and will be followed by ISAAC II which is the Libertarians hitting the ticket. Climate Change that brought on ISAAC’s fury will help the Republicans decrease the impact of public dispute with the backers of Ron Paul. The Republicans still have difficulties accepting the Climate Change reality – but will take advantage of it nevertheless. ====================================================== The EDITORIALS of the day (NYT): No Crime, No Punishment The financial crisis is receding, without prosecutions to deter wrongdoing even as a fuller picture is emerging of the range of banks’ reckless and lawless activities. A Glitch in Health Care Reform Confusing language in the health care reform law could mean that millions of middle-class Americans are left without affordable coverage.

Scoop: A preview of Romney’s energy plan.

From Philip Bump - grist.org/news/scoop-a-preview-of…

Last night, Mitt Romney announced that he plans to release his energy plan tomorrow. He wouldn’t tell the crowd at his fundraiser what was in it, because “we have members of the media here right now.”

How’d we get this massive scoop? None of your business. Let’s just say that we have our sources.

* * *

First and foremost, Romney will call for drilling everywhere. Literally everywhere. He will propose a bill that mandates an exploratory well be drilled within every square mile area of America. Actually two: one for oil and one for natural gas. Actually, three: oil, gas, and coal. And maybe one for kryptonite. The bill is expected to sail through the House.

Romney will also propose a bill that provides a financial incentive for businesses to conduct research and development into additional ways in which to use oil. Can oil replace a fax machine? Maybe. Can you use oil as wiring in an office? Only one way to find out. This bill will be named, “The 2013 Anti-Terror Job Creation Act,” and will be introduced on the floor by Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.). It will simultaneously be introduced in Times Square by Upton’s niece, Kate. (She is actually his niece.) It is expected to be passed by the House on party lines and to receive public support broken down on gender lines.

Romney will also sign an executive order naming oil the “Coolest Liquid in the U.S.A.” and mandating that any sodas or other beverages that want to present themselves as cool need to modify their marketing language. So instead of, say, something called Mountain Dew Cool Blast, the drink would need to be called Mountain Dew Pretty Cool Blast.

* * *

Natural Gas
The Republican party has a scientist, Dr. Kredulis, D.D.S., who provides all of their scientific information. A recent study from Kredulis notes:

Fracking is totally safe because God put that gas in that rock and invented pipes.

Pointing to that study, Romney will personally oversee the construction of a natural gas well on the White House lawn, because Kredulis also says you don’t need to actually be near gas-containing shale to drill a well. It will be next to the White House Christmas Derrick.

Oh, Romney will also call for wells everywhere else, of course, except near swing voters, moderate Republicans, and white people who use the internet.

* * *

Coal

This is true: In West Virginia, shops sell souvenirs made out of coal. At right is a photo of a crucifix made out of coal from a shop in Harper’s Ferry.

Mitt Romney will set a Kennedyesque goal: no un-mined coal in the continental United States by the end of the century. Where George Bush vacationed on his ranch in Crawford, clearing brush, Mitt Romney will take his time off deep in a mine just south of Clarksburg. For a solid week, he will work in the mine’s depths, digging out a waning seam, emerging only once the clock hits midnight, at which point he’ll spend an hour at a local bar drinking a Pepsi and loudly complaining about the coal dust under his fingernails and burrowed into his lungs.

As he prepares to run for a second term, Mitt Romney will hand-carve hundreds of thousands of busts of himself and Paul Ryan from coal he himself mined, encouraging voters to build their own small coal-fired plants in their backyards.

* * *

Nuclear

Romney will use the word “nuclear” every time he wants to pander to a group that opposes the use of fossil fuels. On his first day in office, he will sign an executive order mandating that any mention of “clean technology” or “green energy” or “renewable” be replaced with the expression, “smart, safe nuclear power.” He will also ask the House to approve funding for a new nuclear plant to be built by the year 2060 out of coal.

During his third year in office, he will ask NASA to recall the Curiosity rover so that, instead of running on nuclear energy, it can be powered by gasoline like a real American car.

* * *

Renewables

The fuck is a “renewable”? You mean “smart, safe nuclear power.”

And there you have the plan Romney will announce tomorrow. Next week at the convention, however, the rank-and-file members of the Republican party will take issue with how soft Romney’s positions are and challenge his nomination from the floor. They will then nominate a barrel of oil for president and a barrel of oil for vice president and the balloons that fall on them after the vote will be made of coal. Forty will be injured, 10 seriously.

———–

US-based Climate Skepticism

Toxic shock

A climate-change sceptic is melting.

The Economist got this into its Print Edition of May 26, 2012. Great and very timely article considering the G.O.P. leadership.

For true believers only

THE Heartland Institute, based in Chicago, the world’s most prominent think-tank promoting scepticism about man-made climate change, is getting a lot of heat. In recent weeks it has lost an estimated $825,000 in expected donations, a couple of directors and almost its entire branch in Washington, DC.    At its annual shindig in Chicago this week, this instead of the previous escapades to New York City, the institute’s president, Joseph Bast, said Heartland had “discovered who our real friends are.”       The 100-odd guests who failed to show up for the “7th Climate Conference” were not among them.

The institute’s problems began in February when an American water scientist, Peter Gleick, published internal Heartland documents that he had obtained under a false name.    They provided details of its accounts—including references to an anonymous donor who gave $8.6m between 2007 and 2011—and of a plan to send teaching materials denouncing global warming to American primary schools.      (Mr Bast says that far from exposing his institute, the documents exonerated it from charges that it was a front for the fossil-fuel industry.)

Worse ensued early this month after the institute put up a digital billboard in Chicago that linked belief in global warming to madness and terrorism.   It depicted the “Unabomber,” a mass-murderer – Ted Kaczynski – with the slogan, “I still believe in Global Warming. Do you?” The offending sign lasted only for a day.   But PepsiCo, BB&T bank and Eli Lilly, a pharma company, are among donors that announced the end of their support.

Mr Bast decries double standards: those who accept global warming routinely call their opponents Nazis, he argues. He admits that the billboard was in “poor taste” but says it was designed to get attention, and was good value at $200. The real price is proving rather higher.

————–

Will this cause further thoughts to people like the President of a cEntral European State, whom I interviewed at a Heartland Institute New York anti-Climate rally? It could not be that all those that came to their meetings were mad-men or political opportunists – see Pepsi Cola – they will take their drinks elsewhere from now on.

================================

and - grist.org/climate-skeptics/the-se…

The self-inflicted downfall of the Heartland Institute.

By Stephen Lacey

A version of this post originally appeared on    Climate Progress.

“I don’t appreciate being called a terrorist,” the woman said firmly.

I was standing outside the Hilton Chicago hotel talking to Jim Lakely, the director of communications for the Heartland Institute, when an elderly woman approached us on the street. Dressed in a business suit, she was loading her luggage into a taxi when she noticed Lakely’s Heartland name badge and interrupted our conversation.

“We can have a civil discussion. But I really don’t like being labeled a terrorist,” she said, referencing a billboard posted by Heartland equating people who believe in global warming to the Unabomber. “That’s all I wanted to say.”

“Well, I appreciate you telling me that,” said Lakely, who was taking a break from managing Heartland’s conference to watch the 60 or so people protesting the event outside the hotel.

The woman, who was wearing a badge for a different conference, got into her taxi and drove away. There was a brief moment of awkward silence between Lakely and me.

The exchange perfectly encapsulated the public-relations disaster the Heartland Institute has created for itself over the last few weeks. The downfall started with an offensive billboard campaign on May 3, and ended with 11 companies pulling support for the organization —stripping 35 percent its of corporate funds overnight and leaving its financial future uncertain.

The dramatic drop in support was facilitated by the advocacy organization Forecast the Facts, which collected more than 150,000 signatures from people calling on corporate donors to end their relationship with Heartland. Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Verizon, Wisconsin Insurance Alliance, and the Credit Union National Association are the latest to announce that they will not fund the Heartland Institute, bringing the total number of defecting companies to 15.

This series of events built on an earlier incident in which Peter Gleick, a scientist with the Pacific Institute, faked his identity to acquire internal documents from the Heartland Institute. Those documents showed that the organization planned to secretly develop school curriculum to spread doubt about the causes of climate change. It also opened up a window to the organization’s donors, which were forced to make a decision about whether or not they wanted to be associated with Heartland’s tactics.

And then yesterday, the other shoe dropped. In his closing speech, Heartland President Joseph Bast announced that the organization does not have the money to continue putting on its hallmark climate conference — an event that had become a rallying point for an insulated group of climate disinformers.

“I hope to see you at a future conference, but at this point we have no plans to do another [International Conference on Climate Change],” said Bast, explaining that Heartland was struggling to meet expenses.

The cancellation marks the end of an era — albeit a short era — for the oddball world of organized climate change denial.

The event was started in 2008 as a way to organize libertarians — many of whom believe that taking action on climate change would create a one-world government dominated by the United Nations.

Heartland tried hard to label the event a “science” conference. But the presentations were almost always political, peppered with anti-government rhetoric and conspiracy theories.

“We’re in a war. We’re in a war against our standard of living,” said Walt Cunningham, a former NASA astronaut, speaking in a morning session on Tuesday.

“There’s not a lot of science here,” said Scott Denning, an atmospheric scientist from Colorado State University who attended the event last year to present the so-called “warmist” case. Neither Denning nor any of the other 97 percent of climate scientists who say human activity is warming the planet presented at this year’s conference.

In fact, none of this year’s top speakers had any background in climate science. Instead, they spoke about the issues in highly conspiratorial terms.

Czech President Vaclav Klaus, a former economist who gave the keynote address on Monday, called environmentalism “identical to communism — identical, not similar.”

Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), the featured keynote speaker for Tuesday, asked if we “need to put catalytic converters on our noses” by addressing heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere.

And following Sensenbrenner’s nonsensical remarks, Heartland brought up “special mystery guest” Lord Christopher Monckton, who admitted at the beginning of his speech that he has “no scientific qualification” to challenge climate science. He then performed a comedy routine in which he questioned the legitimacy of President Obama’s citizenship — a joke that brought the room to full applause.

These fringe views made even Heartland senior staffers very nervous. After the billboard debacle, the leader of Heartland’s Washington, D.C., office, Eli Lehrer, left the organization and brought six staff members with him, saying the campaign “didn’t reflect the seriousness which I want to bring to public policy.”

But Heartland’s leadership twisted the knife into their self-inflicted wound with a decision to keep repeating their extreme rhetoric in the lead-up to the conference — later calling Bill McKibben and Michael Mann “Madmen.”

The rapid unraveling of Heartland forced it to scale down the conference, and seemingly kept attendees away. This year, only around 300 people showed up — a decrease from the 500 people at its first conference in 2008.

Despite the subdued mood, Rep. Sensenbrenner tried to rally the remaining troops during his Tuesday speech.

“Things are a lot better now than they were three years ago,” he said, referencing the failure to pass a carbon cap-and-trade bill and potential expiration of the Kyoto Protocol.

Things certainly weren’t better for Heartland. The following afternoon, the organization announced its decision to abandon the entire conference due to lack of funds and a backlash from corporate donors.

But Sensenbrenner was right about one thing: The public dialogue has moved dramatically backward in the last three years, driven largely by the aggressive disinformation tactics of the climate denial community — and enabled by the Obama administration’s decision to stop talking about the issue and the media’s decision to sharply curtail coverage.

While the dissolution of Heartland’s conference may be considered a “win” for those concerned about the spread of junk science and disinformation, there are still plenty of allies in industry and the halls of Congress willing to take up the denial cause.

————-

When a Boy Found a Familiar Feel in a Pat of the Head of State

Pete Souza/The White House

In the photo that has hung in the West Wing for three years, President Obama looks to be bowing to 5-year-old Jacob Philadelphia, his arm raised to touch the president’s hair — to see if it feels like his.

By JACKIE CALMES

Published by The New York Times –  May 23, 2012

Please see article:  

I just returned from the Vienna Topkino and found this film to be obligatory viewing for those that want to see progress at RIO+20.

Both – the film and its Director – Cosima Dannoritzer who resides now in Berlin and Barcelona – were extremely enlightening helped further by the Head of the Vienna UN Information Service, Janos Tisovszky, and Greenpeace campaigner on Consumer items – Claudia Sprinz, and about 50 members of a very lively audience.

The movie starts with the conspiracy that involved Phillips, Osram, and General Electric – the Phoebus Cartel documented in 1929 and eventually undone in US courts only in 1953 – that led to incandescent bulbs to last only 1000 hours, while in a firehouse in New Jersey about 800 people came to celebrate the birthday of a bulb that reached 100 years of continuous use. That bulb was a remnant of pre-conspiracy production.

With above introduction, the movie takes us to see how today’s corporate world leads us to squander resources by handing us products that are not intended to stay with us for a long time – and then the industry is not prepared to pick up the old products that include many valuable resources – instead these become objects that pollute – and the further indignity is that they end up in Ghana in Africa, destroying the environment there.

Mountains are literally moved to come up with the elements used in today’s electronics, while those elements could be mined from the scrap of these products. Then why are these rejected TV’s not repaired, why do they get exported as second hand to Ghana and do havoc there? Anyway – these are just a few points and we will revisit this very impressive movie that shows today’s business world in all its inglorious nudity.

Once upon a time ….. products were made to last. Then, at the beginning of the 1920s, a group of businessmen were struck by the following insight: ‘A product that refuses to wear out is a tragedy of business’ (1928). Thus Planned Obsolescence was born. Shortly after, the first worldwide cartel was set up expressly to reduce the life span of the incandescent light bulb, a symbol for innovation and bright new ideas, and the first official victim of Planned Obsolescence.

“Ciné-ONU Vienna” is part of a Europe-wide initiative of regular film screenings of UN related topics followed by podium discussions with invited guests who were part of the film making process or are experts in the topic covered by the film. The United Nations Information Service (UNIS) Vienna is honoured to have “Ciné-ONU Vienna” partner with this human world (THW) film festival and Topkino for the regular film screenings in Vienna. For further information visit: www.unis.unvienna.org

Date / Time: 14 May 2012, 18:30 hrs

Location: Topkino, Rahlgasse 1, 1060 Wien

Participants of the panel discussion (to be held in English):

Cosima Dannoritzer – Film Director

Claudia Sprinz – Consumer Campaigner -GREENPEACE in Central – and Eastern Europe

Janos Tisovszky – Director / United Nations Information Service (UNIS) Vienna (Moderation)

————————————————————————–

The following two photos by   Marc Martinez Sarrado / Media 3.14)  show us this documentary in a nut-shell.

It is from the incandescent bulbs cartel that was established to undo good products in order to continue production at the plant and release to the environment more and more garbage – to the land covered garbage as we see here in Ghana – a dumping ground to refuse from so called developed countries.

From having caused the demise of the good bulb:

to creating ecological disasters out there:

Cosima Dannoritzer is a director specialising in history, ecology and science who has made films for broadcasters in the U.K., Germany and Spain.

Her CV includes“Rebuilding Berlin”, which she directed and co-produced for the Channel 4 science slot “Equinox”, “The Duel” which she produced for Channel 4 History (nominated for a BBC Indie Award) and the BBC series ”Germany Inside Out.”

Her documentary “If Rubbish Could Speak” (“El que la brossa ens diu”, TVE Spain) presents a portrait of the city of Barcelona via its rubbish containers. What would the archaeologists be able to learn from the rubbish we discard every day? The film has won several awards and was screened widely at international environmental film festivals.

“Electronic Amnesia” (“L’amnèsia electrònica”, TVE Spain) offers a reflection about our personal memories and the fact that most of them are increasingly stored in electronic form, using formats which are rapidly becoming obsolete. Will we leave any memories for future generations, or will they inherit stacks of illegible disks, tapes and documents?

With THE LIGHT BULB CONSPIRACY, Cosima Dannoritzer continues to explore the themes of sustainability and our relationship with modern technology.Planned Obsolescence is the deliberate shortening of product life spans to guarantee consumer demand. As an influential advertising magazine stated in the 1920s: ‘The article that refuses to wear out is a tragedy of business’ – and a tragedy for the modern growth society which relies on an ever-accelerating cycle of production, consumption and throwing away.

The story starts in the 1920s when a secret cartel was set up to limit the life span of the incandescent bulb, converting the light bulb into the first victim of Planned Obsolescence and turning it from a symbol of progress and innovation into a model for designers and entrepreneurs aiming to increase profits and sales at all cost. Ever since then, Planned Obsolescence has been the basis of our economy, affecting the life spans of products as diverse as nylon tights, cars and cutting edge electronics.

The result of three years of painstaking research, THE LIGHT BULB CONSPIRACY travels to the US, Germany, France, Spain and Ghana, and uses rare archive material and hitherto unseen internal company documents to separate fact from urban legend. It shows the terrible environmental consequences of Planned Obsolescence – like the immense cemeteries for electronic waste, which have appeared in countries such as Ghana – and presents a number of hands-on ideas from thinkers, designers, businessmen, as well as rebellious consumers, all working on saving the modern economy and the planet.

Press kit ENG.pdf 1889K   View Download

the link on to the film pageof the Light Bulb Conspiracy: www.facebook.com/TheLightBulbConspiracys

We love to post  these links because we feel that people with a feel for these issues, as presented in this film and in the Slovak series of shorts at the UN compound in Vienna, can be further energised when watching these true facts.

The only problem with these UNIS showings is that the public at large has no access to them – this like in the case of them being shown inside the UN compound, or not having enough adverisement if done at TopKino. in this last case, the material that was available in the cinema did not include this special showing. Perhaps it could be arranged for a longer and better covered showing in the future.

The Update of Sunday May 6th:

Here’s one of the most vivid photos of the bunch — just a taste of what it feels like to have the water rising around you, and the tip of the iceberg of the creative masterworks of the past 24 hours:

Click here to see the amazing photos from the day: www.climatedots.org

We’re going to need you soon to fight the political battles that will make use of these images, but for the next day or two just relax, and enjoy the feeling of solidarity that comes from knowing there are millions of people thinking the same way, harboring the same fears and, more importantly, the same hopes.

Bill McKibben

—————————————————

That was the original posting of Friday night:

While at the UN we were having the last evening of the second set of Informal-Informal meetings to iron out a text for the Outcome of what the UN trumpets as the meeting of a generation – the renewal of the Earth Summit of 1992 as RIO+20 – but as we guessed a long time ago – with people and tools that derailed progress of the original Agenda 21 it is hard to build “THE FUTURE WE WANT.” So after two times at two weeks each, or as the chairmen summed up for just the last set of two weeks – April 23 – May 4, 2012, the 29 sessions, 87 hours  and 34,800 hours spent by the people heading these meetings – just 21 paragraphs out of the total over 400 paragraphs – was cleared for Rio.
If you do not mince words you say – THIS IS SHAMEFUL.

So, tonight they decided to meet again in New York for five days – Tuesday, May 29  -  Saturday, June 2,  2012.

By coincidence or planning – Bill McKibben has taken over with his demonstration of the people are ready to claim back climate. We know that this is possible only under adherence to Sustainable Development – the future that is being tripped in the halls of the UN.

So let us get inspiration from Bill McKibben whose e-mail just came in:

Greetings!

For some people on our email list, dawn has arrived on Saturday and Climate Impacts Day has already begun.

So this is a short reminder that 5/5 is no normal day — it’s the day that people around the world are coming together to Connect the Dots about climate change. I’ve just heard that the very first action, in the Marshall Islands in the Pacific Ocean where the sun rises first, was a great success: people there dove down for an underwater rally on their threatened coral reef. So even if it’s raining where you are, know that some people have already gotten entirely wet to sound the alarm!

Here’s the place to find the nearest action — and when you’re done go back to the computer to watch the images scroll in from around the planet (and make sure to upload your own photos).

This is like a giant seminar on the topic: What does global warming look like in its early stages? And if we can put a human face on climate change it will help immeasurably in all our campaigning in the years ahead. You’re that human face.

Thanks so much for heading out to help.

Bill McKibben

P.S. Don’t forget to upload your photos from your events to ClimateDots.org! There are full instructions on the website, but the basic idea is to attach your single best photo and email it tophotos@350.org — and make sure to put the location of the photo in the subject line and the the story behind the photo as the text of the email.

What is 350? Go to our website to learn about the science behind the movement.

A little fun-night in Washington and President Obama thanked lawmakers who “took a break from their exhausting schedule of not passing any laws to be here tonight.”

In the basement ballroom of the Washington Hilton, more than 2,000 politicians, celebrities, journalists and hangers-on gathered for the White House Correspondents’ Association annual dinner. The arrangements created a muddled tableau of elites from different industries, with Kate Hudson paired with Colin Powell and Kim Kardashian, Lindsay Lohan, and her attorney seated at the table with Fox News pundits.

“It’s great to be here this evening in the vast, magnificent Hilton ballroom,” Obama said, “or what Mitt Romney would call ‘a little fixer-upper.’”

President Obama also remembered Republican criticism of him for eating dog meat while a boy in Indonesia. “What’s the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull?” Mr. Obama asked and answered –  “A pit bull is delicious.” Dear Sarah Palin – here you have it – and remember that your candidate for Presidency traveled in a car with his dog strapped in a cage to the roof top. What about strapping Bo to the top of US One and sprint him out of China?

President Obama teased Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who was photographed dancing and drinking a beer at a club during a visit to Colombia. “She won’t stop drunk-texting me from Cartagena,” he said. He also said that he had to leave early because “I have to get the Secret Service home in time for their new curfew.”

The President was followed by Mr. Jimmy Kimmel as official entertainer at last night’s White House Press dinner who said that “I do have a lot of jokes about the Secret Service,”  -  “You know, I told them – for $800  -  I wouldn’t tell them – but they only offered 30.”

Last night’s dinner was also a commemoration at  another level – just think – last year the dinner played a cameo role in the raid that led to the death of Osama bin Laden. When the President  showed up at the dinner a year ago, Mr. Obama had just given the order for the helicopter incursion into Pakistan to burst into a compound where the Al Qaeda leader was suspected of living, but the President smiled and joked his way through that dinner, and a ballroom full of journalists had no clue what was about to happen. One Bravo! or rise-a-glass! – for this President.

“Last year at this time — in fact, on this very weekend — we finally delivered justice to one of the world’s most notorious individuals,” Obama said during his after-dinner speech, seeming to allude to the killing of Osama bin Laden. But then a photo of an orange-faced Donald Trump — who spent much of last spring questioning Obama’s citizenship — flashed on giant screens in the ballroom. Punch line delivered.

———————

and something else – an opinion piece in the New York Times makes it crystal clear – “THE president who won the Nobel Peace Prize less than nine months after his inauguration has turned out to be one of the most militarily aggressive American leaders in decades.” So what are the Republicans hollering about?

See please – OPINION

Warrior in Chief

By PETER L. BERGEN, Published: April 28, 2012

at - www.nytimes.com

The president used the Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech as an occasion to articulate his philosophy of war. He made it very clear that his opposition to the Iraq war didn’t mean that he embraced pacifism — not at all.

“I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people,” the president told the Nobel committee — and the world. “For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler’s armies. Negotiations cannot convince Al Qaeda’s leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism — it is a recognition of history, the imperfections of man, and the limits of reason.”

Mr. Obama’s readiness to use force — and his military record — have won him little support from the right. Despite countervailing evidence, most conservatives view the president as some kind of peacenik. From both the right and left, there has been a continuing, dramatic cognitive disconnect between Mr. Obama’s record and the public perception of his leadership: despite his demonstrated willingness to use force, neither side regards him as the warrior president he is.

But Mr. Obama decimated Al Qaeda’s leadership. He overthrew the Libyan dictator. He ramped up drone attacks in Pakistan, waged effective covert wars in Yemen and Somalia and authorized a threefold increase in the number of American troops in Afghanistan. He became the first president to authorize the assassination of a United States citizen, Anwar al-Awlaki, who was born in New Mexico and played an operational role in Al Qaeda, and was killed in an American drone strike in Yemen. And, of course, Mr. Obama ordered and oversaw the Navy SEAL raid that killed Osama bin Laden.

This Sunday, the New York Times has two excellent political articles that in our eyes should be read in tandem. So – please – go to the originals and please remember our recommendation.

—-

www.nytimes.com/2012/04/15/opinion/sunday/dowd-come-back-sarah-palin.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120415

Come Back, Sarah Palin! By  OP-ED COLUMNIST MAUREEN DOWD

“Having defined Mitt Romney as the “Eh, I guess” candidate, “Saturday Night Live” writers wonder if there’s anything else to say.”

A version of this op-ed appeared in print on April 15, 2012, on page SR11 of the New York edition with the headline: Come Back, Sarah Palin!.

“SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE” writers have devastatingly lampooned Mitt Romney as a corny, coreless candidate who evokes an “Eh, I guess” response in voters. Now they’re worried that we’re heading, comedy-wise, toward an “Eh, I guess” election.

“The fun thing with Mitt Romney is, here’s a guy who has to look in the mirror every day and see that he looks exactly the way a president should look,” Meyers said, and yet he can’t catch fire.

“People are perfectly willing to accept people different from them as long as they don’t try to pretend otherwise.”

and

www.nytimes.com/2012/04/15/magazine/the-soft-middle-of-francois-hollande.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120415

The Magazine article - The Soft Middle of François Hollande – by Steven Erlanger.

Even after a precampaign diet last year — less wine, less cheese and especially less chocolate — François Hollande, the Socialist who is currently favored to become the next president of France, still has a soft face and looks slightly sloppy in his medium-gray suits. He used to be referred to as “Flanby,” after a brand of wobbly caramel pudding, just one of a string of insulting nicknames for a convivial man considered always at the second rank of politics. He has been called “a living marshmallow” and “Mr. Little Jokes,” and just last year, Martine Aubry, the head of the Socialist Party, described him as a couille molle, a nasty way of saying he has no guts. Recently, a frustrated Nicolas Sarkozy, fighting hard to be re-elected,  fumed:  “Hollande is useless! He’s useless, do you understand?”

BUT – Nicolas Sarkozy’s unlikely challenger may possess precisely what the French now want in a leader: A comforting reflection of themselves.

The previous article proves that Romney is no Hollande – in ways that Mitt Romney did not even consider important -the Department of Straight-Talk.

===========

The Editorial picks up with: More Help for the Wealthy

“Under the guise of helping small businesses, Republicans want new high-end tax cuts that would favor the wealthy and starve the government of needed revenue.”

President Obama and first lady Michelle Obama had a combined income of $789,674 in 2011 but paid a lower tax rate than the president’s secretary, who made less than $100,000, the White House confirmed Friday.

The Obamas paid an effective rate of 20.5 percent. White House aides would not reveal presidential secretary Anita Breckenridge’s tax rate but confirmed it was higher than the first family’s rate. Breckenridge earned $95,000 last year.

The Obamas’ rate is less than the 30 percent the president wants millionaires to pay under his proposed Buffett Rule.

“The president’s secretary pays a slightly higher rate … than the president on her substantially lower income, which is exactly why we need to reform our tax code and ask the wealthiest to pay their fair share,” White House spokeswoman Amy Brundage told Fox News.

The release Friday of the tax returns for the president and the family of Vice President Joe Biden came on the same day in which the Obama campaign in Chicago attacked likely GOP-presidential nominee Mitt Romney for, so far, releasing only his most recent tax returns.

“Did he pay a lower income tax rate than the 13.9 percent he paid in 2010 and is that why he opposes the Buffett Rule to ensure millionaires don’t pay less taxes than middle-class families?” Obama campaign manager Jim Messina asked in a press release from the campaign.

Later in the day, a Romney spokeswoman said Romney has file for an extension and would make public his 2011 returns before the November election.

The Case for the Buffett Rule: Speaking from Florida Atlantic University on Tuesday, President Obama outlined the Buffett Rule, which is based on the simple idea that people who make more than $1 million each year pay at least the same share of their income in taxes as middle class families do.

With the Buffett Rule in place, the President explained Tuesday, “it makes it affordable for us to be able to say for those people who make under $250,000 a year – like 98 percent of American families do – then your taxes don’t go up.”

You guess – President Obama wants himself and Mr. Romney to pay taxes in amounts that provide  funds needed without getting their hands into their secretaries pockets.

What Legacy Do You Want To Leave To Your Children? Have A look At What You Have And  Be Thankful.

Ode_to_N.pps 6499K   View Download

A curious article appeared today in the Leftie blog The Huffington Post, claiming that when the Occupy Wall Street protesters set up their own anti-shopping effort on Black Friday, they revealed themselves to be a bunch of snobs out of touch with the American people.

The author stated that the OWS cry against consumerism showed that they really don’t represent “the 99%” at all. Not True. It’s about time someone takes on this beast called consumerism.

Most of the people I work with are middle-class, two-income parents who are away from their children 11 hours out of every day except weekends. They commute at least an hour per day to well-paying jobs that provide an income large enough to keep the kids happy and the neighbors from smirking at their car. Their children are being raised by nannies, grandmas, public school teachers and after-school caregivers. These coworkers of mine bemoan that they never get to see their children. They accuse themselves of poor parenting, but see no other way to provide the gadgets expected of them, the laptops, big-screen T.Vs, and everything invented by Steve Jobs beginning with the letter “I”.  Their children grow up as strangers, and to make this a little easier to deal with, my friends will pull extra shifts, not so much to pay property tax and mortgage, but to keep the gadgets coming, always newer, faster, bigger, and MORE. Family hiking trips and trips to other outdoor locations are out. Shopping vacations are in. This is how a huge number of American families pass their time together, the conversations they share while driving to mega-malls and mega-churches: They share stories about their purchases.

So somebody does need to raise a strong voice against consumerism, even if it is a bunch of kids wandering lower Manhattan who haven’t had a bath in a while. Somebody needs to ask why is it so hard for American families to sit in a room together without being attached to separate electronic devices? You certainly won’t be encouraged to rethink these priorities by the media, with every news outlet providing up the minute Black Friday results as if our lives depended on them.  Is it possible for families to unplug everything and just go to a park? Even if you don’t want to Occupy it, just go there.