Liberalism - Slogans, not rules.
Remember when liberals believed in Free Speech, back before they had the Ring of Power?
Now, they want to use State power to punish public speech from those who dissent from their ideology.
//As you know, an overwhelming majority of climate scientists are convinced about the potentially
serious adverse effects of human-induced climate change on human health, agriculture, and
biodiversity. We applaud your efforts to regulate emissions and the other steps you are taking.
Nonetheless, as climate scientists we are exceedingly concerned that America’s response to
climate change – indeed, the world’s response to climate change – is insufficient. The risks
posed by climate change, including increasing extreme weather events, rising sea levels, and
increasing ocean acidity – and potential strategies for addressing them – are detailed in the Third
National Climate Assessment (2014), Climate Change Impacts in the United States. The stability
of the Earth’s climate over the past ten thousand years contributed to the growth of agriculture
and therefore, a thriving human civilization. We are now at high risk of seriously destabilizing
the Earth’s climate and irreparably harming people around the world, especially the world’s
poorest people.
We appreciate that you are making aggressive and imaginative use of the limited tools available
to you in the face of a recalcitrant Congress. One additional tool – recently proposed by Senator
Sheldon Whitehouse – is a RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act)
investigation of corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the
American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to
climate change. The actions of these organizations have been extensively documented in peerreviewed
academic research (Brulle, 2013) and in recent books including: Doubt is their Product
(Michaels, 2008), Climate Cover-Up (Hoggan & Littlemore, 2009), Merchants of Doubt
(Oreskes & Conway, 2010), The Climate War (Pooley, 2010), and in The Climate Deception
Dossiers (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2015). We strongly endorse Senator Whitehouse’s call
for a RICO investigation.
The methods of these organizations are quite similar to those used earlier by the tobacco industry.
A RICO investigation (1999 to 2006) played an important role in stopping the tobacco industry
from continuing to deceive the American people about the dangers of smoking. If corporations in
the fossil fuel industry and their supporters are guilty of the misdeeds that have been documented
in books and journal articles, it is imperative that these misdeeds be stopped as soon as possible
so that America and the world can get on with the critically important business of finding
effective ways to restabilize the Earth’s climate, before even more lasting damage is done.//
Showing posts with label Free Speech in the Age of Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Free Speech in the Age of Obama. Show all posts
Monday, June 22, 2015
Hope and change in the Age of Obama.
A US Attorney goes after a libertarian magazine because its commenters practice this strange thing called "free speech."
I'm old enough to remember when liberals cared about "Free Speech."
A US Attorney goes after a libertarian magazine because its commenters practice this strange thing called "free speech."
I'm old enough to remember when liberals cared about "Free Speech."
Thursday, May 08, 2014
Are we at the "September Massacres" Phase of the Age of Obama?
Please excuse the historical reference, but when the radicals of the French Revolution were most afraid of losing power, they embarked on a campaign of mass murder:
It does seem that Leftist attacks on their enemies have become more unhinged, frequent and dangerous.
Here is one reason why this is happening:
Please excuse the historical reference, but when the radicals of the French Revolution were most afraid of losing power, they embarked on a campaign of mass murder:
The September Massacres[1][2] were a wave of killings in Paris (September 2–3, 1792) and other cities in late summer 1792, during the French Revolution. There was an overwhelming fear that foreign armies would attack Paris and the prisoners would revolt and massacre the people. Radicals called for preemptive action, especially journalist Jean Paul Marat who called on draftees to kill the prisoners before they marched off.[3] The action was undertaken by mobs of national Guardsmen and some fédéré; it was tolerated by the city government (the Paris Commune, which called on other cities to follow suit).[4] By September 6, half the prison population of Paris had been executed: some 1200 to 1400 prisoners. Of these 233 were nonjuring Catholic priests who refused to support the government. However, the great majority of those killed were common criminals.[5] The massacres were repeated in many other French cities.[6] No one was prosecuted for the killings, but the political repercussions first injured the Girondists (who seemed too moderate) and later the Jacobins (who seemed too bloodthirsty).[7]//
It does seem that Leftist attacks on their enemies have become more unhinged, frequent and dangerous.
Here is one reason why this is happening:
It's obvious that the far left has decided there are no longer constraints on what it can do to anyone who disagrees with it. How did this happen? Who let the dogs out?
The answer is not university presidents. The answer is that the Obama administration let the dogs out.
The trigger event was an agreement signed last May between the federal government and the University of Montana to resolve a Title IX dispute over a sexual-assault case.
Every college administrator in the U.S. knows about this agreement. Indeed, there are three separate, detailed "Montana" documents that were signed jointly—and this is unusual—by the civil-rights divisions of the Justice and Education Departments. Remarked DoJ's Joceyln Samuels, "The government is stronger when we speak with one voice."
That's real muscle. But read the agreement. It is Orwellian.
The agreement orders the school to retain an "Equity Consultant" (yes, there is such a thing) to advise it indefinitely on compliance. The school must, with the equity consultant, conduct "annual climate surveys." It will submit the results "to the United States."
The agreement describes compliance in mind-numbing detail, but in fact the actual definitional world it creates is vague. It says: "The term 'sexual harassment' means unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature." But there are also definitions for sexual assault and gender-based harassment. All of this detailed writ is called "guidance." As in missile.
No constitutional lawyer could read this agreement and not see in it the mind of the Queen of Hearts: "Sentence first, verdict afterwards!" Indeed, the U.S. Education Department felt obliged to assert that the agreement is "entirely consistent with the First Amendment."
First Amendment? It's more like a fatwa. The Obama administration has issued a federal hunting license to deputize fanatics at any university in America. They will define who gets accused, and on what basis.
The White House enabled these forces again last week, releasing an Education Department list of 55 colleges that are "under investigation" for possible Title IX violations. Not formally cited but "under investigation." The list includes such notorious Animal Houses as Catholic University, Swarthmore, Knox College, Carnegie Mellon and Harvard Law School. In truth, every school in America is effectively on the list.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)