| |
|
Thursday, April 24, 2008
|
|
Andrew Sullivan: "A commenter at TNR nails it: 'For all of Hillary's brand recognition, institutional advantages (including the ferocious support of a former president), fund-raising head start and inherent appeal to the party's core constituency (working class white women), she finds herself on the ropes, in debt and having to go hugely negative just to stay alive. Does any sane Democrat really think that this is a viable alternative to Obama?'"
Coyote Gulch would remind readers that voters at the polls decide viability, not those of us that report the news. 
More from Andrew Sullivan: "Increasingly, I think this is going to the convention. The Clintons will use Michigan and Florida to argue that they have won the popular vote, that Obama cannot win the general, and that if he is the nominee, they will switch their support (unofficially, of course) to McCain and prepare for 2012. That's who they are. They will never willingly relinquish their power."
Mr. Sullivan, how could Hillary Clinton be a viable candidate in 2012 if she backs a Republican this year, even unofficially? Is she going to switch parties? We find you a bit too cynical on this subject.
We're more in agreement with Digby, who writes, "My views are horribly out of step with most of you, I recognize that. But I honestly think it's going to be nearly impossible to lose in the fall (although I think the outside Democratic groups need to start working on McCain's favorables sooner rather than later) so I'm just not feeling the panic about the primary. I like it when the voting process plays itself out rather than having the campaign spin and the media narratives telling the people what they are supposed to do. I've always felt that way. I still don't see this campaign as being particularly harsh by historical standards and I remain where I was at the beginning, believing that either candidate would be a good president and having no qualms about supporting either one of them. I just don't feel particularly emotional about it (except to the extent that I'm personally attacked for failing to feel properly emotional....) In fact, I hardly ever feel emotional about primaries. It's the conservatives (and chicken[*] Dems, which neither of these candidates are) who really get my blood boiling."
The Moderate Voice:
If you liked Reagan, the odds are you don't think McCain is too old to be president. And if you liked Reagan, the reason he gave for opposing a bill that would ensure women equal pay for equal work might even make sense to you. Here's McCain, 'reasoning':
"I am all in favor of pay equity for women, but this kind of legislation, as is typical of what's being proposed by my friends on the other side of the aisle, opens us up to lawsuits for all kinds of problems," the expected GOP presidential nominee told reporters. "This is government playing a much, much greater role in the business of a private enterprise system." (AP)
You know what, I don't even know where to start with this. For one thing, I can't believe this is even an issue in the 21st Century. For another, it's hard to type when your hands are shaking with fury.
Josh Marshall: "I think I've said this a hundred times, as have many others. But this article in Thursday's Times is a good moment to revisit the point. As Patrick Healy explains, it is simply a fallacy to claim that winning a state's Democratic primary means you're more likely to win that state in the general election or that your opponent can't win it. The dynamics are simply different between general elections and primaries."
"2008 pres"
6:10:03 PM 
|
|
New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson made a move to protect the pristine nature of New Mexico's rivers and streams on Earth Day, as reported by The environmental News Service. From the article:
Governor Bill Richardson marked Earth Day by moving to protect all surface waters within national forest wilderness and inventoried roadless areas in New Mexico - amounting to more than 5,300 miles of headwaters streams that flow from mountain forests. Designation of these waters as Outstanding National Resource Waters under the Federal Clean Water Act will ensure these headwater streams remain pristine and protected far into the future, the governor said. "This initiative will provide the highest level of water quality protection possible for more than 5,000 miles of beautiful rivers and streams," Governor Richardson said. "This ensures that these pristine waters - including world-class trout fishing areas and vital drinking water supplies - will remain clean for the next generation to enjoy."
The designations also will help counter efforts by the Bush administration to weaken protections in inventoried roadless areas, said the governor, a Democrat who served as secretary of energy in the Clinton administration. Governor Richardson is a proponent of the Clinton administration roadless rule that protected 58.5 million acres of inventoried roadless areas across the country. He has worked to counter the Bush administration's attempts to weaken that rule, which have been turned back by the courts.
The designations must be approved by the New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission. The governor's plan was applauded by environmental and faith-based groups. "Today Governor Richardson has sealed his water protection legacy; with the outstanding title these waters will remain pristine for wildlife and downstream users forever," said Bryan Bird of WildEarth Guardians. "We are thankful for the Governor's leadership and believe that this initiative helps meet our collective moral obligation to ensure that future generations inherit a better planet and a better New Mexico than the one that we inherited from our parents," said Reverend Dr. Barbara Dua, executive director of the New Mexico Conference of Churches. Governor Richardson charged the task of protecting the surface waters and developing documentation for their designation as Outstanding National Resource Waters, ONRW, to the New Mexico Environment Department...
Waters eligible for ONRW designation include those that are part of a national or state park, wildlife refuge or wilderness areas, special trout waters, waters with exceptional recreational or ecological significance, and high quality waters that have not been significantly modified by human activities. Dr. Reid Bandeen is president of the Las Placitas Watershed Association, one of the groups funded through the federal Clean Water Act Section 319(h) watershed restoration funding program. "Given recent predictions by climatologists and the ever-increasing pressure on limited high quality fresh water supplies in New Mexico," he said, "protection of pristine wilderness waterways is crucial to the long-term quality of life in our state. ONRW designation benefits all users of the water by protecting against water quality degradation. If watershed conditions along the ONRW need improvement, designation can help to funnel restoration efforts and financial assistance into the area. Land use activities in existence at the time an ONRW is designated will not be affected so long as they are controlled by best management practices and do not result in new or increased discharges of contaminants to the ONRW after designation. New land uses or activities can proceed if they do not cause water quality degradation in the ONRW. The ONRW designation, if successful, will be the third for New Mexico, all under the Richardson administration, which pursued that designation for the Valle Vidal in 2006 and supported the efforts of Amigos Bravos to gain designation for the Rio Santa Barbara in 2005. Dr. Ron Loehman, New Mexico Trout conservation chairman, said, "Our more than 400 volunteer members are deeply concerned about the health of streams and riparian areas in the state. This proposal recognizes the importance of the headwaters streams to all of New Mexico and, once enacted, it will ensure they remain as resources for clean water, recreation, and wildlife habitat."
It all starts with clean water.
"colorado water"
6:06:52 PM
|
|
The potential for regional conflicts from climate change is the subject of this article from The Environmental News Network. They write:
Countries around the world have hugely underestimated the potential conflicts stemming from climate change and must invest heavily to correct that mistake, a report said on Wednesday.
The report for Britain's Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) by environment expert Nick Mabey said the response had been "slow and inadequate" and to rectify it spending needed to surge to levels comparable to sums spent on counter-terrorism.
"If climate change is not slowed and critical environmental thresholds are exceeded, then it will become a primary driver of conflicts between and within states," said the report "Delivering Climate Security: International Security Responses to a Climate-Changed World."
"cc"
6:58:22 AM
|
|
|
© Copyright 2009 John Orr.
Last update: 3/15/09; 2:21:21 PM.
|
|
|
