An Author's Perspective

Greetings, all! Just a minor fiction update: my short story collection, Leaving Dodge County, is being published by Brown Paper Publishing on November 15th. In the meantime, four more stories from the collection have been published in the newest issue of Predicate Literary Journal. You can download them for free with these links:

Directions: Right-click each link and choose "save as ..."

Stories:

Control

Feel the Void

The Third Pile

All the Prophets in Her House 

Kudos to the Democrats in Congress who caved yesterday to the will of President Bush and voted in favor of the new wiretapping law that provides immunity to the telecommunication companies that helped the Bush Administration spy on Americans without a warrant. You see, I've come around and I understand now that the only way for our government to keep us safe is to simply break the Constitution. Terrorists are everywhere (probably even a couple working right here in Bay View), and we simply cannot wait for the Bush Administration to follow the law in order to protect us. Even through the FISA court was set up for this exact purpose, it simply was not enough. the Bush Administration HAD to spy on Americans without a warrant, because it is the only way to protect us from the Islamofascists who are jealous of our freedom and our love of romantic comedies starring Ben Affleck.

That being said, there are a number of bills coming up for vote right now that we absolutely MUST see pass. These bills are crucial in the war on terror and we simply cannot be safe without them:

1. Vote to "out" CIA agents who disagree with the president. If there's one thing that we've learned time and time again with the Bush Administration, it's that cronyism works. The more loyal underlings are to their leader, the more we can simply get done.

2. Eliminate the "right to bear arms." Spying without a warrant is crucial, and so is severely restricting gun rights. After all, we can't have would-be terrorists simply walking into gun shops buying guns, right? The Bush Administration must make it illegal for Americans to own guns. Don't worry--they've got all of our phone lines tapped to keep us safe.

3. Make it illegal to criticize the president. After the Dixie Chicks are officially charged with this crime, it's time to start going after all those anti-war advocates who are obviously emboldening the enemy. Free Speech shouldn't be free.

4. Declare war on Iran. We need to nip this one in the bud. We can simply take soldiers out of Afghanistan and Iraq, because both of those missions have been accomplished. The "surge" worked great, and the Iraqi government is finally getting a lot of things done--last week, almost ALL of them showed up to vote on a crucial bill providing no-bid contracts to foreign oil companies. Don't believe what the liberal media says--the Taliban are NOT regrouping in Afghanistan. This is a lie spread by the liberal media to undermine our freedom!

5. Pass the "Torture as many people as possible act." This bill is essential to the war on terror. There's no better way to suppress anti-American sentiment than by capturing as many Arabs as possible and torturing them into admitting they're terrorists. Really ... waterboarding isn't torture--it's just a dunk of water!  And we absolutely cannot allow these "enemy combatants" to have access to any evidence against them, or anything resembling a court system. They aren't traditional POW's, which means they don't have any rights under the Geneva Conventions, and so what if only a few have been charged. And so what if hundreds more have been set free after being tortured ... They're still guilty!

God bless our country, and remember: The terrorists will kill you if you don't sacrifice your Constitutional rights to President Bush.

Ken Brosky 

The terrorists are everywhere, and they're probably going to kill you soon. That is, only if we don't continue to provide  

Kudos to Doug Melvin for taking the initiative and getting us a star pitcher for the playoff push. Think about it like this: Milwaukee is one of the smallest (if not THE smallest) market in Major League Baseball, and Melvin managed to make a trade for the number 1 sought-after pitcher. This says two very important things:

1. Our farm system is extremely strong, especially given that we didn't deplete it with this trade.

2. Doug Melvin and Mark Attanasio are making a playoff push.

While Matt LaPorta was a good draft pick, I agree with the general consensus by our local sports jocks: when you have three ace pitchers--Sheets, Sabathia and Parra--you can win playoff games. You can win 3 out of every 5 with ease. Ideally.

Ideally.

For those of you who are truly die hard fans (and enjoy a good laugh), I encourage you to pee your pants for the Brewers. 

In response to the recent court decision ruling against D.C.'s handgun ban, I think it's important to tie this up with the recent vote to provide immunity to telecoms who spied on American citizens--at the behest of the Bush administration--WITHOUT A COURT WARRANT. Why are these two important? Because the very same conservatives who seem to have no problem with what Bush is doing are the very same who--thus far in our recent posts--have been unwilling to say they would give up their right to own a gun to fight terrorism. Hypocrisy? Of course. Let me say first off that I don't oppose the right to own a gun, although I've been more than happy to support restrictions in certain senses. Regardless, I don't see any reason why responsible people can't own firearms. And so here's the question you need to ask yourself now:

How many rights are you willing to give up in order to fight terrorism?

So far, the Bush administration has spied on Americans WITHOUT A WARRANT. This is a violation of the Fourth Amendment of our Bill of Rights. (The Bush Administration has also violated the Fifth Amendment, which guarantees due process, but we'll get to that some other time).

Here are your remaining rights:

 
First Amendment: Free Speech. Are you willing to have your speech limited in order to fight terrorism? Since 9/11, there have been free speech issues across the country, tied mostly to the patriotism of those involved. Does this concern you?

Second Amendment: The right to bear arms. Are you willing to give up your guns in order to fight terrorism? Are you willing accept limitations set out by the president in order to "keep this country safe"?

Third Amendment: The quartering of troops. If there's another attack, will you allow the president to place a soldier in your home? Okay, I'm being a little humorous here, but given what's happened already, the scary part is this could possibly happen in some distant future where John McCain is president.

Sixth through Eight Amendments - The rights of the court system. President Bush is already authorizing the detention of "Terrorist suspects" indefinitely with absolutely no regard for any U.S. or international law. You say it's okay because only the bad people are there, but already over a hundred have been released from Guantanamo alone ... so how many innocent people are there right now?

If support the president's abuse of the Fifth Amendment, then you should have no problem supporting these as well. After all, there's nothing more frightening than a terrorist with a gun who has the same rights in court as an American citizen, right? Right?

You'd think so ...
 

Republican House Representative Jim Sensenbrenner has been going out of his way to somehow blame Democrats for the current economic woes. It doesn't make much sense, since Republicans were running things for six years, but hey, what does that matter? The GOP is desperate, and Sensenbrenner is notorious for proudly displaying his delusions.

But let's take a look at one of the most fervent movements still taking place in the conservative movement: corporate taxes. I was listening to a debate between anti-tax crusader Grover Norquist and progressive writer David Sirota, and the talking points for Norquist were pretty much what he's been saying for decades:

1. Taxing is stealing.

2. Corporate taxes in America are some of the highest on the planet, and are killing our economy.

3. Cutting taxes improves government revenue 

While #1 might be argued, #2 is a flat-out lie. While the STATUTORY tax rate on corporations is 35%, that's not what corporations in America ACTUALLY pay. Thanks to massive tax loopholes and numerous deductions, the average tax rate paid by Fortune 500 companies is anywhere form 6% to 15%. The state tax rate is even lower. While the average corporate tax rate on the state level is 7%, but the average tax rate paid by Fortune 500 companies is 2%-3%.

These are INCREDIBLY competitive compared to other nations' tax rates, and when Grover Norquist says the corporate tax rate is 35%, he's being intentionally misleading. He's doing it because the number is high (although not as high as in the fifties and sixties, when the economy was booming), and it scares people. But, again, the corporate tax rate is NOT uncompetitive.

If you want to argue that the corporate tax rate should be lowered across the board, then that's a different issue. That's possible, but only if the loopholes are closed. Supply side economics--based somewhat loosely on the widely disregarded Laffner Curve--developed into the form it is today primarily with the help of Grover Norquist and NO economists (they came later, ironically), which is why the theory that lower taxes can increase revenue is so easily criticized. Suggesting that the 2005 increase in government revenue was due to tax cuts is highly disputable and far too simplified.

The House passed a bill today that provides retroactive immunity for all telecommunications companies involved in President Bush's domestic spying program. You know why they need retroactive immunity? BECAUSE THEY BROKE THE LAW. The Bush administration, with the help of multiple telecoms, spied on Americans WITHOUT A COURT WARRANT. And now, the House has finally given in and decided to side with the most unpopular president in American history.

And where are the conservatives during all this? Where are the true conservatives who favor PRIVACY among all else, the ones who HATE it when government eschews the law in order to pry in on the lives of individual citizens? Why, they're all backing telecom immunity, too!  That hardly surprises me, given that the conservative movement has grown so limp in the face of the neoconservative minority that few if any have the backbone necessary to actually stand up for their original values. Why follow any laws when they can use the "Terrorist Bogeyman" to do anything they want?

Click here to read the case AGAINST retroactive immunity for telecoms. 

We should be proud today to be citizens of Wisconsin, to be represented by one of the few brave senators left in Congress: Russ Feingold. The guy with the guts to oppose the "Patriot Act" is the only one truly speaking out against this bill:

“The proposed FISA deal is not a compromise; it is a capitulation. The House and Senate should not be taking up this bill, which effectively guarantees immunity for telecom companies alleged to have participated in the President’s illegal program, and which fails to protect the privacy of law-abiding Americans at home. Allowing courts to review the question of immunity is meaningless when the same legislation essentially requires the court to grant immunity. And under this bill, the government can still sweep up and keep the international communications of innocent Americans in the U.S. with no connection to suspected terrorists, with very few safeguards to protect against abuse of this power. Instead of cutting bad deals on both FISA and funding for the war in Iraq, Democrats should be standing up to the flawed and dangerous policies of this administration.”

We can still fight this. There are two things we can do right now to change things:

1. Contact Russ Feingold and express your support.

2. Contact Barack Obama and tell him to stand up and urge the Senate to vote down this bill. He has the power in the Democratic Party right now to kill this bill in its tracks.

Ken Brosky
 

I thought I'd share this from ClimateProgress, which happened to find a rather humorous quote from the Competitive Enterprise Institute's newsletter, which attempted to demonize global warming in its typical fashion. In the newsletter, the CEI said:

"A scientist who says that the atmosphere is warming, and cites certain physical processes, is still a scientist. A scientist who argues that people must take certain acts to avoid disaster has become a priest."

The scientist at ClimateProgress--yes, an actual scientist, unlike the "Expert" writing the CEI newsletter--attempted to re-phrase this from a medical standpoint:

In other words, “A doctor who diagnoses your diabetes using medical tests is still a doctor. A doctor who tells you to exercise, change your diet, monitor glucose levels, and/or take insulin to avoid acute complications has become a priest.”

Humorous, to no end. The writer of the CEI's newsletter has made similar ridiculous statements, including one regarding the "Inhofe 400." Remember how easy it was to debunk that one?

Best to leave the weekend homework to a minimum this week, but you still have an assignment: try to donate a little bit or even volunteer a few hours to help out everyone who's been sucked into this disaster. Here's a handful of links with more info and ideas. I'm passing these along to help get you started:

http://www.datcp.state.wi.us/flood2008/index.jsp

http://www.arcscenicbluffs.org/

http://www.kickapoovsn.org/

http://www.onmilwaukee.com/buzz/articles/floodhelp.html

http://www.dor.state.wi.us/news/070907.html

Special thanks to our representative, Gwen Moore, for suporting the call by House Representative Dennis Kucinich's to impeach President Bush. Kucinich introduced 35(!) articles of impeachment against the president and Representative Robert Wexler called for judiciary committee hearings on the issue. Very few democrats in the House--17 total--have supported it thus far, despite the fact that our president has committed crimes, along with our vice president.

Click here to download and read all 35 articles of impeachment.

Call you senator at this number and tell him/her to support the impeachment: (202-224-3121)

Click here to send an email to your representatives and tell them how you feel.

You have everything you need right here. You have the documents, the phone number and the email address. Now make your voice heard! 

Since this didn't end up appearing on Patrick McIlheran's blog, I thought I would share it with you to ensure you understand the difference between BAD government and GOOD government. In a recent post, Patrick uses the the bad policies of governments in pseudo-communist China and Africa (read: dictatorships, to varying degrees) as a reason why governments in general are "bad." Patrick relies on a story in The Spectator, which just so happens to be--surprise!--an extreme right-wing newspaper. The article in question, which you can read here, talks about a recent visit to Cameroon where the journalist went through multiple roadblocks, which can have horrible effects on food transportation.

Cameroon? Really? Boy, who could have thought that there might be flaws in the Cameroon government? This is one of McIlheran's favorite ways to play people against the U.S. government, and it's extremely effective. Despite the fact that the governments in question are hardly an example of democracy, especially not the kind we have here in the United States, McIlheran argues them as typical examples. And yet, if I were to list the multiple ways in which the Free Market hampers the production and distribution of food, McIlheran would most likely argue: "No, that's not the fault of the Free Market. And those are markets in other countries."

The current global food crisis is an imprortant issue, and reducing the explanation to "Governments are evil" is a gross, disingenuous action, especially when the governments in question are very often at the mercy of the IMF and World Bank, which promotes Free Market principles in exchange for loans. Add to that the skyrocketing cost of oil and massive droughts caused by climate change, and you have a veritable stew of problems that won't be solved anytime soon.

If you're interested in helping to make a small difference, switch to vegetarian meals on a regular basis. I make a point of eating vegetarian at least four times per week (or more), even though I enjoy eating meat. It's a small sacrifice, one we can all make, and it save a LOT of energy that's typically spent raising meat. One giant solution won't solve the food crisis, just like one giant government isn't the problem. 

"China's All-Seeing Eye," by Naomi Klein.

Read it for free, take your time, and really think about this, because it's going to be important over the next ten years. The homeland security market is booming, and its largely unrestricted thanks to the continuing fear tactics being elicited in the public sphere. Not just here, but across the world. London has security cameras on every street, China has more than three on each block in some places, and a lot of the technology being used is coming from right here in America.

This is a very real threat not just of unrestricted markets, but also of the role of government. In a market like this that preys on fear, continuing profits means expanding on that fear base, creating new threats, and constantly injecting fear into the public sphere to accomodate the new technology.

And on the other side of the issue is one of government. Naomi Klein rightly asserts that our founding fathers knew EXACTLY how addictive state snooping could become, which was why so many limits were put in place in our Constitution. While the Patriot Act may have attempted to erase some of those protections, it's not working anymore, but that's only a setback. In order for the homeland security market to continue expanding, it will HAVE to inject more fear into the marketplace.

Yours,

Ken Brosky
 

Greetings, all!

For those of you not in the know, my first short story collection is coming out next year courtesy of Brown Paper Publishing. In the meantime, each of the short stories is going to be published in their literary journal, which you can either purchase or download. The journal looks great, but for those who prefer to read on their computers, the publisher also provides each of the featured story online at no charge. If you want to purchase the print journal, click here.

For those of you who prefer to read the stories online (hey, it's okay ... I'm not mad that you're not buying a print copy!), follow one of the links below. None of the short stories is particularly vulgar, etc., and are safe for work.

Cherries and Blueberries, by Ken Brosky

Labor Ready!, by Ken Brosky

Frolf, by Ken Brosky
 

It's time to sit down and have a very frank talk about the contractors responsible for servicing our troops in Iraq. Thus far, America as a whole has generally looked the other way on a variety of issues, choosing quiet outrage when tens of billions of taxpayer dollars go missing, when reports of rape in companies in Iraq pop up, when reports of contractors playing football with bricks of hundred-dollar bills (more taxpayer money) show up, etc.

I could go on. I could, really! It's not that difficult. What's difficult is finding someone in the Republican Party outraged over this. When the Republicans were in charge, there was absolutely NO oversight of the billions of tax dollars spent on contractors in Iraq. Now, the Democratic Party is holding massive oversight investigations (thanks in no small part to Congressman Waxman--drop him an email and thank him if you have the chance), and the stories keep on coming.

Let's take a look at one of those contractors, KBR. This particular company--despite its numerous complaints--has just tripled its first-quarter profits.

Rape -- Multiple women who formerly worked at the company have come forward accusing co-workers of rape. Every woman involved has offered a similar experience: following the rape, they were told any reporting to any authority would result in immediate termination. The justice department is NOT pursuing the investigation.

Electrocution of Troops -- Democratic chariman Henry Waxman is currently investigating whether the accidental electrocution of troops could have been avoided. According to a recent article by the New York Times, which found massive evidence suggesting KBR was intentionally cutting corners, there's good reason to believe this tragedy could have easily been avoided: "One electrician warned his KBR bosses in his 2005 letter of resignation that unsafe electrical work was “a disaster waiting to happen.” Another said he witnessed an American soldier in Afghanistan receiving a potentially lethal shock. A third provided e-mail messages and other documents showing that he had complained to KBR and the government that logs were created to make it appear that nonexistent electrical safety systems were properly functioning."

Stealing -- A former KBR employee was promoted after she was caught stealing from taxpayers. According to sworn testimony by two former co-workers, this was a regular occurrence. One even allegedly went so far as to melt down gold to make cowboy boots.

Tax dodging -- More than $500 million dollars in taxes has been saved by KBR thanks to very crafty, very devious tax-dodging schemes that involve off-shore shell companies.

Contaminated Water -- the Pentagon dismissed this report of KBR failing to provide safe water to troops in Iraq, suggesting that the water in Iraq is tainted to begin with and everyone should be drinking bottled water. There's only one problem: this report deals mainly with water used for cleaning clothes and bathing, and KBR's unwillingness to even provide this has resulted in numerous problems.

This is just one of the contractors in Iraq taking hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer money every year. Why was there no oversight before the Democrats took control of Congress, despite that fact that billions of dollars went missing and multiple reports of contractor abuses were already being brought forward?

Here's a link for Congressman Waxman's page. Keep an eye on it. He's one of the best representatives we have in Congress, and he's doing an excellent job despite the stonewalling of every Bush administration official in Washington.

At first, looking at the most current information by the Republican Party (and from incumbant Republican Senator Norm Coleman himself), it looks like Al Franken is a tax dodger, a hypocritical liberal who has gone out of his way to not pay his taxes. Even CBS picked up the story from the Politico and it suggests that this could possibly be a problem. 

There's only one problem: Al did pay all of his income taxes, he just did it in the wrong state. And here's another thing: why, exactly, would Al Franken pay ALL of his income taxes in New York state and Minnesota if he was trying scam the government? Given that there are 17 other states demanding income taxes from him, and at least half of them have lower income taxes, wouldn't it have been more devious of him to pay taxes in those states instead, since it would be less than paying them in NY and MN?

Right. It's potentially damaging, and it's a shame because he's just now beginning to pull ahead of Norm Coleman. This is the type of thing the Republican Party can distort in any way imaginable without any trouble whatsoever. And it already is. "Paying taxes is an obligation that I think Minnesotans expect to be adhered to, and that Minnesotans do," says Norm Coleman. Sounds like a good thing, but Al Franken paying his taxes isn't the issue. He just paid them to the wrong state, and he probably ended up paying MORE than he should have, given Minnesota's and New York's high state income taxes.

Sure, Sean Penn's a great actor, but when it comes to other issues, he's about as dense as granite (that means "very" if Sean Penn happens to be reading this). He's going around the country as we speak talking about the wonders of biofuels.

Biofuels are nothing to write home about. At the stage they're currently in, they're not very energy efficient and they have a tendency to drive up the costs of other food-based products. Is there potential? Absolutely. In fact, with the right funding, biodiesel can become a true competitive commodity. But not right now. Right now, biodiesel is not a good option.

What Sean Penn should be doing is going around the country and highlighting all of the clean energy technology we already have available that's already efficient enough to be put into use. In addition to a number of cars running on hybrid batteries and offering superior fuel efficiency, there's plenty of options available that can be implemented immediately and will have no effect on the cost of food.

Still, the cost of food is going to rise. When you have an entire farming industry running on gasoline and diesel fuel, and the prices of both have tripled since 2001, everyone is going to suffer. Except the wealthiest one percent, of course. Because they have plenty of tax breaks.

Yours,

Ken Brosky 

To be fair, it's mostly an island of plastic. And if you've heard about it, you're one of the few. Despite the fact that this particular island is twice the size of Texas, very few people even know it exists, unless you live on a shore in the western Pacific Ocean where the garbage has a tendency to wash ashore on. 

How was it created? Natural ocean currents have a tendency to gather the garbage from various parts of the Pacific Ocean and take all of it to one particular place, where it swirls and remains mostly stuck in one place, occasionally drifting to the nearby shores and polluting them with a thick sludge of plastic products. At one place in the "island," plastic can be measured at one million parts per square mile.

How did this happen? Well, all of this plastic started out on land. Through carelessness and/or ignorance, it made its way into the ocean through various channels. And while we may not see the result of throwing away a few plastic bottles here and there--and perhaps could argue that recycling those bottles is hardly economically "worth it"--there's no denying the consequences of what happens when we simply let discarded trash sit. And collect.

And collect.

And now entire ecosystems in the Pacific Ocean are forced to live with this constant threat. What effect will it have, and will it continue to grow? Plastic garbage in the ocean is becoming a greater problem with each passing year.  And this is one problem we can all fix without falling into partisan politics. All it takes is a little responsibility. A little reducing, a little reusing and a little recycling and an educated consumer base. Consider this next time you're planning on tossing away that plastic bottle. Maybe there's a recycling bin nearby.

Yours,

Ken Brosky 

I'm going to write about this once more later in the week, but for now take a look at this link:

How Do We Know Humans Are Causing Global Warming? 

The point of this particular post is mainly a very simple argument and that is this: nothing short of catastrophe will convince the skeptic movement at this point. It's literally impossible. The IPCC, in their eyes, is one big bureaucratic conspiracy, and the scientific "establishment" is flat-out wrong. There will never be enough evidence. Period.

And there's more. For the past three decades, members of the Modern Conservative Movement have gone out of their way to demonize environmentalism and block literally every single attempt to achieve clean energy. The motives changes from person to person, but the ultimate goal of marginalizing the environmental movement is identical in every aspect. After the democrats in Congress voted to mandate all light bulbs to be switched to energy efficient fluorescent bulbs (and will most likely follow suit with LED as it becomes available), the Conservative Movement was up in arms. Even in the Journal Sentinel, Patrick McIlheran argued what right do they have? How could they do this to our freedom? Big Government, blah blah blah

It's not a bad argument, but how long is it credible? The more energy we use, the more we will affect our planet, and when some people decide to use the less efficient light bulbs, that affects the freedom of everyone else. And we're talking about LIGHT BULBS. Light bulbs that can literally reduce our light-based energy consumption by 75 percent. So then the argument is that the bulbs have a little mercury. Okay. Good argument. So why not provide consumers with a simple way to recycle the used bulbs rather than completely abandon the idea? No, that would be too much. This is the EASIEST way to reduce our eco footprint, and there are Movement Conservatives going out of their way to oppose it.

This is nothing new. While in office, President Carter installed solar hot water panels on the White House. When Ronald Reagan took office, he removed them. He literally took them down despite the fact that they were functioning perfectly. This goes beyond criticism of environmentalism. This was a deliberate attack on the movement as a whole, regardless of the progress made up to that point and regardless of the benefits. It was borderline sadistic, and it set the tone for the way the Modern Conservative movement has reacted to any environmental progress.
 

Let's talk about Global Warming Denial within the U.S. Congress, specifically Senator Inhofe. For those of you who don't know Senator Inhofe, he gained a lot of media attention for releasing the "Inhofe 400," a list of 400 scientists who allegedly believed global warming was false. There's only one problem: most of the 400 have been thoroughly debunked. Not only have a majority of the scientists been completely debunked for various reasons, still more are actually coming out and REQUESTING to be taken off the list. Why? Because they believe global warming exists, and that it's caused partly by human beings. They don't want to be on the list!

But I digress. How about those scientists who argue that global warming is a hoax? Let's take a look at one--Chris Allen, a weather director from an ABC affiliate in southern Kentucky--from The Grist:

"My biggest argument against putting the primary blame on humans for climate change is that it completely takes God out of the picture. It must have slipped these people's minds that God created the heavens and the earth and has control over what's going on. (Dear Lord Jesus...did I just open a new pandora's box?) Yeah, I said it. Do you honestly believe God would allow humans to destroy the earth He created? Of course, if you don't believe in God and creationism then I can see why you would easily buy into the whole global warming fanfare. I think in many ways that's what this movement is ultimately out to do - rid the mere mention of God in any context. What these environmentalists are actually saying is "we know more than God - we're bigger than God - God is just a fantasy - science is real...He isn't...listen to US!" I have a huge problem with that."

 Ouch! That's a pretty tough argument for any scientist to debunk.

Kate Sheppard from the American Prospect sums up the "Inhofe 400" in the most concise, realistic way:

"It's not too hard to dredge up 400 people in all the world who think the lunar landing was a farce or believe that Elvis is living in Albuquerque, much like it isn't too hard to dig up 400 people with a vague background in the field of science who find something to dispute in climate science. That doesn't mean their views should be lauded and held up as scientific proof that global warming isn't so bad. There haven't been any peer-reviewed scientific studies validating any claims that the planet is either not warming, or not warming because of humans, and the world's most-respected climatologists are all in agreement."

Given it's Earth Day/Week (depending on who you talk to), I thought I'd pick out a few of the best articles I've found on Climate Progress that might be of interest.

NY Times Magazine -- ... is full of junk. Don't bother reading it, and by the way those little articles about global warming you see occasionally? Try to avoid those, too. What relatively little journalism remains at this point is focused entirely on Obama's "bitter" comments. This is a good article for those who believe everything they read.

Future Cars -- One new car gets up to 300 miles per gallon, and guess what? It's already a hot commodity in California, where it's raked up 1,400+ pre-orders. Also, the article looks at a Nova story with more information about newer cars.

Carbon-Saving Ideas -- I particularly enjoyed this piece, because it shows just how much a few small, bright ideas can add up when it comes to cutting Co2. California has a lot on its plate, attempting to reduce carbon emissions by 30 percent, but it's finding that the easiest way to do it is to rely on a variety of smaller initiatives that aren't costly and easy to implement. Good to think about, given Wisconsin will probably have something like this soon (only it'll be 10 percent, most likely). 

Well, here we go! It's time for the weekend homework, and this week I'm going to provide you with a number of links to Web sites that you can use again and again. I'll try and do this again in the future, but for now, this will give you a great head start. Bookmark these.

Climate Progress -- Run by a scientist who's actually conducted empirical research on global climate change, this is a great resource. He's funny, intelligent and has no problem calling out Democrats or Republicans who are unwilling to accept scientific facts. Global warming is real, it's important, and we have technology available right now to begin combating the problem.

David Sirota -- One of my favorite columnists and author of Hostile Takeover. Sirota takes Republicans and conservative Democrats to task, focusing mainly on corruption related to lobbying issues and how bribery can affect a politician's decisions. In addition, he makes a point of showing the positive side of government and how grassroots organizations are making a real difference. Well worth subscribing to.

Paul Krugman -- A liberal economist, one of the best on this planet. Krugman's analyses on everything from the dangers of unregulated forces to universal health care to classic economics is always well researched and intelligent.

Enjoy these. The most recent posts are excellent.