Skip to main content


(Nikola Smolenski)

Climate change may be the greatest threat human civilization has ever faced. We don't know for sure, but there's a good chance that if we allow this process to go unchecked, or accelerate the change through expanded use of fossil fuels, warming may actually topple 11,000 years of progress. At the very least, it looks to cost untold lives and unimaginable fortunes as desertification overtakes farmland, oceans invade both land and freshwater environments, storms ramp up to previously unwitnessed ferocity, and millions (if not billions) of people are forced to pick up and move. It's a problem of daunting, almost unimaginable scale.

And yet, when the media condenses Rick Perry's statements this week to "Perry comes out against climate change," they're missing not just the story, but the danger in what he said.

Here's Perry response to a question about climate change.

"I think there are a substantial number of scientists who have manipulated data so that they will have dollars rolling into their projects. And I think we are seeing almost weekly, or even daily, scientists are coming forward and questioning the original idea that man-made global warming is what is causing the climate to change. I don’t think, from my perspective, that I want America to be engaged in spending that much money on still a scientific theory that has not been proven, and from my perspective, is more and more being put into question."
In this statement, Perry has done a couple of things that are extraordinary. One, he's admitted that climate change is real. Don't see it? It's right there, where he says "questioning the original idea that man-made global warming is what is causing the climate to change." Even Perry, with his unending series of rain prayers, can no longer deny what has become blindingly, sweatily, exhaustingly obvious—the world is getting warmer. The battle over whether the climate is changing is done, over, finito. Even for staunch conservatives, the fight will no longer be over if the climate is changing. From here on out it's why.

Perry doesn't bother to provide a why, but then dismissing man-made climate change is only the second strangest thing Rick Perry managed to say in a single paragraph. When Perry says that "a substantial number of scientists have manipulated data so that they will have dollars rolling into their projects," that's just a staggering claim. It's an attempt to write the charges leveled during the laughable "climate gate," into the history books, despite the fact that all of those accusations have been proven over, and over, and over to be insubstantial. Even those politicians who voiced similar statements during the heat of the moment when the accusations were first leveled have some excuse. They jumped the gun. They failed to wait until the charges could be checked out. They were ignorant.

That's not true for Perry. The charges have long been tested and found wanting. The scientists involved have been universally vindicated.

Perry doesn't let that slow him. He levels a blanket charge, one that includes not one name or a single example of wrongdoing. He follows this up with an equally odd statement, that there's been a steady stream of scientists newly-awakened to the idea that man-made climate change is not happening.

Attention television pundits, talk show hosts, newspaper columnists, and magazine interviewers this is the issue, not whether or not Perry believes in climate change. Who are these scientists that Perry says have accepted bribes to alter their data? Can he produce one? Can he name a single instance? Who are the scientists stepping up to question the idea of anthropocentric climate change? If they're coming "daily," Perry should have no problem producing a dozen. Or how about five? Hell, make it three. Where are they?

The charges that Perry has leveled are very, very serious. Everyone made a big deal about his hints that Ben Bernanke had committed treason. Well, his accusations against climate scientists should be at least as shocking. Why is no one asking him to support these charges?

It's not as if you're unaware of what politicians are saying. Let Sarah Palin stumble over the story of Paul Revere, or Michele Bachmann mistake Elvis' birthday, and it's news. But Rick Perry can say that American scientists are taking bribes to create data about climate change, and it's barely noticed. Why is that?

Surely this is weird enough to warrant attention. Who does he think is paying these guys? Who keeps those dollars "rolling in"? Is the UN trying to convince Americans to conserve oil because they want to horde all the fuel for their invading fleet of black helicopters? It's one thing for conspiracies to brew on AM radio, or to slosh around in your elderly aunt's crazy emails. It's another thing to have a candidate for president of the United States painting scientists as members of an evil cabal funded by unknown sources.

That anyone would think that there's some conspiracy to hold up evolution or climate change shows a profound ignorance of not just science, but academia. If anyone was to come up with one shred of solid evidence supporting an alternative explanation to natural selection, or clear evidence that climate change wasn’t man-made, that person wouldn't be run out of town. He or she would be the most famous scientist in a century. They'd have a choice of colleges, research grants, book deals. No one gets famous—heck, no one even secures tenure—by writing a paper titled “Yup, the last guy who looked at this was exactly right.” Science craves controversy, lives on it. Is it a perfect system? Nope, and there are many opportunities for reform (some of which the go-faster world of the Internet has already forced on the slow-down world of scientific journals), but Perry’s idea of how science works is itself a dangerous fantasy.

Forget climate change. Perry’s statements go beyond his views on climate change or evolution. He's attacking science itself, disputing the whole idea that we can actually know anything. For Perry, everything is just a "theory that's out there," with no evidence worth considering but what his gut tells him. Science, the whole experiment of the last two hundred years, is not just suspect, it's already convicted.

Sure, it’s not the first time, and Perry is not the first to level these kind of bullshit charges. But so long as no one calls him on it, it will continue to be open season on science and scientists, and that, folks, is about the biggest threat I can imagine to this nation and all the rest.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Suppose @TarSandsAction (48+ / 0-)

    At this very moment, Americans are behind bars because they are acting to disrupt a plan that could immensly increase climate change. They are acting for you and for your future.

    Please read and support these bloggers and other activists as they put themselves on the line to fight against expanded use of oil from tar sands.  

    And if it is at all possible, please join them.

  •  As Weather Underground says... (18+ / 0-)

    "Many daily record highs and record high minimums have been observed since late May."

    August is not done, and Texas as a state has been racking up 80-degree LOWS on the way to a potential top ten year ranking.

    •  And record drought (13+ / 0-)

      Pollution and drought are combining to both depopulate much of rural Texas and reduce arable acreage.

      I remember this article I read late last year:

      Orchard owner Leonard Baca had been watching his pecan trees slowly die for 12 years when he went into a washroom, put a gun in this mouth and killed himself.

      The frustrated 73-year-old had spent thousands of dollars on technology and improvements to try to resolve the problem at his Central Texas ranch without ever learning what was killing the trees that had supported three generations of his family. Now, 18 years after his death, Baca's son-in-law, Harvey Hayek, believes he's solved the mystery: Sulfur dioxide pollution from a nearby coal-fired power plant has slowly killed two-thirds of his family's 250-acre pecan orchard.

      On Monday, Hayek and other pecan growers held a news conference in Austin to demand compensation from the Lower Colorado River Authority, which operates the plant, and the city. They also want research done on what and how much pollution is being emitted now and how much will be discharged after the plant installs equipment aimed at reducing emissions of sulfur dioxide, a component of acid rain.

      And they accuse us of wanting to "pick winners and losers."

      The so-called "rising tide" is lifting only yachts.

      by Egalitare on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:52:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The more we learn about Perry... (12+ / 0-)

    ...the scarier he gets and the stupider Texans look like.  It was bad enough with W.

    Dailykos.com; an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action -1.75 -7.23

    by Shockwave on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:13:25 AM PDT

    •  I have to retract and apologyze (14+ / 0-)

      Only a majority of Texans.  I have friends there who are not stupid.

      Dailykos.com; an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action -1.75 -7.23

      by Shockwave on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:15:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The blind Texas bashing is getting old. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Bailey2001, Shockwave

      I understand and appreciate that you (sort of) apologized, but c'mon. There are plenty of us Texas liberals who have been fighting for years to reclaim our sanity in the political realm in our wonderful state. To tar and feather literally millions of Texas libs is a disservice at best.

      Best-selling true crime author Corey Mitchell. Buy my books!

      by liquidman on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 11:45:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  My guess is, anyone who feels more offended (0+ / 0-)

        by what is said about Texas and (by implication) Texans, while  proclaiming their liberal credentials,  who is more angry at what "others" have said than what "Texas" has done --  has some serious priority sorting to do.

        The idea that one can bask in the collective warmth of "belonging" to their community, while striking the pose of "having one's heart in the right place" by deploring "some of the things" that community has done,  is a good deal more popular than it is reasonable.

        •  Personally, I had a similar problem with Israel (0+ / 0-)

          I was born a Jew and raised a Zionist ... so in my early 30s I "made Aliyah . I pulled up stakes, lock stock and barrel and went to "be part of something greater than myself."

          I arrived JUST as Israel was transitioning from it's secular a Labor Liberal traditions  to the religiously allied Likuud Coalition they enjoy today.  (Not the change of voice from "us" to "they.")  Now, it would be mere chest thumping to say that the reason I LEFT Israel was "abuse of the Palestinian People ... because frankly, I didn't see much of it myself, and neither Haaretz nor the Jerusalem Post was reporting quite that slant on the issue.

          It was the "social situation" between men and women ... which owed more to Russia and Iran than to Sweden and America was of far more importance to me at the time thn the Plight of the Palestinians ... or, indeed the trends of corporatizaton and religiousity that were taking hold at the time.

          Realizing that I couldn't really make a whole and comfortable life in Israel for reasons most of my Israeli friends and acquaintances could barely understand, let alone sympathize with ... I came back here  to watch the Rise of Reagan, which however bad I thought it was, was not bad enough to make me think I had made a serious mistake by returning here.

          Now ... every time Rabbi Lerner and the Tikuun crowd put on the sackcloth and ashes ... when the European Left and the various Palestinian fronts express their opinions concerning Israel's faults and crimes -- I need to take a deep breath and sort out whether what is being attacked is  "Jews in General" (which it sometimes is) "Israel as an Idea (which it frequently is), "Outrages Committed by Isreal  (which is sometimes is) and what is "about ME" ... which it NEVER is -- though no one could have told me that,  two years before or after my experiences in Israel.

          Now, thirty-odd years later, as I consider retirement, one thing I understand PROFOUNDLY ...  just as I will not go back to Israel (where a small fortune goes a long way) ... I will not  relocate to any Formerly Confederate State, however warm its climate or cheap its real estate .

  •  Seems to me that Perry is deeply engaged in a (15+ / 0-)

    theory that has not been proven, ... that simply praying will fix everything.

    "There's nothing in the dark that's not there when the lights are on" ~ Rod Serling

    by jwinIL14 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:17:39 AM PDT

    •  And of course them reality-based scientists (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jwinIL14

      are criminals and bribe-takers.

      Bribery makes the world go around. That and righties getting sociopaths elected to high office.

      Examples from the Bullingdon Club, an apparent gateway to top positions in England:

      -- David Cameron breaking windows at a restaurant

      -- Nick Clegg committing arson by burning down two major cactus collections in Germany

      -- Gerald Kaufman, ministerial maven under Labour, looted  £9,000 for a a 40-inch teevee (scammed despite a £750 limit in the legal allowance)

      -- Boris Johnson getting caught for the window breaking spree with Cameron

      Lara pawson catches the theme HERE.

      Top dogs walk. It's the George Anderson Era all over.

      Angry White Males + Crooks + Personality Disorder psychos + KKKwannabes + "Unborn Child" church folk =EQ= The Republicans

      by vets74 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 08:26:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Lara Pawson -- first posting (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        oldcrow, jwinIL14, Zack from the SFV

        Pambazuka News - Features

        Riots, royal weddings and recession

        Lara Pawson
        2011-08-18, Issue 545

        Starting out:

        Riots, royal weddings and recession. We have been here before. In 1981, when unemployment was at its highest level in nearly half a century and state racism was rife, a riot erupted in Brixton, south London, sparked by the death of a black teenager in police custody. The disturbances spread across the country, mostly in areas of economic deprivation and high racial tension. In the midst of all this, Lady Diana Spencer married Charles, Prince of Wales; 30 years later, undeterred by his parents' messy divorce, their son, William, has married Kate Middleton. Did the Royals hope to distract us from the spectre of job losses and increasingly privatised lives lived in debt? We shall never know.

        On Thursday 4 August, I was delivering a gift to a friend in Tottenham, north London. The area has one of the most ethnically diverse communities in the country and, at 8.4 per cent, the highest unemployment in the capital. It was dusk by the time I boarded the bus home to nearby Walthamstow. Barely had the journey begun when the driver announced an emergency diversion. As we swung off the usual route, we saw stacks of police cars, flashing blue lights and police tape demarcating a no-go area. Unbeknown to us, beyond the tape lay the body of 29-year-old Mark Duggan. The father of four, a black man, had been shot dead by police.

        Forty-eight hours later, relatives and friends of the dead man marched to Tottenham police station, demanding to know why he had been killed. After several hours, they were none the wiser. Frustration at this display of contempt for Duggan's life tipped some of the protesters into rage. Before long, sections of Tottenham High Road were in flames. The following night, I lay in bed listening to sirens and helicopters as police attempted to quash a smaller riot and looting spree on Walthamstow High Street. Other neighbourhoods followed suit, not only in London, but across the country. In total, five people have died and 2,511 have been arrested during 160 incidents of rioting and looting. ...

        Brilliant.

        A younger girlie-writer version of Meteor Blades, sorta. This Lara's been around for a while:

        The Next Fix
        Lara Pawson

        -- Poisoned Wells: The Dirty Politics of African Oil by Nicholas Shaxson
        Palgrave, 280 pp, £15.99, May 2007, ISBN 978 1 4039 7194 4
        -- BuyOil Wars edited by Mary Kaldor, Terry Lynn Karl and Yahia Said
        Pluto, 294 pp, £17.99, March 2008, ISBN 978 0 7453 2478 4
        -- Untapped: The Scramble for Africa’s Oil by John Ghazvinian
        Harcourt Brace, 320 pp, $25.00, April 2007, ISBN 978 0 15 101138 4

        African oil is sweeter and lighter than Middle Eastern crudes and in recent years it has begun to look increasingly desirable. For political reasons, it became especially attractive after 9/11, and today the US imports more oil from Africa than from the entire Persian Gulf. But there is competition...

        London Review of Books

        Angry White Males + Crooks + Personality Disorder psychos + KKKwannabes + "Unborn Child" church folk =EQ= The Republicans

        by vets74 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 08:48:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  So the theme (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Diebold Hacker

    is be afraid of batshit crazy Bachmann, Perry, Mittens, etc etc, but don't even think of not voting for a man that is embracing and pursuing both con and neoliberal economic and social policies? Um.....ok....wow.

    •  who (5+ / 0-)

      would you vote for then?

      can you name one of these so called social policies?

    •  If my choice is crazy or centrist, (8+ / 0-)

      I think the answer is obvious. I may not like that these are my choices, and we should all be working to change the electoral system so we have better choices in the future, but for now, I'm going to choose the guy who doesn't think the Apocalypse is a GOOD idea.

      "We live now in hard times, not end times." Jon Stewart

      by tb92 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 07:45:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yes, be very afraid, hold your nose, send your (0+ / 0-)

      dollar. It's swell, isn't it?

      How far to the right do the Dems have to move before you stop calling them Dems?

      by Diebold Hacker on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 12:19:17 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  What you avoid is obvious (0+ / 0-)
      don't even think of not voting for a man that is embracing and pursuing both con and neoliberal economic and social policies?

      Pouting lefties such as Firebagger and Diebold Hacker usually avoid the fact that if Obama is not reelected, that even with a four year presidential term for a Republican we will end up with, at "best," a 6-3 Supreme Court.

      That will enshrine Citizens United for 20 years at least, and do you at all even begin to believe that by then, with the corporate interests of the energy industry in an untouchable position, that the world, or at least the US, by then will anything worth living for.

      I sure do not agree with some of what Obama has pursued, policy-wise, and his endless quest for the Holy Grail of bipartisanship, but no matter his decisions, he is a hell of a lot better for the country and your own future interests than anyone who will get the Republican nomination next year.

      Get over it! Or go to your rooms...

      "We will find fulfillment not in the goods that we have, but in the good we can do for each other." ~ RFK

      by paz3 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 01:01:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Every run into "Good Cop/Bad Cop" with real Cops ? (0+ / 0-)

        Listening to White House apologists feels almost like that.

        Unless you've got the price of a Dream Team defense, it probably IS better to sign whatever  the nice detectives and the public defender put in front of you -- whether or not you actually did the crime.  That doesn't make it remotely good, or fair or just ... it's just what IS.

        But y'know when White House apoligists cross the line from "this is the reality" to the authoritarian and condescenting "eat your peas" as in

        Get over it! Or go to your rooms...

        the difference between a police station and a blog becomes blissfully apparent -- and one is tempted to write things one would never say to Bad Cop in his/her Own House.

        That said:  I figure the ONLY hope we've got at the moment is that some of our discontent may percolate up to Those In Charge of the Democratic Party's future ... and MAYBE have some influence.

        Otherwise:   (Godwin Violation Warning:
        .
        .
        .
        It's a choice between 'being' Occupied France and 'being' Etat Francais (Vichy France -- )

        Or  ... if we have to infantalize, rather than dramatize ourselves:

        If Daddy beats or buggers me
        And Mommy can't or won't stop him
        Who is the worse parent ?

  •  that's about the size of it (10+ / 0-)
    But so long as no one calls him on it, it will continue to be open season on science and scientists....

    yeah, someone oughta do that.

    waiting for big media to handle it is hopeless. we really are way down a bad path.

    so bizarre that this man is from TX, which right now is getting a nice first taste of what climate change is all about. but he still must maintain the lie.

    Here I am! I'm up here! Where are you? - the Red-eyed Vireo

    by mightymouse on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:24:18 AM PDT

  •  Some people do not care about facts. (17+ / 0-)

    He is one of them. The danger is not really that he doesn't care. The danger is in the sloppy thinking we are all allowed. There is no value put on accuracy or clarity, on logic. We are all allowed now, to just make things up.

    After all, who will call me on it if I start some crazy story?

    The last couple of days on Facebook my husband was involved in a discussion with a family member (Joe) who does not care about facts. The discussion, as many, was getting somewhat tense, my husband asking Joe to prove his point with facts. (Joe never does, of course.) Finally husband suggested they drop it, as it probably bothers others in the family when they get involved like that. Another family member chimed in and said she wished she could be involved, but she doesn't know much about the topic (economics) so she found the discussions interested and felt like she learned some things.

    My first impression was to tell her in NO UNCERTAIN TERMS that Joe does NOT KNOW anything about economics, either, and if she wants to know more, I can help her with that (based on my degrees and background in finance and economics.)

    Again, though, we could all just start makin' it up. Who would know? Who would care?

    "The Greek word for idiot, literally translated, means one who does not participate in politics. That sums up my conviction on the subject." Sen. Gladys Pyle (1890-1989)

    by Melanie in IA on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:26:35 AM PDT

    •  Convincing enough people that... (6+ / 0-)

      ... certain facts are simply unproven opinion and certain opinions are unimpeachable facts makes the holder of the loudest megaphone projecting 30 second (or shorter) soundbites more likely to win the argument.

      And the Carbon Merchants have proven time and again that they can purchase very loud megaphones.

      The so-called "rising tide" is lifting only yachts.

      by Egalitare on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:57:20 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Perry has the classic "D" student's animosity to (10+ / 0-)

    anyone with more than half a brain. Then again, Texans have shown again and again they love worthless punks.

    •  Actually, I'd call his relationship to those (6+ / 0-)

      smarter than he, more akin to the wealthy businessman who finds smart people "quaint" and "purchasable", given what Big Tobacco, Major Utilities and other corporate interests have managed to do with their "own" scientists.

      Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

      by a gilas girl on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:46:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  if the "D" is for "Domimionist" then you are (0+ / 0-)

      absolutely right.  

      Bumper sticker seen on I-95; "Stop Socialism" my response: "Don't like socialism? GET OFF the Interstate highway!"

      by Clytemnestra on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 09:30:31 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Aaaahhhh, the Texas bashing around here... (0+ / 0-)

      ...is getting old! Yes, Perry is from Texas. Bush was a northeastern transplant that most Texans do NOT claim as their own. I would not, however, consider LBJ, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, J. Frank Dobie, John Connally, Lloyd Bentsen, Dolph Briscoe, William Hobby, Sam Rayburn, Bob Bullock, Chris Bell, Lloyd Doggett, Phil Hardberger, Bill White, Price Daniel, Sheila Jackson Lee, Leticia R. Van de Putte, Molly Ivins, Jim Hightower, or Paul Begala "worthless punks."

      To learn more about Texas liberals, current and past, please visit here.

      Best-selling true crime author Corey Mitchell. Buy my books!

      by liquidman on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 12:06:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Here We Go Again.... (9+ / 0-)

    ONE thing I know I can count on-- if MSM somehow lacks coverage of the latest gaseous bilge emanating from Perry, Bachmann, Romney, etc., on any given day, all I have to do is come here.

    One more time: The problem is not that our political ranks are filled more and more with corporate ass-kissing, anti-science buffoons.

    The problem is there are millions of Americans who eagerly embrace and support these buffoons, thus proving their own ignorance.

    Ignorant nations/empires don't survive long; I think history is fairly full of examples.

    "I don't feel the change yet". Velma Hart

    by Superpole on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:29:45 AM PDT

    •  In The Garden of Beasts (6+ / 0-)

      I'm reading a book now by Erik Larson called In The Garden of Beasts which is about the US Ambassador to German during the rise of Hitler.

      The thing that strikes me is how willing and eager the German people were to receive extremism.  We think about how evil Hitler was, but he could not have existed without a constituancy of believers.  

      Reading the book and watching the Tea Party scares me.

      •  You should be afraid. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        oldcrow

        Modern Republicans are nothing but hard core fascists. They are sociopathic ideologues, willing to shoot children if they think it will advance their agenda.

        If you are not willing to die for your freedom, your freedom will die.

        by Levi the Oracle on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 08:19:43 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Which children? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MinnesotaMom

          Just kidding. Sure, these people scare me too. But even more than I am scared, I am pissed off that the only other party we are allowed to vote for IGNORES all of this, and panders to the crazies.

          The problem is not the asshole crazy fucks on the right. They have always been there. The problem is the utter lack of will on our side to call them on it. Dem leadership absolutely sucks at this, and I'm through giving them cover.

          Call the crazies "crazy". Call the corrupt "corrupt". DO SOMETHING productive, and I'll gladly vote D again. Until then, no.

          How far to the right do the Dems have to move before you stop calling them Dems?

          by Diebold Hacker on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 12:26:39 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Again, It's All About the Goods (0+ / 0-)

        Corrupt Soviet statism ultimately failed, not because they were "Godless commies" but because they couldn't deliver material goods to the Russian people. Four hours in line for a loaf of bread? Please...

        Food banks, food stamps and unemployment benefits are the only thing preventing us reaching a tipping point.
        cut much of those lifeline bennies-- as I'm sure Catfood Commission II will consider-- and watch what happens.

        "I don't feel the change yet". Velma Hart

        by Superpole on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:26:54 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  He has little faith in 'the marketplace', no? (4+ / 0-)

    If he believes it fails in the world of ideas, how can he contend it has value or deserves regard in the world of economics?

    There is, incidentally, a wealth of literature proposing models of how markets in goods and services sometimes fail - literature that proceeds from the entrepenurial spirit in academia. Doesn't Perry owe us a model of how the marketplace of ideas fails to be efficient?

    Am I right, or am I right? - The Singing Detective

    by Clem Yeobright on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:30:32 AM PDT

  •  Perry Foreign Policy....Shoot First..Ask Questions (3+ / 0-)

    Later....(just a hunch)

  •  In essence Perry is acusing most scientists of ... (23+ / 0-)

    being corrupt.  Wonderful.  As a scientist myself (admittedly not a climate scientist) I find this to be highly insulting.  There are certainly corrupt scientists  (as there are corrupt people in other professions), but the main goal of science is to follow the data, not the money. We could certainly get more money for our projects by cuddling up to the polluters and influence peddlers.  I think that he is projecting his own greedy tendencies on a whole group of people with whom I doubt he has had much experience.  However distrust goes two ways and for myself I would not trust Perry to clean a chicken coop. If he is elected I may rethink moving to Central America!  The man is a disaster waiting to happen and if he is elected president it is my opinion that buyer's remorse will set in from the day he is inaugurated.

  •  the repugs love revisionist history. (5+ / 0-)

    I think it is a major at GOP U.

    Sent via African Swallow carrying a coconut

    by ipaman on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:35:22 AM PDT

  •  Texas economy (7+ / 0-)

    lives or dies on fossil fuels. It is no wonder that Perry questions manmade climate change. His entire political career depends on that industry. Of course he is going to create doubts. The interesting thing to me is that while Perry has the clear profit motive he turns it around by claiming that climate scientists are the ones shilling for dollars.

    •  this is reason enough not to (6+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      neighborm, Palafox, Matt Z, Mark Sumner, oldcrow, Rp

      elect a Texas Governor to POTUS, imo, even if the individual holding office had won a bloody nobel prize.  

      There's an inherent conflict of interest between the leadership of a state like Texas and the good of the nation.
      Within existing contexts "what's good for Texas" is definitely NOT good for the whole of us.    

      Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

      by a gilas girl on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:52:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  He will move to the middle on climate change (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    loblolly, Matt Z

    after he gets the nomination.

    He might say that the climate is changing and whether its being caused by humans or not we need to address it.  Then he'll say BUT.........

    Now that I've said that it looks so ridiculous.

    It's the fascism, stupid!

    by lastman on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:36:18 AM PDT

  •  The WaPo, always on the wrong side of the (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Phil S 33, wishingwell, Coilette, Matt Z

    controversy, has a "5 Myths About Perry" feature in the Outlook section this morning.  It states that Perry is not stupid.

    Yes, he IS.

    And why do I fear that he may be the Rethug nominee and not Bachmann?  Because I know Bachmann could be defeated.  Perry might appeal to the stoopid just enough to be able to win--or steal the election.

    "Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

    by Diana in NoVa on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:38:50 AM PDT

  •  Perry's idea of how science works... (7+ / 0-)

    completely mirrors the way corporate purchased pseudo-science PR and "PR ops" work.

    Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

    by a gilas girl on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:39:12 AM PDT

  •  I hate to be elitist, but he sounds like any (8+ / 0-)

    lazy two-bit C student trying by bluster his way through an argument. How he ended up even being governor of Texas is beyond me - and it appears that he is destroying that state.

    He's just demonstrating that if you are not willing to actually learn the facts about anything, then it appears that both sides have equally valid points, or maybe your side is more valid, because your gut tells you so. This is the opposite of science.  The power of science is its ability to discern truths in nature that often go against what naively appears to be the case.

    He is a dangerous utter fool.  If a good Republican from the 1960s, or even the 1980s, could be instantly transported to today and surveyed what was going on with their party, they would be shocked.

    "The only thing we have to fear - is fear itself." - Franklin Delano Roosevelt

    by orrg1 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:39:51 AM PDT

    •  But this is the modern GOP. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Palafox

      Facts? We make our own facts. We make our own reality, remember?

      Have problems with science? Don't like environmental monitoring? Just defund the monitoring, if no one documents it, no one knows it.

      And don't get me started about evolution.

      Recall - DONE! VOTE against the fakes - DONE! VOTE TO TAKE WISCONSIN BACK!!! Rescind. Rebuild.

      by stcroix cheesehead on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 07:15:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I find Perry's statements about evolution (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mircead

    and Bernanke to be much worse than what he said about global warming (AGW).  Over the years many Americans (myself included), who used to believe in it,  have become sceptical of the assertions about global warming and the polls reflect that. Specifically that GW is happening, if it is happening it is caused by man-made activity (as opposed to say sun spot activity), that (again) if it is happening, we can do something meaningful to prevent it. Discussions on the issue have become overly simplistic, IMO.

    •  At best, you are glossing over the points of this (8+ / 0-)

      post.

      The main points of this post are that it is outrageous for Perry to be claiming that scientists are falsifying data to get funding (which you implicitly appear to agree with, since most climate scientists do in fact believe climate change at the present time has a strong anthropogenic component), and to claim that scientists are daily coming forward to question this, when in fact this is not happening whatsoever.

      Nowhere does Perry say that this is in fact happening, but we are helpless to do anything about it. That is Romney's claim, and is just as false.

      It would be the first time in human experience that human caused problems had no human based solutions.

      And I'm sure polls taken during Galileo's time would have "confirmed" that the sun passes across a stationary flat earth.

      "The only thing we have to fear - is fear itself." - Franklin Delano Roosevelt

      by orrg1 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:55:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Discussions are not simplistic. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jds1978, Clem Yeobright, Matt Z

      The models currently being used are very sophisticated and very frightening in their predictions.

      What is simplistic is the treatment by the right.

      Recall - DONE! VOTE against the fakes - DONE! VOTE TO TAKE WISCONSIN BACK!!! Rescind. Rebuild.

      by stcroix cheesehead on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 07:17:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The scientists still have no doubt. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      oldcrow, Van Buren

      So, do you agree with Perry that they are lying, or do you think they're all just incompetent?

      "We live now in hard times, not end times." Jon Stewart

      by tb92 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 08:04:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't think they're lying or (0+ / 0-)

        incompetent.  The majority believe in AGW theory, a minority of scientists are skeptics.

        •  The majority of the skeptical minority (0+ / 0-)

          have financial reasons for their "belief". There are so few who are honest and skeptical that I feel comfortable ignoring them for now. If I'm wrong, and GW is not happening, or humans are not causing it, the worse we will have done is cleaned up the environment and made our machines more efficient. There's nothing to lose in behaving as if it's real.

          "We live now in hard times, not end times." Jon Stewart

          by tb92 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 02:18:22 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  But climate predictions have been correct (0+ / 0-)

      So where do you get your growing skepticism?

      Sun spots? We have been through multiple solar cycles with a relentless increase in the average global temperature. The solar radiance has been measured for decades and is not changing significantly.

      You have succumbed not to new facts but the unceasing barrage of misleading and disparaging pr from the extraction industries.

      Who did you listen to:

      1. Nonscienctist, not really a lord, Moncton who drew his own curve through the end points of the 100 year predictions,  removed the original curves and then  reported what remained didn't match the short term data?

      2. Spencer, a religion-driven but supposed real scientist who can't seem to get the math correct in his publications or take it upon himself to fix the errors.

      3. The climate-gate stuff which dissolved into nothing but gee those guys wrote some pissy private emails.

      ------------------------------

      We know we are making a huge change in the balance of incoming and reflected energy of the earth by doubling the CO2 concentration.  We know that all of the other drivers of climate changes (volcanoes, continental and ocean current shifts, solar and orbital variations) are not changing on human timescales.  We know that when the the physics of fluid, radiative and heat flow and the topography of the earth are combined in these big models they predict temperature changes like we are seeing.  We know that ever bigger computers incorporating ever more mode detail has not changed the results. We know that the earth's temperature is increasing.

      If the climate change deniers were real scientists, they would have created real climate models consistent with physical laws to show why the effects of doubling the amount of CO2 should have a small effect. But they are not real scientists, they pretend that "gee it's complicated" means there is no effect -which is total crap.

    •  What if you are wrong? (0+ / 0-)

      I will ask you the same question I would ask Perry to answer in a debate or press conference setting, based on the Precautionary Principle: What if you are wrong?

      In this case, what if the climate science community that's concerned about man-made climate change and have outlined some of the potentially devastating effects facing my (and yours if you have any) grandchildren and great grand children are correct?

      What delusion or internal fear or pressure ever could have changed your mind? Were you just overwhelmed by the fact that you might have to give up some goodies or 'lifestyle' preferences? Or what? I would really like to know as I'm trying to develop a narrative about climate change denial.

      It's near unbelievable how hard some have looked for excuses to avoid this very uncomfortable future, particularly if little is done until some of the effects become irreversible in the short (200-300 years) term.

      "We will find fulfillment not in the goods that we have, but in the good we can do for each other." ~ RFK

      by paz3 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 01:28:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  What a monster of a quote. He is throwing wide (9+ / 0-)

    the gates of hellish calamity on Earth for the sake of fossil fuel companies.  He is not even advocating on behalf of our future energy needs, which would be a responsible thing to do, but the right to destroy the world in pursuit of profit.
        And this makes me weary:

    I don’t think, from my perspective, that I want America to be engaged in spending that much money on still a scientific theory that has not been proven

       There he is, up to his grimy neck in a river of oil money and ALEC policy, daring scientists to ignore the tenets and ethics of their profession and call a valid theory a fact.
       Great diary, thank you.
  •  Perry said Evolution is just a theory (6+ / 0-)

    and said everything starts with God.  He said God created everything.  

    So he think every scientific fact is a theory.

    He is a true flat earther.

    And sadly , the media does not seem to care and chances are they will not ask him to explain.  

    They will allow him to run amok criticizing scientists or worse yet, calling scientists criminals and frauds.

    •  Then clear it is time to change the media (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      murrayewv, Matt Z, wishingwell

      This blog goes right to the heart of what is at stake here.  It is not the credibility of scientists or whether Perry believes that what he is saying is true.  Rather it is the consequences of what will happen to billions if the warnings of scientists with respect to the earths atmosphere are ignored.  Even those in the media have children, who they might hope to survive to pass on genes to future generations, a future that is likely not to occur if the findings of science are ignored.

      If the media won't cover it, then we must as regardless of what your perspective is, the consequences of not dealing with the accumulation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will end civilization as we know it.  For many that is a reality that is happening now, not at some distant point in the future.

    •  Gravity is just a theory, too. (0+ / 0-)

      How far to the right do the Dems have to move before you stop calling them Dems?

      by Diebold Hacker on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 12:30:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  It did and does (a little OT) (0+ / 0-)
      everything starts with God.  [Perry] said God created everything

      I believe that God did create everything, including man's understanding of science. How God did this is a matter for reflection. But, God also gave mankind free will, as well as the rest of the Universe, and therein lies a Holy Mystery that is known sometimes as love.

      I do not really believe that Perry understands the God of the Bible, because early on in the metaphorical story of the creation of the world it's noted that God beheld his Creation and saw that it was very good. What gives any human the notion that it's there for wanton exploitation, or the idea that the quality of life on this, our island home, is not worth defending with every fiber of our beings if we want to please God?

      "We will find fulfillment not in the goods that we have, but in the good we can do for each other." ~ RFK

      by paz3 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 01:46:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Perry's anti -science beliefs (9+ / 0-)

    We need only look at his choices for chair of the State Board of Education, Don McLeroy, who believes the earth is 6,000 years old, and Gail Lowe, who is just as reactionary as McLeroy, but lower key to see that Perry doesn't hold much with science.

    Perry's solution to our exceptional drought is to pray for rain. Perry himself  said a few days ago that  evolution is a theory "that is out there", and that Texas schools teach both creationism and evolution, which is untrue, and unconstitutional besides.

    A  Perry presidency would be a disaster for science. These attacks on science should not be allowed to stand. It is time for reporters to dig into Perry's outrageous charges and expose them for what they are.

    Good thing we've still got politics in Texas -- finest form of free entertainment ever invented.- Molly Ivins

    by loblolly on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:41:44 AM PDT

    •  His Presidency would be a disaster in all respects (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Melanie in IA, Palafox

      He basically feels free to dismiss evidence, not only in the scientific area, but when it comes to economics or anything else, because he doesn't even try to understand it. He's either too lazy, or just plain incapable. In this way, he is Bush redux - and such a person could only bring further disaster to our country and the world.

      "The only thing we have to fear - is fear itself." - Franklin Delano Roosevelt

      by orrg1 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 07:05:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        oldcrow

        He dismisses these things because he has so far found that he can get what he wants by ignoring these issues.  If you want to have a future for your family or your children's family, you had better do all that you can to show him that these things can't be ignored and that he won't get away with ignoring them.  Until there is counter-selection, the GOP approach will prevail.  Those who want to survive must start creating some, as the only thing Perry and his ilk prove is that they want to remain comfortable and, if necessary, the only survivors in life-boat earth if that is what it takes to remain so.

    •  It's nit picking (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Calamity Jean, MinnesotaMom

      A few days ago, Haley Barber was a guest of Andrea Mitchell.  He dismissed the criticism of Rick Perry as liberal media nit picking.  And, to her discredit, Andrea Mitchell did nothing to push back by saying that what Perry said about Bernanke was outrageous.  And, when she queried Barber about Perry's secession statements, he said that Perry was only joking.  And, she let that statement stand without rebuttal.  Perry's statements about climate change merely mimic everything I hear from my Republican pals.  There is one script out there and they all have it memorized. If reporters cannot rebut these assertions, then television producers must refuse to interview people who constantly lie about the facts.  I won't hold my breath.

  •  minor typofix (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean
    Is the UN trying to convince Americans to conserve oil because they want to horde all the fuel for their invading fleet of black helicopters?
    It looks like you want to say hoard here.
    Although I like the image (and alliteration) of a horde of helicopters.
  •  Those damn fat cat climatologists! (14+ / 0-)

    Sitting in their wooden shacks in the arctic circle, eating MRE's and slicing ice core samples for 10 hours a day, who do they think they are with their luxury lifestyle? Clearly, if the big bucks is what you're after, climatology is the place to go.

  •  I'm glad you brought it (6+ / 0-)

    up the point about findings. I've always been particularly bemused by the charge that climate scientists are fudging data to match existing findings so they can get more grant money. If anyone was fudging data in my field, it would be for the exact opposite reason.

    My best guess is that it's their only response to a very basic but compelling realization: opponents of climate change have every material incentive to deny the science if it were true. Meanwhile, climate scientists have absolutely no incentive to invent the findings if they were false.

    With every goddess a let down, every idol a bring down, it gets you down / but the search for perfection, your own predilection, goes on and on and on. . .

    by cardinal on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:44:22 AM PDT

    •  This is all well and good but (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      cardinal, MinnesotaMom

      the critical issue is establishing the science in a convincing enough way that it can not be doubted by those who might harbor a wish to survive the consequences.  Although realclimate.org is very good in getting the message out and nothing can replace peer review within the most reputable scientific journals, these are not enough.  Scientists need to develop much more convincing ways to get their science understood and utilized to produce wise public policy.  They need to do this in the face of monstrously well-funded efforts to obfuscate and mislead the public and do so while there is still time to act.  

      Its one thing to know with reasonable certainty that the global mean temperatures will rise between 4-6 degrees C over the next 100 years given current rates of carbon dioxide production.  It is quite another to be able to do anything about it.  Like the biodiversity crisis, time is not on humanity's side.

  •  I think the worst thing is actually (7+ / 0-)

    his attack on Bernanke. His position on global warming and science is old hat. Republicans have long held such positions on globsl warming and science, although it's a matter of debate whether this is due to conviction or pandering to their base.

    On the other hand, accusing people who are pursuing a legitimate, legal, and rational policy of treason because you disagree with it is new. That is elevating your ideology not only to the level of state interest, but the ultimate arbiter of law. This is what dictatorships are made of.

    Iuris praecepta sunt haec: Honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere. - Ulpian, Digestae 1, 3

    by Dauphin on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:45:02 AM PDT

  •  So...what does the EPA have to say??? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Palafox, murrayewv

    From the EPA:

    Climate change is a problem that is affecting people and the environment. Greater energy efficiency and new technologies hold promise for reducing greenhouse gases and solving this global challenge.

    Next issue !

    Perry.....GET A CLUE !

    - If you don't like gay marriage, blame straight people. They're the ones who keep having gay babies.

    by r2did2 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:46:33 AM PDT

  •  There Are No Objective Facts. Only Positions. (6+ / 0-)

    Even our own party knows that much.

    It's all a matter of how much of what we "want," we're able to get.

    And we all have to be practical about what we "want."

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 06:47:00 AM PDT

  •  It's projection... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Palafox, Calamity Jean

    Like most things that come out of far-right wing gasbags, it's projection.  Rick Perry can't think of a single thing that he's done that wasn't bought and sold.  I'm guessing that he can't imagine how anyone could ever do anything that wasn't beholden to the highest bidder.

  •  Conspiracy Theory (5+ / 0-)

    It's just part of the far right make up. You can't even be part of the far right or tea party with out a conspiracy theory for just about everything. That fear they try to create is central to there way of doing business.
     The UN is out to get us, big government is out to get you, big labor is gonna do you in, IF only you knew what they were REALLY up to.
     It's what you have to do if you can't make a rational argument. Unfortunately I think it has worked well for them in the past.

    •  the history of conspiracies (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Palafox, texasteamster

      the john birch society, the theories it has publicly held, like the one world socialist takeover, treasonous u.n. and the fed, the Koch brothers father being a founding member, its strength in texas, ron paul's relationship and similar views on money, the cracks with the bush camp, repeal the 17th amendment (another birch platform).

      there is a ton of things going on. we really need hunter thompson to lay it all out.

    •  Not really (0+ / 0-)

      Although mass delusion is a useful political weapon, it can be a very unwieldy one.  Much of the effort towards mass delusion is found on the right of the political spectrum, but it is counterproductive to recognize global warming as a political issue.  Humanity needs to educate and educate quickly, while there is still time to make it a viable strategy.

  •  Typical of America's hostility to science. (7+ / 0-)

    Perry's scathing contempt for science and the scientific process have become the norm in America in the 21st century, which is nothing less than a national catastrophe.

    In the aftermath of the 'Sputnik' shock, the U.S. actually spent some money on science education and in about 10 years there were Americans standing on the moon, backed up by an enormous industrial and scientific base.

    Fast forward 42 years, and what do you see? An America that has grown breathtakingly ignorant of science, and profoundly hostile to it. A nation in which more people believe in the absolute literal truth of a 2,000 year old religious document (one largely plagiarized and pieced together from the ramblings of desert nomads from 4,000 years ago) than the extremely solid principle of evolution. A nation where a politician can get his fans hooting and stomping by suggesting scientists are falsifying data without providing the merest whiff of proof.

    We're doomed.

    •  We are only doomed if we don't find a solution (0+ / 0-)

      The one thing we have on our side is the remarkable effectiveness of logica and reason, when it comes to prediction.

      I think progressives have to begin to use it collectively to OWN the economies of the future.  Not in a philosophical sense, but in a very real capitalistic sense.  If we are to survive and prosper, we must make our wits work for us.  It is simply not enough to merely have them, without putting them to good purpose.

      Why should the Koch brothers have a monopoly on making money?

      •  I read Carl Sagan's Demon Haunted World... (0+ / 0-)

        when it was first published decades ago. In it he railed against the superstition and ignorance even then taking over American public discourse. He noted with alarm that more Americans believed in UFO's than in the reality that men had landed on the moon. Sagan made a number of proposals to get us back on the rails and moving toward logic and reason again as a society.

        Since that time, we as a nation have been racing in the precise opposite direction. It's apparent to me that the primary reason is the despicable opportunism and cynicism of a Republican party and a corporatocracy that finds a profoundly ignorant populace easier to manipulate. And a Democratic party that refuses to fight against ignorance by calling out lies every time.

  •  surely he has already flamed out (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tomephil, Palafox, Matt Z, oldcrow

    anybody who doesnt believe in evolution, believes the entire science community is wrong on the most highly technical subjects, because its good for business, and probably will never say that noah did not literally have two of every animal, a guy like that could never get to first base in america could he?

    •  3 words. George. Walker. Bush. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Palafox, Matt Z, singe

      Washington Post, 2005:

      Although he said that curriculum decisions should be made by school districts rather than the federal government, Bush told Texas newspaper reporters in a group interview at the White House on Monday that he believes that intelligent design should be taught alongside evolution as competing theories.

      "Both sides ought to be properly taught . . . so people can understand what the debate is about," he said, according to an official transcript of the session. Bush added: "Part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought. . . . You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, and the answer is yes."

      Recall - DONE! VOTE against the fakes - DONE! VOTE TO TAKE WISCONSIN BACK!!! Rescind. Rebuild.

      by stcroix cheesehead on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 07:21:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Bush & Perry are in a "who is stupidest" contest. (0+ / 0-)

        Bush got to go first and scored a previously unheard amount of points...now Perry is pulling out all the stops and amazingly seems capable of beating the Master of Idiocy himself!

        Is this a great country in a hand basket or what?

    •  those reasons won't be why (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      murrayewv, Matt Z, oldcrow, MinnesotaMom

      he flames out (if he does). If he flames out it will be because the Bushites and their favorite funders can't stand him. Karl Rove is a pretty good barometer of where Perry stands with them. If he changes his tune about Perry then we are doomed (at least, doomed to a squeaker of an election against a candidate capable of thoroughly exciting and motivating the fundamentalists and teahadists). My worry there is that the president would not go after Perry's most dangerous positions and pronouncements because he won't attack somebody for their religion.

      The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis. --Dante Alighieri

      by uffdalib on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 07:41:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Most excellent summary, and I'll go farther. (9+ / 0-)

    The problem with Perry's bullshit isn't just that he's wrong or lying, it's the celebration, yea enshrinement of stupidity in this country.  It has probably been so since the beginning of politics; but the GOP in recent years has raised it to unprecedented levels of universal distribution.

    Thanks to Perry, Palin, Bachmann and scores of others, it has become perceived as a deficiency to actually be knowledgeable and have a grasp of actual facts.   People wallow in stupid and refuse to be dragged out of the cesspool of ignorance created by these GOP snake oil salesmen with the help of an irresponsible media.  It's saddening, frustrating, and threatening all in one.

    You can't spell CRAZY without R-AZ.

    by rb608 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 07:10:45 AM PDT

  •  His view is mainstream in the Republican Party (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Palafox, jds1978, murrayewv, Matt Z

    why should people be that surprised about his views? Can a Republican even hope to get a sniff of the nomination if he believes in man-made global warming?

    In the eyes of leading Republicans, the "Climategate" "scandal" proved that all global warming was a hoax designed to enrich scientists and Al Gore at the expense of big corporate interests.

    They don't really care that the facts behind climate change were never proven wrong - just a few emails were enough to destroy the entire body of science.

    "I'm not a member of an organized political party - I'm a Democrat." Will Rogers

    by newjeffct on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 07:14:53 AM PDT

  •  The range of options on this issue: (6+ / 0-)

    There is President Obama who believes in climate change, thinks its manmade and  real, but is unable to do anything about it.

    There is Mitt Romney who believes in climate change, thinks its manmade and real, but is unwilling to do anything about it.

    There is Rick Perry who believes in climate change, doesn't believe its manmade, and is therefore absolutely opposed to doing anything about it other than praying.

    Then there is Michelle Bachmann who doesn't even believe climate change is happening at all.

    USA! USA!

  •  Faith-based skepticism based on NO FACTS! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Palafox, r2did2, Matt Z

    It's the TEA PARTY!

    This why the Republican Party is ebbing in popularity: moderate Republican voters are aghast at its lack of reason and its embrace of fundamental Christian conservatism which is inherently irrational, prohibitive, repressive, restrictive and undemocratic?

    •  In all honesty (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ezdidit

      My agnostic side is coming out here, I know, but, aren't ALL religions just like this also?:

      inherently irrational, prohibitive, repressive, restrictive and undemocratic?

      - If you don't like gay marriage, blame straight people. They're the ones who keep having gay babies.

      by r2did2 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 07:28:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  ...the problem's Evangelism. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        r2did2
        •  I see your point (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ezdidit

          From Wikipedia:

          Evangelism refers to the practice of relaying information about a particular set of beliefs to others who do not hold those beliefs. The term is often used in reference to Christianity.

          I think you're right.

          - If you don't like gay marriage, blame straight people. They're the ones who keep having gay babies.

          by r2did2 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 07:46:38 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  No, they are not. (0+ / 0-)
        My agnostic side is coming out here, I know, but, aren't ALL religions just like this also?:

        inherently irrational, prohibitive, repressive, restrictive and undemocratic?

        If you believe that having in the very existence of God is irrational, then you win.

        But if you believe that all religions are not only irrational in how they teach about God, but also the rest of your list, then you are wrong.

        My own denomination, Episcopal (Anglican) - and others such as Methodist, Presbyterian, some Lutherans, Church of Christ - is not prohibitive, unless you consider not stealing, lying, dishonoring your parents, committing adultery, or murdering prohibitive.

        Neither are they repressive, Desmond Tutu is Anglican.  Do I need to elaborate on his accomplishments? Restrictive? See same list of prohibitions above. That could be seen as restrictive, but I say that ironically.

        Undemocratic? Although the leaders of the churches above all pray for guidance, the denominations I list all elect their leaders and vote on their policies.

        I say this mainly because it's moderate Christians who are a large force in supporting earth-friendly policies.

        "We will find fulfillment not in the goods that we have, but in the good we can do for each other." ~ RFK

        by paz3 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 02:14:03 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I would like to think this is a result of BO (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Palafox, uffdalib

    Bullshit Overload.  The media just can't keep up with all the outrageous, factually incorrect, or out-right lying statements of a whole gaggle of Republican presidential candidates, so some fall through the cracks without comment.

    Sadly, it seems that is being too understanding of the media's plight, by at least half.  As Rachel Maddow pointed out in a segment on "Bus-Gate" the other night, it is more likely that the media just copies down and publishes without comment anything the Republican candidates say, and calls that "reporting".

    I fear that this is just the latest example of that.

    •  because if the sound (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Calamity Jean, JC from IA

      bite doesn't get on the air within 5 minutes, the competition will "scoop" you. Analysis, fact-checking, even thought takes far too much time when you are shoveling content to keep a 24-hour news channel fed.

      The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis. --Dante Alighieri

      by uffdalib on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 07:30:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Same with news"papers" in these days of web (0+ / 0-)

        presence.  Almost understandable with TV since the advent of cable, but that's really just the tip of the iceberg, so to speak.

        Moreover, it seems more and more like a problem with how journalism is being taught: Journalists can no longer assume that anything is a fact; they must be being taught that there is no such thing as a fact, only different opinions.  A journalist is no longer allowed to say, for instance, that the sun rises in the east; he must say that xx% of people surveyed believe the sun rises in the east, then spend the bulk of the story on the minority "opinion" and the people who adhere to the minority opinion.

        Journalism colleges have as much to answer for as business colleges, IMO.  I cannot think of one that Edward R. Murrow could even graduate from these days.

  •  GOP=Lies, lies and more lies (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    with no end in sight. Now if Obama really cares about what is good for this coiuntry he should stop all talk about cutting any more bad deals with the Rethugs and directly confront them on every bullshit lie they spew. Besides their only goal is to make him a one term president.

  •  This is the usual third rate manager comment: (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean, Matt Z

    "I expect you to be corrupt, because I am corrupt. But I'm the boss so it's okay for me. "

  •  This diary is somewhat off the mark. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OldDragon

    You are perfectly right about Perry. But Perry just said what all the other GOP presidential candidates (with the exception of Huntsman) either also think, or would say themselves. Romney may not be as dismissive of global warming, but from a policy perspective he will be identical to Perry. Because the GOP base are not only climate skeptics, they are climate deniers. They associate the theory of global warming, no matter how much science is behind it, as an Al Gore idea. And until we are under 6 feet of water nationwide, they will stick with this. Perry is not the problem, his Party is.

    I'm in the I-fucking-love-this-guy wing of the Democratic Party!

    by doc2 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 07:32:54 AM PDT

  •  But it shows how Perry thinks (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    raboof, Calamity Jean, OldDragon
    That anyone would think that there's some conspiracy to hold up evolution or climate change shows a profound ignorance of not just science, but academia. If anyone was to come up with one shred of solid evidence supporting an alternative explanation to natural selection, or clear evidence that climate change wasn’t man-made, that person wouldn't be run out of town. He or she would be the most famous scientist in a century. They'd have a choice of colleges, research grants, book deals. No one gets famous—heck, no one even secures tenure—by writing a paper titled “Yup, the last guy who looked at this was exactly right.” Science craves controversy, lives on it. Is it a perfect system? Nope, and there are many opportunities for reform (some of which the go-faster world of the Internet has already forced on the slow-down world of scientific journals), but Perry’s idea of how science works is itself a dangerous fantasy.

    That idea boils down to, "You get rewarded for proclaiming what the powers that be want to hear."  
    And no, that's not how science works, or academia in general.  But it's exactly how the mendacious side of public relations works.  It reflects the Karl Rove saying, "Repeat the same thing five times, and it becomes truth."
    Joseph Goebbels would be proud.

    The fact that Perry accuses the other side of being whores shows how he thinks -- like a whore, who can't imagine anyone else is honest.

    We're all pretty strange one way or another; some of us just hide it better. "Normal" is a dryer setting.

    by david78209 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 07:39:15 AM PDT

  •  Perry says the climate is changing (4+ / 0-)

    so he doesn't look too stupid in the face of overwhelming evidence, then throws in a threadjack to completely gloss over the fact parts and distract people.
    Aaand,
    The Fail Press does not ask for "links".

    What's new.
    We need to buy CNN.
    Where's Soros and that Buffet guy? How come the liberal rich people aren't buying up media too?

    Here is the truth: The Earth is round; Saddam Hussein did not attack us on 9/11; Elvis is dead; Obama was born in the United States; and the climate crisis is real. It is time to act. - Al Gore

    by Burned on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 07:47:26 AM PDT

  •  Perry is just a theory out there (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JC from IA, OldDragon

    full of payoffs and bribes...he should be discounted and dismissed.

  •  11,000 years? More like 11 million years (0+ / 0-)

    And that's lowballing it.  We're smack dab in the middle of a Great Extinction.  How long before the planet "recovers" from that?

    How long before the planet "recovered" from the Permian Extinction?  Because that's what this looks like to me.  And "recovered" is in quotes, because those species are gone forever.

    I am become Man, the destroyer of worlds

    by tle on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 07:57:07 AM PDT

  •  Happily (0+ / 0-)

    Unlike every other human enterprise, science and its scientists are immune from envy, greed, lust and all the other sins that plague ordinary mortal endeavor. That is why we never, ever hear anything about questionable lab data or rewritten lab notes, retracted papers, false claims to share authorship of papers, favoritism in appointments, racial discrimination in grant awards, abuse of research funds, etc. It's hard to believe that anyone could rationally question any scientific results that are widely accepted among scientists. Why, that would be as dumb as believing that salt in food is generally harmless. No need to take that with a large grain of salt.

    Just sayin'.

  •  The odd thing about Perry... (0+ / 0-)

    is that a lot of people here in Texas despise him, or at the very least don't think much of him, and yet he manages to win elections again and again (which I suppose proves that you don't have to be smart to be successful in politics).

    "You put a monkey in a tuxedo, it's still a monkey" -Kellybee's Uncle Leon, From Chicago

    by Kellybee on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 08:20:08 AM PDT

    •  So, where are those "despisers?" (0+ / 0-)
      The odd thing about Perry...is that a lot of people here in Texas despise him, or at the very least don't think much of him, and yet he manages to win elections again and again

      I understand that Perry was reelected by approx. 18% of the eligible Texas voters. So what happened to all that animus to Perry come election day?

      Perhaps Texans are broken spiritually? If not, what motivates them to participate in democracy?

      "We will find fulfillment not in the goods that we have, but in the good we can do for each other." ~ RFK

      by paz3 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 02:23:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  What is sexy? (0+ / 0-)

    Bachmann and Elvis, is. And Newt and his "Lil" Newt, is. And Palin and bears, and Palin killing bears, is. And O'Donnell writing about sex and refusing to talk about sex is. And Rick Perry and practically anything he says these days, is.
    But science ain't.
    See the problem?

    We Will NOT Compromise On Fairness.

    by franklyn on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 08:34:44 AM PDT

  •  climate change (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OldDragon

    Climate change has happened since the planet existed.

    For example, when a huge meteroite landed where the dinosaurs lived, cutting off the sun for thousands of years, and making the plantet much cooler.  All the dinosaurs died, because they needed very hot   Smaller animals could take the cold and took over a lot of the planet.   Eventually leaving to human beings, and the beginning of human-made climate change.

    Other causes are volcanoes erupting that have the same effect.

    But of course the problem now is modern people using too much gas, and othe similar things that are making climate change soar.     People are doing it deliberately, while the dinosaurs were just caught in a bad situation.

    And now we are told that climate change is growing faster.   If we don't do something about it, it will be humans were are extinct.  

  •  OT, Nuclear War = Biggest Threat n/t (0+ / 0-)
  •  The scariest article I have ever read: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MinnesotaMom

    "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them...well, I have others." --Groucho Marx

    by Dragon5616 on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 09:18:46 AM PDT

  •  dominionists have had a long war with science (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OldDragon

    and now they are seeing fruits of this war, and it makes them bolder and happier.

    No rain, no bother .. god is just saying "No"

    It has nothing to do with man . . . e-coli outbreak, it's gods will. . . germ theory is just a theory after all.

    It's been validated
    .. LIARS!  only god strikes one down with disease as payment for wickedness!  Just like hurricanes and earthquakes.

    this is why Perry is dangerous. . . too dangerous to be president

    Forget climate change. Perry’s statements go beyond his views on climate change or evolution. He's attacking science itself, disputing the whole idea that we can actually know anything. For Perry, everything is just a "theory that's out there," with no evidence worth considering but what his gut tells him. Science, the whole experiment of the last two hundred years, is not just suspect, it's already convicted.

    Which is exactly the dominionist take on it.

    Bumper sticker seen on I-95; "Stop Socialism" my response: "Don't like socialism? GET OFF the Interstate highway!"

    by Clytemnestra on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 09:29:02 AM PDT

  •  Perhaps if the scientists.... (0+ / 0-)

    quit making the data fit their conclusions.....

    IE....MAKING SHIT UP....

    They wouldn't have such a credibility issue.

    The problem is REAL.
    So why do scientists MAKE SHIT UP??
    MONEY.

    There's plenty of good research out there....but as long as you got folks MAKING SHIT UP the door is wide open to mockery.

  •  Huntsman on GOP’s anti-science stances: ‘We have a (0+ / 0-)

    Huntsman on GOP’s anti-science stances: ‘We have a huge problem’

    Which is one of the reasons he's going no where in the GOP.

    Bumper sticker seen on I-95; "Stop Socialism" my response: "Don't like socialism? GET OFF the Interstate highway!"

    by Clytemnestra on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 09:46:04 AM PDT

  •  I assume the DNC issued a blistering response. (0+ / 0-)

    Right?

    Sure, it’s not the first time, and Perry is not the first to level these kind of bullshit charges. But so long as no one calls him on it, it will continue to be open season on science and scientists, and that, folks, is about the biggest threat I can imagine to this nation and all the rest.

    How far to the right do the Dems have to move before you stop calling them Dems?

    by Diebold Hacker on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 12:13:20 PM PDT

  •  It's time to label the climate conspiracy kooks (0+ / 0-)

    There are too many mainstream politicians spouting nonsense about the science not being in or that climate change is only part of a natural cycle. You cannot believe these things without also believing that there's a massive conspiracy in academia. This is Dale Gribble conspiracy theory nonsense and it needs to be publicly labeled as such.

  •  Perry is a Dominionist (0+ / 0-)

    So having things go very badly is wanted, because it might bring Jesus back and could open the way to their version of Christianity ruling the earth.

    They are extremists, the Christian version of the Taliban.

  •  This is really disturbing. (0+ / 0-)

    From Rick Perry's point of view, the bible is full of facts, and science is full of myths and superstitions. That's very unnerving in itself. It's the world view of the ignorant in that anything unexplained is attributed to God, and that science is trying to assault the gates of heaven and must be stopped. For the United States in enshrine such views in our highest offices would represent a irreversible decline of America to world's largest third world country, since faith-based science, engineering, and economics are in direct conflict with the natural laws that govern the universe.

  •  We would be the laughing stock of (0+ / 0-)

    the industrialized world and much of the 3rd world if Perry or any of the evangelists even get the nomination, let alone the presidency. So, what then would world markets do in either of these cases. The house is on fire and they believe it is a hoax, and the only mechanism to stop it or maybe slow it down (science) doesn't know anything.
    So, let's all pray, even though there is no real problem.
    "What, me worry?"

    We saw earlier that Perry did not do so well in his scence classes. He is going to show them alright. I bet he did not do so well in his religion classes either.

    Woe is us!!

    "There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing as simply messing about in boats ..." - Kenneth Grahame -

    by RonK on Sun Aug 21, 2011 at 03:26:08 PM PDT

  •  Perry's allegation of corrupt climate scientists (0+ / 0-)

    Excellent article. The irony of Perry's statement is that if scientists on one side of the debate are going to be corrupt, it's probably going to be scientists on the side that has all the money. Guess which side that is?

    I wrote a blog post (a satirical poem) about this. Please check it out at http://newsericks.com/... and let me know what you think.

  •  Way too much ambiguity. All the stocks and bonds (0+ / 0-)

    the working class and the rich are accumulating are going to be worth zilch because the global economy is going to crater so severely it can't be fixed.  We are having a very light diluted taste of that right now. First the insurance companies will go to hell, followed by the great corporations and the banks..,then it's Katy bar the door.  People are totally underestimating the economic impact of this impending catastrphe.o

    Why do Democrats still persecute gays? Is a vote for Democrats a wasted vote? I voted for change. Where is my vote?

    by SGWM on Mon Aug 22, 2011 at 12:57:31 AM PDT

  •  CNN,FOX created these Scientist. (0+ / 0-)

    CNN AND FOX created these SCIENTIST for one reason AL Gore would never say that BUSH won FAIR so they set out to destroy his work. Another reason KING GROVER NORQUEST is making MILLIONS on this anti-Scientist the real Scientist, not KING GROVERS so called SCIENTIST.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site