Michael Oppenheimer and Kevin Trenberth:
In a recent op-ed for The Post, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.) offered up a reheated stew of isolated factoids and sweeping generalizations about climate science to defend the destructive status quo. We agree with the chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology that policy should be based on sound science. But Smith presented political talking points, and none of his implied conclusions is accurate.
The two of us have spent, in total, more than seven decades studying Earth’s climate, and we have joined hundreds of top climate scientists to summarize the state of knowledge for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the World Climate Research Program and other science-based bodies. We believe that our views are representative of the 97 percent of climate scientists who agree that global warming is caused by humans. Legions of studies support the view that, left unabated, this warming will produce dangerous effects. (This commentary, like so much of our work, was a collaborative process, with input from leading climate scientists Julia Cole, Robert W. Corell, Jennifer Francis, Michael E. Mann, Jonathan Overpeck, Alan Robock, Richard C.J. Somerville and Ben Santer.)
Want a counterintuitive but thought-provoking approach to NSA? Read
David Simon:
Is it just me or does the entire news media — as well as all the agitators and self-righteous bloviators on both sides of the aisle — not understand even the rudiments of electronic intercepts and the manner in which law enforcement actually uses such intercepts? It would seem so.
–
Because the national eruption over the rather inevitable and understandable collection of all raw data involving telephonic and internet traffic by Americans would suggest that much of our political commentariat, many of our news gatherers and a lot of average folk are entirely without a clue.
You would think that the government was listening in to the secrets of 200 million Americans from the reaction and the hyperbole being tossed about. And you would think that rather than a legal court order which is an inevitable consequence of legislation that we drafted and passed, something illegal had been discovered to the government’s shame.
Yes, there is another side to this.
@jbouie Thoughtful piece, but does short shrift on transparency. Not hysteria to assume without transparency and checks, next steps follow.
— @DemFromCT via TweetDeck
Added: Reader
timelad adds this helpful
update from Simon as he responds to the response and adds:
Which, for me, is the point. A good, specific and focused argument makes everyone think better. Unless it pisses everyone off. One of the two.
More politics and policy below the fold.
Dan Balz:
So much has been made of the demographic obstacles facing Republicans in their quest to win the White House that it has been easy to overlook the other huge hurdle in their path: geography. But two prospective GOP presidential candidates — New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul— seem determined to change that.
The depth of the Republican deficit in the Electoral College was laid out in stark detail by independent analyst Rhodes Cook in his recent newsletter. Cook charts two eras in the modern history of presidential politics, one Republican and the other Democratic. Republicans dominated the period from 1968 until 1992. Democrats have been the dominant presidential party since then.
CNN has a piece on Newtown that rings true, including mention of my own physician group:
One of seven children reared on a farm in Massachusetts, [Republican First Selectman Pat] Llodra grew up around guns.
But she has strayed from many in her party with her desire for expanded background checks and a ban on military-style weapons. As a lifelong educator, she always felt high-powered guns were too easily available, but "this event just galvanized that thinking for me."
"If the horror of this event -- seeing 20 innocent 6-year-olds be shot down by a crazed killer -- if that isn't enough to change a legislator's heart and mind and do what is right and needed, then I don't know what could change that person."
This Friday marks the 6 month anniversary. Read the entire piece and then ask yourself what you are doing to make the world a better place.
Reuters:
U.S. Internet companies that want to resist government demands to hand over customer data for intelligence investigations have few legal options, due to the classified nature of such probes and a court review process shrouded in secrecy.
Josh Barro:
What if the problem with your political party is that the policies it advocates are bad?
You can't fix that problem by "rebranding" the same platform or finding younger, less-white candidates to promote it. You definitely can't fix it by leaning into your failed policies and becoming more extreme.
The solution is to change your ideology. And that's exactly what Republicans need to do.