ShareThis

Custom Search

Denial

Monday, June 11, 2007

Denial (noun) 1 an act of declaring something to be untrue. 2 Psychol. a subconscious defense mechanism where a person does not or cannot acknowledge something distressing. 3 a refusal, especially to grant, allow, accept, or acknowledge something to someone.

I think it's high time that GWB changed his moniker from the "Decider" to the "Denier." For as you can see from the definition, Bush's picture would fit nicely here. Denial about what exactly? Denial about the fact that virtually every scientist on Earth is warning about global warming and radical climate change? Denial in the fact that Iraq has turned into a quagmire from which the U.S. has no hope of extricating itself? Denial in the fact that his lot is already cast in the eyes of history as the worst president in the nation's history? Denial in his turning the democracy of the United States into a fascist state, whereby the corporations have all the power and the people none? The answer to every single one of these questions, and myriad more, is YES!

Yes, Bush is in denial about the environment and global warming. No shocker there. However, no administration has done more in its tenure to damage the environment more in favor of corporate profits. The laughable "Clear Skies Initiative" (where polluters are asked not to emit mercury, SOX, NOX and COX) is just the tip of the rapidly melting iceberg. I'm sure that every one of these companies, where profit is the bottom line, is going to line right up to voluntarily spend millions of dollars on pollution mitigation technologies. Jeez.

The appointment of radical corrupt corporatists has certainly not helped the natural world. The most loathsome of these demon spawn is Gale Norton, former Secretary of the Interior. Under her watch millions of acres of preserved forests were opened to mining, clear-cutting and oil exploration. Budgets for bureaus and departments tasked with protection and mitigation were slashed. In fact Freddy Krugger on PCP would have envied Norton's haphazard slashing technique. What qualified this most corrupt of officials for the position to which Bush appointed her? She was a defender of nature-loving environmentalists everywhere, right? Ummm, no. She was nothing more that an attorney and mouthpiece for Council of Republicans for Environmental Advocacy, a radical organization that actually argued some companies had the right to pollute. From J. Steven Griles to Phillip Cooney, the litany of industry insiders seems endless.

Bush and his cadre of neo -fascist war-mongers are still in deep denial about the mess in Iraq. This denial so permeates the Republican Party that John McCain is still spouting the "we have to fight 'em over there, so we don't have to fight 'em here" nonsense. Dick Cheney is still running off at the mouth about how Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11. What has to happen for these idiots to wake up and see the situation for what it actually is?

Every right- thinking (right meaning correct) American knows that our involvement in Iraq has accomplished one thing: America is in more danger now that pre-9/11. This group of hawks cannot, or does not wish to, see the bitter ugly truth: Iraq is an unmitigated failure. At this point in the sad, and all too long, history of this event the only thing the U.S. can do is bring all the troops home. Every day, every hour, every minute, every second we stay involved in this mess is another day, minute, and second where America's fighting men and women are in harms way. At this point 3,512 service personnel have been killed, and tens of thousands more injured. The blood of every single wounded and killed soldier, sailor, airmen, and marine is on the hands of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz. Unfortunately, the blood of the hundreds of thousands of murdered Iraqis is on the hands of America as a whole, because we allowed it to happen in the first place.

As I'm sure most everyone has heard about Jimmy Carter's comments regarding Bush's record. I'm also sure everyone heard the White House's bloated and blithering response: "Jimmy Carter is irrelevant." Are they serious? This man was President of the United States (elected without deception or cheating); helped to ensure countless free elections in countries from Albania to Zaire; tireless force behind Habitat for Humanity and the thousands of homes built world-wide.; and not to mention winner of the Noble Peace Prize, which puts him among people like Nelson Mandela, Teddy Roosevelt, and Aung San Suu Kyi. What is Bush's legacy? Is it a country so deep in debt to foreign nations that it is going to take generations to repair the damage? Is it a country full of imbeciles because we are only teaching to satisfy tests and not to fire imaginations? Is it a country where corporate regulation has been so curtailed that corporations now run virtually every aspect of American life, unchallenged and unchecked?

Because of Bush's denial, corporations are now allowed to run roughshod over the American public. Of course this begins, but not ends, with the Bankruptcy Reform Act. This certainly was a reform, but not for the people of the United States. This reform was a windfall for credit card companies and large corporations. This act makes it all but impossible for disenfranchised peoples to begin their lives anew.

Bush's denial has led to unprecedented corporate take-overs. The Baby Bells are now being reconstituted in the mega-Bells once again; cable companies are now in virtual complete control of almost all programming on television and radio. Furthermore, Bush's cadre of whackos has almost succeeded in getting rid of PBS and NPR. Corporations will continue their power grab until the people say no!

It is high time that we the people hold these criminals accountable for their denials and their actions. To quote a line from V for Vendetta, "People should not be afraid of their governments, governments should be afraid of their people." If we assemble en mass, unify, and demand; they will have no choice but to listen. These cravens and cowards are not going to change their behavior until we change it for them! As my mom used to say when I was a kid "It's time for an attitude adjustment."

Read more...

Climate challenge bigger than moon shot: PG&E CEO

Climate challenge bigger than moon shot: PG&E CEO

Wed Jun 6, 2007 5:56PM EDT

By Bernie Woodall

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - The chief executive of California's largest electric utility said cutting global warming greenhouse gases will take more effort than the United States put into landing a man on the moon in the 1960s.

Peter Darbee, chief executive of PG&E Corp. (PCG.N: Quote, Profile, Research, said beating global warming is also more important than the moon landing in 1969, a challenge President John F. Kennedy put forth in 1961.

"When we set out the target to go to the moon, we only needed the cooperation and collaboration of a portion of the people of the United States," Darbee said in an interview this week with Reuters.

"What the challenge of global warming will require is an unprecedented level of cooperation and collaboration and alignment of mankind. The reality is the challenge for mankind is much greater than putting a man on the moon."

Darbee cites Dick Meserve, president of the Carnegie Institution of Washington and a PG&E director, in saying stopping global warming is the "greatest challenge that has ever faced mankind."

It's hard to remember that not long ago energy executives did not talk much about global warming, said Darbee, 54, who in January 2005 became CEO of PG&E, a $34 billion company serving 15 million customers in northern and central California.

"After I became CEO, I asked where we were on climate change," said Darbee, who was promoted from chief financial officer at PG&E.

"The answer was that PG&E did not have a view. So we started a process of scientific inquiry. We started to develop some strong conclusions and points of view.

"About a year-and-a-half ago, they came up with three conclusions, said Darbee, "The earth is warming. Mankind is responsible. The need for action is now.

"Today, that's practically boring. Those sets of conclusions. People say, 'No kidding.'"

At energy, environmental and business conferences around the United States this year, people often have spoken of a "tipping point" when it seemed that most of the world agreed global warming was a critical issue that demanded immediate attention.

Darbee said the "tipping point" is not identified by a single event or day, but was a slow building of concern until sometime last year when "the increased concern of global warming became exponential."

Part of that tipping point came in January when PG&E was among 10 major U.S. corporations including General Electric (GE.N: Quote, Profile, Research and BP (BP.L: Quote, Profile, Research (BP.N: Quote, Profile, Research to form the U.S. Climate Action Partnership.

"Washington was used to hearing from environmental groups, Darbee said. "After some time, that isn't news. But when companies and CEOs who are viewed as very pragmatic and financially driven say this is such a problem, I think what happened is the politicians asked themselves if they were behind."

© Reuters 2006. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by caching, framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters and the Reuters sphere logo are registered trademarks and trademarks of the Reuters group of company.

Read more...

Copyright

All material is the copyright of the respective authors. The purveyor of this blog has made and attempt, whenever possible, to credit the appropriate copyright holder.

  © Blogger template Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP