When interim/caretaker managers/coaches of sports teams are given the full-time job, it is often said they are the new 'permanent' boss. This cracks me up because there is nothing permanent in life, let alone in sports. For example, here are two news items I noticed recently.
May 23, 2007: Nigel Worthington has ruled himself out of the running to become the Northern Ireland (soccer) manager.
May 31, 2007: Nigel Worthington will be unveiled as the new Northern Ireland manager.
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
The economic impact of climate change
I don't think those who deny man's influence on climate change should be silenced, but a small minority shouldn't paralyze society from what needs to be done... the 'paralysis by analysis' phenomenon.
The group of people who deny the impact of climate change is very diverse. Some deny its very existence. Others say it's natural and that man has no effect in causing (and thus slowing) it. Some claim that the rage in the 1970s was scaremongering over global cooling. Of course, if we can go from global cooling to global warming in only a generation, then isn't this good evidence that something wacky is going on? After all, scientists call the phenomenon climate change, not global whatever.
Some people argue that to do anything about climate change will destroy the economy. New York Times' columnist Thomas Friedman and others argue the opposite. The United States has always been a technological and innovative leader. Embracing, nay pushing, the green agenda would be a great boon to American business who are well-positioned to take advantage of this. All it needs are the right incentives and this is where public policy comes in. It's a great example of where the right thing to do and the profitable thing to do can intersect if given a little nudge.
In fact, there's plenty of evidence to suggest that NOT taking action to slow down climate change will have a serious economic impact. Particularly here in the northeast, where tourism, agriculture and other commerce related to stable weather patterns are a key parts of the region's economy.
Just recently, I've seen a number of pieces in the regional media on this topic. Such as...
-North Country Public Radio (NCPR) did several pieces on the impact of climate change including one on how it risks affecting the very character of the northeast
-Another on how climate change is affect the supply of fresh water
-And a third on its impact on agriculture
-The Boston Globe, ABC News and The Christian Science Monitor all did pieces on how climate change was ruining maple production, one of key money earners in Vermont and northern New York.
-There were not one but but two articles in The Adirondack Daily Enterprise on how climate change is seriously affecting the ski industry. The Enterprise is based in Saranac Lake, in the heart of New York's ski country. Outdoor tourism is arguably the single most important part of the economy of New York's North Country.
-The same paper also pointed out the negative impact on the logging industry, still a key player in some parts of the Adirondacks.
So the next time someone says we "can't afford" to do anything about climate change, tell them we can't afford not to.
The group of people who deny the impact of climate change is very diverse. Some deny its very existence. Others say it's natural and that man has no effect in causing (and thus slowing) it. Some claim that the rage in the 1970s was scaremongering over global cooling. Of course, if we can go from global cooling to global warming in only a generation, then isn't this good evidence that something wacky is going on? After all, scientists call the phenomenon climate change, not global whatever.
Some people argue that to do anything about climate change will destroy the economy. New York Times' columnist Thomas Friedman and others argue the opposite. The United States has always been a technological and innovative leader. Embracing, nay pushing, the green agenda would be a great boon to American business who are well-positioned to take advantage of this. All it needs are the right incentives and this is where public policy comes in. It's a great example of where the right thing to do and the profitable thing to do can intersect if given a little nudge.
In fact, there's plenty of evidence to suggest that NOT taking action to slow down climate change will have a serious economic impact. Particularly here in the northeast, where tourism, agriculture and other commerce related to stable weather patterns are a key parts of the region's economy.
Just recently, I've seen a number of pieces in the regional media on this topic. Such as...
-North Country Public Radio (NCPR) did several pieces on the impact of climate change including one on how it risks affecting the very character of the northeast
-Another on how climate change is affect the supply of fresh water
-And a third on its impact on agriculture
-The Boston Globe, ABC News and The Christian Science Monitor all did pieces on how climate change was ruining maple production, one of key money earners in Vermont and northern New York.
-There were not one but but two articles in The Adirondack Daily Enterprise on how climate change is seriously affecting the ski industry. The Enterprise is based in Saranac Lake, in the heart of New York's ski country. Outdoor tourism is arguably the single most important part of the economy of New York's North Country.
-The same paper also pointed out the negative impact on the logging industry, still a key player in some parts of the Adirondacks.
So the next time someone says we "can't afford" to do anything about climate change, tell them we can't afford not to.
Monday, May 28, 2007
Sunday, May 27, 2007
Anti-war in theory vs anti-war in practice
Last year, Kirsten Gillibrand won election to Congress. She became only the second Democrat in more than a century to be elected to the House. I voted for her because there were only two candidates on the ballot and she was certainly less bad than the incumbent Republican. But it was a vote cast with little enthusiasm. There was little to suggest that she'd deviate much from the corporate Democrat line. I was happy she won less for its own sake than for the principle that a non-Republican can actually win around here.
Still, I expected little of her on most things, especially on the issue that most animated the Democrats that elected her: Iraq.
Rep. Gillibrand recently voted to continue funding the aggression against Iraq. Adirondack Musing blog, a strong supporter of Gillibrand, expressed disappointment in the Congresswoman.
He wrote: Rep. Gillibrand...how about fighting to end the Iraq War rather than fighting to win your next election?
I wasn't really disappointed because I completely expected her to vote this way. It is certainly to bad that she was more interested in keeping her job than in doing her job. But it's not surprising. It's consistent with the equivocation on Iraq that she showed throughout her campaign.
But I think it's an equivocation most Democrats pretended not to see in their desperate attempt to get one of their own elected. It's exactly the same thing so many Democrats did with regard to John Kerry in 2004.
I suppose it's yet another example of why we need true multipartyism in this country. Many elected Democrats are anti-war in theory. They are anti-war when it's politically expedient, when they are before certain crowds. We need leaders who are anti-war in practice.
Still, I expected little of her on most things, especially on the issue that most animated the Democrats that elected her: Iraq.
Rep. Gillibrand recently voted to continue funding the aggression against Iraq. Adirondack Musing blog, a strong supporter of Gillibrand, expressed disappointment in the Congresswoman.
He wrote: Rep. Gillibrand...how about fighting to end the Iraq War rather than fighting to win your next election?
I wasn't really disappointed because I completely expected her to vote this way. It is certainly to bad that she was more interested in keeping her job than in doing her job. But it's not surprising. It's consistent with the equivocation on Iraq that she showed throughout her campaign.
But I think it's an equivocation most Democrats pretended not to see in their desperate attempt to get one of their own elected. It's exactly the same thing so many Democrats did with regard to John Kerry in 2004.
I suppose it's yet another example of why we need true multipartyism in this country. Many elected Democrats are anti-war in theory. They are anti-war when it's politically expedient, when they are before certain crowds. We need leaders who are anti-war in practice.
Public service announcement
I learned that a young friend of a friend recently committed suicide after being kicked out the house for being a lesbian by her mom. Though I didn't know the girl, this shook me. In my life, I've had two friends attempt suicide, though fortunately neither succeeded.
It should go without saying that such the mother's action is reprehensible. I can't see how any parent with a microgram of decency would do something like that. People who aren't willing to accept their children for who they are really shouldn't have children in the first place.
Sadly, too many gay teens crumble under the weight of homophobia by parents, relatives, "friends," other students and society in general. It's one of the few forms of hateful bigotry that is still socially acceptable to some extent. Because of this, gay teens are four times more likely to attempt suicide than heterosexual teens.
If you are a teen (or know one) who has thought of ending your life, please get help. Click here or here to find out how.
It should go without saying that such the mother's action is reprehensible. I can't see how any parent with a microgram of decency would do something like that. People who aren't willing to accept their children for who they are really shouldn't have children in the first place.
Sadly, too many gay teens crumble under the weight of homophobia by parents, relatives, "friends," other students and society in general. It's one of the few forms of hateful bigotry that is still socially acceptable to some extent. Because of this, gay teens are four times more likely to attempt suicide than heterosexual teens.
If you are a teen (or know one) who has thought of ending your life, please get help. Click here or here to find out how.
Saturday, May 26, 2007
Nader to students: YOU are the Deciders
You can tell a lot about the priorities of a newspaper by its editorial decisions. Decisions that include not only what stories to run, but where they are run.
For example, a local daily decided that a rare visit by one of the 100 most influential Americans in history merited a less prominent space than a visit by Thomas the Tank Engine.
But at least The Post-Star actually did a story on the recent visit of Ralph Nader as well as some pre-visit coverage.
The fact of the coverage is shocking... even more so that the reporting was actually decent and showed some depth. There was the obligatory question about the 2000 election but there were also some intelligent questions on how the Democrats harassed him trying to get him off the ballot in 2004 in as many states as possible (the same Dems who'd sniveled about disenfranchisement ever since 2000).
The post-visit article focused on his speech to the local high school, where he encouraged students to get involved and make themselves relevant as citizens.
One of the interesting parts of the article was a section entitled: THE STUDENT'S OPINION [sic].
Hopefully the students in question are more familiar with the fundamental rules of grammar as pertaining to apostrophes than The Post-Star's professional reporter and copy editors. But the article was decent so I suppose I should let that go.
In any case, one student implied Nader was a communist, but that he was okay anyway. I could only chuckle at that.
But high school junior Ben Thompson said, "This is the first politician I've ever agreed with."
And with that, the 11th grader demonstrates that he has a better understanding of basic civics that most political scientists and other political 'experts' in this country.
Ralph Nader ran for president not to be a 'vote stealer,' as one student put it to me. This description is not only pompous, but flat out wrong. Even a basic understanding of the English language will lead one to the conclusion that you can't steal something from someone if they don't own it in the first place. No one and no party owns my votes. Nader didn't steal my votes or anyone else's. He earned them.
Nader ran for president for the only reason anyone should run for president: he thought he could do a better job than any of the other candidates. You may not agree with his ideas, but he ran for the right reasons. He ran for president to fill a void in ideas that was not addressed by any of the other candidates. And for this he is condemned for giving people another choice... most vigorously by the so-called freedom of choice crowd.
If it were up to the political elite, Ben Thompson and other Americans would be forced to vote for someone they don't agree with but who was decreed 'viable'? Shouldn't it be up to the voters to decide who's viable rather than the self-appointed gurus of 'conventional wisdom'?
Hopefully Ben Thompson is not the only student who figured that out.
For example, a local daily decided that a rare visit by one of the 100 most influential Americans in history merited a less prominent space than a visit by Thomas the Tank Engine.
But at least The Post-Star actually did a story on the recent visit of Ralph Nader as well as some pre-visit coverage.
The fact of the coverage is shocking... even more so that the reporting was actually decent and showed some depth. There was the obligatory question about the 2000 election but there were also some intelligent questions on how the Democrats harassed him trying to get him off the ballot in 2004 in as many states as possible (the same Dems who'd sniveled about disenfranchisement ever since 2000).
The post-visit article focused on his speech to the local high school, where he encouraged students to get involved and make themselves relevant as citizens.
One of the interesting parts of the article was a section entitled: THE STUDENT'S OPINION [sic].
Hopefully the students in question are more familiar with the fundamental rules of grammar as pertaining to apostrophes than The Post-Star's professional reporter and copy editors. But the article was decent so I suppose I should let that go.
In any case, one student implied Nader was a communist, but that he was okay anyway. I could only chuckle at that.
But high school junior Ben Thompson said, "This is the first politician I've ever agreed with."
And with that, the 11th grader demonstrates that he has a better understanding of basic civics that most political scientists and other political 'experts' in this country.
Ralph Nader ran for president not to be a 'vote stealer,' as one student put it to me. This description is not only pompous, but flat out wrong. Even a basic understanding of the English language will lead one to the conclusion that you can't steal something from someone if they don't own it in the first place. No one and no party owns my votes. Nader didn't steal my votes or anyone else's. He earned them.
Nader ran for president for the only reason anyone should run for president: he thought he could do a better job than any of the other candidates. You may not agree with his ideas, but he ran for the right reasons. He ran for president to fill a void in ideas that was not addressed by any of the other candidates. And for this he is condemned for giving people another choice... most vigorously by the so-called freedom of choice crowd.
If it were up to the political elite, Ben Thompson and other Americans would be forced to vote for someone they don't agree with but who was decreed 'viable'? Shouldn't it be up to the voters to decide who's viable rather than the self-appointed gurus of 'conventional wisdom'?
Hopefully Ben Thompson is not the only student who figured that out.
Friday, May 25, 2007
The welcome return of 'Biased Commentary'
Local political activist Matt Funiciello is back in the blogosphere. The head honcho of Rock Hill Bakehouse and Cafe is a local political activist and concocter of the only oatmeal raisin cookies I've ever had that are better than my own. His blog is just as delicious. Ok, so it's a real stretch for a metaphor but it's definitely something to bookmark if you want a substantive read. His blog can be found at: mattsbiasedcommentary.blogspot.com.
Ralph Nader in GF today
Apologies for the late reminder but it's been a busy week.
Ralph Nader will be in Glens Falls today (May 25) for a pair of events. He will be at Aimie's Dinner and a Movie at 1:00 PM for the showing of an excellent documentary about him entitled An Unreasonable Man. Contact Matt Funiciello for more information.
At 3:30, he will be at Red Fox Books to sign copies of his book The Seventeen Traditions.
Ralph Nader will be in Glens Falls today (May 25) for a pair of events. He will be at Aimie's Dinner and a Movie at 1:00 PM for the showing of an excellent documentary about him entitled An Unreasonable Man. Contact Matt Funiciello for more information.
At 3:30, he will be at Red Fox Books to sign copies of his book The Seventeen Traditions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)