General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsYou know you're fucking up when your lapdog environmental group is turning against you.
"Next month, the Sierra Club will officially participate in an act of peaceful civil resistance. We'll be following in the hallowed footsteps of Thoreau, who first articulated the principles of civil disobedience 44 years before John Muir founded the Sierra Club."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-brune/from-walden-to-the-white_b_2529534.html
Disappointed and disillusioned by the lack of meaningful progress in stopping global climate change, even Sierra Club has finally recognized that playing political games as usual is going to accomplish nothing. With the effects of global climate change taking a greater and greater toll upon people and the planet, they recognize the time to act, decisively and forcefully, is now.
The question is, with political gridlock even more entrenched with Reid's latest cave, is real change even possible. Though Obama has always talked a good environmental game, his actual actions have been minimal. In fact right now, it is looking increasingly likely that his administration will go ahead and green light the Keystone XL pipeline, effectively consigning the Plains states to becoming an environmental nightmare waiting to happen, and the rest of us to at least another generation of being hooked to oil, only this time especially polluting oil.
I welcome the Sierra Club to the fight, and am happy that their eyes are finally open. With this break, the Democrats need to wake up to the fact that they are making a serious mistake, softpedaling environmental reform, and it could cost them a lot. The Sierra Club provided a lot of cover for them over the past years and decades, and with that now gone they stand as the naked hypocrites that they are when it comes to the environment. Maybe this will shock them into taking action, let's hope so.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RKP5637
(67,080 posts)kicked in the ass.
patrice
(47,992 posts)Democrats, because of their issue, but many of them are not Economic or Social Justice types and I think they'd be insulted by your characterization of them as lapdogs.
MadHound
(34,179 posts)It's almost like the modern day Red Scare, only instead of being communist, those who disagree with the Democrats and this administration must be libertarians.
And while they might be insulted by being called lapdogs, hey, the truth hurts. They have given political cover and environmental cache to Democrats for decades now, all while the world burned. It has finally gotten so hot that they woke up and realized that the water was boiling. The Sierra Club's lapdog status has been well known within the environmental and political circles for a long while, hell, even Mother Jones was writing articles back in the eighties stating essentially the same thing.
patrice
(47,992 posts)MadHound
(34,179 posts)Basing it all on what you post throughout DU. Don't like the conclusion I come to, well, hey, it is based on your own posts. No mind reading involved.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"You know you're fucking up when your lapdog environmental group is turning against you."
...how dramatic! I mean, that's what you got from this:
The piece seems to be a call to action.
Still, don't let that interrupt the hyperbole.
MadHound
(34,179 posts)As Biden said, it's a big fucking deal, no matter how you try to trivialize it. And if you read the rest of the article, you would see that a big part of the push motivating this is the looming approval of the Keystone XL pipeline.
The Sierra Club is marching in opposition to the policies and inaction of the Democratic party and this administration.
So, what the hell does that have to do with your ridiculous OP title?
Activism is good.
MadHound
(34,179 posts)In that case, have a good night.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Calm down pro, it was not an attack on Obama! "
...I'm as calm as can be, but this
"You know you're fucking up when your lapdog environmental group is turning against you."
...has me
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)you have no arguments, just the rolling thing.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)that it's impossible for you to post the point of a piece without poisoning it with hyperbole, here's the goal in a subsequent release:
<...>
In response, Bill McKibben, founder or 350.org, said: "We'll do all we can to help the president realize his goals, and trust he'll begin by blocking the Keystone XL pipeline, whose approval would
make a mockery of his rhetoric."
Last week two new reports showed that the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline would damage the climate much more than previously thought. A Pembina analysis showed how Keystone XL is an integral part of the industry’s plan to nearly triple tar sands production by 2030 (2); and an Oil Change International report showed that proven tar sands reserves of Canada will yield roughly 5 billion tons of an oil processing byproduct, known as petcoke – enough to fully fuel 111 U.S. coal plants to 2050. (3)
A collection of the country's top climate scientists also sent the president a letter asking him to reject tar sands and the Keystone XL pipeline. (4)
This Friday, in an unprecedented unified action among Indigenous Nations, farmers and ranchers,
and business and environmental leaders, attendees at the Protect the Sacred event in South Dakota will sign an International Treaty to block the Keystone XL pipeline. (5)
“Obama’s legacy as 44th President of the United States rests squarely on his leadership in the face of the climate crisis,” says Michael Brune, Executive Director of the Sierra Club. “Only the President of the United States has the power to lead an effort on the scale and with the urgency we need to phase out fossil fuels and go all in on clean, renewable energy sources. He can start immediately by rejecting the dangerous Keystone XL pipeline.”
The Forward on Climate rally comes as pressure mounts on the Administration to take strong climate action in the president’s second term. After a year of record heat and drought, calls for action are coming from all over the country. Newspapers such as the New York Times and The Washington Post, and think tanks like the Center for American Progress, are making it plain that the president must act now to avert the worst of effects from global warming.
Frances Beinecke, President, Natural Resources Defense Council: “The President has rightly called America to action against the climate chaos that is sweeping our nation and threatening our future. Now, we’re looking forward to seeing the president’s words turned into action. He can do so by rejecting dirty fuels projects such as the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline and by starting to cut carbon pollution from power plants that are major causes of climate destruction.”
http://content.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2013/01/momentum-builds-forward-climate-rally-against-keystone-xl-pipeline
This will give people an opportunity to engage.
MadHound
(34,179 posts)Though I'm sure that's not what you intended.
First time the Sierra Club is engaging in civil resistance, against this administration.
Says a lot, none of it good, about this administration's environmental policies.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)is a "lapdog environmental group" that is turning against the President for "fucking up"
No, not my point.
"First time the Sierra Club is engaging in civil resistance, against this administration."
It's called protest. It's a way of pressuring the administration. Don't you think rejecting the Keystone Pipeline is worthy of such actions?
Did you expect environmental groups to sit by and not do anything? I mean, it's a differenct action, but it's not the first time these groups are protesting.
Every bit helps.
Two Hopeful Signs The Obama Administration Will Not Approve The Keystone XL Tar Sands Pipeline
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022248224
"Melissa Block speaks with Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club, about the approved one-time use of peaceful civil disobedience for the first time in the group's history. They will be participating in a climate rally in February in Washington, D.C."
http://www.npr.org/2013/01/24/170198088/sierra-club-civil-disobedience-is-part-of-a-great-american-tradition?ft=1&f=2&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NprProgramsATC+%28NPR+Programs%3A+All+Things+Considered%29&utm_content=Yahoo+Search+Results
"President Barack Obama has pledged to make climate change a top priority for the next four years, and environmental groups are putting pressure on the president to back up his words with actions. The Sierra Club has approved an action in civil disobedience for the first time in the group's history."
http://current.com/groups/news-blog/94029325_sierra-club-approves-civil-disobedience-in-response-to-keystone.htm
"The Sierra Club is the conservative, curmudgeonly grandfather of environmentalist groups. But the nonprofit has moved to break its historic ban on civil disobedience over the Keystone XL pipeline as President Obama stalls his decision on whether to approve the TransCanada project."
http://www.salon.com/2013/01/23/even_the_sierra_club_gets_disobedient_over_keystone_xl/
Now do you get it? The very first time the Sierra Club for the Sierra Club, the environmental group that has, for a long time provided political cover and environmental cache for Democratic politicians and presidents, is going to engage in civil disobedience in protest against any president or administration over a proposed environmental policy. Not a Republican administration, despite the horrors that they have inflicted upon us over the decades, but a Democratic one, this one.
As much as you want to downplay and trivialize this action, it is a huge break with the administration and Democrats in general.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)...really trying to justify your ridiculous OP title with that absurd claim?
President Obama: No Blank Checks for the Fracking Industry
Tell President Obama and EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson: we can't trust Shell to drill safely in the Arctic
https://secure.sierraclub.org/site/Advocacy?page=UserActionInactive&id=6597
Now, do you get it?
2naSalit
(86,292 posts)and I must say that I am becoming oncreasingly more disenchanted with NPR because of what I heard on the interviewer's part. With every conclusive statement that he made (and I have heard her respond in other interviews the same way recently) was with a condescendingly dismissive, "huh" as though what was said was similar to what someone might hear out of the mouth of someone like oh... Wayne LaPierre's or oily tartz's unbelievable tripe which is far from the case here.
He made a good argument and her tone was rather dismissive and that really bothered me.
There needs to be a lot more action about this and other environmental issues. Perhaps actually coming up with alternative political candidates in the 2014 election, neither R or D to show that we f'ing mean it. Jusy a thought but the time has come to shake up the business as usual cabal.
hunter
(38,300 posts)It's hard to be green when you're the Sierra Club. Members tend to be affluent consumers. Affluent consumers damage the environment.
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)blogging on the internet with a tablet you bartered for some radishes, I suppose.
hunter
(38,300 posts)It's a Pentium III, running Debian and LXDE. When I drive, which is rarely, it's a 1984 POS car with a salvage title. My natural unmedicated state is invisible homeless person.
Alas, I'm a hypocrite. My wife would rather live in an ordinary house, not a shack built out of driftwood or an old car (which I have done), and it's my good fortune to live with her.
Personally, I don't buy anything new if I can possibly avoid it but my wife and kids and most everyone else think I'm a little crazy that way.
dlwickham
(3,316 posts)this has to be one of the damn dumbest things I've heard of in a while
the term attention whores comes to mind
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)Five National Parks, and the Endangered Species Act, IIRC
They have blocked dozens of coal fired plants in the Ohio Valley, along with some partners.
*
All that you know about environmentalism is some crappy malaise you read at commondreams or counterpunch.
MadHound
(34,179 posts)You'll find that my use of lapdog is appropriate.
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)Sitting in a chair all day being annoying is not an accomplishment
MadHound
(34,179 posts)You don't know me, you don't know what I have and have not done in my life. Don't make assumptions based upon your own life, others, including myself, have full, interesting lives that do include service to others and the environment.
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)Thought I would school you
MadHound
(34,179 posts)If you wish to school me, bring a lunch, and dinner, because it will be an all day affair.
So far, the only thing that you've demonstrated that you know is snark, and very little about that.
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)You throw up the word "greenwash" and act like you just wrote a thousand word thesis. Sad
MadHound
(34,179 posts)Oh, yeah, snark and insults, very little else. Talk about content free
So, have you done a search using the terms "Sierra Club Greenwash"? No, probably not, don't want to disturb your pretty little mind.
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)Post 21, Mr. Unhappy
Five National Parks, and the Endangered Species Act, IIRC
They have blocked dozens of coal fired plants in the Ohio Valley, along with some partners.
*
All that you know about environmentalism is....
see post 21
MadHound
(34,179 posts)The Sierra Club wasn't responsible for the ESA, Nixon actually was. As far as the parks they established, that was a hundred plus years ago. What have they done lately?
Never, ever in their history have they put their ass on the line and gotten involved in civil disobedience, unlike some of their more contemporary peers like Green Peace. That is why this is such big news, it has gotten bad enough that the staid, old SC is actually going to put their ass on the line.
Furthermore, SC endorsed Clorox bleach as "green", ie greenwashing, in exchange for a cash contribution. Meanwhile, a couple of years ago, SC's Carl Pope toured the country with some folks from the natural gas industry, pushing how natural gas is good for the environment, more greenwashing. That's just the beginning, you can do the research on your own.
Response to MadHound (Reply #42)
Kolesar This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to MadHound (Reply #42)
Kolesar This message was self-deleted by its author.
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)Hint: when a developer plans a project, they must file a _______ ______ _______.
Fill in the blanks
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)for his position.
really sick of it.
not a democratic value/
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)"Words or actions intended to evoke contemptuous laughter at or feelings toward a person or thing"
"what have you done, blah blah blah"
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)
Sid
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)I do still read their stuff on occasion, but I'm a little disillusioned with them.
And, frankly, constant pessimism hasn't proved to be helpful for ANY movement, especially not one as important as combatting climate change.
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)...and I'll give them kudos for that....it's been clear to me for a long time that, if we want a good chance of avoiding the cliched "catastrophic" threshold of climate change, that is, 2*C by 2100, then we will need both political action AND civil disobedience. It can be done, but the real question is when?
uponit7771
(90,301 posts)MadHound
(34,179 posts)Hate to tell you this, but the Sierra club's nature has been known for decades now. Mother Jones was publishing articles using the same wording as I back in 1980. If a pundit is being kind, they will describe the Sierra Club as "conservative". Do a search on "Sierra Club greenwashing", the results won't be kind to the SC.
Sorry, the title, as much as you may dislike it, is accurate.
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)You could delete the original post and this thread will be locked and nobody will disagree with you anymore.
MadHound
(34,179 posts)Sorry, but your beloved SC has a history, and not a very good one. Don't believe me, go through the archives of Mother Jones and others, you'll see.
You don't see groups like Greenpeace endorsing the natural gas industry, do you?
