Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 11,722
Number of posts: 11,722
- 2015 (7)
- January (7)
- 2014 (124)
- 2013 (72)
- 2012 (12)
- Older Archives
July 19, 2014 12:15 AM
Max Radwin / The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Billionaire Tom Steyer and his Super PAC, NextGen Climate, are making big moves in Pennsylvania this year.
The organization aims to call out elected officials who deny the existence of climate change while working with those who are fighting to stop it. In Pennsylvania, it has its eyes on the gubernatorial race between Republican Gov. Tom Corbett and Democratic challenger Tom Wolf.
During a 2011 budget speech, Mr. Corbett said he wanted to make Pennsylvania “the Texas of the natural gas boom.” In May, during an interview with StateImpact — an NPR-affiliated policy news site — he said the reality of climate change was “up for debate.”
A spokeswoman for NextGen Climate said it is working to show voters how Mr. Corbett “stood up for powerful energy companies (who are significant contributors to his campaign) at the expense of Pennsylvania voters’ best interests.” Last week, NextGen sent a Right-to-Know request for all correspondence between Mr. Corbett and oil and gas companies, plus campaign finance records.
Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/news/politics-state/2014/07/19/NYC-billionaire-to-spend-money-in-Pennsylvania-gubernatorial-campaign/stories/201407160044#ixzz380OXKFPp
Posted by Divernan | Sun Jul 20, 2014, 07:02 AM (5 replies)
Party hopes lead in governor’s race will bring majority
Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/news/politics-state/2014/07/20/Democrats-expect-gains-in-state-Senate/stories/201407200171#ixzz380NNep8I
See the article for a more detailed analysis of each seat considered to be up for grabs.
Posted by Divernan | Sun Jul 20, 2014, 06:57 AM (2 replies)
(This story is dated by The Independent as Thursday, July 17, 2014. I posted it as LBN
at 1:52 .am. on Thursday, July 17, 2014. The reporter had written it on an unspecified time on Wed., July 16, 2014, but it was published on 7/17. Even allowing for the international time difference, it was possibly published within the 12 hour limited period for latest breaking news. I think, when in doubt, allow the thread, and responded to the moderator, with a request my comments be forwarded to Skinner or whomever. I believe this to be particularly the case when the OP is re an incident of international importance regarding the at best negligent and wanton and at worst deliberate instance of the violent killing of children. Because it's not just a simple matter of reposting - it's that a number of comments will likely not be reposted on the new thread. Here's that link:http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014848069
"This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Rhiannon12866 (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum). If you believe this was done in error, please contact Rhiannon12866 to appeal."}
Posted by Divernan | Thu Jul 17, 2014, 08:27 AM (0 replies)
Source: The Independent (UK)
As Israel’s continued air offensive against Gaza saw the Palestinian death toll rise above 200 on Wednesday, a leading human rights organisation has warned a fifth of those who have died in the nine-day conflict are children.
Save the Children has become the latest body to voice its concern over the Palestinian death toll, which rose to 211 on Wednesday afternoon when an Israeli airstrike killed four boys from the Bakr family on a coastal road near a beach in the Gaza Strip. A further seven adults and children were wounded.
Last week, five children from the same family died in a pre-dawn bombardment.
In light of the violence, the group predicts that at least 25,000 children will need psycho-social support to cope with the trauma they have experienced since violence in the region restarted last Tuesday.
Read more: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israelgaza-conflict-children-make-up-a-fifth-of-palestinian-deaths-9610425.html
Posted by Divernan | Thu Jul 17, 2014, 01:52 AM (13 replies)
My first job out of law school was working for a small law firm which handled, among other areas, civil suits arising out of auto, truck and motorcycle accidents. In just two years, I had multiple occasions of reviewing accident reports & police photos, autopsy protocols, taking photographers and accident investigators to accident scenes to analyze exactly what happened - not to mention taking depositions of victims of DWI accidents who had been maimed for life, and the grieving survivors of people killed by DWI drivers. This judge has been on the bench FAR longer than 2 years and has EXPLICIT, IN DEPTH knowledge of the human suffering caused when people drive drunk!
Working on DWI cases, I observed that DWI drivers were repeat offenders. If you suspended or revoked their licenses, they drove anyway - not just on limited licenses allowing them to drive to and from work, but during off work hours to get to bars or liquor stores. They're drunks, plain and simple!
I say, throw the friggin' book at her, and the state judicial disciplinary board should toss her off the bench, and the state licensing bureau should strip her of her law license. She likes alcohol so damn much? Let her work as a barmaid the rest of her worthless life!
I myself was nearly killed when I was just 18 and an uninsured, drunk driver crossed the median divider and hit head on the car in which I was a passenger. Between that and my subsequent experience working on the above cases, I have zero tolerance for people who drink and drive. If you need to get drunk to handle life, and you don't have a sober friend to be the designated driver, than just buy your booze, take it home and get drunk by your charming self. Believe me, when you're drunk, no one but another drunk will really enjoy your company.
Posted by Divernan | Wed Jul 16, 2014, 01:09 PM (0 replies)
If you’re not a scientist, presumably you should listen to people who are when grappling with climate change.
This is a great idea. The National Academy of Science and all professional associations of scientists whose fields have anything to do with climate change, both in the US and internationally should not wait to be consulted, but should pro-actively seek out and educate both political decision makers and the general public. In the current economy and political mindset, the only parties with the bucks to seek out scientific advice and fund studies on controversial matters are the corporate interests who will either bribe scientists to be hired guns and produce bogus reports, or will fund research within their own corporate interests and bury any results harmful to their marketing plans.
Heard a good line in a futuristic movie the other day where it was noted that Big Pharma put all its efforts into developing hair growth and penis enhancement products. Follow the money,baby!
Posted by Divernan | Wed Jul 16, 2014, 11:17 AM (2 replies)
You know, that Richard Scaife whose death provoked an outpouring of hatred and loathing on DU. In 2008 she traveled to tiny little Greensburg, PA, where the headquarters for Scaife's conservative chain of newspapers is located, and sought out an "audience" with him. Following that meeting, despite the horrible things HRC and Scaife had said about each other, he gave her his newspapers' endorsement in the Democratic primary. What was the quid pro quo she promised him in exchange for that endorsement? Sciafe took that secret to his grave with him and I doubt HRC will ever tell.
In 2008, Mrs. Clinton, then a Democratic senator from New York running for president, met Mr. Scaife and editors and reporters of The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review for an interview. The newspaper endorsed her, and Mr. Scaife, in a commentary, said: “I have a very different impression of Hillary Clinton today. And it’s a very favorable one indeed.”
Yup, when it comes to rich old white conservatives, they're ready for Hillary, because she promises them what they want. As to HRC, I've been involved in politics and every presidential campaign since my college years (always a Democrat, unlike HRC) and that goes back to when I heard JFK speak at my university campus in 1961. If you look at the details of her behavior over the years - from when she got fired from the Watergate investigation staff for unethical behavior, through the years, it is a truly alarming psycho-profile of a person who has always done ANYTHING to win, keeps an enemies list and seeks revenge (according to the memoirs of her closest friend). Add in to that lethal mixture, the sublimated rage any wife would feel at the public humiliation visited upon her by her serially adulterous husband. I've never seen any Democratic politician the likes of her.
Posted by Divernan | Sun Jul 13, 2014, 07:45 PM (1 replies)
Big Money interests made no profit from opposing gay rights. Therefore HRC was totally free to support gays. In fact, as far as the MIC goes, gay cannon fodder is interchangeable with straight cannon fodder, and they need that cannon fodder to operate the weapons from which they profit. So that was a win/win for HRC. Gets credits from pro-gays, and serves the interests of the MIC at the same time.
You must be unfamiliar w/ HRC's voting/speechifying records to say she always made a more liberal choice. The only times she sides with traditional, old fashioned, humanistic Democratic values is when there's no corporate opposition.
Plus, the issues do not balance out on a simplistic one for one ratio. GMO/Keystone Pipeline/ Iraq War/foreign trade agreements/child refugees/war mongering,as in unsuccessfully pushing Obama to go along with British General Sir David Richards' blood-thirsty proposition to arm and train 100,000 Syrian rebels. Each of these issues have more far-reaching impact upon the US (and much of the world) than the few liberal votes she's chosen to make. Sadly, HRC still believes she's got to out macho male politicians when it comes to making war.
Who is the true patriot, Hillary Clinton or Edward Snowden? The question comes up because Clinton has gone all out in attacking Snowden as a means of burnishing her hawkish credentials, eliciting Glenn Greenwald’s comment that she is “like a neocon, practically.”
Posted by Divernan | Sun Jul 13, 2014, 04:53 PM (1 replies)
Back in the 80's - the first law firm I worked for after finishing law school had a section of lawyers specializing in representing asbestos victims. As you all may or may not know, asbestosis or mesothelioma resulting from asbestos typically takes decades to develop. However, lung biopsies proves the presence of asbestos fibers. Once a biopsy revealed asbestos fibers, all the plaintiff's lawyer had to do was negotiate a settlement, because causation was beyond dispute.
The Asbestos Industry Cover-ups
Although it may be unbeknownst to many, the dangers of using asbestos were documented well before the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulated its production and use. In fact, documents show that railroad companies knew as far back as the 1930s that asbestos was dangerous and could cause an array of medical issues, such as lung cancer and asbestosis.
Reasons for Industry Cover-ups
Even though it was established that asbestos was dangerous decades before the EPA’s regulation, companies, as previously mentioned, continued to stifle any information regarding the hazards of the mineral. Even after physicians, scientists, and even asbestos companies provided details of the dangers after conducting studies, companies still wouldn’t scale back on asbestos usage or inform workers of the dangers.
The reason behind the great cover-ups simply comes down to money. If the production of and the use of asbestos was eliminated, many companies would lose the fortune they built. In fact, in another documented statement, when an executive of a corporation that used asbestos was asked if he would let his workers die if it meant continuing to use the mineral, he replied, “ Yes. We save a lot of money that way.” In other words, the profits of the businesses that used asbestos was more important than the lives of the people who helped these businesses survive.
Classic examples of an industry that hid harmful effects of their products from the public are the Asbestos industry and the Tobacco industry. Both industries hid scientific knowledge of known toxic doses from their products for decades. These toxic doses have been the subject of government regulations and litigation. There are other examples of large corporations in the $880 Billion a year pharmaceutical industry as well as in the medical device industry.
A mega corporation like Monsanto has doubtless conducted extensive research on all its products, and deep-sixed that research under the guise of "trade secret". What a convenient place to bury any smoking guns. But hey, you never know when some goddamned whistle blower will come back at them, so better get insurance, guys! Let's put HRC on that!
Posted by Divernan | Sun Jul 13, 2014, 01:02 PM (0 replies)
Clinton recently attended the BIO International Convention on Wednesday, June 25 and leaked press snippets to confirm what most sustainable food movement supporters already know: she’s pro-GMO much like the other major political candidates that have been bought out by biotech.
Posted by Divernan | Sun Jul 13, 2014, 10:54 AM (23 replies)