Global Warming in the News

Interesting times we live in, no?

Fox News and Rush Limbaugh talk almost every day about how global warming is a myth.

Yet, the lead story on CNN right now is this one:

It keeps getting hotter, and we're probably to blame

5 things to know on climate change

The world's getting hotter, the seas are rising and the U.N. climate change report says humans are the likely cause. FULL STORY

• Researchers say it's 95% certain
• Opinion: We need common sense
• Understanding the report  
• Miami's rising water  
• Photos: Trees on the brink  

 

You should know that, in spite of what any one person thinks or news organization suggests, 97% of studies drawing a conclusion of whether global warming is real and man made, find that it is.

Even the National Security Agency (NSA) says climate change is a serious security threat to the US.

So there is consensus.

Which is why you'd expect this to be news.

And it is. At least on CNN.

As for Fox? This was the lead story on Fox News yesterday for a bit:

 

Timber industry suffers as regs blamed for lost jobs 

 

Lost jobs? How about lost people? More fires? etc.

 

And Rush Limbaugh?

He routinely calls it a hoax.

Rush Limbaugh: Ignorant, racist, misogynistic multi-millionaire

I generally avoid partisan attacks on this blog.

Not for this tool.

Rush Limbaugh is not backing down after widespread condemnation over his misogynistic attack on Sandra Fluke, a Georgetown University Law School student who testified before Congress recently about the problems caused when women lack access to contraception.

If anything, Limbaugh has increased the vitriol, at one point asking Fluke: "Who bought your condoms in sixth grade?"

Yesterday, Limbaugh called Fluke a "slut" and a "prostitute."


Those comments were quickly condemned. Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) called on Republicans to denounce Limbaugh's attack on Fluke, calling out his "despicable attack," which Maloney identified as "a new low in a season of lows." Fluke also issued a statement saying this language is "an attack on all women" and declaring that those who speak out for comprehensive women's health care "will not be silenced."

Limbaugh is not backing down.

Opening his show Thursday, Limbaugh characterized the criticism of his comments as "a conniption fit," which he called "hilarious." He offered what he said was a "compromise" to contraception coverage: purchasing "all the women at Georgetown University as much aspirin to put between their knees as possible."


Limbaugh returned to the controversy later, claiming to have "run some numbers" on contraception costs and arguing that contraception coverage was "flat-out thievery" that would force taxpayers to pay to "satisfy the sexual habits of female law students at Georgetown."


Limbaugh later dismissed concerns over lack of access to contraception coverage and mocked Fluke's congressional testimony, affecting a baby's voice and pretending to cry, saying: "I'm going broke having sex. I need government to provide me condoms and contraception. It's not fair."  


Limbaugh later questioned why insurance should cover contraception and played a portion of Fluke's testimony laying out the problems many college-age women face paying for contraception. He asked, "Ms. Fluke, have you ever heard of not having sex? Have you ever heard of not having sex so often?"

After saying that the Washington, D.C., Department of Health "will send you free condoms and lube," Limbaugh said: "So, Ms. Fluke and the rest of you feminazis, here's the deal. If we are going to pay for your contraceptives, and thus pay for you to have sex, we want something for it, and I'll tell you what it is. We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch."


After discussing outrage over his comments, Limbaugh again attacked Fluke, asking: "Who bought your condoms in junior high? Who bought your condoms in the sixth grade? Or your contraception. Who bought your contraceptive pills in high school?"


Critics of Limbaugh's comments have pointed to the strength Fluke demonstrated by testifying before Congress, particularly given Limbaugh's attacks on her. Limbaugh responded to those critics by saying that Fluke is "having so much sex, it's amazing she can still walk." He also said Georgetown should establish a "Wilt Chamberlin scholarship ... exclusively for women."


Limbaugh read from a Washington Post blog post that reported Fluke had been interested in contraceptive coverage even before she enrolled at Georgetown. Because of this, Limbaugh declared, "She's a plant -- an anti-Catholic plant from the get-go on this."


Limbaugh also purported to explain the issue of contraceptive coverage in a "simple way" by saying: "It's just a new welfare program. And 'welfare' is a bad word, and they can't use it. They can't sell it. So now it's disguised -- welfare disguised as women's health. Or women's reproductive rights."

Limbaugh went on to say that Fluke's testimony was part of a "Democrat plot" to "create a new welfare program and, at the same time, try to cast Republicans in an election year as anti-female." He described Fluke as "a woman who is happily presenting herself as an immoral, baseless, no-purpose-to-her life woman. She wants all the sex in the world whenever she wants it, all the time, no consequences. No responsibility for her behavior."

And for stories like this, Rush Limbaugh is paid $30 million every year?

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201203010012

All Things Considered v. Rush Limbaugh

Driving home from work yesterday I turned on the radio in my car.

It was set to FM 88.5, one of our National Public Radio (NPR) affiliates. Four panelists, each with his or her own area of experstise, were talking about Egypt. The show was "All Things Considered."

I listened for a bit, then during a lull, I flipped it over to AM 1450, a local station where I get local news in the morning. I normally do this in order to hear what topic Rush Limbaugh is addressing.

As I did this, I said to myself, "There's no way Rush will be talking about Egypt, since he obviously has no expertise about that."

To my surprise, when Rush began talking, he was talking about Egypt.

And he said something to the effect of, "Before we start jumping on the bandwagon and throwing our support behing these protestors, we should at least find out who they are and what they stand for."

And here is the kicker. He actually said, "None of us even knows what is going on over there."

I then flipped it back over to NPR and the panelists were explaining exactly what is going on over there.

Who is behind it. Who is not behind it. Why it is happening.

And how it has nothing to do with Islamic fundamentalism, al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or anything like that.

Then I turned back to Rush Limbaugh and he was saying how we don't know if the protestors are "down with" Islamic fundamentalism, al-Qaeda, and the Taliban. Yes, he said all those groups, like they are some big happy family.

He mentioned the "Muslim Brotherhood" and said we don't want to support them, implying they are behind the protests.

A man from North Carolina then called in and asked Rush whether it was true that Egyptian leader Mubarak was a multi-billionaire. And Rush said "I don't know, why?"

Rush also asked the man where he got that information.

The man replied, "I was just reading something in the liberal media, obviously."

The caller then suggested that the mainstream media in the US were covering the story simply because the people living there are protesting a very rich man, and the media love stories like that because they hate capitalism.

Sigh.

Of course, Rush took it from there, attempting to link coverage of this supposed protest against capitalism to other stories in the press that are critical of rich people. To Rush Limbuagh, this is only news because the media hate rich people; any story that makes rich people look bad will be appealing to the media.

My head started hurting, so I turned it back to NPR (today I woke up and realized my IQ had fallen five points. I'll work extra hard today to get them back).

Now, back to what Rush Limbaugh actually said on the program.

He said: "None of us even know what is going on over there."

By "None of us" he obviously meant himself and his listeners.

Limbaugh claims political motivation in media in its coverage of Giffords shooting

Many reject Rush Limbaugh for various reasons. Many simply don't take him seriously.

They do so at their own peril.

The man is the most listened to person on talk radio. And he is incredibly powerful.

He recently defended himself and others with a similar worldview from recent suggestions in the media that charged political rhetoric (by folks like Sarah Palin) may have inspired the Arizona shootings.

I have mixed feelings about this whole situation, as, on the one hand, there is no direct evidence that anything anyone in particular said motivated this particular shooter's actions. However, on the other hand, many specific people did say specific things--including things that suggest a willingness to use violence to solve political problems and that unnecessarily get people all worked up over non issues--that probably generally do increase the likelihood that violent acts will occur.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/01/10/limbaugh-says-dems-playing-politics-with-giffords-shooting/