Inhofe Hearts Gbagbo

Jim Inhofe continued his run as America's Worst Senator with a speech yesterday defending Ivory Coast dictator Laurent Gbagbo against the attacks by U.N. supported and fairly elected Alassane Ouattara. Why would Inhofe do this?

Because Gbagbo is an evangelical Christian and Ouattara is Muslim.

The right conducts its foreign policy in no small part based upon their comfort with the religion of the individual they are talking to. Right-wing evangelical Christianity has had no problem supporting murderous dictators who have converted. Guatemala's Rios Montt is possibly the most famous example of this. Gbagbo is a more recent example.

In the 1960s, the entire foreign policy establishment operated this way. Powerful American Catholics such as John Foster Dulles and Mike Mansfield supported Diem in Vietnam because he was a member of the Catholic elite in a Buddhist nation.

This was a tremendously stupid way to run foreign policy. Democrats and some Republicans have moved on from this myopia. Neoconservatives and the evangelical right very much have not.

A battle for High Commander of the Asshat Armada

Saw this on Taegan Goddard's Politcal Wire...

"I don't have to read it, or know what's in it. I'm going to oppose it anyways."

-- Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), on heath care reform

Whaa, a Republican that thinks he doesn't have to read? Surprising.

So, my question is this: Is Inhofe more worthy of the title "Worst Senator in America"? I had always penciled in John Cornyn for this, but I'll be damned if Inhofe's stock hasn't been rising lately.

I keep coming back to that scene in Mel Brooks' History of World where the Roman Senate votes against aiding the common folk by voting "Fuck the poor!"

The People We Have To Deal With

Fred Barnes' idiotic refutation of climate change has been making the rounds the last few days. Barnes says that it's been cold lately. This is his proof. When pressed for actual evidence, he said, "I'm not going to do your research for you." Because he's not going to do any research at all.

It's hard to know what to do with climate change deniers. More broadly, how do we deal with prominent right-wing journalists who have platforms who reach millions of people, yet prefer to deny reality. Are their heads in the sand? Are they just evil?

My guess is a combination of the two. Barnes is probably not all that smart. At the same time, what he wants is to get the Republicans back in power as soon as possible. So trashing every position held by a Democrat is his highest priority. He's attacking scientific findings, but I'll bet when it comes to weapons technology he's as pro-science as it gets. He's selecting what he wants to know, which suggests a touch of evil as well as a choice of ignorance. David Roberts has a great piece about how Barnes and other right-wing journalists have one source for their climate change denying information: the office of Oklahoma senator and certified idiot James Inhofe. Who needs scientists when you have the single worst senator in office today?

When we talk about climate change specifically, people like Barnes can hold a lot of sway because it's still really hard to get people to think about climate rather than weather. It's been cold in the Northeast for much of the winter. Because they are cold right now, the earth must not be warming at all! It's all a hoax. Al Gore becomes the butt of jokes. Meanwhile, Australia is setting record high temperatures and suffering through deadly fires. Texas has been 10 degrees warmer than average all winter. And while either of these circumstances could happen independently and thus aren't specifically the fault of climate change, the overwhelming evidence shows that the earth is warming and that extreme weather will be more common. But how to communicate this complexity to the public? I have no answer, but without a simple message it's really hard to convince people that their world is changing irrecovably and that we must take immediate action to stop it.

Meanwhile, birds are wintering further north every year because of warming. And salamander populations are collapsing in Central America for the same reason. But it's cold outside!

Climate Change Update

It's been awhile since I talked about climate change. An e-mail from MoveOn I received yesterday made me realize I needed to get back on it. According to the e-mail, the major TV networks have asked presidential candidates 2,679 questions. How many of those were about global warming? 3.

That's right. 3. The same number as about UFOs.

Climate change is the greatest crisis of 21st century. And it is not even on the radar screen in this election. I understand that there are other pressing issues that are dominating--Iraq, health care, the economy. These are very important and I don't want to take away from them. But these pale in comparison to how global warming will completely transform the way we live, and almost entirely for the negative.

And most Americans could not care less.

In other news, you may have heard about Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe's list of 400 "skeptics." Inhofe, arguably the stupidest person in the Senate, put this list out as part of his campaign to prove that global warming is a hoax. But the 400 aren't taking kindly to their inclusion. Grist has put together a series showing how many of the 400 aren't skeptics at all; rather what they said was totally misunderstood by Inhofe and his staff. Today, they discuss George Waldenberger. Waldenberger has asked to be taken off the list, saying,

"Take me off your list of 400 (Prominent) Scientists that dispute Man-Made Global warming claims. I've never made any claims that debunk the "Consensus".

You quoted a newspaper article that's main focus was scoring the accuracy of local weathermen. Hardly Scientific ... yet I'm guessing some of your other sources pale in comparison in terms of credibility.

You also didn't ask for my permission to use these statements. That's not a very respectable way of doing "research".

Ouch. Of course, Inhofe's office has refused and Waldenberger is still on the list.