More Conservative Nonsense

The lies, mistakes and misjudgments of the hapless and increasingly impotent Bush administration have forced conservatives to try to salvage their “movement” by retreating to the radical fringes of their constituency. Unfortunately, they’ve also retreated to the fringes of logic, reason and common sense. Consider the three glaringly idiotic positions taken by various conservatives during the past week.

1) Requiring young girls to take an HPV vaccine will encourage promiscuity.

And tetanus shots will encourage children to impale themselves on rusty metal objects.

Please. This claim is so hollow and pathetic it draws into question the intelligence, integrity and motivation of anyone who utters it. And yet conservative groups in several states are trying to block legislation requiring the vaccines for girls.

Social conservatives are terrified of their own urges and seek to limit the behavior of others in order to feel safe from dangerous territory like human sexuality—often at the expense of long-term health. How sad and tyrannical. Reasonable people need to ensure that the superstitions of social conservatives don’t infect our laws and keep our children from important medical advances, like the HPV vaccine.

2) Criticizing, restricting or rejecting the Iraq troop surge harms the morale of our troops.

Again, utter nonsense. And yet conservatives on the talk-show circuit are making the claim over and over.

What is more comforting to soldiers – the knowledge that the nation is going to get them out of a lethal, untenable and relentless civil war, or the knowledge that the nation is keeping them there and committing more lives and resources to a hopeless situation?

Debate, oversight and the reversal of the worst foreign policy mistake in our nation’s history serves to comfort our troops, and further demonstrates to enemies and others the principles and values of our democratic system. On the other hand, an unfettered Imperial President whose ego drives him to compound his mistakes at the expense of our military hurts morale and emboldens our enemies.

3) Global warming scientists are just bureaucrats and can't predict the future.

Conservative Michael Crichton appeared on Charlie Rose last week and made a series of bold, knowing, professorial pronouncements about Global Warming. But rather than offer any data of substance to back his position, he spent his time criticizing and belittling the recently released IPCC report, a consensus document stating that global warming was real, grave and caused by human activity (see my 2/6 post).

According to Crichton, his information providers are skilled and correct while the sixteen hundred international scientists who contributed to the IPCC report were all “bureaucrats,” and thus worthy of dismissal.

Like so many conservatives, Crichton gives blanket condemnation to an entire group of people whose position he disagrees with. Rather than attack the substance of their conclusions, he attacks their character and belittles them with labels, all to sell his own book. But like other climate change Denialists, Crichton has done nothing to change the fundamentals of what we know about global warming.

Reading from standard conservative talking points, he also claimed that predicting the future is impossible, and thus any projections made by climatologists should be dismissed. Which is also utter nonsense. Climate models, like all complex, technology-based mathematical models, are getting more accurate and robust with every passing day. To completely dismiss their conclusions would be pure folly. And few of them are predicting anything less than dire.

But even if they turn out to be inaccurate, wouldn’t it be better to err on the side of safety and prevention than on the side of doing nothing? Thus far, Crichton and his ilk are just a lot of dangerous hot air.

- JT Compton

Global Warming's Dangerous Deniers

A recently released report by the International Panel on Climate Change stated that Global Warming was a certainty, that the cause was human activity to at least a 90% probability, and that the consequences would be dire. The IPCC has a history of caution and rigor, and this report was formed by a huge number of respected scientists from 40 countries. It represents a broad, unparalleled scientific consensus

But two other aspects of this report were notable.

First, that a large number of scientists vehemently disagreed with the report. No, not the oil-funded pseudo-scientists—they’ve all but disappeared. These dissenters felt that the word “dire” was too weak. They wanted stronger language, stating that words like “catastrophic” were much more appropriate.

It's significant that the possibilities for Global Warming are increasingly falling into the range of “dire” to “catastrophic”. There are no longer legitimate groups or bodies of scientists arguing that the consequences will be mild or beneficial.

Second, another group of dissenters--outside the scientific community--disagreed with the report, led by Republican Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma. These might best be described as the oil addicts in denial. Flying in the face of a sea of facts and consensus reports, Inhofe and his small but angry following claimed that Global Warming was a “hoax.” Indeed, Inhofe stated recently that the hoax is being perpetrated because The Weather Channel and others stand to make money off it by spreading fear.

As grotesquely ridiculous as Inhofe and his claim are, his office gives him a legitimacy that continues to impede progress on this crucial issue. It should come as no surprise that the oil-patch Senator Inhofe received more campaign contributions from the oil industry than any other, by almost a two-to-one margin.

But beyond revealing ignorance and a conflict of interest, Inhofe’s comment also reveals the dark side of the Conservative mentality. His claim that cable channels make money from climate change is a reflection of the greedy, money grubbing, pay-for-play world he comes from. He’s taking the reality of his own office—one bought and paid for by oil companies and others whose motives are to keep their elite officers in the millions by paying for legislative favors—and projecting that reality on others.

But Senator Inhofe’s brain can neither grasp nor trust that scientists and the environmental community are often motivated by a passion for truth and nature. Unlike Inhofe, they’re not desperate to maintain their hundred-grand membership at the local country club so they can hang with a bunch of other back-slapping, drunken, wealthy white golfers and scheme on ways to make more money by screwing others.

Conservatives like Inhofe have a tough time understanding anything but the motivation to make a buck, and the last six years of GOP rule reflect that mindset. By shifting vast amounts of wealth to the already-wealthy, they’ve done an effective job of widening the gap between rich and poor in America. Which is why those who deny Global Warming are often those who have the most invested in conspicuous consumption and a lavish, wasteful lifestyle.

Denial is a means to avoid responsibility. Accepting the harm that carbon emissions do to the environment--and the threat they have created--means taking responsibility for developing a new paradigm for society, not to mention making personal sacrifices.

In a perfectly just world, our future would include keeping track of those who deny climate change and impede its correction, penalizing them as the situation worsens. If food or energy shortages occur, the deniers would stand at the back of the line. As regions bake, deniers would be the last ones allowed to move.

But the world isn’t just, and voters are often as ignorant and deluded as their leaders. Until people stop electing dangerously misguided and reckless people like Inhofe, the issue of Global Warming will continue to be attacked and impeded while the world burns.

- JT Compton