Beware of global cooling?

An interesting read from Timothy Patterson, professor and director of the Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Centre, Department of Earth Sciences at Carleton University in Canada.

In a nutshell, he says forget the cries about “warming” – it’s cooling we need to worry about, and that it’s solar output – not man – which spurs climate change.

Liberals still whining because liberal talk radio isn’t very popular

Jonah Goldberg received a press release from the Center for American Progress (also posted at Think Progress). Here’s what it said:

ADVISORY: New Report Documenting Conservative Domination of Political Talk Radio

Conference call to discuss new CAP, Free Press report

Washington, DC – A major new study of all the news/talk radio stations controlled by the top five commercial station owners documents in detail the massive imbalance between conservative and progressive talk radio broadcast each weekday.

The study, set for release this Thursday, June 21st, 2007, by the Center for American Progress and Free Press, raises serious questions about whether the companies licensed to broadcast over the public airwaves are serving the listening needs of all Americans and providing a range of information on important public issues.

Statistical analysis of all 10,506 licensed-stations reveals how media ownership and consolidation over the past decade has contributed significantly to the one-sided nature of political talk radio. The report outlines specific policy solutions to address the imbalance and ensure that the commercial use of public airwaves serves local and community needs.

Goldberg’s response:

Let’s stipulate that the report is accurate about the fact that conservatives dominate talk radio. Who among us is shocked by this very old news? What I find simply amazing is that liberals see nothing wrong with using the state to police media content when they don’t like the content.

Does anyone really believe liberals would even entertain this renewed passion for the fairness doctrine if talk radio were overwhelmingly liberal? It just strikes me as so transparently opportunistic and unprincipled. If a conservative were to argue that the state should get involved in making Hollywood, or the biggest newspapers, or the broadcast news networks, or leading museums, publishing houses, or universities less liberal, liberals would justifiably scream bloody murder about censorship and propaganda.


…. I’m sure if we conservatives thought about it for a few minutes, we could come up with all sorts of ways the state could use its power to strong-arm other bastions of artistic and political expression to provide more “balance.” But (with the exception of public broadcasting) you don’t hear much of that from conservatives, do you? Meanwhile, in the one area of the media where liberals are at a disadvantage and can’t compete in the marketplace, they want to draft the state to do what Air America couldn’t. What sore losers. Suck it up for Pete’s sake.

Dem party logoIsn’t it interesting how liberals supposedly want to protect ‘innocent Americans’ from the state when it comes to accusations of terror ties, yet will turn right around and advocate that same untrustworthy state regulate the airwaves to make them more ‘fair’ to the left? These people are more than just ‘sore losers.’ They’re fascistic idiots.

You can fight back against this attempted resurrection of the Fairness Doctrine by contacting your House and Senate reps and expressing your concern. The sooner the better.

Updated to add: Just thought of something: If the left was really interested in their side getting ‘equal time’ on the airwaves, then they wouldn’t have demanded that the Democratic hopefuls for president avoid Fox News. After all, doesn’t “Faux News” need that ‘balance’, too? I smell the powerful, foul odor of hypocrisy in the air …

Thur AM Update: Much more extensive coverage of this developing story can be found via Michelle Malkin.


John Edwards to re-emphasize “Two Americas” theme

Via Mike Allen and Ben Smith at The Politico:

John Edwards, battling signs he may be left behind by Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, is seeking to reinvigorate his candidacy with a new focus on New Hampshire and a renewed emphasis on his populist “two Americas” message, advisers say.

The Edwards advisers say they have concluded that voters may not perceive sharp distinctions within the Democratic field on Iraq — an issue where Edwards was in the vanguard with a starkly anti-war stance that has dominated his campaign’s message.

So Edwards will try to differentiate himself by stressing a message of economic fairness that could appeal to the lower-income and union voters who are essential to his success. The focus is also designed to put him in a strong position with unions as they begin their formal endorsement process in late summer.

In a speech Thursday at New York’s Cooper Union, Edwards plans to talk about “one America of opportunity” and preview an agenda that includes tax policy that rewards work instead of just protecting wealth.

He plans to talk about alleviating middle-class debt by reining in predatory lenders and creating opportunities to lift Americans out of poverty by saving families money on the cost of college, gas and health care.

Only one problem with your “Two Americas” theme, Mr. Edwards …