Recent comments

  • Reply to: Whopper, Indeed: Republicans More Responsible for Green Outsourcing   13 years 10 months ago
    Nice try by Brendan Fischer. Too much depth and fact might just help confuse common sense even further. But isn't that what Left and Right spin does to any normally functioning fair-mindedness? We may agree that creativity and entrepreneurship, whether bona fide or malintended, create job opportunities for others of differing more dependent initiatives. But surely it's only as a direct function of when enterprise and ownership develops sufficiently to require helping hands; and then only when such expansion is not impacted regressively by direct interference and unrealistic demands on such business activity? Obviously then, what else must be expected if our otherwise successful business community is also always being held directly responsible for subsidising forever unsatisfied wants of 'developing' economies and untended population explosions in persisting uneconomic nations? Are those demands and regions not as much, if not more responsible for any dubious causes now conveniently concealed behind such an innocuous phrase as 'climate change?' Yet no squawk on those facts for some perhaps forbidding reason! Thus, hiding behind the rather frail and highly-contested premise of 'man-made global warming' for some political expediency, and suggesting that the US's best minds and corporations willingly abandon their talents and country's best interests, is lame. And such logic then falls on its own sword, when failing to note alongside China's praise, that those very same enterprises also laud China ... but for providing them, like with other Western mega-corporations and of course even George Soros's interests, with invulnerable competitive economic climates to presently succeed in (even if ultimately at their peril). How then can Big Labour and anti-free enterprise regulations, lawyers, activists, special interests, taxes, and so on, NOT avoid myopic responsibility for debilitating and hence unwittingly (purposefully?) redirecting the time-proven successful courses for Western enterprise? Are not such interferences forbidden in the previously failed economies of Labour et al's long-time allies and sponsors, like China, where private enterprise is now being carefully nurtured for its solutions? So, once again, differentially, I can join Brendan in his thus ironic and rhetorical questioning of US businesses moving to China (or Ireland, or India or ?). But It's the driving 'force' and unnatural 'cause' behind his own illusion in his article which alert and alarm this American business-owner. His "Buy America" spin, while his CMD colleagues attempt to raise domestic consumer prices to afford and fund their biased ideologies - by also laughably attacking a deaf, US-awakened and now entrepreneurially indestructible China to increase its costs of production, given its labour, humanitarian and environmental record - simply has to bring him full circle to first sensibly challenge his whole 'Green' premise: How does alternative or renewable energy in any way prevent global warming if proven to be a natural phenomenon? Thereafter, and without humankind's cause, what has its many life-styles' carbon-emissions to do with anything? Or, better still, even if 'man-made' global warming has some proven credibility, and given that fossil fuels and atomic energy have done such a good job of progressing and feeding the planet so far, where's any sound argument against such technology continuing to feasibly morph towards more efficient and effective means than 'Green' in helping to economically preserve the planet? Thus, despite all the one-sided 'facts' attempting to argue an untenable logic, purely for purposes of political justification, perhaps we can rather agree on the merits of sincerely seeking and finding common apolitical energy ground, which best serves Americans first - with the world's nations choosing likewise for their individual shortcomings; if permitted by our 'globalist' power mongerers? Allowing initiative and entrepreneurship to show the way (as opposed to consistently berating and disrupting the best yet for purely selfish motives), presents not only a more conducive atmosphere for mankind's technical progress, but a more realistic climate for natural change; AND, a more unifying forecast for individual, national cooperation with understanding on a global basis. For a start, this contrary media and its well-known sponsor/investor, George Soros, have seemingly more than enough creativity and appropriate resources, WITHOUT government and taxpayer support, to risk economically developing whatever desired alternative energies are preferred. Surely adding to mankind's, centuries-earned inventories of such investments and opportunities make more sense than, for example, undermining US light bulb output to support so-called eco-friendly substitutes from China? Brendan Fischer's renewable energy thoughts thus fail substantially. Destroying everyone and everything reflecting civilization's progress to date, and on whose present strategies and technologies rely most of humanity in one form or another (even wind-turbines and solar-panels), is nonsensical. It is appreciated that his vision may be blinkered by seeing fruitful economies only through the eyes of Governmental power, dictate, and freeloading people's rights and resources. But, he should well note, that even his obvious mentor's favoured China has hardly an honourable record for HIS OWN individual freedom and well-being at the end of the day; and, it has only recently succeeded in now challenging the world on most fronts by first bringing the real power of private ownership/enterprise, free-markets and competition back into play.
  • Reply to: Lies in the Name of the Free Market   13 years 10 months ago
    SW
    Dear Cody-- Your allegation is simply untrue. If there is something that is not accurate, please let us know, but entries by SourceWatch contributors are strictly sourced so a reader can check out the basis for statements made. Sometimes people don't like to see the truth in print, like about the conditions at some factory farms producing the food they eat. Or, are you a factory farmer?
  • Reply to: Wendell Potter: "My Apologies to Michael Moore and the Health Insurance Industry"   13 years 10 months ago
    As someone who lives in a European country with governmental health care, I had no clue what Michael Moore's film had caused as reactions, discussions, etc. in the United States. I actually just watched the film "Sicko" for the first time a few weeks ago. Now someone on a webboard I'm on linked to the public apology Mr. Potter made on TV. And I was stunned. This is a rather personal message, really, and I am not sure if it will reach Mr. Potter personally, but it was important for me to say this because really, it's a public issue, too (especially now): This must have taken a LOT of courage. Mr. Potter was facing public attack, and that's a personal issue that is absolutely not easy to handle. Also - Mr. Potter's face is widely known now. Fame is never easy to handle. And negative fame, as this ultimately is, committing one's "crimes" so to speak publicly, is even harder to handle. I am in awe at the courage this must have taken. Mr.Potter says on this interview "I have only been doing this for 18 months" - of course this is true, but also: Mr. Potter DID do this. He came forward, publicly, and spoke up. And that, in my opinion, deserves some real applause. Because it needs backbone and something we call "civil courage" here (I don't know if it's the same in English-speaking countries) and that is something that is extremely, extremely rare in all situations, in all people. So a very personal thing, that. And I can appreciate that. A whole lot. -Claudia
  • Reply to: Who'd Pay for Rupert Murdoch's Climate Change Skepticism?   13 years 10 months ago
    The argument of climate change skeptics and the deniers is in hot. We see some people are not serious at all about it. In the name of excess production and excess facility, we are doing just the opposite. We clearly know that long days cause more heat, more precipitation, more rain; after rain, the land is wet, days are shorter, cold increases, When we disturb this phenomena, wouldn’t the process be disrupted. So instead of wasting time in arguments, lets work in harmony with the nature and follow sustainable development strategy for the good of our own future children.
  • Reply to: Lies in the Name of the Free Market   13 years 10 months ago
    SourceWatch is nothing but bullshit propaganda in of itself. They deliberately lie to protect corrupt groups like PETA and the PCRM,

Pages