Rush Limbaugh Hating On Japanese Victims of Quake, Tsunami and Radiation. He Should Be Boycotted
March 17, 2011 No CommentLimbaugh has said some disgusting stuff in his time, but his mean-spirited, sick rants against the Japanese people as they face a nuclear meltdown and radiation poisoning on top of the massive earthquake and tsunami are beyond the pale. In a just world we would see him get fired. A boycott should at least come out of this. CALLER: I need some of your wisdom. I’m confused. At the top of the first hour, you played a clip. Diane Sawyer, I believe, about the recycling that is still going on in Japan. LIMBAUGH: I did. You’re right. CALLER: If these are the people that invented the Prius, have mastered public transportation, recycling, why did mother earth, Gaia if you will, hit them with this disaster? LIMBAUGH: Well, that’s an interesting question. Let’s go back and grab Diane Sawyer. Audio sound bite number nine. This is her report on a shelter for refugees in Japan and how they are handling their waste management. [PLAYS CLIP] DIANE SAWYER: This is a shelter. Some of these people here for days, and look, it’s recycling. Organized for recycling. GUEST: Plastic, combustible, burnable, canes. [END CLIP] LIMBAUGH: Did I really hear this? Did I really hear — Diane Sawyer is in a refugee camp in Japan. Play this again. This is almost like a kindergarten teacher talking to the four year olds. That is how old you are in kindergarten, right? Five? Five? Four? Alright. This is — some of these people here for days and look, look it’s recycling, organized for recycling. [PLAYS CLIP] SAWYER: This is a shelter. Some of these people here for days and look it’s recycling, organized for recycling. GUEST: Plastic, combustible, burnable, canes. [END CLIP] RUSH: My god, she sounds like she saw her husband for the first time in six months there. Oh, it’s recycling, look, organized for — these people are in the midst of earthquake devastation and the credit they’re getting is for recycling and our caller Chris with a great question. The Japanese have done so much to save the planet. He’s right. They’ve given us the Prius. Even now, refugees are still recycling their garbage, and yet Gaia levels them [laughs], just wipes them out. Wipes out their nuclear plants, all kinds of radiation. What kind of payback is this? That is an excellent question. They invented the Prius. In fact, where Gaia blew up is right where they make all these electric cars. That’s where the tsunami hit. All those brand new electric cars sitting there on the lot. I like the way this guy was thinking. It’s like — it’s like Gaia hit the Prius in [inaudible]. It’s like they were in the crosshairs, if we can use that word, it does. What is Gaia trying to tell us here? What is the mother of environmentalism trying to say with this hit? Great observation out there, Chris. Here’s Tom in Naples, Florida. You’re next on the EIB network. Hello. CALLER: Hey, Rush Limbaugh, how you doing? LIMBAUGH: Fine sir, thanks much. CALLER: Hey, I know, I’m calling about and I was trying to just add a little levity to the day. My issue is that I don’t want Obama to pick Ohio State in his brackets, because that’s who I’m picking. Great observation out there, Rush. Yea, what a kick in the pants it is that Gaia would hit the home of the Prius with this kind of devastation. I bet Japan is laughing right with you. What a sick, sick, diseased man. After being called out on it, Limbaugh tried to downplay his laughing at Japan And the news at the point that I wrote this post from the NY Times: U.S. Calls Radiation ‘Extremely High,’ Sees Japan Nuclear Crisis Worsening The chairman of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission gave a far bleaker appraisal on Wednesday of the threat posed by Japan ’s nuclear crisis than the Japanese government had offered. He said American officials believed that the damage to at least one crippled reactor was much more serious than Tokyo had acknowledged… read on
Continue reading …
Markets that trade carbon pollution permits are meant to cut emissions. So why did the carbon dioxide vented in 2010 under Europe’s scheme go up? An update on the European Union’s Emissions Trading Scheme and just how loose the cap on emissions is now, following the economic crash … The latest analysis from Bloomberg New Energy Finance shows that last year, carbon emissions from the energy, steel, concrete and manufacturing facilities in the ETS rose by an estimated 1.8%. Yes, rose, not fell. I think carbon trading schemes are necessary as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and limit climate change. But to work, the cap on emissions has to be tight enough. The reason emissions rose in 2010 compared with 2009 was that emissions had fallen hard from 2008-2009 (11%) and 2007-2008 (5%). So there was room last year for emissions to grow, as the economy recovered a little, without hitting the cap. As it stands, Sandbag ‘s Damien Morris tells me that no country in the EU will have to cut its carbon until at least 2015. Sandbag’s analysis shows that the entire 2008-2012 ETS period (phase two) is likely result in no carbon being cut, at all. On the contrary, some spare pollution permits will probably be carried over into the next phase. I agree with the UK’s energy secretary, Chris Huhne, that Europe has to increase its ambition, to a continent-wide 30% . Some may argue that allowing businesses to make use of the looseness of the carbon cap as they recover from the recession makes perfect sense. But that is only the case if you believe that high-carbon businesses have a long-term future. If you think a low-carbon future is inevitable, then banking the carbon cuts caused by the recession and thereby redirecting investment to develop sustainable activities, such as renewable energy, is the only sane choice. If not, I’m sure China will be very happy to sell us the technology when we realise we need it, rather than vice versa. Footnote: If you want to post comments below like “the ETS is corrupt and broken – time to cash in”, or “quick, fill your boots before they close down this scam!”, then feel free. The ETS has been appallingly badly run . But for the sake of clarity, do please say whether you think carbon emissions need to be reduced at all. If you do, please say what your alternative to the ETS is. I am away for much of tomorrow, but will dive into the comments later. Carbon emissions Carbon offsetting European Union Damian Carrington guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
When a TechCrunch writer posted ‘snarky’ remarks about Source Code’s marketing, the studio wasn’t impressed. So what? Reader, prepare yourself: Someone on the internet thinks Source Code looks silly. Source Code, of course, is a movie that premiered at South by Southwest last weekend, and which stars Jake Gyllenhaal as a man who must relive a train wreck over and over again, in the hope of changing its outcome. The last time you saw this movie, it was a comedy called Groundhog Day, and it starred Bill Murray and a remarkably unrealistic groundhog puppet who could drive a car. This time, however, the time loop is achieved with futuristic technology rather than mystical rodent curses, and as far as the Summit Entertainment studio is concerned, jokes should not be allowed anywhere near it. Consider Alexia Tsotis, a TechCrunch blogger called upon to cover the movie’s premiere. Her piece focused on the movie’s marketing, described as a “cross-platform, trans-media campaign” involving “social media game play”. This amounts to asking people to promote the movie on Facebook; Tsotis noted that, and joked about it, calling the above-quoted hype a “buzzwordgasm”. At which point, the trans-media cross-platform marketers at Summit found a whole new use for the internet: contacting AOL, the company that owns TechCrunch, to suggest that Tsotis change her piece. The email from MovieFone – the AOL-run film blog that Summit contacted – is apologetic. “Wanted to raise a concern that Summit had about the piece,” it says. “They felt it was a little snarky and wondered if any of the snark can be toned down?” It concludes on a similarly uncomfortable note: “If you have good reasons not to change anything that’s fine, I just need to get back to Summit.” One pities the sender. Especially since Tsotis published the email after receiving it. MovieFone defends its actions , but it had every reason to know it was doing something wrong. It wasn’t Summit’s place to demand changes; nor was it MovieFone’s place to imply that TechCrunch needed “good reasons” not to make them. The “good reason” they had to keep the piece intact was simple: Tsotis was paid to write a blog post, not to write ad copy for Summit. And she definitely wasn’t answerable to Summit’s concerns about, of all things, her sense of humour. Summit is not alone in its concerns. Most criticisms of internet writing centre on its tone. It is undeniably true that “snark” – the single most irritating new word of the past 20 years, given that it means “sarcasm”, which we already have a word for – does predominate, in some circles. It’s an easy way to convey that your target might be silly or inconsequential. It can be cruel; it’s undeniably unpleasant to work hard on something and to have it dismissed with a nasty joke. But one suspects that Summit’s response is less about hurt feelings than about the fact that negative coverage might affect its bottom line. Which somewhat relieves one’s sentimental concerns. And it’s also true that bloggers are frequently called upon to cover extremely silly and inconsequential things. To discuss the bold new marketing innovation of “making people talk about a movie on Facebook” with a straight face, especially when that movie is a Groundhog Day remake with slightly more train explosions, is a bit too much to ask for. Without at least some acknowledgment of the ridiculousness at hand, the writer risks turning in an article that is little more than a press release. Without snark, Tsotis’s piece wouldn’t be cruel. It would be something even worse: boring. SXSWi Blogging SXSW Festivals Digital media Internet United States Sady Doyle guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …When a TechCrunch writer posted ‘snarky’ remarks about Source Code’s marketing, the studio wasn’t impressed. So what? Reader, prepare yourself: Someone on the internet thinks Source Code looks silly. Source Code, of course, is a movie that premiered at South by Southwest last weekend, and which stars Jake Gyllenhaal as a man who must relive a train wreck over and over again, in the hope of changing its outcome. The last time you saw this movie, it was a comedy called Groundhog Day, and it starred Bill Murray and a remarkably unrealistic groundhog puppet who could drive a car. This time, however, the time loop is achieved with futuristic technology rather than mystical rodent curses, and as far as the Summit Entertainment studio is concerned, jokes should not be allowed anywhere near it. Consider Alexia Tsotis, a TechCrunch blogger called upon to cover the movie’s premiere. Her piece focused on the movie’s marketing, described as a “cross-platform, trans-media campaign” involving “social media game play”. This amounts to asking people to promote the movie on Facebook; Tsotis noted that, and joked about it, calling the above-quoted hype a “buzzwordgasm”. At which point, the trans-media cross-platform marketers at Summit found a whole new use for the internet: contacting AOL, the company that owns TechCrunch, to suggest that Tsotis change her piece. The email from MovieFone – the AOL-run film blog that Summit contacted – is apologetic. “Wanted to raise a concern that Summit had about the piece,” it says. “They felt it was a little snarky and wondered if any of the snark can be toned down?” It concludes on a similarly uncomfortable note: “If you have good reasons not to change anything that’s fine, I just need to get back to Summit.” One pities the sender. Especially since Tsotis published the email after receiving it. MovieFone defends its actions , but it had every reason to know it was doing something wrong. It wasn’t Summit’s place to demand changes; nor was it MovieFone’s place to imply that TechCrunch needed “good reasons” not to make them. The “good reason” they had to keep the piece intact was simple: Tsotis was paid to write a blog post, not to write ad copy for Summit. And she definitely wasn’t answerable to Summit’s concerns about, of all things, her sense of humour. Summit is not alone in its concerns. Most criticisms of internet writing centre on its tone. It is undeniably true that “snark” – the single most irritating new word of the past 20 years, given that it means “sarcasm”, which we already have a word for – does predominate, in some circles. It’s an easy way to convey that your target might be silly or inconsequential. It can be cruel; it’s undeniably unpleasant to work hard on something and to have it dismissed with a nasty joke. But one suspects that Summit’s response is less about hurt feelings than about the fact that negative coverage might affect its bottom line. Which somewhat relieves one’s sentimental concerns. And it’s also true that bloggers are frequently called upon to cover extremely silly and inconsequential things. To discuss the bold new marketing innovation of “making people talk about a movie on Facebook” with a straight face, especially when that movie is a Groundhog Day remake with slightly more train explosions, is a bit too much to ask for. Without at least some acknowledgment of the ridiculousness at hand, the writer risks turning in an article that is little more than a press release. Without snark, Tsotis’s piece wouldn’t be cruel. It would be something even worse: boring. SXSWi Blogging SXSW Festivals Digital media Internet United States Sady Doyle guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Former Haitian president will be joined by Hollywood actor on return to homeland from seven-year exile in South Africa Actor and campaigner Danny Glover has arrived in South Africa to escort former Haitian president Jean-Bertrand Aristide home, the politician’s lawyer said. American lawyer Ira Kurzban has flown to Johannesburg to accompany Aristide back to Haiti. She has been joined by the star of the Lethal Weapon action movies, who is board chair of the human rights and social advocacy organisation TransAfrica Forum . The United States has called for Aristide to delay his departure until Sunday’s disputed presidential run-off in his homeland , saying his return would distract voters. Aristide, who emerged as a leading voice for Haiti’s poor in a popular revolt that forced an end to the Duvalier family’s 29-year dictatorship, remains Haiti’s most popular politician despite being in exile for seven years. He has said he will not be involved in politics in Haiti and wants to lead his foundation’s efforts to improve education in the impoverished Caribbean nation, which was devastated by last year’s catastrophic earthquake. Aides say he fears the winner of the presidential elections might reverse the long-awaited decision to allow his return. Both candidates in the the run-off have long opposed Aristide. Glover is among several high profile US figures who have been pushing for Aristide’s speedy return, including politician Jesse Jackson, the US envoy to Haiti Paul Farmer, and singer Harry Belafonte. “I am going to South Africa to show our solidarity with the people of Haiti by standing at the side of the leader they elected twice with overwhelming support,” Glover wrote on the TransAfrica Forum website. “People of good conscience cannot be idle while a former dictator is able to return unhindered while a democratic leader who peacefully handed over power to another elected president is restricted from returning to his country by external forces,” Glover said. Kurzban blamed Aristide’s delayed trip on arranging an aircraft. Air charter companies in South Africa said a private jet would cost more than half a million dollars. South African officials said they are consulting “interested parties” on the logistics of moving Aristide, his wife and two daughters. Glover and nine others recently wrote to the South African president, Jacob Zuma, urging him to “assist the Aristides in making their transition as soon as possible” because “all the last remaining obstacles to the Aristides’ return have been removed”. Haiti South Africa US foreign policy Human rights guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Former Haitian president will be joined by Hollywood actor on return to homeland from seven-year exile in South Africa Actor and campaigner Danny Glover has arrived in South Africa to escort former Haitian president Jean-Bertrand Aristide home, the politician’s lawyer said. American lawyer Ira Kurzban has flown to Johannesburg to accompany Aristide back to Haiti. She has been joined by the star of the Lethal Weapon action movies, who is board chair of the human rights and social advocacy organisation TransAfrica Forum . The United States has called for Aristide to delay his departure until Sunday’s disputed presidential run-off in his homeland , saying his return would distract voters. Aristide, who emerged as a leading voice for Haiti’s poor in a popular revolt that forced an end to the Duvalier family’s 29-year dictatorship, remains Haiti’s most popular politician despite being in exile for seven years. He has said he will not be involved in politics in Haiti and wants to lead his foundation’s efforts to improve education in the impoverished Caribbean nation, which was devastated by last year’s catastrophic earthquake. Aides say he fears the winner of the presidential elections might reverse the long-awaited decision to allow his return. Both candidates in the the run-off have long opposed Aristide. Glover is among several high profile US figures who have been pushing for Aristide’s speedy return, including politician Jesse Jackson, the US envoy to Haiti Paul Farmer, and singer Harry Belafonte. “I am going to South Africa to show our solidarity with the people of Haiti by standing at the side of the leader they elected twice with overwhelming support,” Glover wrote on the TransAfrica Forum website. “People of good conscience cannot be idle while a former dictator is able to return unhindered while a democratic leader who peacefully handed over power to another elected president is restricted from returning to his country by external forces,” Glover said. Kurzban blamed Aristide’s delayed trip on arranging an aircraft. Air charter companies in South Africa said a private jet would cost more than half a million dollars. South African officials said they are consulting “interested parties” on the logistics of moving Aristide, his wife and two daughters. Glover and nine others recently wrote to the South African president, Jacob Zuma, urging him to “assist the Aristides in making their transition as soon as possible” because “all the last remaining obstacles to the Aristides’ return have been removed”. Haiti South Africa US foreign policy Human rights guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …“Democrats on both sides of the Capitol say they have no idea where the White House stands or who’s running the show.” — Politico , 3-17-11 “Obama The Invisible: Anti-leadership Amid World Crises”–headline, John Podhoretz column, NY Post , 3-15-11 With the Hamptons beach season looming, has Donny Deutsch let working on his abs get in the way of watching what's going on in the White House?
Continue reading …“Democrats on both sides of the Capitol say they have no idea where the White House stands or who’s running the show.” — Politico , 3-17-11 “Obama The Invisible: Anti-leadership Amid World Crises”–headline, John Podhoretz column, NY Post , 3-15-11 With the Hamptons beach season looming, has Donny Deutsch let working on his abs get in the way of watching what's going on in the White House?
Continue reading …
Hillary Clinton condemns the rulers in Manama for not showing restraint as Shia-Sunni tensions mount around the Middle East The US has issued a sharp rebuke to Bahrain after a day of crackdowns on demonstrators, in which hospitals were blockaded by riot police, scores of people were wounded and the Shia diaspora condemned the kingdom’s rulers. The capital, Manama, was under curfew from 4pm to 4am, and the government was using emergency laws to ban public gatherings. The central square known as Pearl Roundabout, which had been a base for the protest movement, was violently cleared by riot police. Troops and riot police then moved on to locations across the city, including the Salmaniya medical clinic , which had become a second focal point of demonstrations. Doctors reported being attacked in wards and claimed power to part of the hospital had been turned off. The government said it was pursuing “thugs and outlaws”. “We have been chased, attacked and locked inside the grounds,” one doctor told the Guardian. “But the worst thing is … that we have been stopped from reaching patients.” On Wednesday night the British government said it would charter planes to evacuate its citizens who want to flee the deteriorating situation in Bahrain. The Foreign Office has urged people to leave the country on commercial flights but those who cannot get a ticket will be evacuated on a Foreign Office-chartered flight costing £260. Phone lines to Bahrain appeared blocked for much of the day , making it difficult to confirm reports of attacks on demonstrators. However, videos uploaded to YouTube and Facebook showed clear violence against unarmed protesters – including one man shot in the leg from at least 100 metres away. In another case, men in riot police uniform vandalised parked cars as they confronted demonstrators. The US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, led diplomatic reaction to the violence, delivering a stern warning to Bahrain’s rulers. Clinton said Bahrain, and neighbouring Gulf states that have sent troops to help quell the uprising, were “on the wrong track”. She demanded that Bahrain show restraint with demonstrators and keep hospitals open. She described the situation in Manama as alarming and condemned the use of force against demonstrators. She said four Gulf states had sent troops to Bahrain. Only Saudi Arabia has so far publicly acknowledged doing so. In the UK, William Hague, the foreign secretary, said Britain would review arms sales to Bahrain and Libya, including crowd control equipment which has been used against unarmed protesters. Iran, meanwhile, ratcheted up its rhetoric, labelling the damage done to diplomatic relations as “irreparable”. In Iraq and Lebanon, the Shia leaders Muqtada al-Sadr and Hassan Nasrallah criticised the attacks in comments that underscored sectarian undertones. “They attack us because we are Shia and our presence threatens them,” said Hussein Mehdi, a protester shot in the leg by birdshot on Tuesday. “The Saudis are the ones who have driven this. They are taking a hard line and the regime answers to them.” Saudi Arabia’s stance has been the subject of much speculation among demonstrators, who felt they had established trust with Bahrain’s crown prince, Sheikh Salman bin Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa . Saudi Arabia has a restive Shia minority near its border with Bahrain, which accounts for roughly 12% of its population. Saudi’s rulers have long viewed the Shia as a potential threat. Commentators say Riyadh was not prepared to tolerate demonstrations that would weaken it by proxy and empower its arch foe, Iran. Bahrain Saudi Arabia US foreign policy Iran Hillary Clinton Martin Chulov guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Washington’s ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, says new resolution would authorise aerial bombing of Gaddafi’s tanks The US is pushing the UN to authorise not just a no-fly zone over Libya, but also the use of air strikes to stop the advance of forces loyal to Muammar Gaddafi. Washington’s ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, said on Wednesday that a no-fly zone would have only a limited use, and that the Obama administration was working “very hard” to pass a new resolution, which would authorise the use of aerial bombing of Libyan tanks and heavy artillery. The UN security council is planning to vote on the resolution late on Thursday. After a day of intensive negotiation in New York, Rice told reporters: “We need to be prepared to contemplate steps that include, but perhaps go beyond, a no-fly zone at this point, as the situation on the ground has evolved, and as a no-fly zone has inherent limitations in terms of protection of civilians at immediate risk.” The draft, supported by the US, Britain, France and Germany, reflects a significant shift by Washington, alarmed by the speed at which the uprising is collapsing and concerned at the possibility of a massacre in the rebel stronghold of Benghazi. Until this week, the US had been totally opposed to becoming involved militarily in Libya. “We are interested in a broad range of actions that will effectively protect civilians and increase the pressure on the Gaddafi regime to halt the killing and to allow the Libyan people to express themselves in their aspirations for the future freely and peacefully,” Rice said. A diplomat on the security council told the Associated Press that Rice said the goal should be expanded from creating a no-fly zone to protecting civilians. To do this, the international community must have all the necessary tools – including authorisation to use planes, troops or ships to stop attacks by Gaddafi’s air, land and sea forces. The US, still fighting in both Iraq and Afghanistan, is deeply reluctant to be drawn into conflict in another Muslim country, and remains opposed to putting American troops on the ground to create “safe havens”. “The United States is pretty busy with two wars, and we don’t want a third,” a senior official told the New York Times. Washington is insisting that any military action would have to be authorised by the security council and be carried out by an international coalition, including Arab states. Barack Obama has been cautious over calls for a no-fly zone, which the Pentagon has described as a step tantamount to war. But the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, told reporters that the turning point was the Arab League’s support over the weekend for a no-fly zone over Libya. “That was an extraordinary statement,” Clinton said, noting that Arab nations were asking the UN security council to take action “against one of their own”. Libya’s deputy UN ambassador, Ibrahim Dabbashi, who supports the opposition, said five Arab countries have offered support, and told reporters he expects a no-fly resolution to be adopted, with a provision that will also allow air strikes. Whether the security council does take action and authorises “all necessary measures” to protect civilians remains to be seen. A vote has been pencilled in for Thursday afternoon, although schedules have a tendency to slip at the UN. Russia and China, which both have a veto on the 15-member security council, could yet block it. China’s UN ambassador, Li Baodong, the current council president, told reporters “we hope we will have real progress tomorrow”. Libya Muammar Gaddafi Arab and Middle East protests Middle East United States United Nations Ewen MacAskill guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …