Limbaugh Taking Down Other Hosts Too. 98 Advertisers Want Off Controversial Radio Shows

Nearly a hundred advertisers have asked Premiere Radio Network to keep their products from airing during the day on shows such as Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Tom Leykis, Mark Levin, and similar shows.

As Politico Blogger Dylan Byers, notes that is probably most right wing's stars, but the further request about similar shows could take down a lot of less popular ones too.

I hope the Sugar Daddy network has a lot of ad buying money for those guys.  No, actually I don't, but you get the point.

See 98 advertisers to drop Rush Limbaugh

CA Communities Face Changes to Get More Representative Leaders

Whittier CA Train Station

The reality that Whittier California is governed by an all white council is as quaint as a train station. Here's hoping changes come quickly.

Picture placed using Flickr's native sharing code and allowed via Creative Commons license Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0).  Roll over for name of photographer who has no relationship to this blog or blogger. Click to go to original site.

Communities may have to end citywide voting for leaders to get ones that better represent their people.

In some, currently, all white councils preside over majority minority populations according to a Sacramento Bee report.

Lawsuits may be necessary.

I am amazed that this is still going on.  And it's funny how the Bee writer Will Evans sneaks in implications that  the bill sponsors were in it for the money. I guess it's a little more important that people finally get their civil rights, yes?

In general journalists would go along with wealthy companies having a money impulse for what they do, but some civil rights lawyers had better not make money off legislation they most likely went to a extensive effort to pass.

See  mobile report: Sacramento Bee: White-dominated California boards face legal threats over racial makeup

Bill O'Reilly Makes Up a #Conspiracy Theory About Sandra #Fluke To Pretend She Entrapped Rush #Limbaugh

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Remember Bill O'Reilly is the same man who famously taught us that the sun goes up, and the sun goes down and nobody knows why (with the implication that this is all done by God's magic er.. hand or something). Then the great mystic O'Reilly proclaimed soon afterwards that the tide goes in and the tide goes out and nobody knows why that happens either.

In fact, as Blue's buddy Steve taught preschoolers, the sun does not go up and down.  Instead the earth turns, AND PARTS OF THE EARTH GO IN AND OUT OF IT'S OWN SHADOW. That's the only reason the sun appears to go up and go down, and we get the sensation of night and day. It's simply a matter of whether at the time our part of the globe can be reached by the sun's rays. Sorry, to over-explain this, but I'm trying to get through Bill O'Reilly's triple thick ego.

The tides actually do go in and out relative to the land because the moon pulls on them. When confronted with that fact, O'Reilly was triumphant. "BUT WHY DO WE HAVE A MOON? MARS DOESN'T HAVE A MOON!" O'Reilly proclaimed, loudly. The implication there is that God loves the earth and that's why he gave it a moon. Unfortunately for Bill's reputation, Mars, in fact, has two moons.

And on the latest conspiracy theory, Ed Schultz explains how the timeline demolishes O'Reilly's theory, and how even as he offered a weak apology to Sandra Fluke, Rush Limbaugh started suggesting he was really a victim of a conspiracy. I guess when Fluke then contacted the agency, Rushbo and O'Reilly decided that story could be cooked up into conspiracy stew for their intellectually challenged followers.

(Remember these are the same airhead racists that followed Glenn Beck for more than two years.)

Yes, Sandra Fluke is quite a witch to get Limbaugh to call her all kinds of names and smear her reputation without merit. Watch out for her in the future, when she will be a witch and a lawyer. Real double trouble! LOL!

Gloria Allred Asks for Prosecution of Rush Limbaugh For Florida Crime of Maligning a Woman

In the state of Florida there apparently are laws against trashing the name of a woman, and specifically doing so in the manner which Rush Limbaugh trashed the image of Sandra Fluke recently.
Gloria Allred has contacted the Palm Beach state attorney advising he look into Rush Limbaugh's verbal assault on the 30 year old Georgetown University student.  She says she cannot bring a case herself unless Ms Fluke requests her to do so.
See report:  http://bit.ly/wGj6e6

GOP Steals Legislation From Dems in House, Barnie Frank Gives 'em What for, Gets Banned For the Afternoon

Way to rebel, Sir!

See report from my current favorite Politico blogger for catching the words the GOP tried to disappear.

http://bit.ly/zuEhLZ

CA Fish and Game Commission May Change Rules For Choosing Leader

At their next meeting the protectors of California's wildlife may use a majority vote to force their leader out of his to chair after photos surfaced lay month of the man displaying the carcass of a cougar shot in another state.  It turns out that the Commish was formerly designated by whomever had the most seniority, leaving the panel under Governor Brown headed by a man appointed by his predecessor.

This report ends with the suggestion the man might not be removed after all but CA pumas are hopeful.

puma = cougar = mountain lion

http://bit.ly/y7NOTv

American GOP Posturing Over Post Birth Abortion Remarks From Italian Scientists

Melozzo di Forli's Angels, Sacristy St. Marks, Loreto, Italy.

It is a bit weird for Italians to be promoting such ideas, but it is also unlikely to sway Americans

Picture shared via native Flickr code and allowed by Creative Commons license Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0)Roll over picture to see name of photographer who has no relationship to this blog or blogger.

"Sneaky Italian Scientists are going to slide into the US and start aborting new born babies (aka "4th Trimester" fetuses)" is the new meme from the hard right.  Or maybe they're going to convince Americans to start killing their own newborns.

Who knows, but much is implied since, if they come right out and say what they are claiming will happen most Americans will laugh themselves silly and then the 30% of Americans who really fall for such wild allegations won't send right wing Christian groups and
GOP candidates big donations to keep the evil bogeyman (and woman) at bay.

See hysterical report:
Pro Life Action League report  "Abortions in the Fourth Trimester: Why Not?"

Profiles:
Dr Alberto Giubilini  (See Biography section lower on page)

Francesca Minerva

If you believe those two are going to get post birth abortions going in the US, I have a Jaguar in mind that you can buy me, and I will be forever grateful!  God loves it when you buy a poor person a Jag and he will reward you 20 times for it.  (Actually the Bible does say that those who give to the needy will be rewarded in return with more than they gave, but you don't see Christians giving like they believe in that part of the Bible.)

Two Scientists who were educated and likely born and raised in Italy, make some statements about post birth abortions and the posturing right acts as if it's already enthroned in law or that Obama is going to pass a bill in his next term. 

That is how the American Right Wing pushes their fascism-lite.

This, obviously, isn't going to become mainstream American law or even accepted quirky behavior.  It is a non starter.

Even if the GOP manages to get hormonal birth control outlawed so a lot of extra babies are born, you will see a likely rise in cost for caring for such children by the state as many families will have to give them up.  You'll be footing the bill for that, Dear Taxpayer.

 Years later you will see a horrific exponential rise in crime, making most cities and even towns and rural areas unsafe.

But you won't see "4th Trimester" abortions; not as an accepted practice.  (and yes, there are those now that kill their kids.  The Church hasn't been able to stop those people, even now.

The claim that "4th Trimester" abortion practice will ever really be acccepted in the US is just more of the Nazi talk from the right. Their tendency is to make outrageous claims to try to get people's rights taken away, and to collect money based on the fears those claims create in certain susceptible folk.

 The GOP is now even more effective than the Third Reich.  In Germany, much of the church just tried to hide from the onerous effects of the Nazis, while today's American Evangelicals and even the Catholics jump right in.

But God says: "ROFLMAO!  Get real Douchbags.  It ain't gonna happen."

Map Shows "Limited" War on Iran Likely "Not Possible"

I'm betting that some will be pushing a "Limited" war on Iran, but I think that Stratfor's Map of Iran's Select Known and Suspected Nuclear Sites shows that won't be possible. 

Stratfor is currently open to all, but I don't know if they will want this widely distributed and they might hide this one page.  I am linking to their site because anything else, without permission, would be plagiarism.

If they take it down or lock it up, I'll try to find it pasted somewhere.

Here's an FAS PDF with a map from 2007with some of the sites noted on the Stratfor map.

The Guardian 's map from November 2011 You will have to click next a  couple of time to get to the map.  Still fewer sites than Stratfor's, which might have gotten info straight from Tel Aviv so consider the source, but Stratfor's probably the map being pushed on the US government.

Al Jazeera offers a Google map with sites listed from January of this year.  Still not as many places noted, and zooming in doesn't show more sites, but does add names to towns etc.  So if you want to vacation near Iran's nukes you could do so.  LOL

This apparently abandoned blog from the Canadian Cartographers Association has lots of marks in it.  I can't enlarge it on this computer, but will try later on another one, and see if it is anymore interesting.  You can enlarge the map by clicking on it from the first page that opens up, and I can read the second map with strong glasses.  Still one would liek something a little larger at the least.

CA GOP Spokeswoman Called MSNBC Contributor Offensive Name Too.

The CA Republican Party spokeswoman called MSNBC contributor Krystal Ball the S word last week, also implying she was working for the Democratic party.

I'm sorry to learn about her brain cells, but a person cannot both work for a party and MSNBC at the same time.  And, beyond that Sheesh! Really are all Republicans the same?

Are they trying

http://bit.ly/z3Nlew

Proof Anti-War Activists Tend to be Good People

Picture used via native placement and attribution code from Flickr.com. Roll over to see name of photographer who has no connection to blog or blogger. Use allowed via Creative Commons License Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0)

People were marching to support the activists in Libya. Within a couple of weeks something happened to cause at least one of those people to spend an extended amount of time apparently hundreds of miles away from home trying to repair parts of his own nation.

My point: Activists are generally good people, who will give generously of their time and support.

I fully expect haters like the FOX News crowd to trash each and every one of them, because they can't understand what it's like not to focus on making the almighty big bucks. Conservatives did it to my generation and I'm sure they will do it to yours.

Minority Students Bear Brunt of School Punishments

That is not a surprise.  But I'm glad someone documented it.

See report:
http://bit.ly/xrNr0R

Forget Nuclear Power, We Could Have Sewage Power Soon

Nuclear Power Plant and Landscape,
Cofrentes, Valencia, Spain

It's almost like a landscape by Goya, with a few differences, especially those cooling towers

Picture placed using native sharing code from Flickr and allowed via Creative Commons License Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0).  Roll over to see name of photographer who has no connection to this blog or blogger.

Though George Monbiot did multiple talk shows last year after the March 11  Honshu quake and following tsunami  that created a nuclear emergency at the Fukushima Nuclear Plant, telling people that we cannot wean ourselves from nuclear power (showing sad levels of ignorance) a recent publication at Science Magazine shows that using waste water could help to create the equivalent of 15-20 nuclear reactors in gigawatts of power just within the United States according to a podcast at the site.

The Guardian reports on the study  at Science Magazine (I cannot access the original report at Science due to a pay-wall) in New device heralds potential to turn sewage plants into power stations.

Even better hear the podcast at Science Magazine where they warn "The contents of this podcast interview represent the opinion of the author and may go beyond the content of the published paper" But that could be good.  The guy who has been working on this technology is probably the most qualified to project on how the technology can be improved beyond it's current state.

Where would we be if Edison had created a light bulb that would last longer than a few seconds and everyone had then said "But what is one light bulb going to do for the nation?"

A troll commenter at The Guardian, self named "Plutonium" whines and moans his way through a screed denigrating the amount of power that could be created by the system as explained by the Guardian which most likely stuck with just the facts from study.

That's where the projection comes in. After all the first Apple computer would be pretty much a joke these days.  Who would go back in time and tell Steve Jobs to give it up, knowing what we know now? (I mean besides Bill Gates.)

George Monbiot's latest on nuclear power at The Guardian deals with the promise of fast breeder reactors in We cannot wish Britain's nuclear waste away.  Okay, I won't keep him from dreaming big either, though I wonder sometimes that -- since nuclear power must be done by the biggest companies because of the expense -- if it isn't easy to back it because the industry will help protect your career, rather than because it really is the best solution.  Also, how can Monbiot assure the people that they truly have been able to overcome the dangers of fast breeder reactors?

Another plus it seems to me is that this could reduce or eliminate the power for third world communities that are often adversely affected by power that relies on burning products which create heavy soot, whether in the home or by a regional utility.  Such  dirty energy production makes millions of people in the world sick though they need to be strong so they can nurture their families.

Mitt Romney Should Tell Rush Limbaugh to Stop Endangering Young Women, or Fire Him (and yes he could do that).

OKC Bombing Memorial

The 1995 attack was one inspired by hate speech politics

Picture shared using native code found at Flickr site and allowed via Creative Commons license Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0).. Roll over picture to see name of photographer who has no relation to this blog or blogger.

First of all we must remember that hate speech does threaten lives of their target and similar people.  In particular, I'd like to remind people of  two instances in which hate speech resulted in one or more people taking action to kill or attempt to kill persons targeted by the words or similar person(s) to the subject of the speech and in one case many other people.

Just last year, after a period of hate speech aimed at our President, Barack Obama, a young man with mental problems was inspired to shoot at a White House window, apparently in the hope that the bullet would enter the interior and find the president.  According to the reports the bullet broke through the outer decorative window, but was stopped by a second layer of glass that was bullet proof (the two layers are the solution to keeping the building looking like it should from the outside while protecting our commander in chief, his family, and staff inside).  The shooter did not know that the president was away on a state trip at the time and appeared to be very intent on killing someone within the White House in any case.  Right wing talkers acknowledged that fact quickly enough as they passed a bogus story that the shooter was an integral part of the Occupy DC crowd, a guess that was disproved by federal investigators, though still not accepted by many on the right.

A more serious case happened in 1995 when a young man who had heard for 2 years that something needed to be done to pay back "federal agents" for the disastrous confrontation at the Branch Dividian compound in Waco, Texas. in 1993.  You may have heard about the solution the young man decided on.  It's called the bombing of the Oklahoma City Alfred P Murrah federal building and killed 168 or 169 people most of which were not federal agents involved in the 1993 action nor Ruby Ridge incident also cited by Wikipedia as inspiring the attack and, in fact, included children in a day care center that Timothy McVeigh knew of according to news reports surrounding the bombing.  For some reason his partner Terry Nichols never seems to have faced a threat of full justice for the bombing, but McVeigh was executed in 2001.

Still, there are many more instances in which hate talk seems to have been followed by violence and murder aimed at similar people.  After decades of listening to hate rants against the IRS, a man in Austin flew a plane into a local IRS office.  Just  weeks later, a young man exited the subway train to the Pentagon and tried to kill the guards and enter the building in attack mode.  That young man had visited Austin after the IRS plane bombing incident apparently in solidarity with the man who flew the plane though he didn't know him.  Another man attacked the holocaust museum in DC killing a guard about the same time as the other attacks.  A strain running through these men was  that they seemed to have listened to a lot of right wing rhetoric about the evils of the government and certain minorities.

So what should we say about Rush Limbaugh's attack on a young woman who had gone on TV talk shows to tell us about her friend who needed birth control pills because the hormones contained in them would keep cysts from growing on her ovaries, but couldn't afford to keep paying $1200 a year for the product.  The young woman did not complain about needing pill coverage for herself, only to protect a friend's health.  (The friend who did not receive the treatment she needed via insurance from her Catholic University became unable to continue the treatment because she was a student and couldn't afford the cost.  The lack of the hormonal treatment led to a large cyst on an ovary, removal of the ovary, a poor prognosis for child bearing, and the young woman exhibiting signs of entering menopause at the age of 32.

But Rush Limbaugh said that Ms. Fluke, the woman who went on talk shows and tried to testify before Congress wanted pills for herself, for having sex, and that she was having so much sex she couldn't afford protection, therefore Ms. Fluke wanted us to pay for her birth control and that made her a slut, and American citizens her pimp.  Then Mr. Limbaugh demanded sex tapes from the young woman in pay back for providing her birth control.

Of course, that rant is ridiculous, and makes one wonder what Mr. Limbaugh is doing, if anything, with his young wife.  I don't mean to make fun, but there are simple facts that you would think that any man would learn from a wife if they have marital relations.

Birth control pills must be taken 3 out of 4 weeks, and then a break week without pills is inserted to promote a menstrual period.  It does not matter if the young woman has little sex or a lot of sex, the pill schedule is the same.  You cannot stop taking the pills because you are taking a few days or weeks off from sex.  You must follow the plan even if you are having no sex for a while to keep from developing hyper fertility preceded or followed by heavy bleeding.

I don't want Mrs. Limbaugh to get in trouble if she is being badly controlled by her husband and finds it safer to ask for money by saying she needs more birth control because they have so much sex, but I do know that Rush is not likely to be reading my blog so I will say that the  idea he has of how birth control is achieved very wrong.

But mistaken as he is, he is piling on so much dispersion that it is likely to push some unstable person to attack Ms Fluke or another young woman acting in the attacker's mind as a surrogate.  As I showed above, attacks on surrogates have happened repeatedly after the right had demonized individuals or groups that were similar to the people attacked.

So, we have Limbaugh verbally attacking young women and putting them at risk of physical attack by his followers.

But who can stop him?

It turns out that Mitt Romney can stop Rush Limbaugh  because Bain Capital into which Mitt Romney is likely to have a lot of money invested owns a substantial portion of a company that employs Rush Limbaugh.  The Republican primary candidate earned 42.7 million dollars from Bain Capital in 2010 and 2011 according to the tax returns he released to the news media. Info from Celebrity Net Worth .  Though his title is "Retired Partner" for the company, the amount of remuneration he received says he has a lot of money invested in Bain Capital.  When you have that amount of money in a company, you can control what it does by threatening to withdraw your dollars from their enterprise.

Mitt Romney therefore can control Bain, but how does Bain control Limbaugh's boss?

According to American Dream Blog which appears to be a Libertarian publication, "Bain Capital is one of the primary owners of Clear Channel".

According to Wikipedia on Clear Channel

On November 16, 2006, Clear Channel announced plans to go private, being bought out by two private-equity firms, Thomas H. Lee Partners and Bain Capital Partners for $18.7 billion, which is just under a 10 percent premium above its closing price of $35.36 a share on November 16 (the deal values Clear Channel at $37.60 per share

(The American Dream blog used the same excerpt.  I followed their example.)

More from The American Dream:

The deal was finalized in 2008.  Today, Bain Capital is still one of the primary owners of Clear Channel.

and Wikipedia itself reports at above linked site:

On July 24, 2008, Clear Channel held a special shareholder meeting, during which the majority of shareholders accepted a revised $36-per-share offer from Bain Capital and Thomas H. Lee Partners.The company announced on July 30 that it would offer shareholders either $36 in cash or one share of CC Media Class A common stock for each share of Clear Channel common stock held.

 The two latest excerpts above are important for those who might think that there is no reason to believe that Bain can control Clear Channel  talk show hosts despite being a primary owner of the station.  Notice that the work done on acquiring an interest in Clear Channel was set up to get control of the station with many important right wing pundits just about the summer of 2008  when Mitt Romney was hoped to be in the leading candidate in the Republican primary, and heading for the 2008 general election.

Therefore, Bain and it's powerful "Retired Partner" bought enough interest in Clear Channel to control the speech of the pundits on the station, an immensely valuable asset for someone who wants to be president.

So tell Mitt Romney to have a talk with Rush Limbaugh.  Young women deserve a contrite public apology from the talk show host, and if they don't get one.  Mitt Romney should have the man fired.  The former Massachusetts governor intends to wield power to control speech at Clear Channel or get rid of hosts that won't be controlled for his personal uses.   He should do the same for a young woman who is not a candidate and has been put in danger along with others of our sex by a hate filled pundit.

Mitt Romney holds the key.  If he won't use it for women, then we need to know that, since he wants to be our president.  Everyone needs to know whether Mitt Romney will stand up to Rush Limbaugh and have him apologize or, if he doesn't, will fire the man who hates and endangers women.

Why Plants Can't Save Us From Global Warming

Polecat Bench in all it's glory showing off its PETM stripes

 

Picture use allowed by explicit note at source. Copyright 2006 Phillip Gingerich. (Author of this blog makes no claim of any backing by or connection with Mr. Gingerich. The significance of Polecat Bench is explained in article found at "World Without Ice" link below.

Rick Santorum recently said: "CO2 is a pollutant? Tell that to the plants."

 according to Dave Weigel at Slate.com

I have styled part of the remaining post like a response to the presidential candidate, but it is, in fact, for the eyes of anyone who reads this:

Yes, Mr. S plants do use CO2 but you are ignorant about, or are not telling, the entire story.

Just because plants use CO2  in their sugar crafting cycle, doesn't mean we can count on them to fix everything we do to our ecosystem through that process.  I know the simple lies that Christians rely on to tell themselves that everything is going to be alright even if we continue to burn carbon that was stored underground millions of years ago. (I was a Christian for over 40 years and probably would still be except for George W. Bush, someone who is a lot like you.)

But to stop you and others from raping the earth more, and setting up conditions that may kill millions (though rich folk like you and the Koch brothers will be able to save your families for far longer than the poor people, who are already dying by at least 150,000 a year because of global warming) I will explain how the carbon cycle works and why it can't help us now.

I grant you that plants do consume some CO2 in their quest to create sugar.

They don't use it in during the photosynthesis process.  The formula for that process is immediately below:

2 H2O + 2 NADP+ + 3 ADP + 3 Pi + light → 2 NADPH + 2 H+ + 3 ATP + O2

Light provides the energy that is stored by changing ADP to ATP

The formula above creates a product that is essential in another chemical reaction that takes place in plants. In a second formula our green earthly compatriots do tie up carbon from CO2 molecules and build basic sugars:

3 CO2 + 9 ATP + 6 NADPH + 6 H+ → C3H6O3-phosphate + 9 ADP + 8 Pi + 6 NADP+ + 3 H2O

(For speed I got the formulas from the Wikipedia page for Photosynthesis)

All good and fine, right? But then what does the plant do with those sugars? They store them in more complex sugars, starches, and fats. Some plants, like trees, find structures that are a bit more permanent to create as well.

Sounds great, right?  I bet you're congratulating yourself Mr. S on how your "faith" has just solved all our problems.

Sadly, no.

The life cycle of any plant in our world is short,  new growth is "trimmed" or dropped and eventually all plants die, most within years of their emergence.

Some forests do help a little, though I doubt they could capture the mass amounts of carbon we release now even if they had all the land they needed to build their depositories that have been called "old growth forests" the only plant product capable of storing carbon for even the least geologically significant time.   Even worse though is the fact that most of our older forests are under attack by insects that were barely on the radar five decades ago. Massive swaths of old growth are being killed off by pests that weren't very successful under the cooler conditions then.

Other Old Growth forests are being cut down for development, farming, and access to minerals both by powerful industries and by marginal families looking to make enough money or get energy and food to get through another week under the oligarchic systems that are in charge in this world. So actually, the sequestration of carbon by plants is going in reverse.

And what happens to our crops, grasslands, etc? They die and then they decompose whether in our bellies as food, or on the ground, in a compost pile, or where ever, but the plants release all the carbon they stored in their short lives while they are decomposing or after being eaten an animal because, in the process of being digested by animals or even just microbes abundant in the world,  while the stored energy is released from sugar, starch and fat molecules, the carbon is once again released into the atmosphere as CO2.

Meanwhile (and this is the most important point)  we are pumping and digging millions of tons of carbon from the ground that has been locked up since the dinosaur ages. That carbon is then released by burning the fuels we use into the atmosphere never to be permanently locked up again until we get serious about doing something about the global crisis we are facing or until we are driven extinct and the earth has time to heal itself.

And please don't pretend that extinction will not be preceded by massive wars, riots, and totalitarian societies. Great fun to be had by all!

 Another factor you don't seem to have considered is that higher temperatures lead to more drought because the atmosphere doesn't need to release as much as much of it's water to the earth under higher temperatures. This is shown in empirical evidence from the fossil record from the PETM the massive heatwave brought on by the dump of thousands of tons of carbon into the atmosphere that then triggered the dreaded unleashing of captured methane in the arctic regions, a situation that scientists now fear the earth is approaching again.

During times of drought, which are considered likely under even moderate warming, plants cannot store as much carbon even temporarily for food we can consume. So the drought brought on by global warming hampers carbon sequestration. Look at the formulas I placed above. You aren't getting to the second one without the ATPs created by the photosynthesis which requires water available to the plant.

Yes, over the course of millennia the earth actually can actually stash the excessive levels of carbon away into rock formations, and some species may even survive in greatly changed forms, mostly very small. I doubt though that the human race will be recognizable if our weak, petulant selves can even be roused to face such harsh conditions without widespread war, pillage, and even cannibalism.

And, one thing is abundantly clear: Plants cannot save us from this future because their carbon storage is extremely temporary.

By drilling for oil and gas, and digging up coal we are taking amounts of carbon stored through geological levels of time permanently from the bowels of the earth and releasing it rapidly. It does not compute that plants can "permanently" lock it up again fast enough to stop catastrophe especially if the global climate change naysayers are in charge of our nations.

And, sadly, we are releasing the carbon much faster than the massive dump that happened at the end of the Paleocene Era where there is ample evidence of the widespread catastrophe brought on by too rapid carbon release.

Following is an excerpt from a National Geographic report on the Thermal Maximum that developed at boundaries of the Paleocene and Eocene eras. For more see a National Geographic report  World Without Ice print page. (Just close print command box that pops up if you don't want to print it. I can't find the original site which may not be available at this late date.)

The total of 4.5 trillion tons [of carbon that was released] is close to the total carbon now estimated to be locked up in fossil fuel deposits; the initial burst corresponds to about three centuries' worth of human-caused emissions at the current rate. Though the data aren't conclusive, most scientists assume the PETM release was slower, taking thousands of years

 Yes, so in three centuries, if we even have that much time, human kind is likely to produce conditions that will cause massive extinctions, and that means us too, on this planet.  Before that though, as noted above, we are already killing at least  150,000 people a year because the Koch brothers and others want to make billions pandering an antiquated solution to the earth's energy problems, and people like Santorum want to accept their Big Money and play a game of Christo-politics which tells folks that they can ignore the warnings

Trust me. I studied botany. Plants cannot save us, and Santorum is fronting for Big Energy and others who are intent on growing wealth by being able to jack up the price of fossil fuels on struggling families while failing to help protect them and their progeny's future existence.  Meanwhile the Republican candidate pretends that some invisible being is going to send angels or something to save us, or maybe the plants will do it themselves.

I've shown that the plants can't do it, and has anyone seen any planet saving angels hanging around? I ask because there were no angels to save the million people W's war on Iraq killed, nor to help the other millions who had their lives horribly disrupted by the conflict.

I am frankly sick of the posers that pretend that there are such emissaries of God, or even a magic God figure,  so that they, and the wealthy and powerful can continue raping our planet and stealing from poor people to satisfy their own avarice.

Top Montana Federal Judge Sent Racist Email w/ Obama Cartoon

The Bush appointee says his intentions weren't racist, he just doesn't like the president.

Forwarded cartoon that implied president's mother might have engaged in bestiality.

http://bit.ly/womjKd