unusualmusic_lj_archive | Dec. 1st, 2008

Dec. 1st, 2008

Taking aggressive action to green schools is about one of the smartest steps the nation can take, action that should go beyond bipartisanship to true unity of action as it is a win-win-win-win strategy along so many paths:
Save money for communities and taxpayers

Create employment

Foster capacity for 'greening' the nation

Reduce pollution loads

Improve health

Improve student performance / achievement

And, well, other benefits. When faced with such an opportunity, "The Bush White House threatened a veto, saying it was wrong for the federal government to launch a costly new school-building program.

About that threatened bill
In May, to far (FAR) less attention than it merited, the House of Representatives (facing that W (mis)Administration veto threat) passed the 21st Century Green High-Performing Public School Facilities Act with $20 billion for greening public schools across the nation.
The legislation passed on a vote of 250-164, a substantial majority but not veto proof and it sat awaiting Senate action. It would have provided $20 billion over five years for school construction across the country (with $100 million per year allocated specifically for Katrina/Rita impacted areas). A major focus of this legislation is to drive greener design and building practices within schools, with 50% of funding in 2009 and 90% in 2013 "for public school modernization, renovation, or repairs that meet Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) green building rating standards, Energy Star standards, or equivalent standards." It also provides for a far more aggressive Department of Education effort to foster such green practices throughout America's school infrastructure.

....

But Republicans, and the White House, saw the bill as a federal intrusion into education matters normally under the jurisdiction of states and local governments.

Rally around the (Confederate) flag: State's Rights! (Of course, that doesn't apply for environmental issues like California and other states seeking more aggressive auto efficiency standards.)

"The Democrats' massive $20 billion 'green scheme' would place faceless Washington bureaucrats in charge of priorities historically and best handled by states and local school districts," said House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio. Other Republicans warned it would siphon off funds from federal programs for poor or disabled students.

The Republican Party and John Boehner: defenders of the poor and disadvantaged. To be honest, one of the challenges of building school infrastructure more efficiently is the resource challenge of becoming knowledgeable about costs, benefits, options, and opportunities. The thousands of school districts across the country are far from uniform in their ability to develop this expertise. Thus, truth be told: this is not "best handled" across all these districts due to this resource challenge.
This legislation is actually truly excellent Federal/Local/Private partnership for moving the nation forward. The Federal government is providing funding and expertise assistance to Local governments to improve their infrastructure using Private businesses (for the most part) to execute the projects.

The bill "would create an inappropriate and costly new federal role in modernizing and renovating public schools," the White House said in issuing its veto threat.

"Inappropriate". Huh? "Costly" if one only examines cost and doesn't consider benefit, sadly, a technique being applied across too many arenas (and hereand hereand hereand ... For a counter discussion.). And, of course, those benefits extend beyond the schools into larger public goods.MORE

Will someone please explain to me why Republicans insist on being reactionary, backwards, ignorant assholes on so many issues? Really? States rights? W/regards to greening schools? Why am I supposed to believe give them the benefit of the doubt, again?

( The Generation that NEVER bought Gasoline with must-watch videos )

Western Guvs Take Lead on New Energy Policy

Recognizing the key role western states are going to take in the nation's potential energy revolution, the Western Governors are weighing in with their recommendations for the Obama administration's national energy policy, and for action that should be taken in the first 100 days.
SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — The governors of the nation's largest energy-producing states are encouraging President-elect Barack Obama to quickly adopt a national energy policy that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The bipartisan Western Governors' Association has delivered Obama a four-page letter outlining what steps it believes his administration should take in his first 100 days in office to address the issue....

...

The governors propose an ambitious 100 day plan (pdf, via New West):

Establish an aggressive and achievable national greenhouse gas emissions reduction goal that will put the United States on a path to contribute to global climate stabilization.
Propose a mandatory national system for reducing greenhouse gas emissions that makes maximum use of market-based mechanisms. Revenue raised should support the energy policy principles in this letter and not be used as a means of sustaining or expanding general governmental operations.
Aggressively pursue a national energy efficiency program to reduce existing and future energy demand and thereby reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Establish an oil import reduction goal that strengthens energy security and independence. Since nearly 90% of oil is used for transportation, propose a plan that
Brings more fuel efficient and near-zero emission vehicles into the market;
Increases the supply of domestically produced, low-carbon fuels;
Minimizes the economic and technological uncertainties inherent in deploying high efficiency vehicles and developing and using nonpetroleum transportation fuels; and
Reduces vehicle miles travelled and increases mass movement of people and goods.
:
MORE

Recommending Enviro blogger Johnny Rook on Daily Kos

Daily Kos Climaticide Update: Thirsty Yet? Alpine Glaciers in Full Retreat

Climaticide Update: Ocean Cooling, A Science Lesson for Denialists/Delayers

Climaticide Update: Changes Taking Place in Arctic Sea-Ice Growth and Melt Cycles

Climaticide Update: Lack of Radioactivity in Himalayan Ice Cores Bodes Ill for Millions

President Obama, It's Climaticide and the Survival of Civilization, Not Just Energy and Environment

Climaticide Update: A Message from Africa

Wind Farms Cause Bat's Lungs to Explode

The Story of Stuff

Story of Stuff, Full Version; How Things Work, About Stuff

From its extraction through sale, use and disposal, all the stuff in our lives affects communities at home and abroad, yet most of this is hidden from view. The Story of Stuff is a 20-minute, fast-paced, fact-filled look at the underside of our production and consumption patterns. The Story of Stuff exposes the connections between a huge number of environmental and social issues, and calls us together to create a more sustainable and just world. It'll teach you something, it'll make you laugh, and it just may change the way you look at all the stuff in your life forever.

©Tides Foundation & Funders Workgroup for Sustainable Production and Consumption

This Wednesday, over 100 nations will gather in Oslo to sign the Convention on Cluster Munitions, a global ban on the use of cluster bombs. The vast majority of our allies will be there: Australia, Canada, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom and many others. The United States will not. Once again, the United States laughs in the face of international cooperation and moral leadership.

...

Should I be surprised that I didn't see much coverage of this - none actually - in the U.S. press today? Channel News Asia reports on the signing of the cluster bomb ban this Wednesday:

Some 100 countries will ban the use of cluster bombs with the signing of a treaty Wednesday in Oslo but major producers such as China, Russia and the United States are shunning the pact.
The treaty, agreed upon in Dublin in May, outlaws the use, production, transfer and stockpiling of cluster munitions which primarily kill civilians.

...

The United States has said that it is developing cluster bombs that will be less prone to failure (not exploding) than the current weapon. The editorial board of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer summed up that argument perfectly back in July:
The world bans an inhumane weapon. We want to perfect it. Embarrassing.

MORE

Good God Almighty. And this is just us refusing to sign humanitarian, commonsense treaties. Take a look at the treaties that we signed and then refused to honor:

UNRATIFIED TREATIES

Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty
Signed and ratified, summer 1972; United States unilaterally withdrew on December 13, 2001. By pulling out of the ABM Treaty, the United States became the first major power to unilaterally withdraw from a nuclear arms-control treaty.
COMPREHENSIVE TEST-BAN TREATY
Signed September 24, 1996; never ratified. The U.S. Senate voted in 1999 to reject ratification of the test-ban treaty signed by President Clinton. In early 2002, the Bush White House released its Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), hinting at a return to testing and a willingness to use nuclear weapons in a first-strike attack.
UN Framework Convention on Climate Control (UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol
UNFCCC ratified October 15, 1992. Kyoto Protocol signed November 12, 1998; never ratified by the U.S. Although President Clinton signed the Kyoto Protocol, the State Department under Bush rejected it on the grounds that it would harm the U.S. economy. U.S. representatives at the 2007 climate summit in Bali who maintained the same position were booed and widely condemned. Recently, the administration’s recalcitrance on this issue may be softening.
CONVENTION ON DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN (CEDAW)
Signed July 17, 1980; never ratified. The United States remains one of a handful of countries, including Iran and Sudan, not to ratify CEDAW, which was signed by President Jimmy Carter. The treaty continues to face resistance from conservatives in the Senate.
CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD
Signed February 16, 1995; never ratified. Only the United States and Somalia have not ratified the Convention, which was signed by President Bill Clinton. Among other things, the Convention forbids capital punishment of minors. Senate conservatives who support the death penalty for minors continue to oppose the treaty.MORE

WTF? What. The. Fuck??? Who the hell are we to be telling other countries how to run their shit when we haven't even ratified conventions against discrimination against women and the rights of children? On what moral grounds do we stand on, exactly? I mean, this is the nation that cannot pass the Equal Rights Amendment! Good grief! And I won't even TOUCH the bills to limit inhumane military weapons, since Americans are well imbued with the idea of empire, and might makes right, always.

But just one more thing. Remember torture? You know the stuff that a Supreme Court Judge (so help me God) defended by saying that since it worked on 24 (yes, I mean 24, the fictionalised Jack Bauer cable crap) it was a needed method of American security? (Dear God

giandujakiss! Why on earth did you decide to sandbag me with this so early in the morning?) Yeah well. Turns out info that led to the killing of that notorious Iraq Al Quaeda leader abu Musab al-Zarqawi? Didn't come from torture. In fact as Balloon Juice sarcastically links to the Washington Post article by a former Army interrogator:

Instead a renegade unit tried handling suspects with respect, a novel approach recommended by the notable terrorist lovers in Israeli intelligence. The unit found a guerilla leader’s hideout among other useful information.
We turned several hard cases, including some foreign fighters, by using our new techniques. A few of them never abandoned the jihadist cause but still gave up critical information. One actually told me, “I thought you would torture me, and when you didn’t, I decided that everything I was told about Americans was wrong. That’s why I decided to cooperate.”

[...] I learned in Iraq that the No. 1 reason foreign fighters flocked there to fight were the abuses carried out at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. Our policy of torture was directly and swiftly recruiting fighters for al-Qaeda in Iraq. The large majority of suicide bombings in Iraq are still carried out by these foreigners. They are also involved in most of the attacks on U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq. It’s no exaggeration to say that at least half of our losses and casualties in that country have come at the hands of foreigners who joined the fray because of our program of detainee abuse.The number of U.S. soldiers who have died because of our torture policy will never be definitively known, but it is fair to say that it is close to the number of lives lost on Sept. 11, 2001. How anyone can say that torture keeps Americans safe is beyond me -- unless you don't count American soldiers as American

See also The Torture Myth via

giandujakiss

The darkly amusing thing about the argument that I have highlighted is that it is a pragmatic argument, rather than a moral one. Why? Because many Americans, who see themselves as world policemen and so much better than other countries morally (our Constitution! Bill of Rights! Lets spread our democracy to those savages! We're Christian! Greatest country in the world!) are by no means persuaded that torture is wrong from a moral point of view. They seem to think that tossing away our values and morality are quite alright in the service of "securing" the United States. Well, then. Maybe the progmatic argument of IT DOESN'T FUCKING WORK!!!! can reach them. If not, well. Nemesis has a way of cutting down hubris to size.

Via: Carnival of the Elistist Bastards

Neil Turok: 2008 TED Prize wish: An African Einstein

Neil Turok works on understanding the universe’s very beginnings. With Stephen Hawking, he developed the Hawking-Turok instanton solutions, describing the birth of an inflationary universe -- positing that, big bang or no, the universe came from something, not from utter nothingness.
Recently, with Paul Steinhardt at Princeton, Turok has been working on a cyclic model for the universe in which the big bang is explained as a collision between two “brane-worlds.” The two physicists recently cowrote the popular-science book Endless Universe.
In 2003, Turok, who was born in South Africa, founded the African Institute for Mathematical Sciences (AIMS) in Muizenberg, a postgraduate center supporting math and science. His TED Prize wish: Help him grow AIMS and promote the study and math and science in Africa, so that the world's next Einstein may be African.
Later on in 2008, Turok was named the Executive Director of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, in Ontario, Canada.

"To me this seems like one of the most fundamental questions in science, because everything we know of emerged from the Big Bang. Whether it's particles or planets or stars or, ultimately, even life itself."
Neil Turok, interviewed on Edge.com

Next Einstein.org is his website.

Education, research and economic development: A lesson for America

A bit paternalistic, god knows, but good intentions. And they've got a youtube.com channel here

Here are some graduates of the program:

AIMS student Ousmane on science and sustainable development

Ousmane, an AIMS student from Burkina Faso, was convinced by his family that the only way to face poverty was through education. After receiving a BA and MA in physics, he became a high school teacher to save money for further education. Ousmane began AIMS in 2006 and now plans to get an MA and PhD in water engineering. His ultimate goal is to return to home to work toward the sustainable development of his country, as both a practitioner in the field and as a lecturer at a water institute.

AIMS alum Hind on the hope she found at AIMS

Hind, born in Central Sudan to a family of eight, happened upon AIMS in a unique way. While studying mathematical science at the University of Khartoum, she picked up a paper her colleague had been using as a fan, only to discover it was an AIMS advertisement. There were only three days to the deadline but she applied and was accepted. In AIMS she found a home full of people from diverse backgrounds, lecturers that did not teach answers but rather how to think about solving problems, and hope to pursue her dreams.

There's more there.

Patrick Awuah: Educating a new generation of African leaders

Patrick Awuah left Ghana as a teenager to attend Swarthmore College in the United States, then stayed on to build a career at Microsoft in Seattle. In returning to his home country, he has made a commitment to educating young people in critical thinking and ethical service, values he believes are crucial for the nation-building that lies ahead.
Founded in 2002, his Ashesi University is already charting a new course in African education, with its high-tech facilities, innovative academic program and emphasis on leadership. It seems more than fitting that ashesi means "beginning" in Akan, one of Ghana's native languages.

Malcolm Gladwell: What we can learn from spaghetti sauce

Malcolm Gladwell searches for the counterintuitive in what we all take to be the mundane: cookies, sneakers, pasta sauce. A New Yorker staff writer since 1996, he visits obscure laboratories and infomercial set kitchens as often as the hangouts of freelance cool-hunters -- a sort of pop-R&D gumshoe -- and for that has become a star lecturer and bestselling author.

Sparkling with curiosity, undaunted by difficult research (yet an eloquent, accessible writer), his work uncovers truths hidden in strange data. His always-delightful blog tackles topics from serial killers to steroids in sports, while provocative recent work in the New Yorker sheds new light on the Flynn effect -- the decades-spanning rise in I.Q. scores.

Gladwell has written two books. The Tipping Point, which began as a New Yorker piece, applies the principles of epidemiology to crime (and sneaker sales), while Blink examines the unconscious processes that allow the mind to "thin slice" reality -- and make decisions in the blink of an eye. A third book is forthcoming.

"Pure Gladwell: cutting through conventional wisdom to define a new way of understanding how something works."
Washingtonian

How it feels to have a stroke

Neuroanatomist Jill Bolte Taylor had an opportunity few brain scientists would wish for: One morning, she realized she was having a massive stroke. As it happened -- as she felt her brain functions slip away one by one, speech, movement, understanding -- she studied and remembered every moment. This is a powerful story about how our brains define us and connect us to the world and to one another.

Jared Diamond: Why societies collapse

Why do societies fail? With lessons from the Norse of Iron Age Greenland, deforested Easter Island and present-day Montana, Jared Diamond talks about the signs that collapse is near, and how -- if we see it in time -- we can prevent it.

THE ACCOLADE - PINOCCHIO

Myspace

As Taboos Ease, Saudi Girl Group Dares to Rock

JIDDA, Saudi Arabia — They cannot perform in public. They cannot pose for album cover photographs. Even their jam sessions are secret, for fear of offending the religious authorities in this ultraconservative kingdom.

But the members of Saudi Arabia’s first all-girl rock band, the Accolade, are clearly not afraid of taboos.

The band’s first single, “Pinocchio,” has become an underground hit here, with hundreds of young Saudis downloading the song from the group’s MySpace page. Now, the pioneering foursome, all of them college students, want to start playing regular gigs — inside private compounds, of course — and recording an album.

“In Saudi, yes, it’s a challenge,” said the group’s lead singer, Lamia, who has piercings on her left eyebrow and beneath her bottom lip. (Like other band members, she gave only her first name.) “Maybe we’re crazy. But we wanted to do something different.”
MORE

The F Word: DC to Delhi: Only Our Missiles, not Yours

The Big Picture Behind The Mumbai Attacks

VIJAY PRASHAD: You know, there's a broad sociological story the starts in the 1970s. Until the 1970s, parties that identified themselves as religious parties pretty much had very, very low ability to pull people out to vote for them. In the 1970s, when the Indian government shifted its ability to provide social welfare, to provide agricultural credit to the vast bulk of the people, essentially, when it broke down the Nehruvian part of social development, at that point to gain legitimacy even the Congress Party, which was Nehru's party, started to bring in religious forms of mobilization to gain legitimacy, but they were outflanked on the right by the Hindu Party, particularly the Bharatiya Janata Party, which in the 1980s took off at an unimaginable pace. It created this family of organizations. In a way it outsourced its terror to groups such as the Bajrangdal and most recently to this group that committed, perhaps, the blast in Malegaon, a town northeast of Mumbai, in 2006. This group is called Abinhav Bharat.

So, these groups all across the country have been committing atrocities, mainly against Muslim populations, but not only, also against Christians, also against people who in India are known as tribals, and others. So, there's been this growth of the kind of Hindu politics, in a way, because the state has been incapable of providing an agenda for the social development, the complete development, of the Indian population.

And, of course, in reaction to this, you've seen the growth of Muslim politics, of resentment and anger.MORE

Why Mumbai? Terrorism Has Many Causes. Here's One Of Them

In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, Gallup International did a poll in 37 countries--including the US--asking how America should respond to the attacks. Should they/we respond with a military attack, or should they/we take a criminal justice approach--tracking down those responsible, extradicting them, and putting them on trial. Of the 35 nations, landslide majorities in 32 of them said that a criminal justice approach was best. The three others? Israel, the US, and... India.

This alone should have warned us not to take the path of war. Israel and India have both spent decades responding to Islamic terrorist threats with war. Hasn't worked. But the more it doesn't work, the more determined their people have become. Of course, they've also employed a criminal justice approach as well. But they've had their own Guantanamos come out of that, as well.

India and Pakistan have gone so far as to turn themselves into nuclear threats to one another. And still the terrorism hasn't been stopped. MORE

Profile

unusualmusic_lj_archive

February 2020

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
						1
2	3	4	5	6	7	8
9	10	11	12	13	14	15
16	17	18	19	20	21	22
23	24	25	26	27	28	29

Page Summary

(no subject)
Daily Kos enviro news
20 minute, fun, fast paced, cool. watch
In which the US really, REALLY needs to do some deep thinking about wtf kind of country we are.
Please ignore this guy's irritating nervous laughter.
(no subject)
(no subject)
really cool.
(no subject)
funny thing, those parallels between the Indian terror attack and 9/11
cool news
tracking the taser nation via hullabaloo blog

Style Credit

Style: by timeasmymeasure

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

Page generated Jun. 21st, 2025 02:03 pm