Not good. Not good.

Without a trace of embarrassment, a spokeswoman for the Scottish Nationalist Party leader, Nicola Sturgeon, admitted that the first minister’s science adviser had not been consulted because the decision “wasn’t based on scientific evidence.”

The scientific community is facing a new European reality. Last November, the European Commission’s president, Jean-Claude Juncker, chose not to reappoint Prof. Anne Glover as his science adviser after lobbying by Greenpeace and other environmental groups.

“We hope that you as the incoming Commission president will decide not to nominate a chief scientific adviser,” they wrote.

Never mind that Professor Glover’s advice on G.M.O. safety reflected the scientific consensus. Mr. Juncker, hoping to make his political life easier, complied with their demand. Europe now has no chief scientific adviser.

Yep, GMO foods. And again, I find myself in the awkward position. I'm not a fierce advocate, and I have my own occasional worries about possible unforeseen environmental consequences, but I hate when My Side is acting like wingnuts.

[Added] From the links at the bottom of the piece (last link above): An Ecomodernist Manifesto and "Is eco-modernism the third way on climate change? seem like good further reading.

Line of the Day: 2015-08-27

Altruism and compassion toward the feelings of others represent the best of human impulses. And it is good to continually challenge rigid categories and entrenched beliefs. But that comes at a sacrifice when the subjective is elevated over the assumption that lurking out there is some kind of real world.
    -- George Johnson

(h/t: @drninashapiro via @SamHarrisOrg's RT)

Definition of the Day

... progressives (the term of choice for high-maintenance liberals) ...     -- TBogg

"... a subject in which popular beliefs often do not reflect scientific evidence."

I've had this same thought myself:

Some compare the hostility to G.M.O.s to the rejection of climate-change science, except with liberal opponents instead of conservative ones.

And I've shared this despair:

Popular opinion masqueraded convincingly as science, and the science itself was hard to grasp. People who spoke as experts lacked credentials, and G.M.O. critics discounted those with credentials as being pawns of biotechnology companies.

A longish article, which I have not yet finished, but which I do wish to share based on the opening paragraphs: "A Lonely Quest for Facts on Genetically Modified Crops."

Related: if you're still not persuaded to be a bit more open-minded about GMO food, how do you feel about modifying a plant so that it produces more low-carbon biofuel?

Because some people really do not have enough to do

Yep ...

Disinvite Beyonce from singing the Star Spangled Banner at the Inauguration

... that's recently up on the "We The People" petition-the-White-House site.

The best argument against democracy is ...?

Wyatt Cenac investigates PETA

Good all the way through, but the last two minutes are truly FTW.

(alt. video link)

(h/t: Adam Rutherford)

The truth gets its pants on? A lie is flushed? Tough call.

DougJ calls attention to a post on Salon that says they have decided to delete from their site a 2005 article by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. That article played a big part in helping to push the myth, now thoroughly debunked, that vaccines caused autism.

MORE »

Hurrah! I Finally Lost My Virgonity!

Now I can call myself a Leotard!

(That's better, right?)

No way to start a morning

I'm not sure which is worse: that Vanity Fair has a long article about Peter Daou and some other clown trying to claim credit for creating Huffington Post, or that if you do click over, the first thing you get is a pop-up ad. Featuring the latest cover of the print edition. Featuring Justin Bieber.

I will say this, though: you know who else chronically tries to claim credit for HuffPo? Andrew Breitbart, that's who.

(h/t: Curse you, Roger Ailes)

Two small pleasures in the battle against woo

PowerBalance has admitted their magical bracelets are a fraud:

In our advertising we stated that Power Balance wristbands improved your strength, balance and flexibility.

We admit that there is no credible scientific evidence that supports our claims and therefore we engaged in misleading conduct in breach of s52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974.

If you feel you have been misled by our promotions, we wish to unreservedly apologise and offer a full refund.

W00t!

Even better news: this is currently a top trending topic on Twitter worldwide.

Hope Shaq asks them to take this page down soon:

(embiggen)

And as long as we're being giddy with enthusiasm, let's pretend he's reading this, and invite him to donate the money they gave him to a worthy cause. Here's a suggestion:

Damn that Daniel Davies

Except for my usual emotional plea of "sure it's only a choice of the lesser of two evils, but less evil is still less evil," I am unable to rebut any of D²'s argument.

Given that the Senate did not come out as bad as it seemed like it might, I can only say that I am glad I did not happen across it before the election.

Someday I will belong to a party that thinks paying attention to its (ostensible) base is worth doing on a consistent basis. After the Rapture, most likely.

On the other hand, there is Timothy Egan's "How Obama Saved Capitalism and Lost the Midterms," which if you haven't already heard from me through other channels that you should read, you should.

So ... when do the impeachment hearings start? That seemed to work surprisingly well for the forces of rationality last time.

"What does your rally sign say?"

So asks @TheDailyShow.

And then people reply, with the hashtags #rally4sanity and/or #stewartrally! (Or, to Keep Fear Alive, with #colbertrally.) Anyway, it is hilarious.

Saw this one from @sonjablair:

"What do we want? Reasonable Negotiation with Positive Outcome for as Many as Possible Given the Circumstances!"

This once again proves The Matt Lewis/William Beutler Theory, that Conservatives Are Winning On Twitter™. Remember the #dontgo movement? Never forget!

(previously)

Descend Upon Washington With All of Your Libtard Fury! (Or Irony, or Whatever.)

Just in case you haven't already heard:

Click the images for more details. And see also your Wonkette Editor-in-Chief, who is so enraged by these things that he will have a counter-counter rally! (Probably with furries.)

Green Go The Rushes, Yo

I came across this a while ago, in a print edition (!) of The New Yorker, and just remembered it while moving a stack of magazines.

To the recycling bin, of course.

As morally superior citizens of planet Earth, we Prius owners consider it our duty to keep finding new ways to enlighten those eco-heathens who are still floundering in the eco-darkness, even as our cars sometimes fail to decelerate when the brake pedal is depressed, a violation of Newton’s third law of motion, caused by global warming. Herewith, some suggestions from the “Things to Do with Your Prius” message board.

Here is my favorite:

At the next Luther Burbank Day vegan barbecue and weed roast, back your Prius up to within a few feet of the folks lounging on the grass, with the engine running, and explain that its super-clean exhaust system is actually freshening the air.

DRINK

As I said elsewhere when asked about some pronouncements from the Great Orange Satan Himself:

Also, I think, like Jeff, that it's firebagger-level nonsense to say we haven't gotten much done over the past 18 months. I would say to him: Moonbat, please.

And then I would ask his reaction to this video, particularly the part starting at around 1:10.

(alt. video link)

RM, FTW:

The last time any president did this much in office, booze was illegal. If you believe in policy, if you believe in government that addresses problems, cheers to that.

(h/t: Some Hungover America- and Video-Poker-Hater, via Moonbat Command Central | x-posted)

Don't Say They Didn't Warn You, Part 2

Baby-Eater Bachmann explains the Republican plan for governance, after they regain control of the House because butthurt libtards are mad at Obama:

I think that all we should do is issue subpoenas and have one hearing after another. And expose all the nonsense that is gone [sic] on. And it’s very important when we come back that we have constitutional conservative leadership because the American people’s patience is about this big. So we have to make sure that we do what the people want us to do.

Probably worth mentioning Tarryl Clark again, don't you think?

(previously)

Don't Say They Didn't Warn You

Brian Beutler of TPM reports:

"If Republicans are rewarded with control of the House of Representatives, we will use every means at our disposal to take that case to the American people, and repeal Obamacare lock stock and barrel," said House GOP Conference Chair Mike Pence. "We'll also use whatever means are available to delay implementation of Obamacare."

On a related note, also see Christina Bellantoni's report: "Van Jones To Netroots: Quit Beating Up On Obama."

Sadly, I know the answer to this one, Jill

"The real question is why the Democrats refuse to point this out."

Because it's more fun to grouse about Obama not being perfect, that's why.

(h/t: @siouxeeq | x-posted)

Isn't It Colonic?

From the sidebar at the Huffington Post House of Woo, a moment of clickbait fail so impressive that I immediately left the site:

Better a half a loaf repost than no loaf post at all

Following is something I posted over in the Bh.tv forums.

The first three blockquotes are excerpts from previous posts I had put up elsewhere in that thread, while arguing against both righties and lefties who are bent on bashing Obama. As with my Bh.tv post, I included the excerpts for context, and as a lead-in for the real meat, from Jim Newell, which follows.

__________

Originally Posted by bjkeefe

It is also true that some of us, at least, who remain in the "approval" column have never thought a president got handed a magic wand on Inauguration Day. Some of us were and continue to be realistic about the checks and balances, to coin a phrase, that exist in our system. Some of us are more inclined to be pissed at the Congress and/or certain Dems and "Independents" in the Congress than we are at the President when it comes to passing legislation.

Originally Posted by bjkeefe

And of course, our media environment being what it is, we tend to see and hear those most willing to scream the loudest. It's not much of a news story to report on someone like me -- kinda phlegmatic, reasonably satisfied, willing to give him four years before passing final judgment -- as it is to report on someone howling that he is JUST LIKE BUSH!!!1! No, worse!!!1!

Originally Posted by bjkeefe

So, at the end of the day, I still consider him far better than the thought of McCain/Palin, and I still can't imagine voting against him in 2012, given any even remotely plausible options.

damn it all, i agree with that too.

Yep. It does kind of suck, in some ways, doesn't it?

Tying the above, and more, together, Newell get serious for a while, and as is usually the case in these situations, his post deserves to be stolen reposted in full.

C'mon, Give Barack Obama Some Credit For Making BP Pay

The weak, spineless worst president ever, whose abysmal speech yesterday eliminated any hope for American prosperity for countless generations, is such an evil corporatist that he's... found a way to make BP pay claims. Will he ever "show leadership"?

The reaction to Barack Obama's mediocre speech last night revealed one of the more annoying trends in parts of the Left: you're less vulnerable bashing the shit out of him at all times than trying to defend him, or even consider his motives.

It was disappointing that he didn't acknowledge the environmental need or the economic merits of pricing carbon in the wishy-washy second half of his speech, absolutely. The public has, sadly, grown more skeptical if not outright dismissive of the need to address climate change and the transition to an advanced, high-tech, clean energy economy — something only achievable through carbon pricing, be it a cap-and-trade system or a carbon tax. This is understandable — most people are too busy worrying about unemployment right now — but the president can't let our carbon problem disappear entirely from the public arena. A line or two would've been nice!

But there are not and will not be enough votes in the Senate this year to pass an energy bill with a strong carbon pricing mechanism, and that's why he didn't bring it up or "set markers." This was the takeaway from his speech. You can ask him to "lead" more, but the votes will not show up in the Senate. They're not there. He cannot twist enough arms. It would go down in flames and ultimately be a major misread of the public mood, in an election year. The same people would be calling him "weak." This is the situation.

So if Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, Howard Fineman and pretty much every other liberal pundit who freaked the fuck out over the quality or modesty of the president's 20-minute television speech last night would like to help the situation, they should direct more ire at the Senate. That is where people write laws. And they don't have the collective will or numbers right now to write a good law pricing carbon.

But what of today's White House agreement with BP for it to set up a $20 billion, independent escrow fund to pay claims, cancel its dividends for at least the rest of 2010, and set up another fund compensating oil workers for lost wages? (And that $20 billion is not a cap, either — it can, and probably will, go up.) Those seem like pretty strong results and displays of leadership! BP probably wouldn't have conceded its hand like this, either, if it thought the White House wouldn't try more aggressive legal ways of getting them to pay up were they to refuse.

This fund is going to help many, many people along the Gulf Coast, immediately. That doesn't change the fact that Barack Obama doesn't "act angrily," like a clown, for the personal amusement of pundits, but it's something.

And look at how crazy Minnesota GOP Rep. Michele Bachmann is reacting!

The president just called for creating a fund that would be administered by outsiders, which would be more of a redistribution-of-wealth fund. And now it appears like we'll be looking at one more gateway for more government control, more money to government

Thanks for the confirmation, Michele. Now we're making progress.