Sunday was the day when Americans were watching the Iraqi election, of course. What do you think the Strib’s editorial page had for this weighty day? Well, a lengthy editorial on Ethanol, for those who rise Sunday morn with a healthy appetite for flapjacks, sausages, orange juice and 2000 words on corn subsidies. (“Bold gesture, missed options.” Was ever a more perfect headline for an editorial ever printed?) But the main page had this at the top:There's more; read it all.
“For the first time in our history, ideology and theology hold a monopoly of power. What that means for the environment is frightening.”
Well, it depends on your perspective. We all remember how 270,000 people were killed in a day when the environment demonstrated that it had a monopoly of power over plate tectonics.
Below the words, a picture of cracked parched earth, which had once no doubt been green & verdant farmland before the Right Rev. Bush got out his joystick and sent his 900 foot tall Jesus robot to blast the crops with his death-beam laser eyes.
Did I mention that the shadow of a cross falls across the parched land?
You look down the page to see what this might be titled – Meek gesture, seized options? Bold & spicy options, savory gestures? Get this:
THERE IS NO TOMORROW.
We’re on a roll! Ecological catastrophe brought on by “ideology and theology,” with another dull DONG of the catastrophe bell that’s been tolling ever since the Indian cried a famous lone tear over phosphates in the laundry soap. Then comes the cherry on the sundae:
“By Bill Moyers.”
Tuesday, February 01, 2005
Lileks Remains on A Roll
His Bleat column is a must read for the third straight day:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I had to laugh, Moyers goes on this rampage about the apocalyptic nonsense (as he sees it) of the Christian right, then immediately segues into his own brand of apocalyptic nonsense (environmentalism) with no apparent sense of irony.
Pat's right. Environmental extremism is characterized by a dogmatic belief in the un-provable identical to that the left (falsely) complains about in conservatives. As I've previously written, "Kyoto emission caps are justified only if all five of the following are true:
1) global warming exists
2) global warming would be harmful
3) global warming is man-made, as a result of increased CO2 emissions
4) Kyoto caps would significantly reduce emissions
5) the costs of imposing Kyoto caps are less than the benefits"
Only the first of those prongs has more than half a chance to be correct, yet the environmental left declines to debate climate change with anything approaching the reason and logic they insist is lacking in religiously faithful conservatives.
I don't care if Bill Moyers is familiar with the Book of Revelation. But, especially given his claim to have "read the literature," he really ought to have studied Lomborg's The Skeptical Environmentalist before opening his mouth to insert his foot.
Post a Comment