Blogs

Will Colbert Use "The Late Show" To Save the World?

| Fri Apr. 11, 2014 12:07 PM PDT
Bill O'Reilly on Stephen Colbert's Comedy Central show in 2007.

Jumping from his niche cable show on Comedy Central to a plum CBS slot will roughly triple Stephen Colbert's national television audience. So when he takes over David Letterman's late night show next year, we at Climate Desk be tracking one thing in particular with great interest: Will he bring his astute political satire about global warming to an even bigger audience?

None of the current late night barons—Kimmel, Fallon, Ferguson among them—are especially notable for speaking out about climate change, though they occasionally work it into the odd monologue or guest appearance. Colbert is different. In his role as right-wing Satirist-in-Chief, Colbert has regularly skewered climate deniers by pretending to be one of them. One of my favorites is this takedown of Fox and Friends (a frequent target of the show), whose hosts had accused Nickelodeon of pushing a sinister warmist agenda...via SpongeBob Square Pants:

 

And this year, he nailed Donald Trump:

 

But Colbert has not just mercilessly parodied the attacks on climate science, he has also delved into some of the more complex aspects of climate adaptation, including geoengineering. During an interview last year, Harvard University environmental scientist David Keith presented the case for pouring out sulfuric acid into the atmosphere to temporarily ameliorate the effects of warming. "It would be a totally imperfect technical fix," Keith said. "It would have risks. It wouldn't get us out of the long-run need to stop polluting. But it might actually save people and be useful."

But perhaps his best—most sobering, most blistering, most poignant—take on the subject was during this segment from January 2013, where he lampooned an emerging trend of commentators throwing up their hands in faux despair, and resigning themselves to the fate of a warming world. (In this case, he's going after Erick Erickson, who worked for CNN at the time):

COLBERT: Sure, I know: America beat Tojo, we crushed Hitler, we put a man on the moon, but incrementally reducing CO2 emissions? That sounds like a lot of work. And how can fight an enemy we can’t see? I mean, get out of here, get, get out of here, carbon! [Swats air]. Did I hit it? I don’t know. So it’s high-time we stop trying to solve the problem and resign ourselves to each day getting worse. Because ladies and gentlemen, when Erick Erickson says "get used to it", he means get used to city-swallowing storms, mass extinctions, deadly heat waves, crippling floods, and droughts that make a desert out of Oklahoma. And, that's just how it is now. Our problems are just too big to cure. So join me and Erick. Give up. Crawl into bed with a cheesecake and wait for death. And now, sure, the only thing worse than global warming itself might be knowing you're destroying the planet, and doing nothing, but if guys like me and Erick have our way, you'd better get used to it.

Advertise on MotherJones.com

Friday Cat Blogging - 11 April 2014

| Fri Apr. 11, 2014 11:50 AM PDT

Here she is, the Queen of Sheba, keeping a watchful eye on her domain and her loyal subjects. Soon she will take a well-deserved nap.

But before you take a nap, how about donating a few bucks to our investigative reporting fundraiser? Our goal is to raise $100,000 over the next three weeks. As you all know, we're a reader-supported nonprofit, so those dollars aren't going to come from big corporations or super-rich political donors. They'll be small contributions from regular people who read Mother Jones. If you value our reporting—or hell, even if you only value our catblogging—please donate $5 to the Mother Jones Investigative Fund. If you can afford it, make it $10. We'll put it to good use. Here's how to make a contribution:

Thanks!

Who Started the Culture Wars, Anyway?

| Fri Apr. 11, 2014 11:16 AM PDT

A couple of days ago Paul Waldman wrote about Persecuted, a new movie that features a Christian evangelist who gets framed for murder by an evil senator and then spends the rest of the film running from government agents. It all sounds pretty silly, and it's come in for plenty of mockery on the left. But after watching the trailer, I have to say that it didn't sound much sillier than plenty of other movies and TV shows I've seen. In Hollywood, evil businessmen have done a lot worse than this to environmental activists and the CIA has done a lot worse to national security whistleblowers.

So fine. Why not make a silly movie about a persecuted evangelist instead of a persecuted journalist trying to expose the CIA? It's not my cup of paranoid thriller tea, but all of us enjoy being paranoid about different things. And I was happy to see that, unlike many lefties, Waldman concedes that right-wing Christian paranoia isn't completely ridiculous:

But liberals should acknowledge that for more fundamentalist Christians, there's a genuine feeling that underlies their fears. In many ways, the contemporary world really has turned against them. Society has decided that their beliefs about family—in which sex before marriage is shameful and wicked, and women are subordinate to their husbands—are antiquated and worthy of ridicule. Their contempt for gay people went from universal to acceptable to controversial to deplorable in a relatively short amount of time. If you are actually convinced that, in the words of possible future senator and current congressman Paul Broun, "I don't believe that the Earth's but about 9,000 years old," then modern geology is an outright assault on your most fundamental beliefs. And so is biology and physics and many other branches of science.

And it's not just changing culture. Over the last half century, various branches of government have also taken plenty of proactive steps to marginalize religion. Prayer in public school has been banned. Creches can no longer be set up in front of city hall. Parochial schools are forbidden from receiving public funds. The Ten Commandments can't be displayed in courtrooms. Catholic hospitals are required to cover contraceptives for their employees. Gay marriage is legal in more than a dozen states and the number is growing rapidly.

Needless to say, I consider these and plenty of other actions to be proper public policy. I support them all. But they're real things. Conservative Christians who feel under attack may be partly the victims of cynical politicians and media moguls, and a lot of their pity-party attempts at victimization really are ridiculous. But their fears do have a basis in reality. To a large extent, it's the left that started the culture wars, and we should hardly be surprised that it provoked a strong response. In fact, it's a sign that we're doing something right.

As far as I'm concerned, the culture wars are one of the left's greatest achievements. Our culture needed changing, and we should take the credit for it. Too often, though, we pretend that it's entirely a manufactured outrage of the right, kept alive solely by wild fantasies and fever swamp paranoia. That doesn't just sell the right short, it sells the left short too. It's our fight. We started it, and we should be proud of it.

VIDEO: David Corn on Why Republican Strife Has Gotten Personal

Fri Apr. 11, 2014 10:23 AM PDT

Mother Jones DC bureau chief David Corn spoke with MSNBC's Chris Matthews and Clarence Page this week about why the fight between Rand Paul and Dick Cheney is about more than just policy. Watch here:

Obamacare and the Hack Gap: A Case Study

| Fri Apr. 11, 2014 8:45 AM PDT

"Watch the right search desperately for bad news on Obamacare," says the headline to Michael Hiltzik's piece a couple of days ago about the right, um, desperately searching for bad news on Obamacare. And it's true. Obamacare is a great example of the famous hack gap.

Don't get me wrong. We lefties generally try to portray Obamacare as a success. You won't find Diogenes on either side. But I read lots of lefties who write about health care, and they've generally been willing to acknowledge Obamacare's problems. The federal website rollout was a disaster. The insurance pools so far seem to have fewer of the young and healthy than we'd hoped. Narrow networks are a significant problem, especially in some states. We don't know yet how many Obamacare enrollees were previously uninsured—and in any case, the number appears to be less than CBO projected earlier this year. Etc.

But unless I'm reading the wrong conservatives, you simply see nothing of this sort on the right. Their coverage of Obamacare is simply an endless search for increasingly strained ways to deny that anything even slightly positive has happened. The Obama administration is lying about its numbers. If they're not lying, the figures are meaningless anyway until they've been unskewed. Premiums are skyrocketing. People are being tossed off their plans and thrown in the street. The budget projections are a joke. Cancer patients are dying for lack of doctors to see them. Hours are being cut back and part-time workers are being fired. Fewer people have coverage now than before Obamacare started up.

I could go on. And on. And on. This is the hack gap in all its glory. There's simply no willingness on the right to acknowledge any success at all. And even when they're forced to concede that maybe there are a few people benefiting from Obamacare, it's just an opportunity to rail about Democrats handing out bennies to inner-city moochers like a modern-day Boss Tweed. Welcome to America, ladies and gentlemen.

Senate Torture Report Starts to Leak

| Fri Apr. 11, 2014 8:01 AM PDT

In an entirely unsurprising development, it appears that the Senate report on CIA torture is starting to get leaked. Today, McClatchy reports the complete list of findings from the report, including these:

  • The CIA’s use of enhanced interrogation techniques did not effectively assist the agency in acquiring intelligence or in gaining cooperation from detainees.
  • The CIA inaccurately characterized the effectiveness of the enhanced interrogation techniques to justify their use.
  • The CIA’s use of enhanced interrogation techniques was brutal and far worse than the agency communicated to policymakers.
  • The CIA impeded effective White House oversight and decision-making. The CIA has actively avoided or impeded congressional oversight of the program. The CIA impeded oversight by the CIA’s Office of Inspector General.
  • The CIA manipulated the media by coordinating the release of classified information, which inaccurately portrayed the effectiveness of the agency’s enhanced interrogation techniques.

The whole story is here, along with the complete list of findings. I expect more like this in the future unless the CIA stops slow rolling its declassification process and allows the report to be substantially released.

Advertise on MotherJones.com

We're Still at War: Photo of the Day for April 11, 2014

Fri Apr. 11, 2014 6:57 AM PDT

Expert Infantryman Badge candidates wait at the start of the 12-mile foot march before the sun rises, April 3, 2014, on Fort Stewart, Ga. All of the 94 candidates who started the foot march arrived on Cottrell Field in the time allotted, where they were awarded the EIB. (U.S. Army Photo by Sgt. Joshua Laidacker, 4th IBCT, 3rd ID, Public Affairs)

Religious Right Fears the GOP Can't Handle a National Convention in Las Vegas

| Fri Apr. 11, 2014 3:00 AM PDT
GOP Hangover poster

Religious conservatives are urging the GOP to scratch Sin City off its list of potential locations for the 2016 Republican National Convention, the Dallas Morning News reports. According to the paper, advocates are concerned that Las Vegas' reputation as a gambling and prostitution haven will discourage conservatives from attending the event and that the city is a "trap waiting to ensnare" convention attendees.

"The GOP is supposedly interested in reaching out to conservatives and evangelicals. Maybe that’s just a front, but if they really mean it this is not the way to do it," James Dobson, founder of Family Talk, a Christian radio show that broadcasts across the United States, told the paper. "Even though Vegas has tried to shore itself up and call itself family-friendly, it’s still a metaphor for decadence. There's still 64 pages of escort services in the yellow pages."

Dobson, along with leaders of the American Family Association, Eagle Forum, the Traditional Values Coalition, and Family-PAC sent a letter to Republican chairman Reince Priebus warning him to choose another destination.

Las Vegas is considered a frontrunner for the 2016 convention. Other cities under consideration are Dallas, Denver, Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Kansas City, Missouri. The Nevada city has never hosted a national political convention for either Democrats or Republicans, but it's been aggressively courting the GOP. The city's promotional video for the convention does not feature any gambling. Instead, it emphasizes Las Vegas' hotels, sunshine, rock climbing, proximity to the Hoover Dam, NASCAR, places of worship, and the "growing Asian population." The video pans to Disney's logo.

Las Vegas has a strong lobbying campaign behind it. The team includes casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, who spent over $98 million on GOP candidates in 2012, resort businessman Stephen Wynn, and Washington political strategists, according to the New York Times. Andrea Lafferty, president of the Traditional Values Coalition, told The Dallas Morning News that while she supports Adelson, she fears that with all of the escorts and prostitutes available in the Las Vegas area, she "can see all the setups that are going to take place."

Erick Erickson, editor-in-chief of the conservative blog RedState.com, also expressed concern about the GOP choosing Las Vegas. "Good Christian delegates getting drunk, gambling, stuffing dollar bills in strippers' g-strings, etc. will be the toast of not just MSNBC, but the front page of the New York Times, ABC, CBS, NBC, the Huffington Post, and more." he wrote. Not to mention, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) might wake up with a tiger in his bathroom.

Quiz: Who's More Metal, the Cat or the Owner?

| Fri Apr. 11, 2014 3:00 AM PDT

Metal Cats, a new book that compiles photos of headbangers with their felines, made us wonder: Who's more metal, cat or owner? Take the quiz below, featuring some of the book's photos, to find out.

 

Photos from Metal Cats by Alexandra Crockett, published by powerHouse Books.

File This One Under Big Government Run Amok

| Thu Apr. 10, 2014 8:23 PM PDT

What a weird story this is. A few years ago, someone tacked an amendment onto a farm bill that lifted the 10-year statute of limitations on collection of old debts to the government. So now the Social Security Administration is intercepting tax refunds in order to collect on ancient overpayments.

But that's not the weird part. The weird part is that in some cases, they're seizing money from the children of dead beneficiaries who were overpaid as long ago as the 60s and 70s. According to the Washington Post, "Social Security officials say that if children indirectly received assistance from public dollars paid to a parent, the children’s money can be taken, no matter how long ago any overpayment occurred."

But wait. Even that's not the weirdest part of the story. This is:

A few weeks ago, with no notice, the U.S. government intercepted Mary Grice’s tax refunds from both the IRS and the state of Maryland. Grice had no idea that Uncle Sam had seized her money until some days later, when she got a letter saying that her refund had gone to satisfy an old debt to the government — a very old debt.

When Grice was 4, back in 1960, her father died, leaving her mother with five children to raise. Until the kids turned 18, Sadie Grice got survivor benefits from Social Security to help feed and clothe them.

....Social Security officials told Grice that six people — Grice, her four siblings and her father’s first wife, whom she never knew — had received benefits under her father’s account. The government doesn’t look into exactly who got the overpayment; the policy is to seek compensation from the oldest sibling and work down through the family until the debt is paid.

WTF? They just go after the eldest child first and work their way down? All because their mother was (allegedly) overpaid, which means a bunch of teenage kids benefited three decades ago? That's got to be the most cockamamie thing I've ever heard of.