White House ‘Eviscerated’ CDC Testimony Regarding Climate Change and Health
WASHINGTON - The White House severely edited congressional testimony given Tuesday by the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on the impact of climate change on health, removing specific scientific references to potential health risks, according to two sources familiar with the documents.
Dr. Julie Gerberding, director of the Atlanta-based CDC, the government’s premier disease monitoring agency, told a Senate hearing that climate change “is anticipated to have a broad range of impacts on the health of Americans.”
But her prepared testimony was devoted entirely to the CDC’s preparation, with few details on what effects climate change could have on the spread of disease. Only during questioning did she describe some specific diseases that likely would be affected, again without elaboration.
Her testimony before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee had much less information on health risks than a much longer draft version Gerberding submitted to the White House Office of Management and Budget for review in advance of her appearance.
“It was eviscerated,” said a CDC official, familiar with both versions, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the review process.
The official said that while it is customary for testimony to be changed in a White House review, these changes were particularly “heavy-handed,” with the document cut from its original 14 pages to four. It was six pages as presented to the Senate committee.
The OMB had no comment on Gerberding’s testimony.
“We generally don’t speculate and comment on anything until it is the final product,” said OMB spokesman Sean Kevelighan. He added that OMB reviews take into consideration “whether they … line up well with the national priorities of the administration.”
The CDC is part of the Department of Health and Human Services and its congressional testimony, as is normal with all agencies, is routinely reviewed by OMB.
But Gerberding, who could not be reached late Tuesday for comment, was said to have been surprised by the extensive changes. Copies of the original testimony already had been sent to a number of associated health groups representing states, county and city health agencies that the CDC routinely coordinates with, a CDC official said.
CDC spokesman Tom Skinner sought to play down the White House changes. He called Gerberding’s appearance before the Senate panel “very productive” and said she addressed the issues she wanted during her remarks and when questioned by the senators.
“What needed to be said as far we’re concerned was said,” said Skinner in a telephone interview from Atlanta. “She certainly communicated with the committee everything she felt was critical to help them appreciate and understand all the issues surrounding climate change and its potential impact on public health.”
The deletions directed by the White House included details on how many people might be adversely affected because of increased warming, according to one official who has seen the original version. Also deleted were the scientific basis for some of the CDC’s analysis on what kinds of diseases might be spread in a warmer climate and rising sea level, the official added.
Gerberding seems to have tried to address some of those issues during questioning from senators.
Sen. Barbara Boxer, a California Democrat and the committee’s chairman, produced a CDC chart listing the broad range of health problems that could emerge from a significant temperature increase and sea level rise
They include fatalities from heat stress and heart failure, increased injuries and deaths from severe weather such as hurricanes; more respiratory problems from drought-driven air pollution; an increase in waterborne diseases including cholera, and increases vector-borne diseases including malaria and hantavirus; and mental health problems such as depression and post-traumatic stress.
“These are the potential things you can expect,” replied Gerberding when asked about the items listed. “… In some of these areas its not a question of if. It’s a question of who, what, how and when.”
Peter Rafle, a spokesman for Boxer, said the senator knew nothing about changes that might have been made to Gerberding’s testimony by the White House.
© 2007 Associated Press
Another reason to BEWARE OF THE SUPREME COURT
1. I agree that the Dems haven’t done all they can. And it is true they can’t break a filibuster. We need to elect enough, probably 9 and 10 for sure next election. And for sure a Dem Prez no matter who. The Supreme court is on the verge and one more conservative on it can undo everything that is still intact. And that will last for another 20 years. I don’t contend this is more important than lives being lost isn’t the most pressing issue, but it is important to realize that one more wingnut judge and they will overturn not just Roe v. Wade, but Social security, medicare, most large social programs. Remember Social Security only survived by a 5 to 4 vote in the 30s despite a court that at that time was liberal. Think of the damage that could be done, millions of seniors in poverty, no healthcare for them. Medicaid, Schip. If you don’t think that the right wingers won’t push for all of this as they become more and more emboldened, you are wrong. If you listen to right wing talk, their overall objective is to totally overturn the new deal of FDR, the new society of the 60s and 70s of the war on poverty, medicare, etc.
The electorate in the last 7 years has made the Dems extremely gun shy and the constant lies from prez and repugnets do echo across the land and it is unfortunate that this still resonates in the red states. I live in Georgia and hear the wingnuts exicited that this can occur in our lifetime; Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Scalia are licking their chops for just one more wingnut Supreme court judge and we can begin. Justice Breyer, liberal is 87, Ginsberg, Stevens, and Souter in their 70s DANGER! DANGER! DANGER! Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas, just licking their chops for one more wingnut
We must support the Dems and nurse them along no matter what!!! Don’t vote for any 3rd party candidates, don’t sign any petitions to get other candidates on the ballot in any state. THIS COMING ELECTION IS THAT IMPORTANT.
REMEMBER DIVIDE US AND THEY WIN!!!!!!.
Look, I probably shouldn’t respond, but here goes…
What you are doing is called “trolling” or alternately “spam”. Please stop doing this. We all know that 1) the election is happening, and given that, 2) there’s a difference of opinion about how best to respond. If you want to stay on-topic, or at least on-thread, that’s fine - but this is over the top. Please stop. OK?
Sounds like telling someone not to “troll” is “trolling” itself.
Restive,
I know what it is called, but this next elction will determine whether we remain a democracy or a dictatorship helped by the Supreme court. The cout already appointed one prez; so the next election cannot even be very close!!
Restive. I agree 100%. I will not waste my vote on the Democrats or Republicans - unless Kucinich or Ron Paul are the nominees. The Dems have lost their chance with me. I’m sick of them. Sick of Reid. Sick of Pelosi. The only answer to what the White House did with the CDC report, torture, 4th Amendment violations etal is accountability - that takes the form of impeachment. If our constitutional officers will not uphold their office, they (The Speaker and Senate Majority Leader) do not deserve continued support. Period!
I see “trolling” all the time here if getting off the topic is trolling. I had thought that trolling is more about a bunch of people who rarely visit a site invading it and filling it with hostile commentary. Am I wrong about this?
More on topic, what the President is doing here is wrong. It is interfering with the ability of Congress to conduct oversight of the agencies and use the information these agencies possess to make policy. Does anyone know if there are laws about this?
What’s the big deal? Bush and Co. has been lying and screwing the true citizens of this country since god has told Bush what and what not to do. The Republican cult party are traitors to our country and constitution. But who cares? Evidently, Pelosi and the Dems don’t give a damn. As far as i’m concerned they’re all traitors too, when they go along with Bush and his Republican cultist party. They let Bush get away with anything him and queer Cheney want to do, including murder. Now Bush wants to start a war with big and bad Cuba. They could have a nuclear bomb any day now, and are hiding terrorists, so let’s bomb the hell out of them along with Iran, Syria and anyone else God tells Bush to invade and kill. I just don’t understand why the psychiatric association hasn’t committed him to a mental institution, along with his buddy, Dickless Cheney. They are all looney toons in that administration. But the sorry part of this situation is there are over 50 million cultists who voted for these jerks, who should also be locked up-FOREVER. Hopefully before Bush starts WWIII. He salivates just thinking about his power he has over the world that won’t stand up to him. Only Putin has the balls to speak up and stand up to that lunatic. God save the King!
I wonder if at least one member of the news media could get a copy of Gerberding’s report and publish it. Maybe we need to stop listening to “Congressional testimony” of government agencies since the White House eviscerates EVERYTHING they report and re-writes it to support the Republican political agenda.
We’ve probably “peaked” with a great many things — reached the top of the hill and are now careering down a steep hill out of control — the Constitution, Global Warming, as well as oil and other energy sources.
We at least need to know what to expect, and damned if the White House has a right to censor this kind of information.
I have a fantasy born of a lot of anger and frustration. It is that GW Bush will go nuts, take Saddam Hussein’s honored gun that he specifically asked for, and shoot Scalia, Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Cheney, and then turn it on himself. Maybe some kind of brain-fever. America would survive this kind of disturbance with a great deal more hope for the future than this precipitate rush into destruction.
I wouldn’t have such fantasies if the Democrats cared about America more than their re-election. They certainly haven’t earned MY vote again.
madlib and restive
I am constantly on this site. I am 63 yrs old, retired military, served 2 tours in Viet Nam. We were slowly moving forward unil the Reagan election. Peace movement had reversed the unholy war, Medicare and medicaid had passed. War on poverty had begun, and worker’s rights were advancing. A single income could sustain a reasonable lifestyle.
A lot has been reversed beginning with Reagan and union busting. An imperial Presidency is now established.
Before we can go forward, the reversals need to be stopped. Even Hillary is a weak start, but is must begin.
Any of the repugnant candidate will assure the backward movement to monarchy. Remember, Hitler got the courts first and then the Holocost began!!!
Please think befor we get divided!!!
I agree that the democrats aren’t that different than the repubs but a third party candidate is throwing your vote away. A democrat in the presidency is a start.
This is an important subject. To my mind it exactly parallels the ‘weapons of mass destruction’ threat in invading Iraq. Global warming is now becoming the administration’s next Big Secret with which to persuade Congress to do its bidding on invasion of privacy and even a crackdown by the private military which has grown to such huge numbers - like the chemicals amassed to fight a trumped up war to the benefit of huge corporate entities, the private armies have to be employed somewhere in quasi-legitimate fashion. They are going to have to be ‘needed’ as (hopefully) we get out of Iraq. That means a new BIG FEAR which only the government, and specifically only the executive branch, knows about.
This is not to say that climate change is not a real threat. We need, however, absolute clarity about what the threats are, and the only reason for obscuring those basic facts is to persuade us to submit to future crackdowns.
It won’t work. The rest of the world knows what we know, and they’re going to be up front in letting the information flow. This gives me comfort. I hope the Congress will get themselves informed instead of just listening to what Bush wants them to listen to. If I can do it; they can!
You Democratic apologists will probably get your wish — Hillary will probably be president — but it will be without my vote and that of thousands of other progressives who would have voted Democratic if the Democrats already in Congress had fought to stop the Bush agenda. But they collaborated instead.
Furthermore, until the campaigning Democrats pledge to restore the US to its Constitutional basis, NOBODY who’s really alarmed about the Bush-agenda will even consider voting for them. The candidates haven’t indicated they’re concerned about it.
The Democrats have governed and campaigned against themselves, so look to the cause instead of begging for votes from those who were betrayed by them.
We need to stop talking about democracy as if we have it. Please.
Last night, I had the pleasure of hearing Lewis Lapham in a very informal but substantive discussion on where we are heading.
One of his big points: WE ARE NOT A DEMOCRACY. We’ve been an oligarchy and remain so. The sooner we abandon this language about losing democracy, the sooner we and others will begin understand the extents to which we don’t have it and to do something about it.
There couldn’t be anything more “on point” to this article than noticing we now have one of the most secretive administrations in American history, courtesy of Republicans. They’re censoring the Centers for Disease Control, for Heaven’s sake, to see “whether they line up well with the (CONSERVATIVE) priorities of the administration.”
Perhaps some Democrat would do a similar thing in office (I can’t prove they haven’t or wouldn’t), but the notion of having someone at OMB (Office of “Management” & Budget) review testimony about science and health to see if it’s Bushie enough is sickening. Hiring “expert” advisors and then muzzling them from the political side is a form of treason against your tax dollars used to hire the experts in the first place.
dkitching is patriotic and correct to call from the rooftops on this and every other commentary site for Americans to wake up and not lose the 2008 election to Republicans. That means, of course, Democrats will need to beat them, because no one else is going to.
As for the “troll” stuff, everybody who finds it funny and cute to repeat that word is emotionally stuck somewhere in grade school and would serve their country better to log off permanently and spend a long, long time reading the complete works about Harry Potter.
The Dem Party apologists are out in force today! In today’s commercial for the Dems, Daniel David says (1:13 pm), dkitching is … correct to call …for Americans to wake up and not lose the 2008 election to Republicans. That means…Democrats will need to beat them, because no one else is going to.”
Voting for Democrats is not a way to “beat” Republicans. It’s a way to surrender to Republican policies, even in the event that so-called “Democrats” win the elections. This is precisely how the US political system was intended to function: it’s a mechanism guaranteeing continuity of basic economic policy, regardless of which party is in office.
Bill Clinton’s mentor at Georgetown, Prof Carroll Quigley, specifically wrote about the desirability of such a system. He noted that it provides a way for the population to get the emotional satisfaction of “throwing the bums out,” every 4 or 8 years, without endangering any basic features of the status quo. The faces, personalities & style of rhetoric would change — but the economic policies would not, and the distribution of privilege would not.
This is what Dem Party apologists are begging readers to accept — a system from which there is no escape, as long as you fall for the good-cop/bad-cop gambit. A Republican is a Republican. A Democrat is a Republican in sheep’s clothing. The social elements that control both parties are the same — they sit in the same board rooms, & belong to the same clubs. There is no way to eliminate Republicanism from the nation’s political life by supporting the Bush-protecting, Bush-collaborating crypto-Republicans of the Democratic Party.
re restive and RichM:
keep calling ‘em like you see ‘em.
re the actual topic:
this bunch puts a whole new spin on the term “poiltical science.”
If the outrage towards the weak ineffictive democrats grows large enough there will be a viable third party. There is little difference between both parties. I would have to plug my nose in order to vote for the likes of Clinton, Pelosi or Reid. They have failed the people by caving into these fascist republicans time and time again. Then they punish the few that have the guts to speak out. Shame , shame shame.
You look back to 2000, when the court gave bush the presidency, and move forward to all the still-living bodies left in the wake of the GOP killing machine that’s taken no prisoners since - McCain, Cleland, Kerry, the CIA operative (her name escapes my old brain at the moment), and all the others. Who knows what has been done to, or threatened to be done to Reid, Pelosi, and other dems who might make a difference, that we have no clue to. I agree that it’s vitally importance that we do all we can to keep the next Supreme Court appointee from being the one that topples us over the cliff.
I’ll admit, I waffle a bit when I read all the back-and-forth about supporting a third-party candidate vs. supporting a Democratic lesser evil candidate. Most people have very cogent arguments supporting their point of view. I’m not cogent myself when speaking of political matters-just ask my husband, who is pretty much a conservative and with whom I have some pretty loud arguments.
I voted for Nader in 2000, and for Kerry in 2004. I don’t feel like I threw my first vote away, but I do the second. I felt sorely betrayed when Kerry capitulated so early, given what was being said about Ohio.
I’ve come to the conclusion that ultimately all you can do is study the candidates and vote for and support the one who has the platform and character you can respect-no matter what their party is. It seems to me more honest than not voting for someone you respect because you think they’re “unelectable” or that you’re “throwing your vote away”. If you study the issues and vote for the candidate you believe in, you are never throwing your vote away, because you are doing your duty as a citizen. If enough people followed their consciences instead of trying to play the odds, we might indeed have a viable third, fourth, even fifth party.
I grew up in a Republican household, but I’m a registered Democrat. But I never vote party line, and I do vote for independents. I agree that there is not much difference between the two parties-the Democrats had a lock on Kentucky for years, with blatant patronage in place, and when we elected a Republican governor, ostensibly to clean up the corruption, we got just as many scandals and as much patronage from the other side.
Just because I voted for Nader, I won’t take the blame for putting Bush in office. Anybody who spouts that argument is just making it harder for people to get representatives that actually care about them instead of their corporate sponsors. I’ll cast my vote for Dennis in the primary, and when the DLC puts up their annointed corporate candidate, I’ll look really hard at the independents.
The oligarchy’s choices for us today:
1. Hillary–fascism lite wins
2. Giuliani–fascism wins big
3. Progressives don’t vote–fascism wins big
4. Progressives vote for Kucinich, Nader, republicans–fascism wins big.
5. Progressives demonstrate in the streets and are ignored by the MSM–fascism wins
We the People’s choices for today:
1. Join the Green Party and wait for change–fascism wins for now
2. Join Mike Gravel’s National Initiative and wait for change–fascism wins for now
3. Incorporate We the People, give each American equal shares of non-transferable stock in and dividends from our public assets –We the People win NOW.
wilmoor,
Thanks for a useful thought here. (I think the CIA person you’re trying to remember is Valerie Plame.)
Moonshadow,
Excellent post, and good on you!
People should vote for the candidate who best represents their values. To only vote for someone who you think is “electable”, while disregarding their values, is no better than having Congresspeople who vote, not for values or standards or constitutionality, but for whatever they think will get them re-elected.
I don’t see any difference at all.
wilmoor writes (2:09 pm) “Who knows what has been done to, or threatened to be done to Reid, Pelosi, and other dems who might make a difference, that we have no clue to…”
- Do yourself a favor and forget about such nonsensical explanations for the Dems’ behavior. It’s not a matter of threats, blackmail, or anything of the sort. Rather, what’s at play here is a matter of social class, and class power.
If you analyze both parties as institutions, you see that by their histories, their traditions, their composition, & their entire organizational culture, they are both capitalist institutions, through & through. First and foremost, they both represent the interests of the owning classes in the US. Neither party is capable of criticizing the owning classes — not least, because they are both owned & operated by these classes, for the express benefit of these classes.
If either party were to magically begin to defend the interests of the population, it would immediately come into conflict with the owning classes, who would immediately withdraw their support. This would promptly cause the collapse of the offending party. All party insiders understand this perfectly. Therefore, neither party will ever defend the population’s interests against the interests of the ruling classes.
When Pelosi refuses to impeach Bush, she is exhibiting her class loyalties. She’s a member of the ruling class, & naturally fights to defend her class interests. It’s not a matter of being blackmailed or threatened. On the contrary — she’s just doing what comes naturally to her. She knows that impeaching Bush would entail exposing him for his crimes — and his crimes have all been committed to strengthen the ruling class against the working class. Such exposure would risk unleashing great hostility towards ruling class control — and Pelosi wants no part of that.
I am becoming paranoid about this administration’s attitude to climate change. It is clearly happening. We can we expect more eratic and violent weather, rising sea levels and more disease. Also, I’ve read enough to know that some changes may (and probably will) occur with speed and violence, causing catastrophic distruction.
So, why does the administration continue to deny this? Have they accepted (or are they counting on) the expected distruction? Does the “elite” have some safe place to do that the rest of use won’t have? What possible motivation do they have for their denials?
I’m not a democrat apologist but there is no way a third party candidate will win the presidency. I’m voting for a democrat and if things don’t change then everyone should join a third party. Trust me, the democrats that I know are already disheartened by the dems that were voted in a year ago. People are getting restless.
RuthK
I think the motivation for their denials is religious. Bush & Cheney are both “Christian” fundamentalists who believe in “end times”. Catastrophic natural events are supposed to accompany it. Many people think Bush sees himself as the Messianic servant that will hasten its arrival.
Somewhat related is the quote below:
=====
Mr. Bush certainly sees himself as a Messiah figure. Listen to his language after 9-11: ” I will not forget this wound to our country or those who inflicted it. I will not yield; I will not rest; I will not relent in waging this struggle for freedom and security for the American people.” Or, in his 2003 State of the Union speech: “I will defend the freedom and security of the American people”. He has become the nation. He is its embodiment. According to Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas, - Bush told him: “God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them.” This is Biblical language . it isn’t political script. This is Bush’s soul language. He understands himself as a man with a Divine mission. It also means that for him leadership is not “representing the people” rather leadership means transcending the will of the people. George Bush already knows the truth before the evidence is presented. He is guided by God and must blaze the trial even if the people are reluctant.
Iraq, for example, was a necessary war whether or not Saddam had nukes. Saddam, for Bush, was a bad guy who tried to kill “my dad”. The war, for Bush, was holy and justified and necessary. Purging evil is necessary in the Holiness/Holy War tradition of the Bible. The righteous will purge evil but the unrighteous will be consumed by it. Think of an alcoholic: it’s all or nothing. The whole world is all or nothing.
Like all religions the Bible has various narratives within its pages: Jesus drew on the prophetic traditions that called upon the people to change their way of life even as it critiqued and called upon the elites to decentralize their power. Jesus himself role modeled a lifestyle of service. Mr. Bush, on the other hand, draws on traditions that call for purity and cleansing. It is a language of hostility towards enemies and a strident call for obedience. It calls forth a lifestyle of the RIGHTEOUS ONE who will purge evil from the world through sacred violence.
All of this is not to say that the political world is of less importance. We know that the planning for the Iraq war was at least a decade in preparation. We know that America has had imperial designs and has intervened militarily throughout the world. And we’ve known for 25 years that Corporations have been savagely reducing labor rights while looting the treasury. We know that Mr. Bush is not the cause of our problems. Rather, the point I am making is that Mr. Bush is a sincere front man for an emerging fascism. His religious rhetoric is an authentic merging of Holiness Christianity with Imperial Americanism. The emphasis on security, law and order is necessary to maintain the “high calling” of the American people. The policies of fascism, in other words, are consistent with religious holiness and holy war narratives. And fascism, woven underneath Christian Holiness/Holy War traditions, is a powerful symbolic narrative that speaks to the American people… http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5648.htm
=====
I don’t think one will EVER understand Bush through a rational lens == you must steep yourself in Biblical “end times” thought, and never assume that Bush is rational like most people.
Even if you don’t like Dems because they aren’ progressive, if a Repugnant gets in, there will be another wingnut on the court. I don’t expect Bryer 87 yrs old will last.
Then we get the prez and congress we want next time.
Every law passed will be declared unconstitutional. Their thinking is that taxes to help people infringe on the individual, thus wingnut rule for the next 20 to 30 years before the next chance. No more Roe, no more Social Security, healthcare destroyed and less services. I will be gone by then, but my kids will be around. I certainly hope progressives and I am one won’t vote 3rd party instead of Dem and put this court on them. Somestimes you have to hold your nose and vote for the lesser of 2 evils. USE COMMON SENSE. If Hillary is the nominee, I will hold my nose and vote for her!
Well, this discussion derailed off topic immediately, but turned into a good debate between Democratic apologists and progressives who refuse to hold their nose one minute longer.
As usual, RichM provides perceptive and persuasive analysis. I especially appreciate the note about Carroll Quigley; I had not heard of him before and it’s surprising to hear that someone spoke so frankly IN DEFENSE of one-party rule. Normally, the fact of the Corporate Party leviathan is acknowledged amongst elites surreptitiously and silently but vehemently denied publicly.
I find it more than ironic that Democratic apologists excoriate the Bush administration for fear mongering for political gain and then engage in the same tactics. We MUST vote Democratic because if not we’ll have fascism. Really? Do you honestly believe that Hillary Clinton will do anything substantial to reign in the imperialist adventure in Iraq? Or to repeal any major provision of the PATRIOT ACT Or to abolish warrantless wiretapping? Or extraordinary renditions? Or Gitmo? “Hillary is a first step”? To what?
Permit me to engage in a little counter-fear mongering. If progressives capitulate YET AGAIN to the Democratic faction of the Corporate Party, our values and the rights we cherish will YET AGAIN be betrayed and in 2010 and 2012 we’ll be sitting here YET AGAIN arguing about what went wrong! And YET AGAIN the Democratic apologists will employ the sham argument of laying all fault on the GOP. “We need to elect MORE Democrats” they’ll say. “If we just would have filibuster proof control of the Senate and 300 House seats and if President Hillary wins re-election in a landslide, THEN we’ll see a major change”. And on, and on…
I think most Democratic apologists are sincere and I respect them for that. Alas, they are stuck in a simple dichotomy of Good (all Democrats) v. Bad (all Republicans). Meanwhile, Hillary, Pelosi, Reid and the entire DC Democratic elite are pleased as punch that these “useful idiots” do so much to keep progressives in line.
This election, I believe that the number one issue by far is the Supreme Court. The wingnuts have known that since the 70s’ and they have gotten four they want. Souter appt by Bush 1 is hated by the right. They wish he was dead since he turned once appointed. Do you want to take that chance.
Nader08,
I am a progressive myself, don’t like anyone but Dennis, but we know that he won’t get the nomination. I will vote for him in the primary, but will hold my nose and vote for the Dem nominee in the general!!!
Are you really Ralph Nader?
dkitching,
First, the oldest Justice on the Supreme Court is John Paul Stevens at age 87; NOT Stephen Breyer who is 69.
Secondly, voting to elect a President mainly based on who they *may* or *may not* appoint to the Supreme Court is a very speculative reason. Both John Paul Stevens and David Souter (both considered liberals on the court) were appointed by Republican Presidents. It’s very hard to gauge how a justice will end up voting.
Thirdly, the most obnoxious of conservative justices, like Alito and Roberts and, going further back, Scalia, owe their seats in part to Democratic Senators doing nothing to block their nomination. Yes, the GOP controlled the Senate in 2006 and 1986, but on each occasion Democrats did very little to try to filibuster. So, Democrats bear some responsibility for the current ideological state of the SCOTUS .
Well, in George Bush World…the last thing you want the Center for Disease Control talking about is diseases….maybe he can replace her with Brownie?
I guess you are not Ralph Nader.
If only the nose-holders would be political outside of their blog or comment section. You are not going to convince Green voters to vote for Killary, so stop wasting our time.
Go meet up with your local DFA chapter and start hitting the pavement or the phones. At this point, a good Democratic candidate should grab a MANDATE. I’m talking 60+%. If you guys can’t pull off a margin large enough to absorb the Green conscience vote, then there’s no point to the exercise anyway.
Wake up: the Supreme Court is already a Bush majority. It was in 2000, before O’Connor left. It’s YOUR Congress that is polling at 11%. All they have to do is stand up to Bush, twist arms, and get things passed that mean something. Instead they are actively supporting Bush, asking the Republicans what they’d like in their laws, and condemning their base. If that’s not brain-dead, I don’t know what is.
Please will somone explain to me how if republicans who had control of the congress and the white house and the supreme court brought us to this dire point that the dems who have a slim majority in congress (if Lieberman is included and other pseudo dems)… that the way to show republicans we don’t like what they have done is to make it easier for them to be elected?
I think such advocates of not voting dem to teach them a lesson for what republicans have donbe …are republican plants actually. Are we really this dumbed down?
Dr. Gerberding gets her paper eviscerated …and oddly the posters who ignored the article’s subject didn’t give her warnings much of an airing either. Um…I’ll break with a growing tradition on CD comments …and address the article. Please forgive me.
Bush wants mexican trucks to drive direct to any state. This will result in the introduction of insect and plant pests and as well new diseases directly from the tropics. Thousands of trucks reach the border daily and all can’t be inspected properly. With increasing warming newly introduced diseases is a poorly reported story yet last week we heard of antibiotic staph infections… my theory is the tower of babel story referred to a pre election year.
Are we so insane to dismiss one of the killers inherent in global warming that is stalking us? Disease is the last thing we need on top of all the rest that is happening with global warming. We can move away from a flooding beach but where do you hide from a killer disease? Did you know that Fosse’s mountain gorillas are being decimated by hemorraghic fever? New diseases are truly a potential ahead and worse a rather immediate one in their effects. Our whole system creaking along as it increasingly seems to be, could be paralyzed seemingly overnight. A series of new diseases coming one on top of the other could …yeah well.
And to all you PETULANT NERO types who because you are unhappy are willing to let others suffer because you don’t care anymore… where will you …cough…hide when…achoo…cough…when you…cough…wheeze… I feel sick… ah not to worry. What me worry about a killer plague? Cough…cough.
Here is a world map showing what land remains with a 100 meter rise in water level from melting polar caps:
http://resumbrae.com/archive/warming/100meter.html
Here are maps for the US East Coast with a 1 - 100 meter rise:
http://resumbrae.com/archive/warming/east.html
As someone has said, eventually you can surf in Memphis…
egads. from one-liners to pettifoggery in 24 comments, cough-cough.
ok, quickly:
this - “THIS COMING ELECTION IS THAT IMPORTANT.
REMEMBER DIVIDE US AND THEY WIN!!!!!!”
is what i was referring to; it’s been said several times now on different threads, in exactly this manner. no disrepsect dketching, i was just saying “we hear you, please turn down the volume a bit.”
as for snide comments about my maturity, well - i think that speaks for itself. over and out, sorry to digress.
“I’m voting for a democrat and if things don’t change then everyone should join a third party.”
I’ve voted for Democrats and nothing has changed. How long are we supposed to wait ? The time is now to join a third party. It appears that the current crop of Democrats will bring about the same outcome, so it’s a waste of my vote to elect them. Maybe I’m just an optimist, after all I’m from a state that elected an Independent to be governor (OK it didn’t work out so great, but at least it showed the status quo that we were serious). We seriously need to change the status quo- that is MY only point this coming election year.
Really is everything Bush does supposily a secret?
Do we even have a clue what his favorite food is.
This President and all his henchmen are plainly Paranoid,or is it they know they are doing wrong?
So in turn what do we do? We call each other whatever for not staying on the subject.
We brag about how we are not going to vote.
Methinks we deserve 8 more perhaps a lifetime of Bush dictatorship. Why? Just look at your comments that is why.
Be damn greatful you got Democrats in the majority. All of you seemed to have forgotten The Repoblican Rubberstamp Congresss for Bush.
You want more just keep up what your doing and Not Doing!
Where the hell did you people get the idea that everything can be done and presented to you on a silver platter?
Yes, I am voting , May I say any Democrat running has got my vote.
If you need to asked why then you have been out of this solar system for 30 years or more.
Go ahead and call me whatever.
genaman
“The White House severely edited congressional testimony given Tuesday by the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention…”
NO shit! What science haven’t they edited to keep the facts away from people?
“We generally don’t speculate and comment on anything until it is the final product,” said OMB spokesman Sean Kevelighan. He added that OMB reviews take into consideration “whether they … line up well with the national priorities of the administration.”
Hell no, speculating or commenting on a potential plague before the “final product” would imply that the people working at OMB have enough intelligence or balls to step out of line with the priorities of the administration and work with the priorities of the AMERICAN PEOPLE; the very same people who are giving him and the rest of OMB their “undeserved” paychecks.
Dr. Julie Gerberding, Director of the Center For Disease Control can’t seem to find her own voice. Maybe it’s time for her to resign so she can spend more time with her family as dozens of others under this administration have done!
What a disgrace!
genaman
“We brag about how we are not going to vote.”
I haven’t seen a single person on CD say they weren’t going to vote. We’ve seen a LOT of people say they won’t vote for the Democratic nomination for president, Ms. Hil but will vote for the person who represents what they value.
“Be damn greatful you got Democrats in the majority.”
Why be grateful anymore? I was ecstatic after the 2006 elections because the Democrats were finally the majority in both houses. I should have saved my breath. They’ve collaborated with Bush on every unconstitutional bill he’s wanted and voted them into law, utterly betraying those who voted them into office.
“All of you seemed to have forgotten The Repoblican Rubberstamp Congresss for Bush.”
Well, it isn’t easy to forget when the Democrats are doing it just as enthusiastically as the Republicans. Just wait, you’ll see. The Democrats will NOT cease Bush’s unconstitutional power-grab of the US with “unitary executive” governing, staying in Iraq, still keeping an attack on Iran on the table, keeping the Patriot Act, still allowing torture and rendition, still continue Bushs’s blurring of the line between church and state, still allowing the telcom lawbreakers amnesty, still allowing the destruction of the Constitution, still allowing unconstitutional surveillance of Americans.
Unless our government is a constitutional government, it doesn’t matter what name a compliant politician wears.
It is very unwise to cast your vote for a politician who doesn’t fight to protect and defend the Constitution before anything else, before raising the minimum wage, before adding more children to SCHIP, or any other feel-good legislation.
When I heard that Tommy Thompson (former governer of my home state of Wisconsin) was selected to head H&HS, it was clear to me that it was just cronyism. The man was impeccably unqualified to head such a department. But 7 years later, it’s equally clear to me that qualifications were never germane to the issue, save one: the ability to be complicit. Regardless of who (if anyone) wins the presidency in 2008, we should be paying a whole lot more attention to the cabinet selections. In fact, I heard this idea: demand candidates produce a list of intended cabinet selections prior to even the primaries.
If they won’t, ask them why they have signed on with the idea of a unitary executive.
With apologies for being pedantic, “trolling” does not mean what most people here seem to think. The *verb* “to troll” is internet newsgroup slang (like “newbies”, “lurking”, “flame” and so on) that has been around since at least 1990, and refers metaphorically to fishing, not to fairy-tale ogres.
The person who “trolls” repeatedly raises a provocative issue in a way that inflames emotions and leads nowhere, so that experienced readers learn to ignore the troller. For instance, a troller might pop up in CD discussions making provocative statements about how liberals all hate American and they should go some place else to live. This would be followed by numerous comments by “newbies” who explain carefully that all of us can live here even if we criticize the government, not realizing that this kind of rational discussion will have no effect whatsoever on the troller, who will just make the same comment a few weeks or months (or days) later, re-starting the whole process.
Hopefully dkitching is not trolling, but has gone off-topic just this once, railing about the supreme court and the importance of electing democrats, when in fact this article is about white house censorship.
And restive definitely is NOT trolling.
fresh1,
dkitching most certainly is not “trolling” and has been contributing more sense to many discussions than half the posters on CD. He/she is being called a troll because of CONTENT supporting Democrats.
I too have experienced the same from several self-important smart alecks, and I still say its a juvenile way to treat people who care enough to come in and try to add thoughts to a discussion. Whether it’s a fishing metaphor or a fairy-tale metaphor, either way its rude and dismissive and smacks of mean girl cliques in middle school.
Though it’s true that many CD posters have no interest in hearing anything except about Dennis Kucinich (and I by the way LIKE and ADMIRE him), people who know he is not going to be elected are interested for the sake of our country in pleading with people to support the liberals who can be elected. There is nothing “troll” about that.
Daniel David
Nader08,
Sorry, I meant to write Stevens, I made a mistake there.
Just remember, one more and the rest of the new deal disappears as unconstitutional.
As far as the war, patriot act, wiretaps, the Dems don’t have a majority, Remember a guy called Lieberman. until Tim Johnson got back; on these issues Dems were 50 to 49 in the wrong direction . now is 50 to 50. Guess who breaks the tie! Sounds like a lot of you don’t know what is going on.
dkitching
The Democrats in both houses of Congress control what bills come to the floor for votes. All they would have had to do was refuse to bring any unconstitutional matters to be voted on and propose only those bills that pass constitutional muster. That’s all it would have taken. The same for funding the illegal war in Iraq, over and over.
Why are the Republicans, who are the minority, joined by enough Democrats for a majority of the votes to pass these bills? You think they aren’t colluding?
A lot of people disagree with you, not just here, but everywhere I’ve seen.
I wont support or vote for Hillary. Whatever her rhetoric, she has shown her true colours.
She has given her allegiance to AIPAC and to Zionist Rupert Murdoch. She was FOR the war on Iraq. She is currently FOR war on Iran. She was FOR the patriot act. A vote for Hillary is a vote for the military industrial complex and for Israel and for war. And she is against universal health care too.
Why do I feel that our government considers us ‘expendable?’
WASHINGTON - The U.S. has a shortage of laboratories to test the thousands of people who might be exposed to radiation if a “dirty bomb”…
Daniel David,
“dkitching most certainly is not “trolling” and has been contributing more sense to many discussions than half the posters on CD. He/she is being called a troll because of CONTENT supporting Democrats.”
Hi, I’m Restive, you can talk to me directly, it’s ok.
As I said above, what I was referring to is repeated posting of the same thing in different contexts at high volume. Following this, I also said, and I quote:
“no disrepsect dketching, i was just saying “we hear you, please turn down the volume a bit.”"
How you’re getting not supporting Democrats out of all this is beyond me, but so it goes. As for supporting Democrats, I’ll probably vote for Kucinich, but not for Hillary or Obama, although personally I think he should ditch the party and run as a Green or as an independent, given how the “leadership” seems determined to shove him off to the sidelines. There ya have it. This does all remind me of the Emma Goldman quote “If voting changed anything, it would be illegal”, though.
Speaking of Kucinich, the reason I didn’t mention the many one-liner posts supporting him as trolling is because mostly of volume, although the Kucinich supporters here seem to have the upper hand to some degree in terms of frequency. Maybe that’s because of being shut out of some the debates, just like Gravel is, you know? It’s not like the system is giving fair and equal hearing to either of them.
As for the topic we all seem to be on though: I just can’t bring myself to vote for either Hillary or Obama - I’m sick to death of this lesser of two evils crap. (As for that other party, I would rather be hit by a speeding bus than vote for a Republican - and that includes Ron Paul, fwiw. As with most right-wing civil libertarians, I like some of his positions on personal freedoms, but the whole free market stuff scares the crap out of me.)
Given all that, voting for either of the Democratic front runners would be pretty much a betrayal of everything I stand for, not to mention (imo) a completely losing strategy in terms of progressive success in the legislative process on a national level, because front runner or not, it’s giving ground to the rightward shift in this country. Voting for whatever hairball of a front runner candidate the Democratic Party hacks up every four years is a failed approach to civic involvement that does nothing but permit fascist neo-cons to use corporatist/centrist neo-liberals as their proxies in the short to intermediate term, and the proof of this is where *both* parties have landed us since 1980. The problem is the two party system itself, and the way that the two party system is used to manufacture consent and silence dissent. The more power we can have in the hands of everyday people, the more freedom we will have - and the more power is in the hands of the wealthy and/or despotic, the less we will have, by definition. Hillary reflects the class interests of the vast majority of people in this country about as much as walking in front of the afore-mentioned bus supports their health and longevity.
This may or may not be shocking to you, but I pretty much view voting in national elections as strategic bending of my principles - it’s worth it only because of the way the system takes power away from us and invests it back in socially controlled processes such as voting. By definition, voting is something that I think is in place mostly to keep people subservient and thinking that the system works for them, when in fact it doesn’t, and never has. So I vote for whoever fits the best to what my conscience and my politics reflect. Do I feel like I’ve done my civic duty afterwards? Erm, hahahahaha.
To be honest, I usually feel dirty, which I consider to be a sure sign that both my heart and my head are both intact and well. Voting over who gets to have nuclear strike capability is anything but a virtue.
As for the article: no shock there at all, given who is doing the eviscerating.
To all you who say a democrat must be our next president, I say hooey. I made a pledge to myself to NEVER vote for someone that I did not aggree with on the important issues. What is a democracy worth if you vote for the lesser of two evils? It certainly can’t be called a Democracy. The only way to change is get these dispicable people out of our government and out of our life.
It’s true, trolling is when someone who isn’t normally a site poster comes on and makes inflammatory remarks to provoke people. Maybe dkitching isn’t a troll, but when I scrolled down expecting to read comments about the administration’s gutting of yet another scientific report on climate change, I thought dkitching must have gotten lost and was commenting on the wrong article or something!
I’m with alan–you are never truly free unless you can vote according to your conscience.
But for future reference, it is really hard to give a crap about an unrelated rant after reading an article on a completely different topic.
My Fellow Trollers,
Since we are off topic here I thought the quote from Carroll Quigley
was a real misinterpretation because no history professor would say such a thing if he was not bein Sarcastic, so I looked it up.
Hey trollers why not use google before you slander somebody OK?
http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/shadow/tragedyandhope.htm
http://www.alexanderhamiltoninstitute.org/lp/Hancock/CD-ROMS/GlobalFederation%5CWorld%20Trade%20Federation%20-%20136%20-%20The%20Anglo-American%20Establishment.html
Actually Bill Clinton came to my house on the day Jim Garrison was on the Tonight Show and I tried to tell him my story about the Case.
I think Hillary might follow up on what I have been telling the world now since 63…
I thought being progressive has something to do with Truth.
ForUs,
Jim
scully, alan, restive,
if you think CDC reports are eviscerated now, wait until Rudy, Mitt, or Thompson get in, appt wingnuts to the court, etc. No reports will be given at all, much less a congressional hearing done. By just voting your conscience, you give the terrorpublicans not just the White House, but Congress as well.
As I said before, I am a progressive and not apologizing for Dems, simply being practical. If progressives had voted Gore instead of Nader in 2000, we wouldn’t be in Iraq, Universal healthcare may have been enacted, no Patriot act, no CIA Renditions, Social Security fix would be done and no illegal wire taps.
This is what the lack of practicality by progressives have caused. please think of repercussions that this election could be. COMMON SENSE, PLEASE!
Didn’t we already elect Democrats in the last two Presidential elections? If people like Mr. Diebold can make statements like, “I can guarantee Ohio to George Bush” and Kathryn Harris can throw away 100,000+ African-American votes in Florida, then what good will it do to vote for a corporate candidate such as Clinton or Obama?
A quote from the late professor Carroll Quigley, from his book “Tragedy and Hope” –
“…The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can throw the rascals out at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies…”
If you google on (for example) “The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies”, there are about 450 hits. If you look through a few of them, you’ll get the idea. (The Wikipedia hit is no longer there.) // Obviously, each website that uses the quote has some potential for distorting the meaning, in one direction or the other.
JR,
I don’t know what good voting will do except it is your duty if you are a citizen!
The best way to piss people off is to tell them who or who not to vote for.
I have even gone so far as to recommend voting for yourself as a protest.
I think we are trolling each other by Vote this or vote that….
We have a year to make up our minds….
“if you think CDC reports are eviscerated now, wait until Rudy, Mitt, or Thompson get in, appt wingnuts to the court, etc. No reports will be given at all, much less a congressional hearing done. By just voting your conscience, you give the terrorpublicans not just the White House, but Congress as well.”
Which Rudy or one of them will in 2012 or 2016 if we keep going this way. It’s a cycle, which is why I said we’re in this mess because of what both parties have done since 1980. Scare tactics don’t move me in this case, simply because the combination of ending up at the same spot we would otherwise but a bit later is *even worse*, simply because it creates a false sense of hope, and then the left takes several years to regroup. Thinking in 4 and 8 year cycles as per the presidency = not being strategic at all; in fact, it basically means you’re being used imo.
Also, I understand but disagree about the whole Nader thing, but I don’t see how not voting for Hillary gives Rudy et. al. Congress as well. Are you saying that they will strip Congress of their budget, veto everything, etc.? While it’s possible, that makes no sense.
ps: If I really voted my conscience, I wouldn’t vote at all. It just encourages them.
Predictably, CNN left out the other big reason for global warming in “Planet in Peril”–extreme wealth and power concentration. When people are struggling to survive as the oligarchy exploits them, they don’t worry about global warming.
Hi restive,
Thanks for inviting me to talk to you directly. I appreciate friendliness, and respect all your views.
Didn’t mean to seem to be attacking you about the “troll” thing, but I’m a tad sensitive about that.
Since joining the CD discussions for first times less than a month ago, I’ve repeatedly been referred to by several others as a troll and a (paid) Dem shill, just for passionately arguing that I believe we have no workable strategy for avoiding Republican-style conservatism except to elect a lot (lot) of Democrats. (Because independent progressives, though most of them are morally better, have very, very very small chances of being elected, especially at national level.)
So when seeing the “troll” word come up about someone else, I weighed in, but not to attack you. By the way, you’re quite right that a post COPIED again and again on different threads is sort of like “spam.” I spend a lot time keyboarding away on the same theme, but never with carbon copies, and wouldn’t want to see anyone do that. As far as I’m concerned, we’re to start with something related to the author and article, and go from there.
Interesting comments on your part, too, that voting is something we do a lot to “feel” like we’re in control, when we’re really not. In the 21st Century, it’s a reality that corporations are in control of many aspects of our lives, and any/all politicians are going to perpetuate that. I just feel that the pendulum has swung too far “conservative” since Reagan, and I want to see it swing back some. Peace.
Daniel David
SCIENTIFIC BETRAYAL
Never before have Americans experienced such dangerous manipulation of essential scientific data, as used by this administration to derail vital environmental reforms, conservation, family planning– and the list goes on. The resulting long term environmental and social damage are beyond measure, and can only worsen if not curtailed.
Despite their clandestine cloak, or environmental friendly disguise, these sellouts have been evident since Bush first was handed the presidency. They have been exposed by defectors from the EPA, health & human services, etc; and have been documented and chronicled by numerous dedicated environmental organizations including The Union of Concerned Scientists.
The gravity of these unprecedented betrayals eclipses the Monica Lewinski scandal which led to an impeachment, and pose greater dangers than Watergate which terminated a presidency. Blame falls mainly on the populace and our legislators for tolerating this reckless and arrogant occupant of the White House.
Restive,
Since when did the wingnut agenda ever make sense. I have always listened to Rush, Billo, and Sean. you know the old saying, be close to your friends, but be closer to your enemies. Rush in particular espouses the demise of all facets of the New Deal which started, in my opinion, the progressive movement.
Wingnut agenda is to get rid of all social programs that taxes fund using the Supreme court to declare them unconstitutional since taking money from individuals to support others are a violation of individual freedom of choice. This is a broad generalization as to the arguments on the conservative side. The real reason is to put money in the pockets of the wealthy and damned with the poor, downtroden, and sick.
Social Security barely survived a 5 to 4 vote in the 30s using this logic. We now have Alito, Thomas, Roberts, and Scalia who if you study think this way. Get one more and watch the challenges to all social programs emerge.
As we saw in 04, people voted in mass against their own interests. The conservatives are extremely adept at deception, orwellian language and lies, which when repeated enough become truthes in the minds of many.
I just love the way this White House doesn’t hesitate to adjust reality whenever it doesn’t suit their interests! Absolutely delusional. Living in a state of altered reality, and in control of a super-power! Terrifying!
“Wingnut agenda is to get rid of all social programs that taxes fund using the Supreme court to declare them unconstitutional since taking money from individuals to support others are a violation of individual freedom of choice. This is a broad generalization as to the arguments on the conservative side. The real reason is to put money in the pockets of the wealthy and damned with the poor, downtroden, and sick.”
That’s not just the wingnut agenda, that’s the corporate nut agenda as well. Remember “Ending Welfare as we know it?” The main difference between the GOP and the corporatist/centrist Democrats is the speed in which they dismantle the legacies of the New Deal. Remember, you’re talking with someone who thinks that the New Deal was a way of lessening social change, not enhancing it (as per Howard Zinn et. al.) I refuse to accept faster and slower versions of the same exact package, sorry.
Hey, if there are about equal numbers of Reshrubicrats, and we get the same governance no matter which major party has a majority, how about
VOTING ALL INCUMBANTS OUT EVERY TIME!!
IF THEY’RE IN, VOTE THEM OUT
EVERY TIME UNTIL WE START TO GET THE REPRESENTATION WE WANT AND NEED:
People before profit, peace, environmental responsibility, on and on.
If they were good they could get voted in the next cycle, but never two in a row. That’s almost like a national referendum, and since not all offices are changed each year (2,4,or6), the ones still in might wake up and smell the coffee.
Please comment.