As Whoopi Goldberg would say. She’s F*CKABLE.

How do you like these apples? This is coming from the Adminstration. just proves Taylor’s point. Obama does not cae about progressive perogatives.

I keep thinking about this climate change argument and just don’t understand how anyone can think that we can keep abusing this earth as we have without devastating repercussions. The only way I can explain what I mean is to use an analogy with smoking and the body. People smoke, causing all kinds of horrid things to happen to their bodies. Aren’t we doing the same thing to the earth? I know that’s a simplistic way of looking at things but it’s the best I could do at the moment.

Agreed Jane Austem, indeed a great job. My husband, too is a scientist, and is in total agreement with what JA says her husband has been saying. This is about a lot more than economic disaster.

As an aside, like JA, as well. My husband and I both came from families of 7 (5 kids). No Asthma. We have 2 daughters and 2 grandchildren – all have asthma.

Very nice.

This is where I think the so called progresive blogs and cable shows have undermined our case. They have been so condescending to Palin and all the wing nuts that they have just served to reinforce the divisions and the elitist charge.

This country is way too divided to be able to met the challenges of today. We practically have paralisis in congress with the Senate the worst.The whole country is dithering over inconsequential differences when you think about the survival of humandkind. I continue to be surprised at how dumb we have become as a nation.

Whether Sarah’s climate change, “drill, baby, drill,” or Dick Cheney, these Republicans seem willing to stand against innovation and science, as well as 21st century solutions, even ignoring the economic urgency.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/759a741e-e34e-11de-8d36-00144feab49a.html

Big business goes on the offensive
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2e875fce-e399-11de-9f4f-00144feab49a.html

Quote
“Certainly, yesterday’s “endangerment” finding – which the EPA says was based on “decades of sound, peer-reviewed, extensively evaluated scientific data” – will have huge implications for business. It could allow the EPA to use the Clean Air Act to require emitters of more than 250 tonnes of carbon a year – a threshold that critics say would sweep up buildings such as schools and apartment blocks – to start cutting their carbon output in 2012.

However, analysts say that the EPA is likely to raise the bar to large stationary sources that emit more than 25,000 tonnes of carbon a year, which would limit the new regulations to power and chemical plants, oil refineries and cement kilns.

Regardless, business lobby groups could file lawsuits to delay the implementation of the new regulations, which would cover carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases, for years. But in spite of the business uproar, the Obama administration appears to have deftly achieved two goals with the EPA’s ruling. First, it will strengthen the US’s position when Barack Obama, president, goes to Copenhagen next week.

The Obama administration has expressed a preference for legislation over regulation, but with the bills proceeding through Congress at a glacial pace, it decided to act unilaterally yesterday. Now, faced with the prospect of less flexible and more expensive regulation through the EPA, the cap-and-trade system suddenly looks like the better option for business. “Obviously it would be better to have thoughtful legislation,” said Steve Chazen, president of Occidental Petroleum, the US’s fourth-biggest oil and gas company.
End of quote

Finally, as regards innovation, check out what I consider to be one of the most brilliant website out there. It is a FREE website showing speeches from the smartest and innovative people of the world. One invention from this Indian guy Pranav Mistry who studied at MIT is just AMAZING. And you are right there is a lot going on in the world as regards innovation, the US cannot afford to fall behind.
http://www.ted.com/talks/pranav_mistry_the_thrilling_potential_of_sixthsense_technology.html