Patriotism, Politics & Plastic; Trump 2.0 would be “game over for climate progress” Dan Rather and Team Steady; Sept. 23 On the list of “issues that matter to most,” climate change doesn’t usually rate as highly as it should. But issues significantly affected by climate change are certainly in the top 10: inflation, escalating food prices, rising utility and health care costs, and the lack of affordable housing. Let’s talk about why climate change doesn’t move the needle for most voters. One reason is that “climate change” is a monolith, encompassing everything from greenhouse gas emissions to deforestation to plastic accumulation in our oceans. The challenges of tackling the myriad causes and effects of climate change are daunting, and all require sacrifice. So people tend to push the issue to the side in favor of problems that seem easier to fix. For many people, the concept is also terrifying. Climate change has advanced far faster than most scientists predicted. There is real fear that it simply can’t be stopped. For the good of the 8 billion residents of Earth, we must find a way. And the United States, with all its wealth and innovation, should be leading that way. A CBS News poll did find that 70% of Americans support the government taking action to address climate change, while a Pew Research poll found that a majority of Americans believe that neither large corporations nor the federal government is doing enough to reduce the effects of climate change. All this was brought into focus today because we have a big problem with plastic. We are drowning in the stuff. Billions of pounds of plastic are floating in the oceans and scattered to the four corners of the globe. In case you didn’t know it, plastics are petroleum products. Yup, Big Oil is getting rich off plastic bottles too. For years, they’ve claimed all those plastic bottles are recyclable. Not so, says a lawsuit filed today by the state of California against ExxonMobil. The suit alleges that the oil giant has falsely promoted the idea that all plastic is recyclable, when in fact no more than 6% of U.S. plastics are recycled. California Attorney General Rob Bonta alleges that the oil company has engaged “in a decades-long campaign of deception that caused and exacerbated the global plastics pollution crisis.” Oil companies have played the long game with what is being called a public relations stunt that has allowed ExxonMobil and others to produce plastics with impunity. The two presidential candidates will likely have vastly different reactions to this suit as they offer polar opposite approaches to dealing with climate change. Though I am hard-pressed to call Donald Trump’s “an approach” — it’s more of a capitulation. Trump calls climate change a hoax perpetrated by China. How can you have a plan to fight something you claim doesn’t exist? But it is worse than that. Rather than hedging, Trump has actively and destructively worked against climate action. During his presidency, he rolled back more than a hundred environmental rules and regulations. He also exited the Paris climate accords. When Trump took office, hundreds of scientists working for the federal government were forced out or silenced. The climate scientists who remained at the Environmental Protection Agency were told to dismantle their own work. If you think a second Trump administration wouldn’t be any different, I’ve got some plastic for you to recycle. Project 2025 would effectively kill federal environment protections. One scientist warned that it would be “game over for climate progress.” The far-right policy playbook has called for the elimination of rules to protect clean air and water, the gutting of the EPA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and prioritizing fossil fuel production while getting rid of renewable energy programs. Trump himself has promised to expand oil and gas drilling on his first day in office, perhaps to make good with the oil and gas execs he propositioned. Remember that back in April he promised them tax and regulatory favors in exchange for a billion dollars in campaign contributions. If Kamala Harris simply maintained the status quo and kept all of the Biden administration’s environmental policies in place, she would prevent 4 billion tons of greenhouse gas emissions being released by 2030. Though she hasn’t made action on climate change a central pillar of her campaign, Harris has talked about it, calling it one of the “freedoms” she is fighting for. At the Democratic National Convention, Harris included “the freedom to breathe clean air and drink clean water and live free from the pollution that fuels the climate crisis” on her list. A new study from New York University suggests that framing climate action as patriotic can increase support among all voters. In an op-ed in today’s USA Today, actor and climate activist Robert Redford concurred. “We have a history, in this nation, of confronting threats to our freedom head-on, not denying they exist until it's too late to act,” he wrote. At the presidential debate, Harris answered the only question about the environment while Trump went on a nonsensical rant about Chinese car manufacturing and the mayor of Moscow’s wife. Harris may not have time to break through with all voters on climate policy, but for young voters, the environment is a top-5 issue. For those young people who prioritize climate and the environment, 78% are extremely or very motivated to vote. In 2020 the youth vote helped Biden win the White House; since then, 8 million more Americans have turned 18. They could be the difference in this race too. However the election turns out, the climate crisis, including the problem with plastic, isn’t going to improve without definitive action. Jean Totten as One Day at a Time
Why do you keep quoting a failed journalist who ruined the name of journalism. Might as well quote Mickey Mouse. What Dan Rather doesn't want you to know about Dan Rather. How the Dan Rather scandal wrecked journalism forever (nypost.com) Yes, Rather was forced out at CBS for his disastrous reporting on George W. Bush’s National Guard service, in which he relied on fabricated documents to allege that Dubya got special treatment and that his superiors had been ordered to lie about his record. As all the follow-up reporting showed, it was utter nonsense. The narrative — that Bush was a nasty, evil, bad, bad, bad, bad man — was correct, Rather argued: Facts were and are irrelevant. Remember, he stuck by the fake story for years and tried to make himself out as a victim of a sinister plot at CBS, when in fact he suffered only thanks to his own partisan rage and midwit hubris. He seemed an outlier at the time, even in a media landscape that most certainly leaned left and did its best to run interference on his BS. (Remember the immortal “Fake But Accurate” New York Times headline about the forged docs?) But he ended up writing the law our stenographer class lives by today. That being: Journalism exists to help Democrats, period. By trying to suffocate bad stories about Hunter Biden (including his 100% real laptop) to fend off the political harm they might do his dad. Or greasing the path for the Biden administration to lie about inflation or the border crisis. Or going to bat for the Chinese government’s version of where COVID came from while shrieking for useless draconian measures against the virus here at home based on nonsense data. Here we are, almost two decades later, with Ratherism near-triumphant and the actual goals of journalism in near-ruin. So, great work, Dan. You and your pals helped wreck a key institution of American life. The only casualty was the truth.
Stock market today: Dow, S&P 500 eke out record closes as stocks extend September rally US stocks rose Monday, as the Dow Jones Industrial Average (^DJI) and S&P 500 (^GSPC) eked out record closes, extending a winning streak on Wall Street. Investors looked to Federal Reserve speakers and a key inflation reading for clues to the odds of another big rate cut. The Dow rose more than 0.1% after closing at an all-time high on Friday. The S&P 500 edged up more than 0.2% to finish at its own record. The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite (^IXIC) climbed 0.1%. The market is laboring with concerns about the health of the US economy, which have persisted after the Fed's bold pivot to cutting interest rates last week. The big question now is whether upcoming data releases this week will support Fed Chair Jerome Powell's assertion that conditions remain strong. Read more: What the Fed rate cut means for bank accounts, CDs, loans, and credit cards Much will depend on Friday's reading on the PCE index — the Fed's preferred inflation gauge — and Thursday's second quarter GDP print. Experts believe that cooling inflation, not a rising risk of recession, will give policymakers the green light for another 0.5% cut this year. Investors received more policy insight from Fed officials on Monday morning. Raphael Bostic and Neel Kashkari explained why they were in favor of reducing interest rates by a jumbo 50 basis points instead of a smaller first cut, citing progress on inflation and a cooling job market. Given the rare lack of unanimity in the last decision, remarks from Powell and dissenting Fed governor Michelle Bowman later in the week are likely to be closely scrutinized. Among Monday's movers, Tesla (TSLA) stock rose on a bullish delivery forecast from Wall Street ahead of the electric vehicle maker's robotaxi day in October. Intel (INTC) shares also jumped after Apollo Global Management reportedly offered to make a multibillion-dollar investment in the struggling chipmaker — a vote of confidence in its turnaround strategy.
Opinion Today The New York Times September 30, 2024 By Kathleen Kingsbury Opinion Editor Regular readers of the Times editorial board will not be surprised to learn that our choice in November’s election for the next president is overwhelmingly Kamala Harris. This pick flows from our long-held view that Donald Trump is profoundly unworthy of the job — the former president has demonstrated, again and again, that he is morally and temperamentally disqualified from leading the United States. The editorial board has made its case to that end — that Trump is unfit — repeatedly, but there’s no need to accept our judgment alone: Multitudes of people who have worked closely with and supported Trump have publicly attested to as much for years now. So the choice is obvious. On one side is a candidate who, as she promised in her acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention, would “move past the bitterness, cynicism and divisive battles of the past.” Harris has pledged to continue the ambitious work started in the Biden administration to strengthen America’s communities, tackle urgent threats like inequality and climate change, and to restore our standing around the globe. Trump, on the other hand, draws oxygen from chaos and unrest. His first instinct is not to address real grievances but to exploit them. Yet, a certain amnesia having taken hold, some Americans have decided that they are not much better off now than they were when Donald Trump was in the White House. We’d urge them to think again, and to look beyond their immediate concerns, to what’s really at issue on the 2024 ballot. Americans can choose to cast a powerful vote for freedom and democratic norms everywhere by electing a candidate who embraces civic obligation, tolerates dissent, encourages open discourse and brings relief and a sense of common purpose to the nation. That person is Kamala Harris.
