The declaration of war by the Republican led Congress against the EPA is the perfect example of the old joke 'if the opposite of pro is con what is the opposite of progress?'. Most issues in politics are not provable. they are a matter of viewpoint, of interpretation, of  ideology. The necessity of changing our approach to our Earth is not one of them. most issues allow a do-over. If we err on the side of too much economic regulation, or of too much laissez faire in most areas we can undo what we have done and proceed differently in the future. Environmental devastation is not one of them. The Republicans are against regulations which have an immediate, easy to understand objective such as reducing smog linked to asthma and chronic bronchitis. I guess none of their kids have respiratory problems. Coal ash can be tested and the various heavy metals and carcinogens measured physically. The extremists in the Republican party ague it is not a hazardous material and should not be regulated. Even Global Warming is beginning to be seen in its effects at the poles and with rising oceans. The problem with the solutions is that they require a different approach and view of the Earth than is conducive to unlimited profit making. Republicans have no problem witrh spending tremendous amounts of money on defense yet will not use the same calculations to analyze the effects of using our oceans and atmosphere as waste bins. Of course it is cheaper to dump all your trash in your neighbors land instead of paying a dump fee but my guess is that if one did this to Republican's gated communities they would howl. The entire world however is seen as a common garbage dump which they refuse to pay the dump fee.                                                                                   The proof that government regulation is the only way to stop unlimited pollution is the track record. Wwe already tried the  Tea Party/ small government approach. It was called the 19th century. In it we exterminated the passenger pigeon, almost wiped out the American Bison, cut down the great eastern hardwood forests and poisoned waterways. It is like a baseball game. Republicans would not dream of allowing a major league baseball game without an umpire yet they think business does not need any rules keepers. Either they think  a ball game is more important than  the fate of our planet or they really are blind to the provable science if it interferes with profits. Some laws are poorly written and may need to be adjusted from time to time. It is important though to remember that most government regulations are the reaction to egregious incidents which are the result of human greed and short-sightedness. It is not easy to pass legislation. Conservatives often act like bureaucrats invent the regulations instead of them being the result of laws passed by congress.  A law creates a disincentive for for individual sleaze. Of course a company can do the right thing on their own, but in competition with sleazy operators they are at a disadvantage. We tried to let business write its own rules. It failed and it is time for voters to get over tired stereotypes of counter cultural types and deal with the reality of environmental science. Barry Goldwater was considered conservative yet he was a conservationist as well as a conservative. Why the Right cannot acknowledge that pollution and environmental damage are a legitimate area for government just as they acknowledge national defense is must be due to greed and short sightedness. For the  company heads and their bought politicans the incentive is clear. The voters must stop being suckered by cultural tribalism and accept the scientific consensus on the fate of our earth.                                                                                                                              

     Our new Guvner, Greg Abbott gave a speech in which he outlaid the some of the strange ideas some Libertarian leaning conservatives employ. The people who think lives should be free from Federal control have never held that to mean a freedom from State control. The same people who can pretend the water under my property is different water than that of you conjoining property think towns should not be free to make their own rules. This strike's this Yankee as odd. Isn't Austin making rules ( bag ban, SOS, et al ) local control? How does the state interfering with UT's desire for “a Well Regulated' state of the “the right to keep and bear arms” on Campus? Does not seem much like l;ocal control making these decisions on the state level instead of at the County/City level? The bag ban is a really good example of a local law that is working. Industry lobbyists came with misleading statistics about 'mass' of plastic ( we experience plastic bags as volume!) but we the citizens of Austin through our Republically elected representatives, our Gov say's it is bad for a city to just make it's own rules. Odd perspective from those who do not think much of what we do here in Texas should come under federal oversight. It is hard not to see this as an example of the double standard; today's Right see's pot's and declares that there have never been any kettles. If someone wants to produce desired end ( Nat Resources riches?) , that end will come. One seemingly has a Right to exploit property but not to preserve it.

 We have a really blatant expression of  Right wing hypocrisy lately in Texas and Oklahoma. The same people who whine about 'local control' and 'states rights' are looking to take away the ability of municipalities to decide on their own affairs, that is if the decision is in favor of a pro-environmental cause. However, they do nt want to be under Federal supervision for anything that makes money form the extractivist mentality. Austin has a single use plastic bag ban. Denton banned fracking. There are bills to take away the Cities right to do this, placing these under state ( read no) control. However they do want to be able to ignore federal mandates on the environment, on equal rights, on voting rights. It is basically if it is a really bad idea the locality should be free from govt interference but if it is a good idea they want centralized control. Right wingers do not have a monopoly on ends justify the means type thinking but this is getting quite naked. They no longer feel the need to pretend they have a coherent philosophy. They have no shame and the media does not hold their feet to the fire on this at all. Oklahoma is having earthquakes. Most think it has to do with deep well injections of used fracking fluid. So Oklahoma is banning the ability of municipalities to ban fracking within their own borders. I guess they do not trust the market ( at least for ideas) after all. I have heard of similar bills in other states trying to do away with rooftop solar but I am not as familiar with them as I am with Texas and Oklahoma and their oil/gas fetishes. The most basic Rightists idea is different rules for different folks. Like different rungs on the hierarchy get different rights. Therefore calling Rightists hypocrites is like calling a Progressive tolerant.

47 Senators

This latest action by the Republican 47 is unprecedented and capable of causing international mischief. If Our (particular) democracy is seen to be incapable of entering into binding international treaties and agreements, it would be very, very bad. A couple hundred years of development of a code in which our nations might function, if not always live, we cannot have national legislature's, of any country, threatening to undo international agreements. It just isn't done and I feel like an idiot spelling it out but if nations cannot trust the USA on treaties and agreements, the international order vanishes. I am not sure it gets more serious than this and the fact that our Right Wing is so used to being an oppositional force they cannot be trusted with real power.

The  Euro has outlived its usefulness. When the Euro first appeared it seemed a necessary antidote to USA dominance. A uni polar world is a recipe for abuse and hegemonism. Now, however, the rise of China has made the USA  less of a worldwide behemoth and has created the bi polar world we are comfortable with. The Euro papers over differences of national attitude at the detriment of democracy. When the former Finnish minster says  ( paraphrased) we do not change policy because of elections it is a frank disavowal of democracy. If there is a counter weight to the USA we do not need a European union as much. As an American I want a counter balance to USA hegemony. The European union has failed at being this counterweight and merely ties economic policy to a non democratic techno- authoritarianism that is both unpopular and doomed. The European union is the modern equivalent of the Holy Roman Empire; neither holy, nor Roman nor an empire. It was a noble attempt, but since the rise of China as well as  the  Islamic State  the  USA does not seem so  invincible. It is time to loosen the union back to the former common market.

Execution and understanding

 I am back! Didn't post for a few years but.....                                                                                                       Lately one of the issues  in the  death penalty debate is whether the intended death row inmate  knows why they are being executed.  To me this is silly. If the reason for death penalty is to remove those who cannot get along with others with no chance of them getting paroled is would not matter if they know why they are being executed. If the reason is purely bloodthirsty then having the inmate ponder their upcoming  mortality  ( I guess in terror) would be important. This is a big deal now because  so many of our mentally ill are incarcerated.  TExas desperately wants to execute people  but balks at executing those who think their punishment is because they are Jesus or Napoleon. Texas juries do not want to consider this kind of technicality but courts have ruled on capacity and responsibility and it is  that the convicted's understanding is so important. If it is all about revenge served cold then this makes sense.                                                                                                                 

non-understanding and respect

I have learned to respect what I do not understand. This took quite a while; I abhorred Nationalism,thought it a sign of Bad Primitive thinking. I did not understand it. I followed the 1990's Balkan Wars and said Serbian nationalism posed the greatest threat. I have come to that same conclusion with American Nationalism. Our Nationalism used to be overtly about pride in our Constitution and ideals. We called it Patriotism and it was differentiated from Blood and soil nationalism of Europe. Now our nationalism is resembling classic "blood and soil" nationalism which is expressed culturally as much as racially. We all must openly advocate for s return to our old national identity, because nationalism is important. People like it.What the cosmopolitans missed is how important ties such as national identity are to a large cohort of people. Many people rarely see anyone who does not share their worldview. Southern Republicans live in places where almost everyone is conservative and Christian just as Progressive areas like the Northeast and Northwest do not understand white, protestant, small town rural culture and often make assumptions based on stereotypes. Godless Urban Liberal commie, meet stupid crackeredneckmutha clutching his assault rifle, his Bible and a large pick up truck. There are some big questions that would need to be resolved, but the rural people who like Tea baggism right now but agree with Occupy _____! on many issues. They would have to accept environmentalism ( the total rejection of environmental science from the Rethugs is recent.) and Progressive cosmopolitans would have to recognize white small town culture as being as valid as the Yanomani. I do not get serious sports team fanaticism but I try to enjoy and learn. Can America do this? Occupy ____ is excellent this is an idea for attracting rural folks. They might listen if we don't insult them.