I normally avoid the WSJ Editorial Page, for reasons I'm about to provide an example of. But, I followed a front page article inside, and there it was.
You know how everyone that agrees with you is at the very least a good listener, and everyone who disagrees with you is unfit to participate in discussions of public policy?
The feeling I get from absorbing all these facts about the state of labor comes close to the nauseated dread that washes over me when I stay up late to read one of those what-if stories in which Hitler wins World War II. Could this really have happened to my country?idiot
It has not merely "happened"; it has been done to us. The distinction is an important one to keep in mind as we survey the ruins of the affluent society. What has overtaken America's working people is not a natural disaster like "globalization," and not even some kind of societal atavism in which countries regress mysteriously to their 19th-century selves. This is a man-made catastrophe, a result that proceeded directly from the deliberate beatdown of organized labor and the wrecking of the liberal state.
It is, in other words, a political disaster, with tax cuts, trade agreements, deregulatory measures, and enforcement decisions all finely crafted to benefit one part of society and leave the rest behind.
[H]onor, the value that underlined Mr. McCain's stand, is no use on an issue like global warming.What? Really? Anyone living in North America can notice the ice caps melting* and shoving enormous amounts of cool, wet air on us, but I'd have to look that up. I think he might be referring to the fact that while 2007 was warm as part of a trend, 1998 was a crazy warm outlier, and they're both tied for second place to 2005, ie, they were as warm, shown on this plot from Science Daily.
The push toward warming that CO2 provides in theory is no reason to presume in confidence that CO2 is actually responsible for any observed warming in a system as complex and chaotic as our atmosphere.
[W]hat, as a practical matter, would be the aim of global warming policy? Our political system permits only one answer: to please the special interests that even now are gathering at the trough for subsidies in the name of climate change.
And yet every journalistic tendril senses that the fuss over warming is about to cool. Global mean temperatures have been flat for a decade.
So, if you draw a line from 1998 to 2007
- Global mean temperature looks flat
- You're an idiot
* -- Remember middle school? Heat can go into a phase change (ice -> water) as well as into a temperature rise. So, melting would tend to slow heating.
** -- Which, having had both, I far prefer to physical whiplash.