Paulsen didn’t’ invest in Minnesota. Now, he wants to represent us in Washington?

You would never know from Paulsen’s web site that he voted to reduce education funding.

The angry pitch from parents, students and educators must have reached Paulsen’s ears in 2003? Not. Eden Prairie voters ultimately had to vote on a referendum if they wanted local schools to operate on par despite drastic cuts to programs and services.

What our no-tax legislator didn’t tell us was that the House Omnibus K-12 Education finance bill was going to fund education by increasing property taxes $112M, by including one time shifts of $211M and $134M in the form of state aid from uncertain casino revenues.

In comparison the Senate bill funded education by making more direct investments in early childhood education with the bulk of the funding coming directly from state aid, not property taxes and shifts

The Minneapolis Foundation said that state funding had not kept pace with inflation forcing school districts to cut programs in order to cover operational costs. In their report, “Dismantling Education, parents reflected on the consequences to their kids.

http://www.mplsfoundation.org/minnesota/Education.pdf

The result was essential programs, adequate staff and yes, operational expenses, had to be cut. Representative Paulsen helped cut programs by not supporting a budget that included increases for inflation.

Though the effectiveness of school readiness programs is well documented, Paulsen supported deep cuts to Head Start, School Readiness, and Early Childhood Family Education—and funding for Way to Grow programs were eliminated.

http://www.cdfactioncouncil.org/scorecard/mn04.pdf

The Children’s Defense Fund (CDF) gave Paulsen an 8% out of 100% for cutting early education programs.

The flat revenues Paulsen supported were felt keenly by local parents and children in the form of larger class sizes, fewer class choices, no transportation funding. Thus, parental subsidies became essential for programs and operational costs in the form of taxation via referendums.

While taxpayers were towing the burden of school funding, Paulsen pounded away at school accountability. He supported the 65% rule which meant no extra funds for staffing.

Trent Stamp, who served as the founding president of Charity Navigator, America's largest charity evaluator, from 2001-2008, says on his blog that "Paulsen wanted to eliminate all state funding to non-profit organizations, the kind that provide services most people think government should run" like “running day-care centers, taking care of the elderly, providing community health programs, and cleaning up the environment.”

http://www.trentstampstake.org/search/label/government%20funding%20for%2...

Paulsen thought ”the state should just eliminate giving any money to non-profits until they figured out how to track better.” Paulsen said, "Until state agencies enact better controls and procedural safeguards, the only responsible course of action is to enact a moratorium."

Stamp called Paulsen’s reasoning akin to "throwing out the baby with the bath water." In other words, instead of the state working on a way to track and measure allocations for non-profit services on behalf of the state’s residents, they should just dispense with ANY giving of funds at all until they could account for where the funds were going? Stamp called this, “a heck of a lesson to teach the kids, “Who benefit greatly from these dollars."

Way back in the 2000, Paulsen issued a Legislative press release which included the destabilizing cuts enacted by the Ventura administration, referring to them this way,"We substantially cut income taxes, refunded $2 billion to taxpayers, made historic commitments to education and transportation and slowed the rate of government spending. I will continue to work on these issues next year."

Yet, what he supported and contributed to was the beginning of a trend in slowing the rate of government spending to the detriment of transportation infrastructure, the environment and education.

In a series of reports documenting the impact of the 2003 legislative budget cuts, the Minnesota Foundation said, “state funding had not kept pace with inflation, forcing school districts to cut educational programs in order to cover their basic operational costs; pre school program cuts have the implications for achievement gap.

One parent from Stillwater, included in the report, was quoted as saying “There are consequences to what’s going on. You’re talking about the rest of these kids’ lives.”

In addition to a "funding formula freeze, an additional $185 million was cut and $437 million in costs were shifted to individual school districts.
These cuts affected educational services from pre-school to adult basic education." (Minnesota Foundation Report)

MAPT, Minnesota Association of Pupil Transportation, said the relatively flat appropriations and budget projections passed during the 2003 and 2004 Legislative sessions made gap between funding and the amount of transportation services needed by school districts even greater. www.mnapt.org

Paulsen’s environmental voting record from 2003 until 2006 recorded by the Minnesota League of Conservation voters, was consistently under 33%, and as low as 13% out of a possible 100%. In 2006 and in 2007 his environmental voting record changed considerably after the Legislature lost its Republican majority.

A 2007 Star Tribune article states that after nearly two decades, (of which Paulsen served six years), there was little action on comprehensive funding for Minnesota's transportation network, until the current budge to a DFL controlled Legislature.

"The gas tax, which was last raised in 1988, when its 20 cents a gallon was worth 34 cents in today's money, had yet to be raised. And under Ventura’s administration which was from 1998 -2002, (of which Paulsen served eight years) the state sharply cut vehicle registration taxes, another longtime source of revenue for roads and bridges. "

"As a result, Minnesota's annual shortfall in transportation funding was estimated at least $1.8 billion a year. The 2007 transportation bill would have only provided less than half that. "

There was no majority to override a Pawlenty veto before, but in 2007 DFLers ran the roost. So, Paulsen would have been out-egged.

http://www.startribune.com/politics/11759786.html

Paulsen didn’t invest in our children; he didn’t invest in the environment, and he didn’t invest in transportation and infrastructure. So, why would we want to send him to Washington?

Scientist, Sleuth, Sage?

Get out your magnifying glass and acuity, because if you’re going to search for information on Global Warming, you’ll have to wade through a deceptive plethora of web pages….

Extremists have gone off the deep end with rhetoric eschewing Global Warming. They accuse its supporters of being intimidaters, who use press bias, policy advice, corruption and censorship to gain support for global warming efforts. That’s a mouthful!

Here’s an example of a switch and bait ploy the anti-Global Warming community uses: a coalition of mostly conservative groups, who do not support the idea of Global Warming, have named their web site Global Warming.org because their hope is to attract people who believe in it, so they can convince them not to. They have two basic arguments against global warming:

1.Scientific claims don’t hold up to scrutiny and are alarmist
2.The economy will be hurt

http://www.globalwarming.org/about

Another member of the coalition against Global Warming is the Heartland Institute, an innocuous sounding organization, until you open their web page, and you see it for yourself—there are some pretty unscientific, highly zealous anti-Global Warming images and messages.

James Taylor, a senior fellow at Heartland, an anti-critic, has recently glommed on to Pope Bendidict XV1’s January 1 World Peace Day message to add to the propaganda war, saying the Pope decried Global Warming proponents as “extremist” in his speech.

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=22613

Science has been a tough issue for the Church to grapple. The house arrest of Galileo comes to mind, for his unverifiable proof for the existence of heliocentrism, which was considered to be contrary to the Scriptures. Galileo was eventually forced to recant. The concepts that the earth’s resources are finite and causality presupposes effect are not part of ecclesiastical doctrine. Nevertheless, Christians believe in them.

Another conservative group that does not support Global Warming is the Cato Institute. In an article appearing in the National Review in 2005, “Hot Enough for You,” Jerry Taylor, a senior fellow at Cato specializing in energy policy and environmental protection said this, "There is no proven link between human activity and global warming." Taylor also said, “According to the IPCC, "[T]here is little sign of long-term changes in tropical storm intensity and frequency," and "no compelling evidence" that local severe-weather events are on the rise.”

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6633uman

So, Taylor made three statements, which do not reflect the conclusions of the IPCC, the very organization he is disputing:

At the IPCC web site you will find this 2007 unedited assessment. The most important part of the report in relation to whether there is human involvement in climate change:

“Global GHG emissions due to human activities have grown since pre-industrial times, with an increase of 70% between 1970 and 2004 (Figure SPM.3).5 {2.1}

Global atmospheric concentrations of CO2, methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) have increased markedly as a result of human activities since 1750 and now far exceed pre-industrial values determined from ice cores spanning many thousands of years. {2.2}

There is very high confidence that the net effect of human activities since 1750 has been one of warming.6 {2.2}”

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr_spm.pdf

The 2007 IPCC findings contradict Taylor who says the IPCC confirms that "There is little sign of long-term changes in tropical storm intensity and frequency."

Yet, in a 2007 Fourth Assessment report, the IPCC says, “Globally, estimates of the potential destructiveness of hurricanes show a significant upward trend since the mid-1970s, with a trend towards longer lifetimes and greater storm intensity, and such trends are strongly correlated with tropical SST. These relationships have been reinforced by findings of a large increase in numbers and proportion of hurricanes reaching categories 4 and 5 globally since 1970 even as total number of cyclones and cyclone days decreased slightly in most basins.”

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter3.pdf

Taylor claims that the IPCC has found, "no compelling evidence" that local severe-weather events are on the rise.”

Again the IPCC information contradicts Taylor’s claims.

In a 2007 Fourth Assessment report, The IPCC says, “Since 1950, the number of heat waves has increased and widespread increases have occurred in the numbers of warm nights.The extent of regions affected by droughts has also increased as precipitation over land has marginally decreased while evaporation has increased due to warmer conditions. Generally, numbers of heavy daily precipitation events that lead to flooding have increased, but not everywhere. Tropical storm and hurricane frequencies vary considerably from year to year, but evidence suggests substantial increases in intensity and duration since the 1970s.”

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter3.pdf

In a final report, "Understanding and Attributing Climage Change," the IPCC had this to say about the much disputed human contribution to Global Warming:

“The human influence on climate very likely dominates over all other causes of change in global average surface temperature during the past half century. An important source of uncertainty arises from the incomplete knowledge of some external factors, such as human sourced aerosols. In addition, the climate models themselves are imperfect. Nevertheless, all models simulate a pattern of response to greenhouse gas increases from human activities that is similar to the observed pattern of change.”

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter9.pdf

The apparent evidence is that IPCC findings came two years after Taylor’s assertions were published in 2005. But, they are still on the Cato Institute web site in 2008. Science is not a static endeavor, all the more reason for anti-critiques to address their concerns in a less accusatory and more scholastic approach. Rhetorically high-pitched denunciations, inquisitional takes on something new… in themselves contribute to a pretty shoddy attempt at debunking ... SCIENCE…Taylor lacks credibility.... as do so many others like him....at the least pull down the out-of-date accusations....

-----------------------------------------------------------------

“It is an enduring truth, which can never be altered, that every infraction of the Law of nature must carry its punitive consequences with it. We can never get beyond that range of cause and effect.”

Thomas Troward (1847-1916) authored many books that are considered classics in the New Thought Movement, Mind Sciences, and mystic Christianity. Influences on his writings include the teachings of Christ, Islamic and Hindu Teachings, Buddhism, and more.

Paulsen’s chances in the 3rd?

In an increasingly Democratic third, what are Erik Paulsen’s chances?

Describing himself as “one of the last of a dying breed,” Jim Ramstad, a moderate Republican, who frequently crossed party lines, said there are no assurances for a Republican successor.

Ramstad broke with his party five times in 2007 on substantive votes: against the troop surge in February, with an increase to the minimum wage, voted to allow the government to negotiate directly with drug makers for lower prescription costs, voted to repeal tax cuts to oil companies and fund renewable energy programs and to implement recommendations by the 9/11 Commission.

http://www.startribune.com/politics/11615391.html

Erik Paulsen is no Ramstad moderate.

His record runs totally counter to Jim’s: he voted 100% pro-life, voted against wage increases, voted with the Taxpayers League of Minnesota supporting their no-tax agenda and voted with the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, who opposes state general fund tax increases.

They applauded Paulsen for his efforts to require the state to live within its means. He did so by "consistently opposing attempts to increase general fund taxes and for playing a key role on business tax issues by opposing the tax increases on which the Senate budget was based. "

http://www.mnchamber.com/2006_Voting_Record.pdf

What did Paulsen’s votes mean for Minnesotans?

The Minnesota Council of Non-profits (MCN) said that for “budget decisions made during the 2006 Legislative Session, there are limited resources available under the current system of raising revenue. Perhaps of greater concern, a closer look at budget figures indicates that Minnesota may not actually have enough revenues to cover current levels of services in the next biennium. These tight financial times and the reluctance to raise revenues means the state will continue to come up short on investments critical to Minnesota’s social and economic vitality.”

So, while the Chamber lauded the state, Pawlenty and Paulsen for its $88 million general fund surplus for the current two-year budget cycle (the 2006-07 biennium), the Minnesota Council of non-profits regarded it as “relatively small surplus — equal to less than 0.3% of the state’s $31 billion general fund biennial budget.” It was so small that they said it would result in limiting “permanent initiatives that the Governor or Legislature wished to pursue in the 2006 Session.”

That’s exactly what happened.
(See previous blog entries and future installements to Ramstad's replacement.)

MCN stated that state funding “is coming up short in many areas essential to maintaining Minnesota’s high quality of life and strong economy, including early childhood education, child care assistance, and access to affordable health care. "

This lack was also evidenced by the drop in public school funding that resulted in two referendums in Eden Prairie.

The MCN said that "what we see today is a state budget stabilized at an insufficient level of funding, and the state continues to put off making decisions about how to adequately and fairly raise enough revenues to meet the state’s priorities.”

http://www.mncn.org/bp/surpluses06.pdf

Next Installment- More on the Congressional election in the 3rd

Potomac Shutdown for Hillary, Competitive Race for Huckabee….

Yes, there are still four candidates, though Huckabee was becoming invisible to the press until he made it a race with McCain again in Tuesday’s Potomac primaries.

And he was just “accused of waging a pointless nomination battle,” because of what pundits call "his desire to be in there for himself." But, as the race unfolded on Tuesday, Huckabee’s numbers were competitive with his rival.

The Republican race has been somewhat marginalized by exhaustive coverage of the Clinton downslide and Obama victories.

The Huffington Post says McCain’s critics are dying down in blogosphere land. Last month one Republican Congressman said he felt “physically ill over McCain’s nomination,” but relented support on behalf of McCain.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/12/gop-rep-says-he-feels-ph_n_8622...

Wait till they hear what McCain said today; it was picked up by CNN’s political ticker: McCain “criticized Obama for lacking specifics.” Well, either McCain considers Obama his soon to be opponent or he’s thinking of running on a ticket with Hillary? Both McCain and Clinton are pointing the finger at Obama right now, saying he’s not specific. Hillary has ads airing in Wisconsin chiding Obama for not wanting to debate-- talk about specifics.

Maybe, McCain knows something we don’t, but it can’t hurt Hillary to have the Republican contender accusing Obama of something that has been a major sticking point for the Clinton campaign and pundits: Obama is big on feel good, with little on substance.

The competitiveness of Huckabee’s run keeps drawing down base support for McCain, who would like to clinch it before Huck chips till it’s irreparably cracked. So, on both sides of the political spectrum we’ve got a turf battle that’s far from over.

In a column in the New York Times Tuesday, “As Voting Pattern Emerges, so Does the Need to Break it, “by John Harwood, he says “breaking the pattern of voter preferences that has structured the Democratic competition so far” is a must.

“That pattern — driven by demographics and electoral mechanics — has proven more powerful than momentum or the candidates’ policy messages. In the quest for delegates over the next three months, they will be wrestling the pattern as much as each other. The pattern stems in part from what is sometimes called identity politics — not surprising in a race with two history-making candidates.”

Harwood said it’s been a 1 step, 2 step, 3 step race, that’s now into the 4th stage where momentum can make a difference for Obama.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/11/us/politics/11caucus.html?_r=1&oref=sl...

Huckabee’s extremely competitive race in Virginia keeps reminding us of the ideological differences that are splitting the GOP apart. With three weeks off till the next contests, momentum can slow unless other intangibles, like endorsements sway the outcome. But McCain is a sure thing, right?

The Clinton shutdown was not a phenomenon without a just cause …it’s the bounces Obama got that Clinton didn’t, endorsements….Clinton’s front-loaded campaign that didn’t anticipate….

Three weeks is along time…and ”Clinton’s double digit gains in Maine 30 days ago,” were 30 days ago, which appear pretty distant closing in on March.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/13/6943/80382/817/455810

“Hopemiester?”

Framing#4

Why are a bunch of essentially white male prognosticators berating Obama’s campaign pitch of hope, from Joe Klein of the Times to Howard Kurtz and David Brooks of the Washington Post, who dubbed Obama the “Hopemiester?”

According to the Wall Street Journal, Feb 19th 2008, “White Men hold the key for Democrats.” Author Jonathan Kaufman says the changing demographics don’t favor either Obama or Clinton. In other words, in a white man’s world, both are looked upon as an incomplete package. Of course the Wall Street Journal isn’t exactly an unbiased source.

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB120339381585476375-sq1ZdcdDB3TcV6...

Wikipedia says the Wall Street Journal editorial pages summarize its philosophy as being in favor of "free markets and free people. “It is typically viewed as adhering to American conservatism and economic liberalism. The page takes a free-market view of economic issues and an often neoconservative view of American foreign policy.”

Interestingly a study done in 2006 shows that “political leanings are tied to hidden biases,” the Washington Post article states that "We have 50 years of evidence that racial prejudice predicts voting. Republicans are supported by whites with prejudice against blacks. If people say, 'This takes me aback,' they are ignoring a huge volume of research."

"George W. Bush is appealing as a leader to those Americans who harbor greater anti-black prejudice."

"That study found that supporters of President Bush and other conservatives had stronger self-admitted and implicit biases against blacks than liberals did.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/29/AR200601...

Now that these same prognosticators [mainly white men] are pealing away what they perceive as Obama's veneer, they’re getting down to the issues that count.

In the Washington Post, Joe Klein,” in a generally favorable Time’s cover story, said Obama is less than bold when it comes to policy.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR200610...

In his latest Op Ed in the Washington Post, the originator of the moniker, “Hopemeister,” says (“When the Magic Fades,”) what you’ve got is “Obama Comedown Syndrome.”

Does that mean what’s left when the halcyonic state dissapears is less than hope? Brooks asks how Obama’s “going to unify highly polarized 70-something committee chairs, or the nation’s 261,000 lobbyists, who don’t see it his way, or special interests in his own party — trial lawyers, the teachers’ unions, AARP."

Or what about the “Gang of 14 that created bipartisan unity on judges, which Obama sat out for or Kennedy and McCain’s bipartisan deal on immigration, which Obama opted out of the parts that displeased unions or what about the sixty-eight senators, who supported a bipartisan deal on FISA, and Obama voted no. "

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/19/opinion/19brooks.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slo...

Substance finally dawning?

Veto Override
How did Eden Prairie Legislators Vote?

House Bill 2800
Senate Companion Bill SF2521

Transportation finance bill appropriating money for highway maintenance, local roads, emergency relief related to the I-35W bridge collapse, establishing a bridge improvement program; issuing bonds; and modifying motor fuel taxes.

The Facts:

•Minnesota hasn't increased its gas tax in 20 years.

•A passenger car owner who drives 12,000 miles a year and gets 22 miles per gallon would pay about $46 a year more in gas taxes.

•To offset the gas tax increase, the bill provides a $25 tax credit for low-income taxpayers. The credit would go to single people earning less than $22,390 a year and couples earning less than $32,720. They would not have to own a car to qualify for the credit.

For over 2 1/2-hours, Republicans stressed the impact of new taxes on Minnesotans already struggling to pay their bills.

http://www.twincities.com/ci_8359938

Don’t Republicans think people read? That’s $46 a year for an average driver, well worth the safety and efficiency of new and improved highways and bridges.

House Votes-

Paulsen did not vote to override the veto.
Maria Ruud voted to override the veto.

The six Republicans that refused to side with the governor were Rep. Jim Abeler (R-Anoka), Rep. Ron Erhardt (R-Edina), Rep. Rod Hamilton (R-Mountain Lake), Rep. Bud Heidgerken (R-Freeport), Rep. Neil W. Peterson (R-Bloomington) and Rep. Kathy Tingelstad (R-Andover). They voted to override.

http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/votes/votes.asp?ls_year=85&session_numb...

In the Senate on the third vote on House Bill 2800/Companion Bill SF2521 –Final Vote 47-20

David Hann voted no, against passage of the bill.

http://www.senate.leg.state.mn.us/journals/2007-2008/20080221081.pdf#Pag...

Though the Chair of the Republican party in Minnesota said a poll they took indicated people didn’t want a gas tax, according to the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy a 2007 poll revealed that by a 72%-21% margin, residents of the Twin Cities support a half-cent metro sales tax for both roads and transit. In fact, residents favor a half-cent sales tax for transit only as part of a larger funding package by a 63%-34% margin, a higher rate of support than the region gave to the Transportation Amendment last fall. The poll also found a slight majority, 51 percent, supporting a 5 cent increase in the gasoline tax.

Not only is the sales tax increase favored almost 3-to-1 but it had majority support from Republicans, Democrats and Independents as well as from people in the central cities, developed suburbs, and the growing suburbs.

http://www.mncenter.org/minnesota_center_for_envi/2007/05/metro_resident...

The Texas Transportation Institute found in their research that the Cost of Congestion-
in terms of our growing traffic problems is staggering. Drivers wasted 5.7 billion gallons of fuel, or about42 gallons per person, in the 75 areas studied. Annually,3.5 billion hours of extra travel time can be blamed on traffic congestion. The total cost of congestion has risen to nearly $70 billion, a rise of $4.5 billion more than the previous year.

On a personal level, the average cost per person in the 75 cities studied was $520, up about $5 from the previous study. The cost averages ranged from $650 per person in areas with populations greater than 3 million to $130 per person in smaller towns.

Delay costs us more than the taxes to fix roads, and alternative transportation.

http://tti.tamu.edu/publications/researcher/v39n4/39_4.pdf

Which Eden Prairie Legislators are representing the interests of their constituents best?

Press Bias Real?

In the ongoing discussion of media bias the New York Times political blog, The Caucus, “Obama: Press Bought Into Clinton Line on Bias,” quotes Obama, “I didn’t expect that you guys would bite on that,” Mr. Obama said. He chided the reporters on board the plane today, saying they were influenced by the Clinton campaign’s flood of complaints about media bias over the last week.”

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/04/obama-press-bought-into-cl...

That’s what happens when your senior campaign gurus don’t keep their candidate abreast of who’s saying what. On the Project for Excellence in Journalism, ABC’s Diane Sawyer is quoted as saying, “Have all of us in the media used boxing gloves on Clinton and kid gloves on Obama. Have we been unfair?”

http://www.journalism.org/node/10004

Fox News says a study shows that the media came down harder on Obama after the SNL skit.

“NEW YORK — Life imitating art or just a coincidence? A study of campaign coverage found the media took a sharper look at Barack Obama the week after “Saturday Night Live” spoofed journalists enthralled by his candidacy.”

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/03/04/study-shows-media-came-down-hard...

Using the same Project for Excellence in Journalism study, FOX news quoted the project’s associate director saying, “ It’s hard to say whether “SNL” acted as a de-facto assignment editor, since some of the stories were probably being prepared before the NBC show aired, but it did seem to crystallize a thought that had been percolating.”

Evidently there’s enough substance out there to press bias and a belief that bias has been part of this Presidential race, that some media outlets are devoting installments on the varieties of bias. A historical overview of right, left bias, Part 1, is available at Slate.com.

http://www.slate.com/id/2078200/

Harken back to 2004 and you can see that media bias was very much on Howard Dean’s mind.

“For the 2004 presidential campaign, Howard Dean has picked up that theme. Us vs. them — with “them” being the media.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4064624/

Press Bias something new or is it even real?

In a UCLA article from 2005, “Media Bias is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist,” the article states, “While the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal is conservative, the newspaper's news pages are liberal, even more liberal than The New York Times. The Drudge Report may have a right-wing reputation, but it leans left. Coverage by public television and radio is conservative compared to the rest of the mainstream media. Meanwhile, almost all major media outlets tilt to the left.”

“These are just a few of the surprising findings from a UCLA-led study, which is believed to be the first successful attempt at objectively quantifying bias in a range of media outlets and ranking them accordingly.”

“The researchers took numerous steps to safeguard against bias — or the appearance of same — in the work, which took close to three years to complete. They went to great lengths to ensure that as many research assistants supported Democratic candidate Al Gore in the 2000 election as supported President George Bush. They also sought no outside funding, a rarity in scholarly research."

"No matter the results, we feared our findings would've been suspect if we'd received support from any group that could be perceived as right- or left-leaning, so we consciously decided to fund this project only with our own salaries and research funds that our own universities provided," Groseclose said."

"The results break new ground.”

http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6...

Seems we’ve still got ground to break.

TOO BLUE

For the party, but not the public? What do you all think?

"Rather than playing recklessly with electoral politics by sabotaging their own party," he wrote, "each of these compulsive talkers might be a tad less self-righteous, look to the long run, discipline himself, suck it up, and be a man."

The novelist Mark Helprin, a former adviser to Robert J. Dole's presidential campaign, savaged conservatives such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Mark Levin, saying the above.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/07/AR200803...

Grizzly Study McCain’s Pork

The presumptive nominee for the Republican Party has argued that the $3M Biologist Katherine Kendall used to study the Grizzly Bear population in Glacial National Park, Montana is unnecessary pork.

Kendall says it was a "scientific and logistical triumph. “As a scientist with the U.S. Geological Survey, she "set out to get the first head count of grizzlies in the Northern Continental Divide ecosystem.”

Why is it important? Kendall says, "There's never been any information about the status of this population. We didn't know what was going on -- until this study."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/09/AR200803...

According to the National Geographic, “more than 30 years ago the bald eagle—United States' national symbol of strength and freedom—had almost vanished from the skies. At that time, biologists believed less than 500 breeding pairs lived in the lower 48 states. “

"100,000 wild grizzlies roamed the vast stretches of open and unpopulated land when Lewis and Clark explored the West in the early 1800s says National Geographic.

“Today, with millions of people inhabiting the area, only a few remote areas remain where the bears can live and thrive. Scientists believe about a thousand of the solitary creatures currently roam densely vegetated areas in the western United States.”

"The largest grizzly population, with about 550 bears, is in the Yellowstone ecosystem, which covers 14,000 square miles (36,000 square kilometers) in the states of Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming."

"The animals are extremely sensitive to development, and need large, isolated areas to roam. A male's home range is about 900 square miles (2,300 square kilometers); a female's is about half that amount."

"About one-third of the Yellowstone population currently lives outside of their protection zone, and that land is threatened by rural sprawl, as well as oil and gas development. "

"Not protecting the bears' current and future habitat needs will also affect genetic diversity. If federal protection is removed; the Yellowstone population would essentially be stuck on an island, cut off from other, larger gene pools farther north. “

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/06/0628_040628_baldeagle.ht...

Since the “bears came under strict federal protection, the number of grizzlies in the lower 48 states has bounced back to between 1,200. The largest concentration -- 550 to 600 -- is in Yellowstone National Park, with the remainder scattered across northern Montana, northern Idaho and northern Washington.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1061-2004May29.html

McCain’s really barking up the wrong tree by calling $3M to assess the viability of a Grizzly Bear population study, pork. Evidently animal rights activists and McCain haven't been in touch.

Common Dreams says that “Today we’re living through the sixth great extinction, sometimes known as the Holocene extinction event. “

And “as harmful as our forebears may have been,[[on our biological diversity] nothing compares to what’s under way today. Throughout the 20th century the causes of extinction - habitat degradation, overexploitation, agricultural monocultures, human-borne invasive species, human-induced climate-change - increased exponentially, until now in the 21st century the rate is nothing short of explosive. "

"The World Conservation Union’s Red List - a database measuring the global status of Earth’s 1.5 million scientifically named species - tells a haunting tale of unchecked, unaddressed, and accelerating biocide."

"By the most conservative measure - based on the last century’s recorded extinctions - the current rate of extinction is 100 times the background rate.
We now understand that the majority of life on Earth has never been - and will never be - known to us. "

"In a staggering forecast, the prediction is that our present course will lead to the extinction of half of all plant and animal species by 2100."

According to the Red List “more than 16,000 species of the world’s mammals, birds, plants and other organisms are at present officially regarded as threatened with extinction to one degree or another”.

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/04/30/862/

Maybe it starts out small, but minor changes manifest into major ones and result in significant consequences.

Under a McCain Presidency the efforts made by the World Conservation Union, Red List efforts, which were updated and released in May of 2007, "looking at 40,168 species and considered 16,118 to be threatened - including 7,725 animals of all types (mammals, birds, reptiles, fish, insects etc) and 8,390 plants, " would be considered Pork.

http://www.iucnredlist.org/