Re: Fuel Efficient Jet Travel - Greg Pollowitz - Planet Gore on National Review Online

And Paul writes:

Better yet, why didn't he take the AMTRAK train to New York? It's a model of government efficiency right? Hell, the railroad industry was the first industry we nationalized. Now that we've nationalized the auto industry and are soon to nationalize CITIGROUP, shouldn't Obama be touting the benefits of nationalization by taking such an efficient government-run railroad to Broadway? He could have carried his entire staff and the press corps on several cars.

And maybe do a whistle stop speech along the way . . .

Or, at the very least, the press corps and staffers could have taken the train.

Josh Nelson: President Obama Folding on Promise to Make Corporations Pay to Pollute?

This is President Obama's first major test on energy and environmental policy, and he appears to be giving up without a fight. This is not acceptable. President Obama, you know corporations should have to pay to pollute. You said yourself that the public owns the skies, not corporations. You led us to believe you would fight for this principle once you were elected President. You used this very issue to attack Senator McCain, calling opposition to 100% auction of emissions credits a massive corporate giveaway. Why are you wavering on your promise to the American people?

SF Environmental Policy Examiner: Examiner.com exclusive global warming debates--Stephen Schneider, part 2

We start with Professor Schneider following up on this part of the previously published interview:

"By the way, some of the skeptics are going ballistic over my admittedly too provocative word "slaughter"--though given the framing I said I believe it would happen. But they misquote me in saying I challenged them to a debate. I challenged them to go to a legitimate scientific meeting with a knowledgeable audience and challenge from the floor with a room full of experts. I think they would be pretty unhappy with the outcome. I certainly will not schedule some political show debate in front of a non-scientific audience--all that does is generate confusions since lay audiences can rarely discern the quality of a scientific argument. If Roger wants a debate, he can set one up at the American Meteorological Society meeting or the American Geophysical Union meeting and if dates work I'll be happy to go and will encourage others like Ben Santer or Kevin Trenberth to join in. That I would do, A presidential like debate format with shallow staccato jibes and no nuanced arguments, no--confusion only in that style. I never do those anymore."