All posts by riversidemike

Uncategorized

Exploding a Common Talking Point Against Global Warming

Does anyone remember the World Book Encyclopedia?  If you went to elementary school in the 1970’s you probably remember them in your school library or learning center.  They tended to be the primary source of information for many of us at that time.  We even bought a set for our home.

Every year the World Book would issue a Year Book, which would update the basic set.  The Year Book contained special reports as well, covering the more intriguing topics of the prior year.  I got my hand on the 1979 Year Book, and the special reports from that issue are:

1. Aid for Your Aching Back, by Patricia Skalka

2. How to Cope with Rising College Costs by Alexander G Sidar, Jr

3. Saudi Arabia, Allah’s Will and Oil Wells by Edward R.F. Sheehan

4. Australia’s Living Pogo Sticks by Terence J. Dawson

5. Where There’s Hope, There’s Life, an interview with Bob Hope, conducted by Roger Ebert

6. Colder Weather Ahead – Unless It’s Warmer by Peter Gwynne

7. How Real is America’s Religious Revival? by Garry Wills

In addition to noting that we still are dealing with a lot of issues, look at the title of #6.  Contrary to popular conservative belief, there was no consensus on “Global Cooling” in the late 1970’s, at least according to the title of the article.  Further investigation is required…

The subtitle of the article is:

Extremely cold winters and hot summers may point to a major climate change, but scientists lack data to solve this puzzler

Hmmm.  Sounds like further evidence that the scientific community was grappling with trying to understand what was going on with the weather, and that it was far from any consensus due to a lack of data.  The most recent years provided  

California, Election 2010

Burton’s Behavior as Chair: Epic Fail

2 Comments

The general buzz leading up to last week’s California Democratic Party Convention was mostly about the need to energize and motivate the party faithful for the 2010 midterm election.  The conventional wisdom is that the party faces an uphill battle in the midterms due to historical trends (the president’s party generally loses seats in the midterms), and political ones (the teapartiers bring nothing if not enthusiasm).  There is also the general ennui that has set in since President Obama’s inauguration in January, 2009.  The reality of governance has created tension within the party, and there is general concern that liberals and progressives will stay home on election night.  All of these factors set the stakes very high for John Burton’s first convention as Chair of the party.  I wish I could say that he was able to answer the call.

From all appearances, it looked like the Chair was barely able to answer the call to get out of bed.  Sporting a red bowling shirt (Note to John: the party color is blue.  The other guys are red) with an uncooperative white t-shirt underneath on Saturday, Chair Burton stumbled and grumbled around on the dais as if nursing a very bad hangover.  Apparently there is some charm in his preferred demeanor, but I was unable to grasp it.  I realize that the Chair should not be the source for words of inspiration, but is some enthusiasm too much to ask?  From handwaving through the votes by acclamation to searching for the next item on the agenda, there was the appearance that the Chair was winging it.  For Saturday’s agenda this was not such a serious problem, since the general session was primarily a series of speeches, including very good ones from Senator Boxer and Governor/Mayor/Attorney General Jerry Brown.

On Sunday, however, the Chair’s inability to adhere to procedure had some very detrimental effects on the proceedings, and, at least for this delegate, on the enthusiasm of the audience.  Sunday is the day for business at the convention.  We vote on endorsements, platform issues, rules, etc.  We also find out the results of the endorsement votes that were held Saturday afternoon.  The Chair gave the results between speeches as if he had something better to do.  Then it came time to vote on the endorsement for the 36th Congressional District.  Jane Harman is the CA36 incumbent and is being challenged by Marcy Winograd.  An endorsement caucus had been held on Saturday, which Harman had won.  Winograd was able to gather enough signatures, however, to force a final vote on the floor on Sunday.  It almost didn’t happen.

The Chair garbled the endorsement question so badly that I was not sure what we were voting on.  Apparently I wasn’t the only one.  The first vote was a voice vote, and the “Ayes” and “Nays” sounded pretty equal to my ear; nevertheless, the Chair ruled that the Ayes had it.  I was puzzled, not only because of the ruling, but also I recalled that when we had a floor vote two years ago (Leno versus Migden), both sides were given 4 minutes to present their case.  This time the vote was taken without speeches, even though Winograd’s troops were lined up at one of the microphones.  Fortunately a delegate went to another microphone and asked basically what we had voted on and protested that it wasn’t clear.  The Chair bristled.  While he was bristling, Winograd’s forces had made their way up to the dais and protested that they had not been able to speak.  The Chair first berated Ms. Winograd for asserting her rights under the rules, then went back to the parliamentarian for a ruling.  Both flustered and frustrated, the Chair allotted 4 minutes each to Winograd and Harman.  

Both sides passionately presented their case.  The Winograd team made the argument that the endorsement reflects on the party as a whole, so it is only fitting that the entire delegation have a chance to overturn a district’s vote.  Harman’s forces took the opposite side, questioning the fairness of the ability of the entire delegation to overturn a district’s endorsement.  The vote would proceed by a show of delegate cards, but even this didn’t go smoothly.  Supposedly cards were counted, but many delegates did not see counters in their region.  The vote had to be done again.  The second time took longer and it appeared as if there were enough counters, although some delegates were still not sure if they were counted.  Again the Chair looked as if this were his first time doing this, and was not in control of the proceedings.  As the counts were tallied, another speech or two intervened.

Finally the vote was announced, and it was rather close.  The Chair made some crack about nobody being bribed for their vote, which was really bush league.  I guess it was an attempt at humor to lighten the mood.  Winograd protested on another point, but I was unable to hear what it was.  Burton again rebuked her, telling her she should get her people organized better.  This was again bad form on the part of the Chair.  The Chair is in a privileged position and should not be taking potshots at people who are asserting their rights as candidates, delegates, etc.  The Chair should rule but not opine.  Full disclosure:  I  did not support Winograd’s bid to overturn the endorsement; I agreed with the Harman camp reasoning.

One final episode cemented the impression that Burton was winging it the entire weekend.  The platform committee did not recognize the author of an item that the committee had sent over to the Rules Committee even though this person had been standing at one of the microphones during the Platform Committee (PC) report.  The  PC report was then voted on without discussion.  The Chair failed to see the speaker as well, but tried to make amends by allowing the speaker to address the audience from the dais for two minutes later on.

The session limped home to an odd but fitting conclusion when one delegate asked for a quorum call even though there was no more business at hand.  Maybe they just wanted to leave.  Apparently the convention ended, and we were headed out the door.  No calls to action.  No rousing finish.

None of this criticism is meant to take away anything from John Burton’s years of exemplary public service.  He has done more for California than I could ever hope to do, but the party’s “Back to the Future” gambit is having the effect I feared that it would.  Many of the young democrats and Obama supporters who put the party over the top have never heard of John Burton, and don’t know a thing about Brown’s governorship.  There was nothing said or done by the Chair that gave me confidence that the party is connecting with these vital new voters.  If the goal of the Chair for this convention was to energize and motivate the base for 2010, my conclusion is that he failed, epically.