You can see a lot of anti-global warming arguments in her speech here (which is pretty long but if you watch the first four minutes, you'll be able to see what she's doing). She has the idea of economic harm nailed down and she really twists the argument about how much fossil fuels the U.S. uses into patriotism, arguing that the U.S. could be the leading exporter of energy if we would just embrace coal, natural gas, and additional oil production. She also has the notion that carbon dioxide is not harmful, but harmless and a "natural by-product of nature" throughout her argument. She also cites "studies" that have never shown that carbon dioxide is harmful in a manner at least as reckless as anything that ever upset Kenner during State of Fear.
I think that it really highlights the ways that nothing is apolitical in that if any scientist (or journalist or author) is willing to write it down, an idea becomes enmeshed in the political arena regardless of the author's intent.
Ah! Thanks for bringing in Bachmann Heather. The thing I love about her is the ability to guess any counter argument of hers based on the formula of stuffing a problem into the WASP "American Dream" and ignoring all the negative components/impacts. Good idea about nothing being apolitical. I feel so sad for scientists whose work is used by people in ways usually contrary to the reasons it was done.
ReplyDeleteYou know you're in trouble when Michelle Bachmann is explaining elementary science on C-SPAN. I enjoyed her little bit about how CO2 isn't harmful, that's it natural and actually harmless. She does know that if we breathed in CO2, we'd be dead, right? I'm not sure I'd call that completely harmless. Of course I jump in to discredit her science - but what she's saying is about more than that. Building up how much coal and natural gas we have in our country plays to a totally different field. I agree with Grace, there's a lot of "American Dream" ideology at work there.
ReplyDeleteBachmann's assertion that CO2 is a "natural by-product of nature" is not without base. Nor is her assertion that the US could be a net exporter of energy. But she glosses over, doesn't seem to grasp, or perhaps just flat out doesn't care about the consequences of making the US into a net energy exporter. No matter how you slice it, energy production can be a messy business, so things wouldn't be as cookies and cream as she usually makes it out to be.
ReplyDeleteI'm still kind of astounded that she's been as politically successful as she has been. This woman is absolutely nuts.
While her assertion that carbon dioxide is a "natural by-product of nature" is not without base, it is quite a funny and circular thing for her to say. And she's certainly good at that!
ReplyDeleteI understand that people are really baffled by Michele Bachmann's continued re-election but as someone who has knocked on doors thousands and thousands of times in her district (not only have I voted here for a long time, but the controversy over the Stillwater bridge really impacts the communities I work with), I can assure you that a HUGE part of her continued re-election is that there are an astounding number of single-issue voters in District 6 and that a lot of it comes down to abortion. The DFL and the Independence Party here is pretty screwed because if they try to run a pro-life candidate, they will lose the allegiance of the remainder of their voting constituency because the issue is that divisive throughout most of this district.
I understand that she really resonates with the Tea Party movement nationally but as far as what gets people here to the polls when it's time to either give her more time or give her the boot, abortion is really huge.