Ryan Zinke went on Fox News for a hard-hitting interview last night where he suggested once again that President Obama jeopardized the lives of American servicemen and women (and their families). Zinke said:
“When you say that this is a specific team to a task like this, you know, you put the team, you put the dependents, the whole community, I think, in jeopardy.
Perhaps Mr. Zinke should have thought of that before calling every media outlet in Montana to confirm that Navy SEAL Team 6 was responsible within 24 hours of bin Laden’s death. I can’t even wrap my brain around the level of despicable hypocrisy on display here.
The next time someone suggest that human-caused global warming is a myth because of a cold Montana day in July, you may want to respond with this, from Bill McKibben’s article Global Warming’s Terrifying New Math in the August issue of Rolling Stone:
If the pictures of those towering wildfires in Colorado haven’t convinced you, or the size of your AC bill this summer, here are some hard numbers about climate change: June broke or tied 3,215 high-temperature records across the United States. That followed the warmest May on record for the Northern Hemisphere – the 327th consecutive month in which the temperature of the entire globe exceeded the 20th-century average, the odds of which occurring by simple chance were 3.7 x 10-99, a number considerably larger than the number of stars in the universe.
In an article arguing that the gay marriage debate in the United States is over, Michael Kinsley cites philosopher Anthony Appiah, who lists three criteria for finding a belief that may seem harmless today, but indefensible in a generation:
First, “a particular practice is destined for future condemnation” if the argument against it has been building for a while. “The case against slavery didn’t emerge in a blinding moment of moral clarity.” Second, the defenders of current practice “invoke tradition, human nature or necessity” rather than morality. Third, the defenders engage in “strategic ignorance.” We might say they are in denial about “the evils in which they’re complicit.”
I have a number of ideas for practices that will seem indefensible in a generation, but my guess is that our vast prison system’s dependence on drug-related crimes is a likely policy we’ll be unable to defend in the future. Any thoughts from the rest of you?
The Atlantic has posted a fascinating Mike Wallace interview with British author Aldous Huxley who is best known for his novel Brave New World. One passage from the novel about a dystopian future certainly resonates today:
All that is needed is money and a candidate who can be coached to look sincere; political principles and plans for specific action have come to lose most of their importance. The personality of the candidate, the way he is projected by the advertising experts, are the things that really matter.