Blog powered by Typepad

« And so we bid farewell to Sir Mark Sedwill | Main | 'Xi Ping-a-ling' is an international menace »

Tuesday, 30 June 2020


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Mr. Shellenberger will now be erased from all memory for his truth telling. He has deep sixed one major platform of the global left. Racism, feminism are next. All 3 are junk issues as the left is a junk ideology made up of junk people and their money.

Don't get too excited. Michael Shellenberger isn't a scientist. He has a degree in Peace and Global Studies from Earlham College:

He's a paid pundit for the nuclear power industry who's gotten himself in trouble with Forbes before for writing "It Sounds Crazy, But Fukushima, Chernobyl, And Three Mile Island Show Why Nuclear Is Inherently Safe"

It sounds crazy because it is, and Forbes' editors have finally decided being associated with him has become too risky to their credibility.

Well, Bob, nuclear power - so far - is safe. None of those incidents brought about the end of the world. As for Forbes, their recent policy shift must make Mr. Shellenberger very grateful that they have disowned him!

Poor Michael. This incident probably won't make him welcomed back into the environmentalist camp and he isn't a good enough liar to make money as an industry propagandist. I sold him short by not mentioning he also has a master's in Cultural Anthropology from the University of California, which also doesn't make him qualified to comment on AWG. He does have a gift for gab, though. Maybe he'll become a self-help guru.

You'd have sucked his balls and claimed he had a double first from Oxbridge if he'd said all that with a "not" before each sentence, Bob.

Anyway, one little glimmer of light, nowhere near the end of the tunnel but welcome nevertheless, thanks Gaffer.



No gay stuff for me, thanks, but I wonder why you brought it up.

Bob, does the President have the power to impose movement restrictions on all the USA States to counter the Covid 19 pandemic?


My understanding is he doesn't have the power to directly control restrictions, but has several avenues to force governors into going along, or he could just use the president's traditional leadership role to persuade governors.

If you want to get into the details, here's what some Libertarians think:

Bob, so basically governors who do not like Trump will ignore directives from the President for political reasons and possibly ignore the health of the people. It is little wonder the death toll is increasing. Very sad indeed.


The president can't force governors to do anything except under special circumstances or those where federal laws have precedence. But we are in a phase of not being able to do anything without it being politicized. Trump claims people only wear masks to show they don't like him.


Just my 2¢ but I think Trump leans toward federalism rather than issuing directives for the various states populations to follow. 'Local conditions' is, in my humble esteem, agreeable to me too.

Washington DC has a habit of screwing stuff up.

The comments to this entry are closed.