Questions global warming expert
Is professor Richard Muller really "the voice of reason" on global warming just because he now questions his earlier "skepticism"? That depends on whom you ask.
Scientific laymen watching from the sidelines are impressed by that kind of sweeping pronouncement. But some of the (actual) scientists who (actually) worked with Muller on the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project haven't only come to different conclusions, they've taken pains to dispute Muller's opinions with public pronouncements of their own.
The strongest statement came from professor Judith Curry, chairwoman of the Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Tech, and a ranking member of Muller's team.
According to media reports, Curry "furiously rebutted" his remarks and said Muller was helping cover up the fact global warming has stopped.
"She called professor Muller's comments 'a huge mistake' and has said that she now plans to discuss her future on the project with him. 'There is no scientific basis for saying that global warming hasn't stopped. To say that there is detracts from the credibility of the data, which is very unfortunate.' New research also seems to back up professor Curry rather than professor Muller."
Economic record speaks clearly
After 12 years of the Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations, we had the savings and loan crisis, which rocked a lot of small investors' worlds.
After the George W. Bush administration, we had another financial meltdown, which was across the board and affected millions of Americans.
Both Bush administrations ended with huge deficits.
At the end of the Bill Clinton administration, there was no financial crisis and no deficit.
I read in the Times that home prices are recovering. We have the beginning of health care reform and Social Security has a surplus.
It appears that at the end of Republican administrations we, as a nation, are economically worse off than at the conclusion of Democratic administrations.
The results speak.
Fire district needs complete overhaul
Your editorial on voting no on the fire tax in Contra Costa County was one of the best ones you have written.
The proposed tax is just a Band-Aid that would only take care of the excess spending of the district for a year or two and then we would be right back where we started.
The district needs a major overhaul. It needs to reduce its compensation expense. Not only reducing overly generous benefits, especially pensions, but by recognizing that there are many different types of services performed that should be compensated at different levels.
The Board of Supervisors, with the exception of its new member Candace Andersen, took the easy way out and voted for the tax. Rather than take the union on and telling it that more than just raising the retirement age a few years for new hires is needed. For example, the county pension plan assumed an investment earnings rate to establish contribution needs. They chose 7.75 percent, but the market value of its assets only increased 1.76 percent. That means even bigger contributions will be needed in the future.
I don't know if counties can declare bankruptcy like Stockton and San Bernardino, but that is where we are heading.
Times Ryan headline reflects its liberal bias
Many believe there is a liberal bias in the media, including the Times. That includes me.
Example: the headline in the Aug. 12 edition announcing Mitt Romney's selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate. The headline to the story shouts "Romney gambles on Ryan."
In reading the article from The New York Times, no mention is made of a "gamble" until the next-to-last paragraph and then it's buried in the middle of a sentence.
The "gamble" is a very insignificant part of the story, except to the Times, obviously.
The article is largely positive and suggests it's a bold move. But apparently the Times editors could not resist placing their negative spin in the headline. Bias? Yes I think so. You want to guess who the Times will endorse for president?