Public execution seeks to normalize violence

I have strong feelings about the death penalty. It’s always appalled me that a government which claims to be compassionate and rational can justify a practice that is neither.

As a state lawmaker in 1995, and again in 1997, I helped lead successful efforts to stop Governor Branstad from reinstating the death penalty. My contributions included speaking on the floor of the House, staging a week-long fast, and participating in rallies and vigils.

Last week, as Pete Hegseth announced his intention to live-stream a public execution, I thought about our successful campaigns to stop the death penalty in Iowa.

Just as in 1995 and 1997, when our anti-death-penalty coalition found unexpected allies among conservative Republican legislators, Americans opposed to capital punishment again found an unexpected ally.

President Donald Trump. It doesn’t happen often, but Trump’s decision to cancel the live-stream execution of Nidal Malik Hasan was welcomed, and surprising. The President’s reasoning was that “many very good and well meaning people would rather not watch him die.” Continue Reading →

South Dakota deals fatal blow to CO2 pipeline

It’s no secret that I view Donald Trump as a dangerous, narcissistic authoritarian, even as I respect my friends and acquaintances who voted for him. My question for these friends is this: Has Trump delivered what you hoped for, or has he gone off the rails in directions you hadn’t anticipated?

Take eminent domain. Trump supports it. Strongly. Years ago, he even said: “I happen to agree with it 100%. If you have a person living in an area that’s not even necessarily a good area, and … government wants to build a tremendous economic development, where a lot of people are going to be put to work and … create thousands upon thousands of jobs and beautification and lots of other things, I think it happens to be good.”

Trump’s willingness to take people’s property by force might explain why he hasn’t cancelled the 45Q tax credits. Without that handout, Summit Carbon Solutions’ CO2 pipeline isn’t viable. Continue Reading →

US/NATO missiles bombing Russia could lead to nuclear war

I usually look forward to writing this blog. Not so much when the topic is nuclear war.

Ok, so now that I’ve lost half my audience (I get it: who wants to discuss nuclear war?), let me ask the remaining half to indulge the urgency of this message.

Not my message, so much, but the message of Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, founded in 1945 by Albert Einstein, Robert Oppenheimer, and others. The work of this prestigious organization includes the Doomsday Clock in response to the threat of nuclear war and other existential dangers.

Earlier this year, the Bulletin’s Science and Security Board wrote that, “in large part because of Russian threats to use nuclear weapons in the war in Ukraine” they were moving the Clock to 90 seconds to midnight, “the closest to global catastrophe it has ever been.”

If we were 90 seconds from global catastrophe before President Biden said he might allow Ukraine to launch long-range missiles deep inside Russia, the Clock certainly has advanced further in the wrong direction.
Continue Reading →

Stopping Putin through climate action

In a March 7 RNS column, McKibben writes, “If you want to stand with the brave people of Ukraine, you need to find a way to stand against oil and gas.

As I and others have been saying for years, a quick shift from oil and gas to renewables (and most importantly, conservation!) can and must happen quickly. The US response to Hitler proves that, when we want to, we can rapidly and radically shift our economy.

As McKibben points out, “In 1941, in Ypsilanti, the world’s largest industrial plant went up in six month’s time, and soon it was churning out a B-24 bomber every hour. A bomber is a complicated machine with more than a million parts; a wind turbine is, by contrast, relatively simple. … Do we think that it’s beyond us to quickly produce the solar panels and the batteries required to end our dependence on fossil fuel?” Continue Reading →

Summit is lying about its CO2 pipeline

Summit’s refusal to provide assurance verbally or in writing that the CO2 will not be used for fracking is a clear indicator of its plans. Statements such as: “As we stand here today,” “We can’t make the promise long term,” and “Commercial options might be available that are different than storing it underground,” are all rock-solid indicators that CO2 from Iowa ethanol plants will be used for fracking — or what the industry calls “enhanced oil recovery.” Continue Reading →

CO2 pipeline rupture hospitalized 49 people

Zegart’s article in HuffPost describes how, “two dozen individuals were overcome within a few minutes, collapsing in their homes; at a fishing camp on the nearby Yazoo River; in their vehicles. Cars just shut off, since they need oxygen to burn fuel. Drivers scrambled out of their paralyzed vehicles, but were so disoriented that they just wandered around in the dark.”

Describing one of many rescue efforts, Zegart writes, “Inside the small red Cadillac sedan were three men: DeEmmeris and Andrew Burns, and Victor Lewis. DeEmmeris Burns lay across the backseat in the fetal position. The other two were slumped against the windows, white foam coming out of their noses and mouths, their clothes stained with urine and excrement. The firemen thought they were too late. Continue Reading →