|
2. ABC's Stossel Takes on Gore Movie, Talks to Dissenting Scientists
3. CNN's O'Brien Talks to Gore Critic, Hints Doubters 'In the Dark'
4. 11-Year-Old Kid on CBS Reality Show: Bush 'Not Smart at All'
5. Late Show Contest's 'Top Ten Cool Things About Global Warming'
Couric told Smith that Plame is "very charming, incredibly intelligent and eloquent and really mad about what happened to her, angry and resentful of being outed, if you will, having her career end this way." On Friday's Evening News, Couric avoided Armitage's name as she reported that "when senior administration officials leaked her name to reporters, they may have exposed other spies and damaged operations targeting Iran." Couric soon relayed Plame's contention that "that the leak of her name had serious repercussions." In a likely understatement, Couric ended her preview by highlighting how "Valerie Plame Wilson also has some harsh things to say about President Bush." In the 60 Minutes piece which aired, Couric went so far as to suggest President Bush's personal involvement in the "smear" effort: "When all is said and done, the top aides to the President and Vice President leaked your name to reporters, do you think President Bush was in on this?" Plame replied: "I don't know about that. But I, like most other Americans, saw President Bush say on TV that he would fire anyone from his administration found to be involved in leaking my name. It turns out the President is not a man of his word." In the closest either preview came to casting any doubt on Plame's viewpoint, Smith raised "these allegations that came out after the fact, people in Washington, these insiders say everybody knew she was in the CIA, everybody knew that she was a covert op. She wasn't outed at all." Couric countered: "She would contend that this was part of a smear campaign against her..." Neither preview raised anything about the political motives of her husband, Joe Wilson, who advised the Kerry campaign in 2004, or his culpability for penning an op-ed in the New York Times and then accepting an invitation to go on Meet the Press -- a high media profile he and his wife must have realized would bring scrutiny as to who suggested or directed the former ambassador to travel to Niger. [This item, updated with what aired Sunday night, is based on a Friday night posting on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [1] ] In the actual October 21 60 Minutes story, Couric did mention Armitage, but failed to note he was Novak's source, preferring to spin a larger conspiracy and allow Joe Wilson to accuse the Bush team of "Mafia-like" tactics:
COURIC: The special prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, found evidence there were four leakers: Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, the Vice President's Chief of Staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, President Bush's closest confidante, Karl Rove, and White House spokesman Ari Fleischer. All avoided the most serious charges by claiming not to know she was undercover. But Joe Wilson says that's no excuse.
The 60 Minutes piece, however, did include a mild challenge to Plame for enjoying some limelight as Couric also noted the "partisan" take of the couple:
COURIC: It was so serious, the President promised to fire anyone involved in revealing her identity to the press. Back in March, one media outlet delivered a contrarian take not explored by Couric on Sunday night. An excerpt from a March 8 CyberAlert item, "Washington Post's Contrarian Editorial: Wilson 'a Blowhard'"
For the March 8 CyberAlert posting in full: www.mediaresearch.org [2] A rough transcript of the 60 Minutes story as posted by CBSNews.com: www.cbsnews.com [3] The MRC's Kyle Drennen corrected the closed-captioning against the video to create this transcript of Couric's pre-taped session with Harry Smith aired during the 7:30am half hour of the October 19 Early Show:
SMITH: Valerie Plame spent nearly 20 years in the shadows of the CIA. Then suddenly, she became a public figure. But she's never told her own story -- until now. Her life story reads like a spy novel. She is beautiful, smart, a covert agent. She became the center of a political scandal when her husband, career diplomat Joe Wilson, wrote an op-ed in the New York Times claiming the Bush administration distorted intelligence about Iraq's efforts to obtain uranium in Africa. Eight days later, Robert Novak revealed her identify as an undercover CIA agent in his syndicated column. Speculation was rampant that the leaking of her name, which is a crime, came from inside the Bush administration, in retaliation for her husband's column. The leak grew into a scandal that embroiled the political elite in Washington. And journalists who spent their careers protecting the identity of their sources were faced with a choice of naming names or going to jail. When it was all over, Vice President Cheney's Chief of Staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, was charged and convicted of lying to investigators and obstruction of justice. President Bush later commuted his sentence. No one was ever charged with knowingly leaking Valerie Plame's name. Valerie Plame gave her first-ever interview to CBS Evening News anchor and 60 Minutes correspondent Katie Couric. I spoke to Katie earlier about it. The MRC's Brad Wilmouth corrected the closed-captioning against the video to create this transcript of the promotion on the October 19 CBS Evening News:
[This item, by Brad Wilmouth, was posted Saturday on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [4] ] The ABC host introduced his regular "Give Me a Break" segment: "You've heard the reports. The globe is warming. And it's our fault. And the consequences will be terrible. But you should know there is another side to this story. And scientists who've tried to tell it are often threatened. Which makes me say, 'Give Me a Break.'" Then came a number of clips of journalists relaying the purported danger of global warming, and clips of children expressing their fears of the future. After arguing that An Inconvenient Truth was incorrect or misleading in the way it presented the dangers of rising sea levels and the plight of polar bears in the Arctic, the ABC host then got to the movie's famous graph that the former Vice President used to argue that higher carbon dioxide levels cause temperatures to increase: "I knew that carbon dioxide's thought to amplify temperature increases, but this shows a clear cause an effect. For 600,000 years, when carbon rose, so did temperature. It suggests that carbon levels control temperature. But the real inconvenient truth is that carbon increases came after temperature rose -- usually hundreds of years later. Temperature went up first. I wanted to ask Mr. Gore about that and other things, but he wouldn't agree to talk about this."
Reiter and Christy had notably been members of the IPCC, and they were critical of the way governments chose the members of the committee, some of whom were merely activists instead of scientists, suggesting that politics had played too great a role.
STOSSEL: Paul Reiter of the Pasteur Institute and John Christy say they were members of the IPCC. That so-called group of scientists, they say, is not what people think it is. Reiter further said that he had resigned from the committee in protest because he disagreed with some of the report's findings, and had to threaten a lawsuit against the IPCC to have his name removed from the report, although, according to Stossel, the IPCC disputes this account. Stossel then dealt with the issue of these types of global warming dissenters being "smeared as deniers," as those who support the more liberal view of global warming seek to compare their way of thinking to that of Holocaust deniers.
STOSSEL: Today, scientists like these are often smeared as "deniers." And the August 16 CyberAlert on NBC: www.mediaresearch.org [7] After recounting that many global warming activists, like Al Gore and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., try to discredit skeptics by accusing them of "being purchased by a 'well-funded denial machine,'" these scientists were shown denying that they receive any money because of their views, as they contended that, rather than being rewarded for their views, they have faced harassment and threats. Stossel summed up his report: "Is this what the global warming debate has come to? One side saying, 'Shut up, dissent must not be heard'? The truth is that, while everyone agrees the earth has warmed, lots of good scientists don't agree that it's mostly our fault, and don't agree that it's going to be a catastrophe." Below is a complete transcript of Stossel's "Give Me a Break" segment from the Friday, October 19 20/20:
JOHN STOSSEL: You've heard the reports. The globe is warming. And it's our fault. And the consequences will be terrible. But you should know there is another side to this story. And scientists who've tried to tell it are often threatened. Which makes me say, "Give Me a Break."
Notably, beginning at 1:00 p.m. earlier in the day, CNN started displaying its logo in green, and, for a while, used a clock counting down how long it will be until the upcoming series "Planet in Peril" begins on Tuesday October 23. This special two-part series, which is part of CNN's regular "Anderson Cooper 360" series, will examine environmental issues. See: www.cnn.com [8] [This item, by Brad Wilmouth, was posted Saturday night on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org [9] ] On Friday's special, Gore's claim that global warming has had effects on the frequency and intensity of hurricanes and tornadoes was the first of the nine points examined, as O'Brien brought aboard CNN meteorologist Rob Marciano to discuss the subject. A few weeks ago, on CNN's "American Morning," Marciano had notably exclaimed that he was happy to hear about the judge's skeptical view of An Inconvenient Truth, as he commented about the movie's inaccuracies, prompting email complaints from CNN viewers. On Friday's special, Marciano relayed that there are no studies that show "an increase in tornadoes due to global warming," and contended that there is still debate about hurricanes. He related the theory that hurricane intensity has increased because of a multi-decade cycle, and pointed to difficulties in accurately measuring hurricane intensities worldwide. He also suggested that any effects on hurricanes by global warming would likely be small. But Marciano ended his discussion by suggested that if you "go green," that "everybody wins." Marciano: "As for who's right and who's wrong, we may not know the answer until it's actually happening. Until then, I think most would agree that, if you do your part and you go green, well, everybody wins." O'Brien soon brought aboard Dr. John Christy of the University of Alabama, a member of the ICPP who was also featured on 20/20 the same night on ABC. Christy took exception with Gore's willingness to "speak with certainty" about an issue as unpredictable as climate change, and suggested the Nobel committee was trying to "influence American elections." He also pointed out the absence of media coverage when a recent study showed that "Antarctic sea ice extent reached its all-time maximum." Christy: "I suppose CNN did not announce two weeks ago when the Antarctic sea ice extent reached its all-time maximum, even though, in the Arctic in the North Pole, it reached its all-time minimum." Christy also contended that even if the world constructed nuclear plants to replace carbon-producing energy sources, that global temperature would only be affected by "one-hundredth of a degree per decade." About halfway through the show, O'Brien brought aboard political analyst Bill Schneider to discuss poll numbers on the public's views of global warming. O'Brien had earlier plugged the segment by suggesting that those who do not agree with the more liberal view of global warming are "in the dark." O'Brien: "And what do you believe about global warming? See whether Americans are getting greener or whether they're still in the dark. That's coming up."
Regarding the finding that only 35 percent of Americans see global warming as an "immediate threat," Schneider fretted that "our political system can deal with the problems only if people see an immediate crisis," and contended that "it's unlikely much can happen unless people sense a crisis, and the only time they've sensed it is in Hurricane Katrina, and of course then, government did not work." In a relatively rare acknowledgment, O'Brien brought up the Clinton administration's refusal to push the Kyoto global warming treaty because of its lack of support in the Senate, as he was critiquing the handling of the global warming issue by both the Bush and Clinton administrations. Regarding President Bush, he related that after making a promise during the election to support regulations to reduce carbon emissions, he "cooled to the concept" after taking office, as global warming became a "dead issue." O'Brien contended that "government scientists who disagreed say they were censored or edited so to appear they were towing the line." After relating the Clinton administration's refusal to push the Kyoto treaty, as the issue "languished," the CNN host concluded that portion of the show by warning that "while nothing has been done, the problem has gotten harder to solve." O'Brien: "So if you're looking for the reasons the U.S. has done little to respond to the climate crisis, you can find them on both sides of the aisle. And while nothing has been done, the problem has gotten harder to solve." O'Brien later interviewed Peter Schwartz of the Monitor Group to discuss the possibility that flooding caused by global warming could cause refugee problems which could threaten world peace, and then the CNN host finished going through the remainder of the nine points against An Inconvenient Truth, which he called "alleged inconsistencies or exaggerations." O'Brien concluded the program by insisting the British judge still endorsed the basics of Gore's movie. O'Brien: "And we should point out at this point we've gone through all nine of those alleged inconsistencies or exaggerations brought out by that British judge in the midst of that lawsuit. But worth pointing out, that the judge said in mentioning those nine inconsistencies that the scientific substance, the facts of the science that form the basis of Gore's movie, are, in fact, correct." Below is a transcript of some noteworthy portions of the show:
# 8:05 p.m. MILES O'BRIEN: Gore's critics also picked up some powerful ammunition just before the Nobel Committee announced the Peace Prize. A British judge ruled "An Inconvenient Truth," the Oscar-winning film of Gore's global warming lecture, contains nine errors that need to be pointed out to students as the movie is played in British schools. Since we're keeping everyone honest here, we're going to look at all nine points of contention this hour. First, the link between global warming and the weather. In the movie, Gore implies there's a direct link between global warming and the killer hurricane season of 2005, which, of course, included Katrina, as well as a series of devastating tornadoes the year before. Listen to this.
# 8:15 p.m. O'BRIEN: But many skeptics are quick to point out Gore does not have any scientific credentials. And that's what leads us to a crucial ocean current widely known as the Conveyor belt. What may or may not be happening to it is another bone of contention for those critical of "An Inconvenient Truth."
O'BRIEN: No one doubts it can be sudden, but IPCC scientists see no evidence it will happen any time soon.
O'BRIEN: But I'll tell you who's not laughing, the critics who accuse Gore of being an alarmist, who say global warming is not a catastrophe. One of them is, ironically, one of the scientists who shares a piece of the Nobel Peace Prize with Gore, former NASA scientist John Christy, joining from us Huntsville, Alabama. Dr. Christy, good to have you with us. ...
O'BRIEN: The scientists who share the Peace Prize with Gore say evidence the climate system is warming is unequivocal, and it's everywhere -- increased air and ocean temperatures, rising sea levels, and melting snow and ice. And check out this chart. Based on information gleaned from Antarctic ice core samples, it shows carbon dioxide and temperature levels on Earth over the past 650,000 years.
# 8:33 p.m. O'BRIEN: We're looking at global warming, just the facts, and we're keeping them all honest as we look at Al Gore, his movie and those who say he didn't let the facts get in the way of a good story.
# 8:36 p.m. O'BRIEN: What about Al Gore's record when he was in the White House? Now, you would think he and Bill Clinton would have done a lot to curb global warming. Well, think again. There was a brief moment in time when Al Gore and George Bush actually agreed on global warming. When they were running for the Oval Office in 2000, they were asked in a debate if they would promise to limit U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.
# 8:41 p.m. O'BRIEN: Throughout this hour, we're bringing out the points of contention with Al Gore's "Inconvenient Truth." On to number seven now. The polar bears, as you well now, have become an icon of global warming, and they are literally on thin ice, but could they actually be drowning? That's what Gore says in the movie. # 8:55 p.m. O'BRIEN: And we should point out at this point we've gone through all nine of those alleged inconsistencies or exaggerations brought out by that British judge in the midst of that lawsuit. But worth pointing out, that the judge said in mentioning those nine inconsistencies that the scientific substance, the facts of the science that form the basis of Gore's movie, are, in fact, correct.
CBS's Web site for the show includes a questionnaire completed by each contestant. Asked to name the worst President in U.S. history, Kelsey replied: "In my personal opinion, one of the worst U.S Presidents could be George W. Bush because he has the craziest ideas for the country that could lead us into danger. For example, he started the unnecessary war with the country of Iraq which killed many U.S. soldiers." See: www.cbs.com [10] CBS's page for the 8pm EDT/PDT Wednesday night show: www.cbs.com [11]
From the Late Show's "Top Ten Contest" winning entries posted on Saturday, October 20, the "Top Ten Cool Things About Global Warming." Late Show home page: www.cbs.com [12] 10. "Mild" hot sauce now labeled as "Medium" (Ray W, Rockford, IL) 9. New iPod has built-in Slushie machine (Kathleen M, Philadelphia, PA) 8. Baghdad water park now burqa free! (Tom T, Batavia, IL) 7. Amusing news stories about idiots who break their legs diving into evaporated swimming pools (Mike S, Orlando, FL) 6. David Hasselhoff eats only ice cream off the floor (Mark M, Dunnellon, FL) 5. Chances are, Matthew McConaughey may never need to put his shirt back on (Susan B, Las Vegas, NV) 4. New Jersey smells better under water (Doug P, Le Roy, NY) 3. Your $8 cup of Starbucks coffee will stay warm for a month (Jim S, Pittsburgh, PA) 2. Letterman studio audience expected to thaw by 2050 (Mark S, Santa Monica, CA) 1. When Paris Hilton says, "That's hot," she'll sound smart (Mike H, Mount Tabor, NJ) -- Brent Baker
|
Katie Couric's Sunday 60 Minutes interview, to promote Valerie Plame's new book, Fair Game: My Life as a Spy, My Betrayal by the White House, framed the story just as the media have all along -- Painting Plame as a heroic victim of an orchestrated "smear" with little consideration to who actually gave her name to Bob Novak or the responsibility and motivation of her husband who picked a high-profile political fight with the White House. In a preview on Friday's Early Show, Harry Smith asserted Plame's "life story reads like a spy novel," gushing that "she is beautiful, smart, a covert agent." Smith recalled how "Robert Novak revealed her identify as an undercover CIA agent in his syndicated column" and that "speculation was rampant that the leaking of her name, which is a crime, came from inside the Bush administration, in retaliation for her husband's column." Whether it is a "crime" is far from settled, but without ever pointing out how Novak got the name from Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, a political enemy of Dick Cheney and Karl Rove who opposed the Iraq war, Smith noted that "no one was ever charged with knowingly leaking Valerie Plame's name." 
COURIC: An investigation was launched. But as it dragged on, the Wilsons hardly kept a low profile, appearing at glamorous public events, political fundraisers for the Democratic party, and in Vanity Fair magazine. 
A Wednesday [March 7] Washington Post editorial, "The Libby Verdict: The serious consequences of a pointless Washington scandal," certainly didn't match the angle of the rest of the media's coverage of the Libby conviction. Far from treating Joe Wilson as a truth-telling hero, the March 7 Washington Post editorial declared: "Mr. Wilson's case has besmirched nearly everyone it touched. The former ambassador will be remembered as a blowhard." The Post castigated Libby for "lying under oath," yet explained that while "Wilson was embraced by many because he was early in publicly charging that the Bush administration had 'twisted,' if not invented, facts in making the case for war against Iraq....a bipartisan investigation by the Senate intelligence committee subsequently established that all of these claims were false -- and that Mr. Wilson was recommended for the Niger trip by Ms. Plame, his wife." 
SMITH TO COURIC: This interview, everybody in the world has wanted this interview. This is the interview. First off, what was she like? 
COURIC: Did you ever hear about anything that happened to anyone with whom you had contact as a result of the leak? 
KATIE COURIC: This Sunday on 60 Minutes, Valerie Plame Wilson gives her first interview since top Bush administration officials exposed her role as an undercover CIA agent four years ago. CBS News has learned she was involved in operations to prevent Iran from building a nuclear weapon. In the interview, we talked about what it meant to have her identity revealed. 
On Friday's 20/20, ABC's John Stossel presented the views of scientists who dissent from the Al Gore view of global warming, including two former members of the IPCC -- the committee which shared the Nobel Peace Prize with Gore. These scientists disagreed with the selection process of the committee's members and some of its conclusions. The ABC host disputed some of the claims in An Inconvenient Truth, and even presented the view that increased carbon dioxide levels are the result of global warming, rather than the cause, as he took on Gore's famous graph from the movie: "But the real inconvenient truth is that carbon increases came after temperature rose -- usually hundreds of years later. Temperature went up first. I wanted to ask Mr. Gore about that and other things, but he wouldn't agree to talk about this." 
Stossel presented several scientists who dispute contentions by Gore and others that "the debate is over" on global warming. These scientists included Paul Reiter of the Pasteur Institute, Tim Ball of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project, and John Christy and Roy Spencer of the University of Alabama. Stossel relayed their contentions that global warming and cooling trends have happened in the past, and related that the media had "fretted about that then, too." Stossel: "Climate changes, they point out. It always has -- with or without man. Early last century, even without today's big output of carbon dioxide, the Arctic went through a warm period. The media fretted about that then, too. And Greenland's temperatures rose 50 percent faster in the 1920s than they're rising now. Some scientists say the warming may be caused by changes in the sun or ocean currents or changes in cloud cover. Or other things we don't understand. The debate is not over." 
STOSSEL: Books warn that the earth is under fire, a suicidal planet's approaching a boiling point and a toxic burn. Children are frightened. 
GORE: You are Live Earth. 
STOSSEL: My goodness! I knew that carbon dioxide's thought to amplify temperature increases, but this shows a clear cause and effect. For 600,000 years, when carbon rose, so did temperature. It suggests that carbon levels control temperature. But the real inconvenient truth is that carbon increases came after temperature rose -- usually hundreds of years later. Temperature went up first. I wanted to ask Mr. Gore about that and other things, but he wouldn't agree to talk about this. Why should he when he and others say- 
STOSSEL: Climate changes, they point out. It always has -- with or without man. Early last century, even without today's big output of carbon dioxide, the Arctic went through a warm period. The media fretted about that then, too. And Greenland's temperatures rose 50 percent faster in the 1920s than they're rising now. Some scientists say the warming may be caused by changes in the sun or ocean currents or changes in cloud cover. Or other things we don't understand. The debate is not over. And, anyway, who's to say that yesterday's temperature was the perfect one. If temperatures keep rising now, these scientists say we don't know that that will be all bad. 
On Friday night, CNN viewers were treated to the special "Keeping Them Honest: The Truth About Global Warming," which took time to examine nine "alleged inconsistencies or exaggerations" in Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth, as enumerated in a ruling by a British judge. Host Miles O'Brien also interviewed a member of the IPCC, the group which shared the Nobel Peace Prize with Gore, in the form of a scientist who has challenged Gore's views on global warming. O'Brien, who a week earlier had tagged dissenters with such labels as "dead-enders" and "a very small fringe," on this show suggested that people who are "skeptical" about global warming are "in the dark," and presented what he called "surprising" polling data showing a substantial number of Americans have doubts about global warming theory. 
O'Brien began his recitation of the poll results: "This one is a surprise. This is the CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll, recent one. 'Which of the following statements comes closest to your view of global warming?' we asked. And here's the response. Global warming is a proven fact, mostly man-made: 56 percent. Global warming is a proven fact, mostly natural: 21 percent. And then, completely unproven: 21 percent. It's interesting when you lump those bottom two together, isn't it?" He thought it "interesting" that so many Americans are in a "skeptical realm" even though "more than 90 percent of scientists would say it is man-made and happening." 
ROB MARCIANO: Miles, there's no study that we know of that shows an increase in tornadoes due to global warming, either now or forecast for the future. Now, on the topic of hurricanes and global warming, that is still up for debate. Storms have increased in the Atlantic since 1995. The question is why and where else? Some hurricane experts say Atlantic hurricanes have increased because of a 20- to 30-year ocean cycle. Some say it's because of global warming. Regardless, Atlantic hurricanes account for less than 15 percent of all tropical cyclones worldwide. So studies have been done to see if storms worldwide have increased. And some studies say yes. Others say the data from outside the Atlantic is not good. Estimating hurricane strength from satellites, well, it's just not precise. And the U.S. is the only country to routinely fly into hurricanes. And that's the only way to actually measure a storm's strength. A recent study conducted by respected scientist Jim Kossin re-analyzes the global data and shows that there has been no increase in hurricane strength worldwide in the last 20 years. The fact is, hurricanes need much more than just warm water to grow, but they do need at least 80-degree water to form. Warm water evaporates. It rises, form clouds, and that releases heat. That heat release then leads to more strengthening of the storm. That leads to more evaporation and the cycle repeats itself. The storm can kind of feed on itself and strengthen. Most hurricane experts agree that, if waters increase by one degree Celsius, hurricane winds will increase by about 5 percent by the end of the century. That means any increase that we have seen in recent hurricanes due to warming would only be about 2 percent, statistically indiscernible. And, of course, it's not as simple as warm water equals strong storm. Some things can kill or at least weaken a hurricane, dry land, for one thing, dry air, and something called wind shear. High-altitude winds typically energize most storms, but they actually weaken hurricanes. And when tropical cyclones ride the trade winds east to west and high-altitude winds are strong, it creates this wind shear. When a hurricane or tropical storm hits wind shear, the top of the storm actually gets choked and torn off. This not only weakens hurricanes, but it also prevents storms from forming in the first place. And a recent study done by the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory says global warming may increase wind shear and therefore decrease hurricanes. Now, I'm sure there's going to be more studies down the road, Miles, and no doubt this debate will continue. As for who's right and who's wrong, we may not know the answer until it's actually happening. Until then, I think most would agree that, if you do your part and you go green, well, everybody wins. Miles? 
CHRISTY: Well, as a scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, I always thought that, and I may sound like the Grinch who stole Christmas here, that prizes were given for performance, and not for promotional activities. And when I look at the world, I see that the carbon dioxide rate is increasing, and energy demand, of course, is increasing. And that's because, without energy, life is brutal and short. So I don't see very much effect in trying to scare people into not using energy when it is the very basis of how we can live in our society. 
SCHNEIDER: Well, yeah, because it says only 56 percent. The top two, the top answer, rather, agree with the overwhelming scientific consensus that global warming is not just a fact but it's caused by people. If you don't think it's caused by people, then you probably don't think there's much people can do about it. Like the weather. Everybody talks about it; nobody does anything about it. 
No where on CBS is a safe zone from some gratuitous Bush-bashing, not even the Kid Nation reality show, the MRC's Kristine Lawrence noticed. For last Wednesday's episode of the show premised on kids establishing and running a community at a New Mexico ghost town, dubbed "Bonanza City," four sets of kids had to assemble in chronological order photographs of seven U.S. Presidents. The yellow team won, mainly because of team member Zach, ten-year-old. His fellow teammate, 11-year-old-Kelsey from Pennsylvania, seemed to resent his success as the program featured this comment from her: "We won with the help of Zach, but just because he knows his Presidents doesn't mean he's the best leader. I mean, look at George W. Bush. He's not smart at all but he won the U.S. President two times in a row." 