Honestly, the guy so blantantly pits himself that there’s little left to say.
Cucinelli, the rabidly right-wing new Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Virginia, has now attacked a scientist in an attempt to smear Global Warming research.
From the linked article: (R. Helderman, Washinfotn Post, 04 May 2010)
In a few short months “Cooch” has managed to make me embarassed to be a Virginian. I hope Fox offers him a talk show soon, so I can just turn him off.
Cooch is using his office to pursue the far right agenda and gain political power. It’s a blatant misuse of political office to score political points and pursue political vendettas.
I am sure that the party in power in Virginia will quickly act to try and save some kind of dignity for the position of Attorney General.
Just show him some boobage, and he will run away screaming: Attorney General Saves Virginia from Breasts
Nice crazy, dead eyes on that guy. :eek:
“Disturbing precedent,” indeed.
Hmm, correct term? Boobophobia? Melonoma? Rack Induced Stress Disorder? Mammalomania?
Suppressed Homosexuality?
He believes that global warming is false.
Public money was given to a scientist for global warming research.
He has some tenuous evidence to suggest that the evidence to secure the funding was false or misleading.
He is using legal methods to get documents to verify his claim.
Could be better, could be worse.
And he knows that the science funded was faulty, because the expected results did not materialize.
As the AG, he has the power to determine what kinds of activities should be investigated, what kinds of laws should be followed, and who should be prosecuted for potential crimes. He is using that power, his discretion, and more taxpayer money, in a blantantly political way, to intimidate and discredit someone who he disagrees with about climate science. He’s using his office to pursue an investigation for nothing more than to score political points and further his far right agenda, just like he did when he changed the AG opinion on universities powers to not discriminate against homosexuals. He’s misusing his power for political ends.
Well of course it could be worse. The guy could be murdering babies or something.
But pursuing a case against a scientist because he doesn’t like that scientist’s conclusions, or because he in his completely untrained non-expert opinion thinks those conclusions must be wrong is pretty damn bad. Shamefully, offensively bad.
And I think it’s pretty obvious that that’s exactly what’s going on here. Does anyone for a second think that Cuccinelli would be trying to pursue this same case against a global warming skeptic?
Or that he didn’t look really hard for something with which to nail Prof. Michael Mann? I mean, it’s not likely that when he took office as AG and took stock of the crime problems in his state, fraudulent grant applications at UVa were a problem that just leaped off the page or was urged on him as urgent by experienced staffers.
Of course, I could be wrong, I don’t know much about UVa, beyond Thomas Jefferson’s cool architecture.
To be fair, *Public Enemies *wasn’t that great a movie.
He purposefully miscconstrued how exposed boobage on their state seal could be characterized and used that mischaracterization to change that state seal against the desires of the public.
I’d say he’s a titty-twister.
Could he be relying on something else?
For instance, I don’t see anything in the article to suggest that the basis for the investigation is that he doesn’t like the conclusions or that the conclusions are wrong.
This seems to suggest that he’s looking for provably false documents submitted in an effort to get grants, and doesn’t have anything to do with the results of the research.
Do you have any non-speculative evidence to the contrary?
If he had evidence that the skeptic had procured grant money by fraud? Yes, I would certainly expect him to.
He didn’t change the state seal. He made lapel pins for his staff to wear, with his on pesonal money, that had a different version of the state seal.
YOU, on the other hand, appear to have purposefully “misconstrued” the facts of this story. Why is that?
:dubious: Come on, Bricker, we all know you’re not an idiot. Don’t whore yourself over this one.
Bricker, name me any scientist who was subject to legal action by the Virginia AG for alleged grant fraud in the last 50 years. Or was even threatened with such legal action.
Didn’t think so. This is Crazy Ken using his office to intimidate people he disagrees with.
And you have to go back 60 years to include McCarthy.
I’ll take a Godwin time out from the thread now.
ETA: What BrainGlutton said.
That line of credit has been overdue for at least a couple years now.
Sure, Bricker has to be honest and fair-minded, while his opponents can engage in whatever tactics they please.
If I post an “everyone knows” attack, as I did back when the Massachusetts legislature jumped back and forth between the governor appointing a replacement senator, having a special election, and having the governor appoint a senator UNTIL the special election, people insisted that in each case in was in service of greater democracy… never mind the fact that in each case, the chnage benefitted the Democrats.
No, no – prove it, I was challenged.
But here, when an AG makes a move that’s almost certainly politically motivated but has the barest tinge of possible justification, I don’t get to say prove it? I have to honestly admit that the chances of this being a neutral, good-faith exercise of his office are about 1 in 50?
Why is that?
Asshole.