It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Climate Change Billboard Stirs Controversy
Though the campaign is discontinued, Bast refused to apologize. Instead, he defended it, saying, "This billboard was deliberately provocative, an attempt to turn the tables on the climate alarmists by using their own tactics but with the opposite message." He said those on his side of the climate debate are "subjected to the most uncivil name-calling and disparagement you can possibly imagine from climate alarmists." Bast referenced such incidents as a 2010 congressional hearing when U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders (D-Vt.) made modest headlines comparing climate-change skeptics to Nazi deniers.
Bast believes climate alarmists have free rein when it comes to name-calling and said Heartland's campaign was an experiment to determine whether his organization would be held to a separate standard. "The other side of the climate debate seems to be playing by different rules," Bast opined. "This experiment produced further proof of that."
Bast says provocative messages are not Heartland's normal tack but maintains the institute has spent 15 years and millions of dollars "presenting the economic and scientific arguments that counter global warming alarmism." His latest experiment may have undermined those years of work. "Putting up these billboards is an act of desperation," Stanford University professor Ken Cladeira told the Washington Post. "They are unable to argue based on facts."
Originally posted by FortAnthem
I think the reaction to the billboards shows some of the core differences between the left and the right.
When the right goes overboard on something like this, they are rightfully taken to task for it by their own. Not only do they have to face reprecussions from the MSM and liberals, their allies also distance themselves from the imporper tactics. This shows that the right has enough integrity to insist on higher standards and that their side sticks to the facts and reasoned arguments, not Ad Hominem attacks against their opponents.
On the left, on the other hand, any tactics are considered OK, so long as they further their agenda. They can ignore the facts, paint their opponents as racists, "flat Earthers", anti-semites or whatever label best suits their purpose to discredit their opponents without having to address their arguments. Nobody in the MSM or the left ever calls them on their underhanded tactics, in fact, oftentimes their efforts are applauded by the MSM and the left because they are furthering the cause of progressivism.
Take PETA for example and their anti-fur campaigns:
They present women as objects of sexual desire in order to further their crusade. While you may hear some grumbling about over-sexing the subject, for the most part, the media crows about their innovative tactics and their ability to catch the attention of the average Joe out on the street. "Sex sells" and why shouldn't PETA use that axiom in their advertizing.
Of course, you could never imagine the right using such tactics. They would be called right away for their sexism and it would be used as yet another example of the right's "war on women".
There is a double standard out there and the left uses it to their advantage every time. The right's biggest problem is that the MSM expects them to adhere to their own high standards and attacks every time they stoop to the level of the left.
Perhaps the left's biggest advantage in the war of words is the fact that they have no standards to be used against them and this makes them free to use every and any tactics they please against their ideological enemies. On the left, the ends always justify the means.
Because Heartland does many things that benefit Philip Morris' bottom line,
things that no other organization does, I hope you will consider boosting your
general operating support
Heartland has devoted considerable attention to defending tobacco (and other industries) from
what I view as being an unjust campaign of public demonization and legal harassment.
Liberals have more gray matter in a part of the brain associated with understanding complexity, while the conservative brain is bigger in the section related to processing fear, said the study on Thursday in Current Biology.
Breivik argues that global warming is actually a eco-Marxist plot "to create a world government" using the "Anthropogenic Global Warming scam"