For me, the 4th wall was broken with this one. Nobody is talking about how wireless broadband was just excluded from regulation in the so-called “net neutrality” rules passed by the FCC or how every single member of the U.S. Senate except Senator Al Franken supported this corporate power grab.

Nobody is talking about how from now on, everyone who uses a hot spot to access the Internet with a smart phone or iPad will no longer know if they are actually seeing the whole Internet, or just the sites their service provider wants them to see. Nobody knows, or nobody is talking about how their rights were just snatched away from them in one fell swoop.

Nobody is talking about these things, and it’s bothering me a lot.

I’m starting to see all political news as a distraction vehicle, while real pieces of American freedom are being taken away in the background and signed off on by both parties.

There’s something very wrong taking place in America, and it’s happening right under our noses at this very second.

And disturbingly, a whole lot of smart people are missing the boat on this one, even though it’s going to make all the difference to future generations between living in a free society or a corporate oligarchy.

One thing is for certain: I’m not going to just keep relentlessly bashing the FOX-GOP while the Democrats just sold us out to corporate overlords. We are all being deceived, kept angry, divided…. while the corporations make power grabs and the media distracts the masses. Even the journalists I respect most aren’t commenting on this power grab that is the giveaway of the Internet. And that disturbs me most; when real things happen in America and nobody talks about them.

Don’t get me wrong: I stand by my progressive American values. I still believe FOX-GOP policies are destroying America. But now I see something more insidious happening: the Democrats are selling us out in the background. While they accomplish great things like DADT repeal and an updated GI bill, they sell out our freedom of speech in ways nobody talks about. This makes them just as bad, and just as dangerous to freedom in America as the so-called right wing whack jobs.

It’s time for Left and Right to come together in America and take back our country from the corporate interests who are moving to control what we can see, and what we can say — and from the political leaders who bow to their corporate masters. It’s time that the words “I want my country back” are infused with real meaning.

What can you do to help take your country back from the corporate interests who control it? I’m not sure yet. As soon as I find out, you’ll be the first to know… well… unless this site is blocked by your wireless provider, or slowed down to the point where you think it’s broken. All that will be perfectly legal for internet service providers to do under these sham regulations.

Americans May Get Food Safety After All

In another surprise move late last night by the United States Senate, the Food Safety Bill was passed unanimously by Democrats and Republicans without a single objection to the bill.

This comes just days after the bill was allowed to die in the Senate, which itself came just a month after the Senate had passed the Food Safety Bill by 74-25.

According to an article by Karoun Demirjian of the Las Vegas Sun, Senate Bill S.510 — the Food Safety bill passed last month by the Senate — suffered from a Constitutional hiccup because the bill included provisions for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to collect fees, and this made S.510 a revenue bill. Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution states, “All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives.”

This means the Food Safety bill needed to be scrapped and re-written without the  provisions for fee collection by the FDA. Montana Democrat Jon Tester offered the amendment making this so, and the Food Safety bill passed once again.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said earlier today, “Our food safety system has not been updated in almost a century. This legislation will improve on our current food safety system by giving the FDA the resources it needs to keep up with advances in food production and marketing, without unduly burdening farmers and food producers.”

Commentary:

Perhaps I was too rash in saying the Congress couldn’t do one fucking thing right. Maybe they did something right after all. Let’s just see if it sticks this time.

The Food Safety America Doesn't Have

Just a few weeks ago it looked like the Congress stepped up for America and passed the biggest food safety legislation in decades. Now the sad truth is that the food safety bill will never become law. And this means more Americans will die next year from food born illnesses.

Americans will never benefit from the increased food safety measures that would have been adopted, had the Congress not allowed the food safety bill to die several days ago as part of the omnibus spending bill that was killed in the Senate.

Republicans have already said they will not bring the food safety bill back for a vote next term. The “stop-gap” spending measure that Congress just approved to keep funding the government for three days, does not include the food safety bill. Republicans say they do not plan to bring back the food safety bill in the next term of Congress. This means the bill is dead. Americans get no food safety.

Democrats have let America down, again. They allowed the bill to die without a fight. In fact, they helped the Republicans kill it. The Dems agreed to extend the tax breaks to the rich for 2 years, while only making the extension for the middle class last 1 year. This gave Republicans what they wanted (no food safety bill plus huge tax breaks for the richest Americans that will add over $700 Billion Dollars to the U.S. Deficit) and put middle class Americans back in the gutter. How? Follow me here:

This year, all the tax breaks for the rich and the middle class were set to expire on the same day. This allowed the Republicans to threaten to let taxes go up for everyone (including the middle class) unless the rich got their tax breaks too.

What happens next year? Well, the middle class tax cuts will automatically expire in one year, and the taxes for the middle class will go up next year, automatically.

Middle class? Thank your Democratic congresspersons for selling you out.

Next time the tax breaks for the rich are set to expire? Election year, 2012.

So… next election cycle, what will be the status quo in America? I hope you’re still following along:

Next election cycle, middle class Americans will already be paying higher taxes, because tax breaks for the middle class will expire next year automatically. Rich people will not be paying higher taxes. Got it?

Middle Class a/k/a Democrats will have no bargaining power at the negotiating table. They will no longer control the House of Representatives. They will already be paying higher taxes. They will have no leverage to threaten expiration of all taxes unless the middle class gets their tax cut. The middle class has been fucked in a back-room deal and they will be fucked even harder next election cycle.

Next election cycle, the Democrats will be running for office — including President Obama — while Republicans are even wealthier due to their tax breaks and spending even more money on elections after the horrendous Citizens United decision by the U.S. Supreme Court gave corporations unlimited rights to spend undisclosed millions on American elections.

The middle class will be paying higher taxes and the rich will have all the bargaining power.

Great job, Democrats.

What kind of thinking is this? The Dems couldn’t even fight to make all the tax cuts for all Americans valid for the same amount of time?

Democrats: Where did your balls go? Oh, that’s right… you never had any. You’re a bunch of eunuchs.

The Republicans in the Senate are still filibustering (blocking) the vote on the 9/11 First Responders bill, which would give medical treatment to the heroes of 9/11 who are dying now almost every day from diseases caused by the toxic sludge they breathed in while saving lives at Ground Zero.

Republicans: You are a bunch of hypocritical blow-hard pieces of shit who don’t give a fuck about the Americans who fight and die for your freedom. Pass the fucking 9/11 First Responder Bill, you disgusting pieces of shit.

Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with the people in our Congress? They can’t do anything right. Not one fucking thing.

I have nothing left to say.

Here is a clip from The Rachel Maddow Show which explains how lame the Democrat-controlled Congress is:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Clothianidin is manufactured by Bayer Industries.

Fast Company reports that “the pesticide scooped up $262 million in sales in 2009 by farmers, who also use the substance on canola, soy, sugar beets, sunflowers, and wheat, according to Grist.”

Beekeepers and farmers have been worried for years about the plunging world honey bee population, as bees are critical to the pollination of many crops. The vanishing bee population threatens the world’s food supply.

There has been a lot of speculation about the declining bee population in North America. Theories have included electromagnetic radiation, malnutrition, and climate change. But this document which was leaked to a Colorado beekeeper proves that the culprit is the very agency charged with protecting the environment.

Highlights from this shocking document:

• 

  Dead Honey Bees

  (page 2) “Clothianidin’s major risk concern is to nontarget insects (that is, honey bees)… Acute toxicity studies to honey bees show that clothianidin is highly toxic on both a contact basis and an oral basis.” (Green Media News readers: this means bees will be killed if the pesticide touches them or if they eat it… either way, they die on contact).

• (page 5) “Label Recommendations …This compound is toxic to honey bees. The persistence of residues and potential residual toxicity of Clothianidin in nectar and pollen suggests the possibility of chronic toxic risk to honey bee larvae and the eventual instability of the hive.” (Green Media News readers: this means the EPA knew what it was doing when it approved the pesticide; they knew it would lead to the destruction of entire hives of bees, which means all bees).

Germany, France, Italy, and Slovenia have already banned Clothianidin for its toxic effects, but so far the EPA has refused to step up for America. The reason is likely the corn-based economy of the United States, but there may be more nefarious forces at work behind the scenes as well. Some companies might benefit if the world food supply is threatened and their seeds are ultimately the main source of food for the world.

The Vanishing of the Bees Film

A film called Vanishing of the Bees explores the deadly consequences of the vanishing bee population. However, even more shocking than the concept of vanishing bees is that the entire bee population of North America was cleared for mass extermination by the very agency charged with environmental protection. And the pesticide responsible for the honey bee holocaust is still approved for legal use in America. And nobody is being held accountable.

Commentary in simple terms for people who care:

How the people in charge of the EPA aren’t being held accountable for environmental and other crimes is beyond reason. Let’s not forget the good people at Bayer either. And the FOX-GOP for blocking efforts last year to put money into the study of the vanishing honey bee population? That’s not necessarily criminal, but it is grossly negligent at best, and shows clearly the FOX-GOP’s scientific idiocy.

It’s about time for some Environmental Justice in America. Senators and Congresspersons who fail to take action now that this document has been leaked, must be called out as part of the problem.

What can interested readers do to help save the honey bees? Demand environmental justice.

Call your Senators and Congresspersons. Email them and forward this article, which contains active links to the source documents. Demand the immediate banning of the chemical Clothiandian. Demand the EPA be held accountable for killing the North American Honey Bees. Make your voices known. Readers can also share this article to Facebook, Twitter, and other social media pages. Use the “Share” button below.

The science team already numbers greater than 100 from every area related to climate science. The Climate Science Rapid Response Team includes members from NASA, NOAA, NCAR, Hadley Center, UREL, LLNL, and many major research universities.

According to Professor Scott Mandia from the Climate Science Rapid Response Team, “more scientists are being invited every day and most have accepted our invitation, realizing scientists have a responsibility to engage the public by engaging the media. These are the top scientists in the field who have very busy schedules.  They have agreed to make themselves available to government officials and journalists in a rapid fashion to provide the information that is needed to get the story right.”

Mandia continues, “There is a huge body of scientific work going on all over the world to understand our climate system and humanity’s influence on it, and we will continue to enlarge this team as our resources permit.”

The climate scientists who are members of the Climate Science Rapid Response Team have been chosen to cover all the diverse areas related to Climate Science. Each scientist has been selected for their expertise based upon their extensive original research, as evidenced by their publications in professional peer-reviewed scientific journals.

The Climate Science Rapid Response Team (“CSRRT”) is committed to providing rapid, high-quality information to media and government officials. CSRRT operates as a match-making service between top scientists, and members of the media and office holders and their staffs from various levels of government.

Climate Science Rapid Response Team Process

Climate Science Rapid Response Team

Here is the process for engaging the Climate Science Rapid Response Team: Media or government officials with questions can visit the Climate Science Rapid Response Team enquiry form and identify themselves along with their question and any deadlines. The information is sent to three people: Dr. John Abraham, Dr. Ray Weymann, and Prof. Scott Mandia, who function as “matchmakers” and immediately forward the question to the scientists with the best expertise to answer it. A direct, authoritative response from the scientists and/or one of the three matchmakers will be returned, with all efforts made to meet deadlines.

Those who are not media or government contacts but have questions regarding climate are encouraged to visit Central Coast Climate Science Education or Skeptical Science where most questions can be answered. The Climate Science Rapid Response Team enquiry form is for government officials and media only.

Meet the Matchmakers

Dr. John Abraham

Dr. John Abraham is an Associate Professor of Thermal Sciences at the University of St. Thomas and has consulted for companies including Lockheed Martin, Medtronic, Caterpillar, Johnson and Johnson, and St. Jude Medical. He has published approximately 100 journal and conference papers on areas of expertise including heat transfer, thermodynamics, and fluid mechanics. In addition, he developed computational methods to simulate the flow of energy and fluids in physical systems.

Professor Scott Mandia

Scott Mandia is Professor of Earth and Space Sciences, and Assistant Chair of the Physical Sciences Department at Suffolk County Community College, Long Island, New York, USA. He has been teaching introductory meteorology and climatology courses for 22 years. In 1997, he won the State University of New York Chancellor’s Award for Excellence in Teaching.

Mandia writes about climate change and politics on his blog Global Warming: Man or Myth? The website is listed at Realclimate.org as a climate science resource.

Dr. Ray Weymann

Dr. Ray Weymann is a retired astronomer with 40 years experience at major universities and observatories in teaching and research. He graduated college at Cal Tech and went on to earn a PhD in Astrophysics from Princeton University. Dr. Weymann was a member of two of the teams who designed instruments for the Hubble Space Telescope. Since retiring, he has used his background in astrophysics to help adults and students better understand issues about climate science and global warming.

Early success stories

The Climate Science Rapid Response Team has already been used successfully by The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, The Guardian, CNN, the Center for American Progress Action Fund, AP (the Associated Press), NPR, Skeptical Science and others. In addition to the rapid response protocol, their website has links to important resources in climate science and education.

Commentary in Simple Terms for People Who Care

This is an important development in the history of America. As science has been under attack by the FOX-GOP for years, science has finally organized and is ready to fight back.

However, the Climate Science Rapid Response Team has already made its first critical error in adopting the acronym “CSRRT” which is absolutely devoid of emotional currency. I strongly urge the Climate Science Rapid Response Team to ditch the acronym and use the full name of the team — every time — in order to emotionally connect with the audience and establish a personal brand for the science team.

Climate Scientists and Journalists: if you haven’t already heard, acronyms and other language of the climate movement devoid of emotional currency do more harm than good by alienating people who can’t connect to the message.

This is huge news in America, as just yesterday it was widely assumed President Obama’s compromise with the FOX-GOP over the billionaire tax cuts would stand uncontested by the lame duck Dems in the House of Representatives.

Senator Bernie Sanders (Independent, VT, caucuses with the Democrats) said in an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer the other day that “the American people are outraged” over President Obama’s willingness to give in so quickly to FOX-GOP demands that tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires be expanded even after the GOP hijacked the economy and threatened to let middle class tax cuts expire if they don’t get their way.

Senator Sanders said, “We can win this fight. We can get a handful of Republicans to join us.”

Blitzer said in response to the Senator, “Yes, but you have six Democrats in the Senate who are voting with the Republicans, saying, in a time of economic recession, distress, you don’t raise taxes on anyone.”

To which Senator Bernie Sanders replied, “Yes, well, that is what the millionaires and billionaires always say [but] as Warren Buffett pointed out recently, when times are good, when times are bad, we always — they always want tax breaks for the very rich. The reality is, according to the CBO (Congressional Budget Office), if we’re serious about creating jobs in this country, the worst option — the least effective option — is giving tax breaks to billionaires. The best option is to rebuild our roads and our bridges and our infrastructure.”

Sanders went on to say his office received over 800 phone calls yesterday, almost 100% against the billionaire tax cuts.

As for criticism of President Obama by members of his own party for the President’s seeming habit of caving into Republican demands time and time again, signaling a willingness to compromise on the billionaire tax cuts in the early stages of negotiations without fighting for the progressive position — just as he did with the health care bill when he ditched the public option, and with COP15 last year when he tossed the climate deal for the non-binding Copenhagen Accord – Senator Sanders chose his words carefully:

“Well, look, don’t get me into being overly critical of the President,” the Senator said. “I like him. I respect him. He’s a friend of mine. He happens to be wrong on this issue.”

Senator Sanders continued, “One of the things [President Obama] did say during the campaign is that we were not going to continue Bush’s tax breaks for the richest people in this country.” The Senator from Vermont said the President’s compromise with Republicans does exactly that, and the Democrats will not stand for it.

Today’s resolution by House Democrats to reject the millionaire and billionaire tax cuts seems to echo the Senator’s sentiments.

Here’s what readers can do if you’re passionate about this issue:

MoveOn.org is raising funds to help their campaign for a fair tax deal. This includes TV ads, polling, and grassroots organizing. They’re calling for small contributions of even $5 to help keep their ads on the air in critical markets where they hope to move public opinion. I’m not raising money for MoveOn.org but if you want to give to a cause, this is certainly a worthy one to consider. If you’d prefer to roll up your sleeves and get to work, you can make some calls.

If you think Congress should not add $700 Billion Dollars to the American deficit by giving more tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires, let them know. Call your Senator. Call your Representative. You can hit the MoveOn website for more information.

History tends to repeat itself

In a completely unscientific study, Green Media News has found the biggest obstacles to reaching a global deal on climate change are the massive overwhelm and emotional disconnect that stop climate change issues from becoming part of the national discourse.

Huh?

I’m overwhelmed with all this. And I have a high tolerance for minutia; if I’m overwhelmed, that’s not a good sign for the climate movement.

I have to admit I’m torn. I’ve been reading news from Cancun all afternoon. And I’m tempted to go down the list and talk about all the things that are happening at COP16 and around the world relative to climate change.

The world is burning. Island nations are flooding. Indigenous peoples have been poisoned, their land and water contaminated with toxic waste dumped by oil companies in the name of profit. People are being displaced by the millions due to climate-related disasters. Bloggers are ranting about it. The mainstream news barely covers it.

Is the climate movement guilty of preaching to the choir?

Well, really… is anyone else listening to words like “adaptation” and “mitigation”?

Finding: There is an emotional disconnect between the language of the climate movement and its underlying drivers. This emotional disconnect is the single greatest obstacle to reaching a climate deal because when you look at the language of the movement, it becomes immediately and crystal clear why there is no global consensus for action: without emotional currency driving a movement for change, there is no real motivation for change.

Here’s an example of how a climate refugee might describe their experience with climate change:

I’m scared and hungry. My parents were killed in the flood. Somehow I survived. But there is no one to take care of me. All my friends are gone. My pet is gone too. I have nothing. The government says we don’t have enough money to rebuild and we have to move. All of us… my whole village. It’s so crowded in the refugee camps. There are many thousands of us. Where shall we go now? Is this the rest of my life, in this refugee camp now? Someone please tell me how I can get out of this mess. I have dreams for my life and my future. Are my dreams going to die? Am I going to be a refugee forever?

But here’s how we talk about climate change in the UNFCCC process:

We must make advances on issues such as mitigation and adaptation. We must come to agreement on REDD as part of a balanced package that includes compromise on all sides. Hopefully if participating nations are willing to compromise on important issues, progress to a balanced package can be made.

Can you see the emotional disconnect between the words being tossed around and the actual human experience of suffering and loss due to climate change?

Let’s contrast the above with some anti-climate messages we hear often on the FOX-GOP:

They’re going to raise our taxes! They’re fighting a war against business! They’ll shut down your business with their over-regulation and excessive taxation!!!

Now that’s an emotional message.

See, the problem with the climate movement is that it was born in an era where science really mattered. It’s only recently with the FOX-GOP’s assault on science that the climate movement suffered its biggest setback: the emotional disconnect.

The FOX-GOP has taken the messaging campaign of anti-climate-change to the hearts and minds of America, while the climate movement itself still struggles with an identity crisis and a marketing failure.

As I sit here watching the clock ticking by, my thoughts are many. Here’s just a few:

• I have to work in the morning
• If I don’t post until midnight again, no one’s gonna see the post
• The internet connection at this cafe is so damned slow
• She’s cute (oops, distracted….)
• What is the story down in Cancun?
• Love Bill McKibben’s quote about Winston Churchill.
  
• Great job, Canadian Youth delegation for calling out your government!
  
• Are people really so dense to ignore climate disaster in Pakistan and wonder why they support the Taliban?
• OMFG Ted Turner did you really say that?!
• With all the great coverage of COP16 that nobody is reading, what good can I do?

The overwhelm is the other great obstacle to reaching a climate deal. I’m focused on this with all my heart and all my might. Yet I’m tired after a long weekend of 12-hour shifts at my day job. I spent the whole day today reading and watching news, thinking and meditating, writing and deleting… and when push came to shove, and I saw the clock ticking away, this is all I could muster to say.

So what about the people we’re trying to reach — the people on the outside — the ones who aren’t watching COP16 news, or reading climate change blogs? What about the people who are more emotionally moved that their taxes are going up?

And why are we talking about taxing dirty energy without moving subsidies from big oil to the green sector? Why is it fair to tax something dirty when the clean alternative isn’t even available at scale?

The solutions being discussed are missing the mark.

Here’s what I need to get over my own overwhelm and emotional disconnect… and to the Climate Movement, if you can meet me where I stand — which admittedly is a lot closer to your side of the street than the anti-climate bunch — chances are, you’ll be a lot closer to reaching your adversaries:

• Give me clean energy first. Then tax the dirty stuff. Don’t tax fossil fuel energy excessively without first creating the clean energy which won’t be taxed, and making that energy available to me. DUH.

• Talk to me in words that make me feel something. I don’t care about words like “mitigation” and “adaptation” and “balanced package” no matter how much you tell me those words are important. I DON’T CARE. Find words that move my heart.

Everything else is detail. Speak to these two bullet points above, and we’ll have a climate deal in no time.

Let’s face it – Climate Change talk is boring. Most people just don’t get excited talking about things like “MRV” (the monitoring, reporting, verifying and reducing of greenhouse gas emissions across geo-political borders) and those who aren’t on the front lines of the climate change action movement generally don’t have the attention span to focus on serious talk like this… well at least, not when “Dancing with the Stars” is on.

The other day, I was at my day job, which admittedly has nothing to do with climate change action (although it does have something to do with the economy… I’m just happy to have a job), and while everybody claims to care about the planet, nobody I’ve been talking to here in Los Angeles seems to really care that COP16 is happening right now. I mean they may care… they just don’t seem to have any interest in talking about it, or hearing about it. As opposed to the guy who was talking about his hoop-shooting adventures the night before… everyone was hanging on his every word.

I was bummed out for a minute thinking, “Wow, the planet is in peril, and nobody gives a shit.” But these aren’t bad people or even selfish ones. They’re just living their lives, focused on other stuff. And it got me thinking: it’s not their fault that they’re not interested. We’re just not talking about it right.

So let’s talk about sex.

Even better… let’s talk Tantra.

Why? I mean, besides that climate talk is boring to most people?

Because Tantra holds the key to understanding the secret behind progress and conservatism.

Tantra is part philosophy, part science, and part expressive art.

The root teaching of Tantra is that everything is energy.

Tantra has been controversial since it first hit the scene about 5,000 years ago.

Before Tantra, the ancient Yogis practiced a different kind of yoga where the point was “transcendence” — the philosophy there is that the world is impure, imperfect, and only the spiritual realm is perfect, and we come from spirit — so in order to connect with the divine, it is necessary (pre-Tantra) to transcend the physical realm through austerity and meditation practices.

Along came the Tantrics, who said, “Wait a minute… everything is energy here. And if God created the physical universe as well as the spiritual, then who are we to say God’s creation is impure or imperfect. In fact, the physical universe IS the perfect manifestation of the spiritual realm.” Therefore, according to Tantra, we are all divine, so in order to connect deeper with the divine spirit, we don’t need to transcend the physical, we need to fully immerse ourselves in the physical.

And thus, all physical Yoga was born… including Hatha Yoga (“Ha-Tha” means “Sun-Moon” in Sanskrit) which emphasizes opposite action to master the life force (“planting the feet firmly into the ground, reach up and touch the sky”).

Also born from Tantra were all those fun and dirty sexual practices, where the whole point of the Yoga is to reach the ultimate mind-dissolving orgasm which never ends.

One of the key teachings in Tantric sex is to hold back your orgasm. Why?

Well, think about it: Once it’s over, it’s over.

If you can prolong the pleasure and take it “just to the point” but hold back… the heat keeps rising and rising and rising.

One of the most common Tantric exercises is called “Yab-Yum” (or something like that) and it goes like this: You and your partner sit legs intertwined and your pelvises in close contact. You begin to breathe together, making eye contact, and kind of grinding on each other like grade school kids, but instead of ripping your clothes off and getting down to business, you just keep looking into each other’s eyes… you just keep breathing together… keep grinding together… Yab-Yum.

Eventually you can take this to actual sex, and once you can master your life energies with your partner and not, um, “complete” the act uncontrollably, you can create an endless feedback loop of pleasure waves with each other until your consciousnesses merge into each other and beyond, to the archetypal energies of gender, and beyond that, to life itself, and ultimately to the very source of creation.

To know God… thru mind-dissolving, Tantric sex.

Quick Q: You’re still reading, right?

Good. This is more fun than climate change talk isn’t it?

OK so there’s some information, and here’s where we bring it home with commentary, in simple terms for people who care:

The COP talks are kind of like Tantric sex. Everyone’s holding back for the Big O.

The developed countries are holding back on commitments to reduce their GHG emissions, because they like having sex just the way they do it now: hard and fast.

Developed countries have a lot of testosterone, and shooting out those greenhouse gasses feels great, because GHG emissions come from big powerful machines like power plants… A huge phallic symbol shooting out GHG orgasms day in and day out.

Developed countries can use some Yab-Yum practice and learn to slow down, and go a little deeper.

In a Tantra workshop, a developed nation would be paired with a developing one, and they would practice Yab-Yum together. The developed nation would look the developing nation in the eyes, and the two of them would breathe together, and maybe even grind a little bit. When the developed nation wanted to “complete” the act, it would hold back, and look deeper into the eyes of its developing nation-partner, and would connect with the divine beauty found there.

In learning to back off and go slower, the developed nation would ultimately be able to go deeper and farther... and accomplish even more than ever before possible.

The developing nations, on the other hand, are holding back from full-scale revolt.

Developing nations are kind of like foster kids: they’re often left out of the action but when they complain they get punished even harder. So in an effort not to play the victim, they mobilize to do inspiring and truly moving things like thousands of people dressed in white saying prayers for the planet, or building huge pyramids of hope and presenting them to the negotiating body… but they hold back from what they probably really want to do and say: throw stones at us and scream, “WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE THAT YOU JUST LET US FUCKING DIE LIKE THIS!”

With 20 million people impacted by climate change in Pakistan last year, for instance, and all the talk about how parts of Pakistan are host to anti-American terrorist training camps, we really have to start preparing for the inevitability of climate-related terror: terrorist regimes using climate inaction as a rallying cry for the recruitment and training of a new generation of anti-American (anti-Canadian, anti-Japanese, anti-GHG-polluter) terrorists.

Developing nations can benefit from some Yab-Yum practice as well.

In a Tantric workshop, the developing nation would be paired with a developed one, and would grow stronger in the process of joining together. The developed nation would grow more sensitive in the same process.

It would be awkward at first and maybe for a while, but in time, both partners would benefit.

Plain English conclusion:

The UNFCCC climate talks are focused on big brain activities, thinking with “the big head”… talking, moving commas around, defining words… maybe they should let the “little head” take over for a while…

If the parties to the COP could just take a break for some Yab-Yum? We’d probably have a deal a lot faster.

The TckTckTck team and One Climate TV have joined together to bring live interactive video coverage from COP16 in Cancun. While you’re watching the streaming video, which is a mix of live news, interviews, and pre-recorded video, you can type questions into the chat box below the video and your questions might be answered during the live segments.

You can also tweet your questions to @oneclimate using the hashtag #oneclimate, but I think the chat box below brings faster results. I had the chance to test this during the last live broadcast and was amazed at the speed with which my questions were addressed.

UN Climate Chief Christiana Figueres

In her opening remarks at COP16 yesterday, United Nations Climate Chief Christiana Figueres called for a “solid response to climate change, using both reason and creativity.”

Meanwhile, one delegate on the ground reported feeling a strange mix of hope and frustration in the air as the negotiations were about to begin.

Figueres concentrated her remarks on the three issues she sees as the most important reasons why a global climate action deal needs to be reached and why the UNFCCC is the right body to be driving the process:

1. The latest report by the World Meteorological Organization states that concentrations of greenhouse gases in the Earth’s atmosphere have reached their highest level today since pre-industrial times;
2. The poorest and most vulnerable nations — whose people are already facing climate impacts — urgently need predictable and sufficient assistance to tackle a life-threatening problem they did not cause;
3. The multilateral UNFCCC process needs to remain the trusted channel for reaching a global deal on climate change action, or the negotiations could fall apart just as consensus is starting to form among developed nations as to what they are willing to do.

Chief USA Climate Negotiator Jonathan Pershing

As for what the United States is willing to do, the head of the US delegation Jonathan Pershing gave a press briefing on the opening day and said that from the U.S. perspective, “a balanced package is within our reach.”

Pershing described the Copenhagen Accord as “the progress made last year in Copenhagen” saying that “through direct participation of many of the world’s leaders, including President Obama, progress was made on all key elements of the negotiations.”

The head climate negotiator for the United States continued:

“At the heart of the Accord, on the one hand, was a crucial agreement among both developed and developing countries to implement a set of mitigation targets or actions, and to do so in an internationally transparent manner. On the other hand, there were critical provisions for financing for developing countries, in order to support mitigation, adaptation, technology, and forest protection and preservation which is known as REDD in this context. Taken together these two pieces reflect and create a landmark, balanced agreement, which accommodated and created broad support. What we are seeking here in Cancun,” Pershing said, “is a balanced package of decisions that will build on this agreement. Such decisions, which preserve the balance of the Accord, will be a positive and very meaningful outcome. If Parties here are prepared to take the necessary steps forward, I think we can achieve this goal.”

You can read Jonathan Pershing’s entire press briefing including a fairly significant Q&A by clicking here.

So there’s the information. And now, commentary in simple terms, for people who care:

I’m here in Los Angeles while the talks proceed in Cancun. I’m at internet cafe’s mostly, reading emails, tweets and blogs from people on the ground at COP16. Today, I sat reading for hours, just looking for the story. There are so many ways to come at covering these climate talks:

• The government negotiators: what are they empowered to agree to, and more important perhaps: what have they been instructed by their home governments not to agree to under any circumstances (these are the “deal killers” and we should know what they are);

• The non-governmental organizations (NGOs): these are the organizations who protect the Earth and indigenous peoples, and their voices to a large extent have been shut out of the process by the UNFCCC. The stories here are the human costs of climate inaction, as well as the inspiring stories of people all over the world taking bold action to raise awareness about climate change;

• Students and youth delegates who are there to observe and learn, as well as to add their voices to the discussion: it is their future in the balance, and their views need to be respected;

• Scientists: As climate science itself is under attack by the FOX-GOP in America and the Canadian government, a rapid response team of climate scientists and journalists has emerged. Debunking misinformation spread by climate change deniers is critical to raising the bar of intelligent debate in America.

• Oil Companies: Yes, that’s what I said. Oil companies are the focus of much of the debate, so why not involve them in the process and force a level of transparency never before seen in American Corporate culture? Here’s a question for the oil companies: How much money would you still make every year if you — overnight — decided never again to pollute the waters, or harm indigenous peoples in order to extract our oil from the Earth? Seriously. Have you done the math? If all the oil companies focused on getting our oil without dumping pollution into the ground and water… if toxic spills were cleaned up, and indigenous villages brought back to health… if you developed the best-of-the-best cleanup technology to clean spills when they happen… if you really became a partner-in-the-planet, and not the enemy-of-the-people: how much could you still make in a year? Wouldn’t you like to stop killing people in the name of profit? Oops, sorry… that was more than one question.

I miss being in Cancun where the action is, but there’s a certain level of objectivity here in Los Angeles which the distance provides. I can read all the stories coming in and look for what’s common, or what’s missing from the debate. And when I take jabs at the NGOs for appeasing the UNFCCC, or reference “pretty art” while calling into question the efficacy of certain forms of climate activism, I also know that but for these heroes of the climate movement — the artists and activists, bloggers and students, scientists and policy advisors, and other interested parties — change will never come.

So if all we can achieve this year is a “balanced package” to move forward on “the progress made in Copenhagen” (even while I try not to choke on those words), it would be counterproductive not to support that goal in every way possible.