Regarding Jim Allard's "global propagandist" letter to the editor (12/14/07), I'd like to point out a few things that he left out. Of the movie An Inconvenient Truth, Mr. Allard states that "the high court of London found that [Al] Gore had created a 'context of alarmism and exaggeration' and was factually incorrect on nine points, including his central thesis regarding the correlation between CO2 and warming."
In fact, reports state that the High Court Judge Michael Burton said that the film is "substantially founded upon scientific research and fact" but that the errors were made in "the context of alarmism and exaggeration."
According to the BBC, the justice "had no complaint about Gore's central thesis that climate change was happening and being driven by emissions from humans" and said that the movie could be shown in schools as long as the other side was presented to the disputed points.
Mr. Allard's main argument is that scientists whose views "do not fit the dominant view" of global warming are somehow silenced. Funny, it seems to me that corporations with interests at stake have more than enough money to buy the science they need.
For example, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a "free enterprise" advocacy group and think tank, takes in millions of dollars from the likes of Exxon Mobil, Amoco, Ford Motor, Philip Morris, Texaco, the American Plastics Council and Dow Chemical specifically to put out that anti-global-warming message.
Mr. Allard ends by saying, "If scientists don't stand up for science, they may find their entire field discredited and themselves mere pawns of political propagandists." Indeed, I agree whole-heartedly.
I would love to live in a world where the likes of U.S. Rep. Tammy Baldwin (anti-war, anti-Patriot Act, pro-impeachment, pro-national health and, oh yeah, the only openly gay nonincumbent ever in American history to win federal office) are considered "moderate" ("Is Tammy Bold Enough?" 12/21/07).
Traditional Republicans like Tommy Thompson and Bob Dole would be the "conservatives," while rabblerousing revolutionaries like, say, Venezuela's Hugo Chávez would be considered "liberal."
This alternative universe could be called Utopia - or the isthmus of Madison.
Some Democrats feel that our elected officials should be pounding the desk in Congress, demanding the impeachment of President Bush. Then there are the large majority of Democrats who believe that issues like health care, education, unemployment, economic development and campaign finance reform should be the focus of Rep. Tammy Baldwin's efforts. Count me in the latter group.
While I understand the frustration of those who have put their heart and soul into the Impeach Bush movement, their narrow focus does a serious disservice to Tammy, an elected official with a long record of service.
Tammy has worked for bills that are of great consequence both to our district and to our nation. Legislation such as the Arms Flexibility Act, the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act, the Access to Legal Pharmaceuticals Act, the Paycheck Fairness Act, the Global Poverty Act and a funding bill to end troop deployment to Iraq by December 2008 is just a partial list.
Is Tammy Baldwin bold enough for Madison, Dane County and the 2nd District? Of course she is.
Wayne Bigelow, chair, Democratic Party of Dane County
Another Isthmus classic: the informative, delightful lead piece by Kent Williams on Ambrosius Chocolate ("Consumed With Passion," 12/21/07). It's also a good example of what a paper can do for small business. Footnote for chocolate aficionados: Read Sophie and Michael Coe's The True History of Chocolate. Sophie Coe died, but her husband, Michael Coe, Yale's distinguished Mayan expert, finished the book.