Readers' Comments

you wouldn't mind accepting CMD's general invitation to create stub articles in SourceWatch for some of these people. Couldn't hurt you, right? :-)

Ironic, now that the country has a President that appears to be the intellectual equivalent of Bill Clinton, Newt is back. Time will tell if Gingrich will be using the line often used by the antagonists, "curses, foiled again."

Friends, Your attempt to convince people that humans are causing a global warming crisis would be more credible if you were more honest in your depictions. You claim, "The list of speakers and the free-market think tanks co-sponsorsing the conference provides a reasonably comprehensive guide to the most active of the remaining global warming skeptics." This attempt to mislead your readers about the large number of scientists who are skeptical of a human-induced global warming crisis makes one wonder about your commitment to truth and honesty. As an organizer of the conference, I have had so many impeccably credentialed scientists ask to speak that I have had to beat them off with a stick. Of the more than 100 speakers at last year's conference, we have been able to invite less than half of them back because we have had so many inquiries from scientists who we could not fit on last year's agenda. Sitll other highly credentialed scientists are waiting in the wings for 2010 because we haven't been able to fit them into the 2009 or 2009 program. And even then, we will only be able to invite a minority of them because there are way too many scientists to fit on the agenda. Moreover, these are some of the most brilliant minds in science speaking out against the so-called global warming crisis. Among the speakers at next week's conference are scientists from Harvard, MIT, NASA, NOAA, etc. etc. If the science is on your side, then you shouldn't feel the need to deliberately misrepresent the nature of your opposition and their scientific arguments. If you encourage a fair, open, and respectful discussion, the truth will eventually prevail. James M. Taylor Senior Fellow, Environment Policy The Heartland Institute

Since Obama has been President aerial drones have accidently killed civilians in Pakistan........WAR CRIMINAL We are still in Iraq illegally.....WAR CRIMINAL...can issue an executive order and begin leaving tomorrow Men are still be held without trial in Gitmo....WAR CRIMINAL can issue an executive order and begin releasing them tomorrow. Of course we know why Bush did all of the above.....he is evil, stupid and wants to dole out money to the likes of Blackwater and Halliburton......Obama is the smartest guy around and he is doing the same thing. According to the nutty left Bush is stupid/evil......What's Obama's excuse since he seems to be mirroring Bush's policies. Why shouldn't Obama be a war criminal to?.....

You were doing good until the final paragraph, which reflects an absolute lack of research and knowledge. The US Government closed the Army's School of the Americas and opened the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation. Those activists you refer to didn't know anything factual about the school, and they certainly did no research on the institute, so they could continue their fraudulent 'movement' against US foreign policy in the region. Trouble is, the policy had changed already. The government closed the school and opened the institute to get away from the name itself, but so the security cooperation that almost everyone likes could continue. There has never been one example of anyone using what he learned at the school to commit a crime, so you miss the entire point of the creation of a new organization. And, as I have offered to others of your organization in the past, come see us and see for yourself who we are and what we do. We are open to visitors every workday. Sincerely, Lee A. Rials Public Affairs Officer Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation

That "unhinged" comment and your oh-so-rational reply are both signed "anonymous." How do I know you didn't write both of them?

No rational person in a rational debate about anything behaves the way this person has. Without bothering to argue the facts, the previous poster should seek counseling.

Why? You have been the strongest voice for ending the Iraq War at CMD and I'd argue elsewhere as well. No chance you'll change your mind?

I think the furor over second hand tobacco smoke and the so-called statistics are a bunch of made up numbers by people with nothing better to do. What about all the chemicals we breath everyday at home and work. Out-gassing from nylon carpet, which is petroleum based, all the chemicals and pollutants at work places, smog,etc,etc. By the way, if you go to the root cause of the issue you will find that the govt was not doing their job. No regulation of this industry, due to "trade secrets" of the industry.

Here's the text of the actual article, with the comments at the bottom. O'Dwyer's is both a part of the PR industry and a real thorn in its side, a constant critic of major players. It's a wonder they have managed to survive. Jack O'Dwyer is on the dartboard of many PR execs and Kevin McCauley his senior editor is very sharp. (OK, maybe with those kind and honest words they'll not ask me to pull this off our site since they charge for it on theirs!) ====== John Stauber is stepping down as executive director of the Center for Media and Democracy, publisher of PRWatch.org. Stauber The founder of the Madison, Wisc.-based, nine-staffer PR watchdog says, "At 56, I want a less demanding life with more personal time." His successor will be a high-energy fund-raising pro with an understanding of the world of public interest social change, he said. Stauber says he launched CMD 16 years ago with $5,000 because the "world needed a public interest group devoted to documenting and exposing how government propaganda and corporate spin undermine democracy and progressive social change." His successor will lead CMD as it probes areas of human rights, citizen empowerment, social and economic justice, ecological sustainability and political and corporate accountability, according to the job specs. CMD wants a new executive director in place by the summer. Boston-based Egmont Assocs is handling the search for Stauber’s replacement. A cover letter, resume and salary history goes to segmont [at] egmontassociates.com or 85 East India Row #24, 02110. Responses: Don Quixote (2/23): Yes, we're all very sorry to see Mr. Stauber ride off into the sunset. But what exactly did he accomplish? What's changed? How is the world a better place? Veep (2/23): I'm sure a lot of reporters will be sad to see him go. He was the go- to quote when a slam on PR or story critical of PR spending was needed. Oh lord, he's probably going to write a book now, isn't he? Ron Levy, NAPS Research Director (2/24): They should be authorized to pay half the minimum wage for disseminating half-truths. What these people DO tell you is what they say you will get from what they propose. But what they often DON'T tell you is the "peril of the alternative" -- what the public will lose if it does what is urged. Just as every medical pill and procedure may confer not only an intended benefit but also a possible risk, so does every industry including PR which these people attack. Anyone who creates public benefit can be criticized: why don't they do it for less ... or better ... or with fewer side effects? But the public NEEDS much of what our companies and industries create. These critics don't tell how to do it better but often just whine that we should get more or pay less. Inherent in being a "public watchdog" is sometimes less watching than bitching.

...minimum, to read the piece. No thanks. There's no shortage of crocodile tears from people in alligator shoes everywhere you look, for free.