At TxSharon’s BlueDaze of Texas , TxSharon writes—How to Slow Climate Change Immediately: Cut Methane Emissions:

Reducing methane emissions now will significantly slow the rate of climate change almost immediately. This is because methane is more powerful at warming the planet than CO2. The IPCC now states that methane is more than 100-times more powerful for the first decade after emission, 86-times over a 20-year period. It might seem like a reasonable request to ask the oil and gas industry to cut their emissions for the sake of our children’s future. But the oil and gas industry is anything but reasonable. They knew for years their activities were causing climate change but spent millions on a disinformation campaign. AND, over the years, I have come to believe that they can’t keep the methane from blasting into the atmosphere. They are incompetent. In California an unimaginable amount of methane is spewing into the air and the industry doesn’t know how to stop it.

At NC Policy Watch, Rob Schofield writes—The department of environmental quality, huh?

No, the lower case letters in the title of this column are not a misprint; they represent an attempt to convey and emphasize a radical and ongoing shift that’s taking place in North Carolina and the public agency once charged with protecting our air, land and water. For many years, North Carolina was a state in which elected leaders maintained some semblance of a commitment to preserving parts of our natural environment for future generations. Despite the massive power of Duke Energy, the automobile and trucking industries, fossil fuel distributors, road builders, homebuilders and scores of other polluting industries (not to mention the simple and destructive math that comes with a rapidly growing population of SUV-driving, air conditioner and quarter acre lot-loving residents), North Carolina was a state in which the green and the sustainable stood at least a chance. Sometimes over the opposition of polluters and sometimes with their cooperation, the state spent a lot of money protecting clean water, moved ahead to reduce air emissions and promote sustainable, less-polluting electricity generation and employed a series of dedicated public servants to oversee its regulatory bureaucracy who believed in its mission. Heck, not that long ago, the General Assembly even maintained a standing committee dedicated to studying and responding to climate change and a Republican mayor of Charlotte presided over the establishment of a light rail system that drove far right ideologues to distraction. Sadly, however, almost all of this positive environmental protection momentum came to a screeching halt a few years ago when conservative forces took over the General Assembly and then, soon thereafter, the Governor’s Mansion. After years of modest but frequently measurable progress in blunting some of the worst impacts of what 10 million energy and resource-hogging humans can do to 53,000 square miles of air, land and water, North Carolina leaders have not only thrown up the white flag; they’ve joined the other side.

At the Dakota Free Press of South Dakoa, Cory A. Heidelberger writes—Marmorstein Dismisses Race/Ethnicity Issues as Leftist Power Plays:

At Democratic Diva of Arizona, Donna writes—It's a Dry Denial:

Arizona Republic columnist Laurie Roberts, AZ Capitol Media Service’s Howie Fischer, and KJZZ host Steve Goldstein were asked for their prognostications for 2016, with the winning scores being tallied at the end of next year. The first questions were about the Presidency: who would win their respective party nominations and then the general elections. The three panelists differed on who would win the GOP nod, with Roberts picking Rubio, Fischer Cruz, and Goldstein going with Jeb Bush. All three believe the GOP nominee will prevail narrowly in the electoral college, though Roberts suggested that a third party run by Trump could derail that. Only white people living in a very rarefied Phoenix establishment bubble could express the kind of confidence this panel did in a GOP victory in 2016. Fischer thinks Cruz(!) will win because Democrats won’t show up to vote for “damaged goods” Hillary Clinton (despite her being about the most popular politician there is among Dem voters). Goldstein thinks Jeb will win Florida and Ohio. Laurie Roberts seemed to be expressing her own wishful thinking when she predicted that Marco Rubio would be swept to 287 electoral votes through his “electability” and because terrorism will be the number one concern of voters throughout 2016. To be clear, I’m not suggesting the eventual Democratic nominee (who I think will be Hillary but not a single primary vote has been cast yet) is going to have an easy time of it. I’m just saying it takes an incredible level of denial of the demographic changes that have taken place in America to think the GOP will even eke out a win for the weak reasons the Horizon panel offered. The GOP could win, but not without employing a whole bunch of voter suppression and other dirty tricks.

At Blue Jersey, Talaiporia writes—Let’s Get Real: Why Our Money Matters in the Democratic Primary:

I just donated to the Bernie Sanders campaign. I support his run for President, so I am happy to donate. But I donated now because of an email from Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Hillary’s campaign sounded an alarm today – not for an issue I care about — not for any issue at all actually. She sent out an email with the subject, “We could be outraised by Bernie Sanders”. That is the hook – that ever important subject line – to motivate potential donors. Her email emphasizes the scare she is facing: “With just three days left in 2015, we’ve had a very good year — but we also have to face the very real possibility that we could be outraised by our Democratic challenger this quarter. We’ve set an ambitious goal of raising $2 million online this week to close the gap, but unless more people step up, we’re not going to reach that goal.” What a compelling message. We should rush to donate to the Wall Street connected Hillary campaign because she is suddenly scared Bernie will out raise her. More to the point, the popularity Bernie gets for raising his campaign money from regular people—and not corporations and millionaires—is threatening her desired image as the people’s choice for president.

At Capital & Main of California, Peter Dreier writes—Washington Post Sacks Columnist Harold Meyerson:

Fred Hiatt, the Washington Post’s editorial page editor, has fired columnist Harold Meyerson, one of the nation’s finest journalists and perhaps the only self-proclaimed socialist to write a weekly column for a major American newspaper during the past decade or two. At a time when America is experiencing an upsurge of progressive organizing and activism — from Occupy Wall Street, to Black Lives Matter, to the growing movement among low-wage workers demanding higher minimum wages, to Bernie Sanders’ campaign for president — we need a regular columnist who can explain what’s going on, why it’s happening, and what it means. More than any other columnist for a major U.S. newspaper, Meyerson provided ongoing coverage and incisive analysis of the nation’s labor movement and other progressive causes as well as the changing economy and the increasing aggressiveness of big business in American politics. He was one of the few columnists in the country who knew labor leaders and grassroots activists by name, and who could write sympathetically and knowledgeably about working people’s experiences in their workplaces and communities. Since Steve Greenhouse retired last year as the New York Times’ brilliant labor reporter, no other major paper has a reporter who covers unions and working people on a full-time basis. Now with Meyerson’s firing, there’s not one weekly columnist who understands the ins and outs of organized (and disorganized) labor.

At Bluestem Prairie of Minnesota, Sally Jo Sorensen writes—Houston Co commissioners' move to ignore planning board term limits roils SE MN:

In 2013, the Houston County Board voted that anyone who serves three consecutive 3-year term on the planning and zoning board must sit out for one term at the end of that service. In short: term limits. Now the move by three Houston County board members to ignore those limits in re-appointing a board member to his fourth consecutive term is receiving sharp criticism in the largely rural county in Minnesota's southeastern corner. Many critics believe the action illustrates a pro-frac sand mining bias on a county board that flouts its own rules. Last week, the Caledonia Argus, the local paper, reported the news in Two appointed to Planning and Zoning Board: Now the rest of the story. But the Argus editor didn't stop with reportage. On the op-ed page, Daniel McGonigle wrote in It’s beyond time for us to be represented by someone who governs fairly and doesn’t bend the rules for their own agendas.

At Better Georgia, Bryan Long writes—Brian Kemp hires Nathan Deal crony with no-bid contract:

The conservative lock on power in Georgia has created a zero accountability zone for state government. One piece of evidence to prove this is Secretary of State Brian Kemp’s brazen decision to hire one of Gov. Nathan Deal’s top cronies using a no-bid contract. Kemp is clearly in crisis mode. He’s still reeling from a massive data breach where he shared personal information, including Social Security numbers, of every Georgia voter with a “no compromise” gun lobby, a neo-Confederate political party and others. But crisis or no crisis, Georgia’s no-bid contract law is clear. When the state government spends money on a contract, every contract must be put out for a public bid unless “only one supplier is capable of providing the needed goods or services.” Brian Robinson is not a unique unicorn. There are plenty of crisis communications professionals who have “extensive knowledge of the press and communication.” But Kemp wants to award Robinson $72,000 — using taxpayer dollars — for political reasons.

At Plunderbund of Ohio, D.C. DeWitt writes—State Rep Wants To Name Highway After Doc Who Claimed Rape Victims Don’t Get Pregnant:

An Ohio state representative intends to introduce legislation to name a highway after a doctor who popularized the idiotic theory that victims of rape don’t get pregnant. Dr. Jack Willke, founder of Cincinnati Right to Life, was best known as the purveyor of that odious falsehood, and now state Rep. Jim Buchy, R-Greenville, wants to name a portion of Ohio state Rt. 119 after him. Willke died in February 2015. Willke wrote a book in 1971 called “Why Can’t We Love Them Both: Questions and Answers About Abortion,” in which he claimed women rarely get pregnant as a result of rape because the emotional trauma makes a woman’s fallopian tubes “tight.” He doubled down on those fatuous claims as recently as 2012 in an interview with the L.A. Times.

At Show Me Progress of Missouri, WillyKay writes—Roy Blunt: The beginning of the end?