Gregg Easterbrook has recently written a piece for TNR about GW's environmental record, namely that it's been unjustly criticized. He claims Bush has done more for the environment than he's getting credit for. Huh?!

You know me by now, I just could not believe what I was reading. Too much has been written from reliable sources saying quite the contrary. Well, after digging around, it's as I guessed: Easterbrook's "facts" are not quite factual. There's much hooey in his article. Read here.

But it's not shocking since apparently Easterbrook has been caught doing this before (in the LA Times in 2003). Read here.

Shame on The New Republic. What's happened to this once-reliable publication? It's not the first time of late that they've published quackery. I'm questioning whether to renew.