Out with the old…in with the new
I was a firm believer in using experience to train others for the future but recent years with the financial issues and all of the corruption in our government going on, I no longer believe that to be true. As frustrating as the bailouts and other unnecessary uses of tax payer funds may be, Americans are missing the underlying issues of replacing greedy, corrupt people with more greedy and corrupt people. For example, as Governor Palin steps down as Governor of Alaska, she will be replaced with the Lieutenant Governor of the state. To most this makes sense, that is to people that don’t pay attention to 30+ lawsuits brought against Mrs. Palin for corruption. Does it make sense to replace someone who was just found, by a independent investigator, to be corrupt with the person that reported directly to that person? Only if you want more of the same, I for one don’t.
To be honest, I am sick of our society putting people in charge of businesses and our Government to replace the very people they have learned how to be ”successful” from the most corrupt, greedy, and discriminatory people. I am not so much frustrated with the fact that these people are this way, no matter what anyone says MONEY and POWER will rule the United States, it doesn’t matter who leads the country.
I know there are ways to fix these issues, but who would want to listen to people like me that want a BETTER country for our children? No one, not one single politician or business leader. Who would want to replace corruption with someone that has not been in that position and believes in honesty, integrity and accountability? Take a look around, every product you buy, every television show you watch, every news article you read, every person that cuts in front of you in traffic or in line, and every young child that screams and begs a parent to give them what they want and the parent gives in to them because they don’t have the time or they don’t care enough to show their child they right way, this is what has become normal.
So once again, who am I to judge? I am only a person that believes in accountability, understanding, integrity, and honesty, the very type of person that big business does NOT want around as things may have to change and people may have be accountable.
The Oil debate
There has been differences in opinion when it comes to the short term and long term benefits of beginng to drill for oil in places that are off limits now. The areas that I am referring to are the Arctic shelf and off shore drilling in the United States. The most informative article I have found can be found here : http://www.theoildrum.com/node/4215
Some highlights of this article state that “
If legislation is passed to permit drilling in areas which have previously been off limits, it will be at least 7 to 10 years before we can expect new production (Transcript 15:43). If new production is far from existing pipelines, as is often the case, new production is likely to be at least 10 years away. This long time period is required because of the many steps involved. ” According to the article.
Also, “A reasonable estimate of the timeframe for oil production in these new locations might be 2018 to 2040 if we start the process now. If we delay for say, another 20 years, the production window might be 2038 to 2060. Who is to say what the world will look like then? If we don’t start now, there is a good chance we may never be able to access oil in difficult locations.”
Do we really know how much is out there? Not really, the article states “
According to API (Transcript 23:17), we really don’t know how much recoverable oil is available. There are some published estimates for various pieces–coastal oil, OCS-48 states oil, Alaska-offshore, Alaska-ANWR–but none of these is very big. At this point, we haven’t done any on-site research to see what is really there, using today’s equipment. We don’t know if there are some fairly good sized fields that we have overlooked. It is possible that the estimates are too high, but without looking, we really don’t know.”
Interesting, so what do we do for a short term solution? The article suggests “
We have pipeline systems both for transporting oil to refineries and for transporting refined oil to consumers. The pipelines exist within the 48 states and Alaska. As production from existing wells diminishes, the amount of oil flowing through these pipelines will drop below their planned operating levels. Additional production from new sources will keep the pipelines operating longer, and give at least of chance of business close to normal, if not business as usual. The issue of minimum operating levels is raised in a recent EIA analysis of ANWR.”
There is much more information in this article so I would suggest taking a closer look at it. It sounds as though this will solve the long term issues, but will not ease the short term tension.
Reference:
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/4215 retrieved on August 1, 2008
What do you think??
I came across this story this morning on the Yahoo! website. Could our Government waste more of their time on something that means nothing? Congress has already proved that they believe President Bush to be a horrible president, now they are wasting our money with “contempt of Congress” charges against Karl Rove. Congress has already acknowledged that it is mearly a “suggestion” for something to be done to Mr. Rove, so what is the point? I guess it’s important to waste more of the tax payers money.
Congress, instead of working on issues that effect middle and lower class Americans like high oil prices, seem to want to deal with less pressing issues. What’s funny is I am sick of it and I am a Democrat.
Here is the link to the article.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080730/ap_on_go_co/lame_duck_oversight
Enjoy!
Right to privacy, which really doesnt exist
Here is another distinct disregard for personal rights given by the constitution. Recently, congress and the President of the United States have collaborated on a wiretapping law that, in a summary, says:
“(1) In general.—Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, a court order is not required for electronic surveillance directed at the acquisition of the contents of any communication between persons that are not known to be United States persons and are reasonably believed to be located outside the United States for the purpose of collecting foreign intelligence information, without respect to whether the communication passes through the United States or the surveillance device is located within the United States.”
(http://thomas.loc.gov/home/gpoxmlc110/h3773_eh.xml, 2008)
Does that sound like infringing on some rights? How about this one, the 4th Amendment of the Constitution: (2001)
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” (Mount)
Looks pretty clear to me.
Reference:
Mount, Steve. “Constitutional Topic: Martial Law.” USConstitution.net. 30 Nov 2001. http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_mlaw.html (3 Dec 2001)
Webpage accessed on 2008-07-21 from (http://thomas.loc.gov/home/gpoxmlc110/h3773_eh.xml, 2008)
Freedom of Speech, better watch what you say
I thought it fitting that the first real post I put on here is one about freedom of speech. I am just a “lay” person and I do not try to interpret the laws of this country. With that said, I have found some interesting facts on our, as citizens of the United States, freedom of speech right.
According to the constitutional website (US Const am 1), the first Amendment reads:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. (US Const am 1)
Simple enough to some one like me, it seems to be very straight forward. However, I found that if you exercise your first Amendment right and am arrested (yes I said arrested for exercising your right), and don’t ask how I found that out.
To me, it seems like the powers that be are trying to interpret the law instead of using the law for what it was intended to do, protect the citizens of the United States. However, this writer, being only a plain citizen of the United States, does not have the right to question authority to find what is right and what is wrong, on the other hand I am a person that is subject to one person’s interpretation of the laws set forth.
More on this in the future
