The country of Irate yesterday announced it had launched, "The Finger," an enormous missile, in a show of defiance at the ability to learn from others' mistakes.
Irate's Supremely Exalted Leader I-Yah-Tol’-Y’all I-Was-Ah-Nut-Job shouted, "We are a great super-power! We don't care about seismic activity in our country, the fact we have sunshine nearly 24 hours a day, and that oil that bubbles up to the surface of our wonderful land during earthquakes.
"What do we care about all those sources of energy at our fingertips when we could create toxins of such a strength, in our own borders, that cause hair to fall out very quickly?
"We demand to make the same mistakes the Great Satan has made. We will build nuclear power plants at huge expense and have incessant infighting on where to store the waste.
"We will be sure to waste tens of billions of dollars, taxed from citizens, and hand it over as a jobs program to those in the nuclear sector, thus ensuring our country has high-paying jobs.
"We have studied the Great Satan closely and our conclusion is we will mimic their current status of being like a cluster of ticks sucking on each other."
"What do we care about our neighbors and their concerns about our rockets falling on them. We are ready to sacrifice our children's future by paying for massive weapons and racing to build bigger and more destructive devices, like the U.S. leaders and military. Do I expect to be around in 80 years and have to pay off the bills? Ha ha ha. Like them I plan on retiring before I have any grey hair.
"Who knows, our rockets may even fall on us, but I've got a bunker! Shacks and houses are for the little people. Mighty mansions are for those God favors.
"I recommend all you imperialist swine watch the video below of how our great country of Irate plans on taking advantage of our citizens, in your footsteps.
"Long live nuclear waste!"
See the video here.
Yesterday, like many days, I went for a hike in the mountains where I live. One of my favotrite hikes is The Cougar Crest trail in the San The San Bernardino National Forest that is maintained by US Forest Service. So, on this hike I encounter a group of about 20 workers doing maintenance. While talking to the supervisor I find out that stimulous money is paying for the maintenance, which is great. I am all for the stimulous plan, 100%. However, the maintenance they were doing was unnecessary and uneeded. I really hate to say this but these workers were there raking the forest. Yes I said raking the forest and clearing the trail of small pieces of gravel and debris. In many cases I saw where they had dug holes and filled them in. It was the biggest waste of the workers time I have ever seen. The forest does not need raking and holes do not need to be created and filled in. It's exactly what The republicians said would happen. Busy work with no real value was getting done.
Now there is real work to be done on the trail like clear fallen trees and boulders, but when I asked the supervisor if those could get cleared, his response was that's not what we're here for today.
Please don't tell the right wing about this.
I’ve also posted this blog entry on my blog: http://www.theparadigmshiftshere.com
I'm sure you're all familiar with the sensational 'war' declared by the wealthy and the mighty on the pirates (mostly) from 'Somalia'...if you're not, view THIS article for the big 'spin' served to you courtesy of massive sponsorship by some very wealthy 'special-interest' groups...
Now for 'a' truth about the matter...
The Pickens Plan: For those who would like to become an active participant in a solution for our nations energy needs I urge you to join with T.Boone Pickens in his quest for a cleaner planet through alternative energy.
Also see Green Wave Energy: Green Wave was founded by Mark Holmes and was formulated for viable alternative energy solutions. Green Wave Energy is promoting state-of-the-art energy-saving products and services throughout the country.
Green Wave Energy understands alternative energy technology will become “main stream” when
Call 949.645.1701 for information on how Green Wave Energy can help you save the planet.
Alternative EnergySource: David Apperson
url: http://veterans.barackobama.com/page/community/tag/alternative-energy
From Politico.com - RNC appears to shell out $150,000 for Palin fashion
So while McCain/Palin are posturing how they represent the salt-of-the-Earth, Joe the Plumber, Joe Six-Pack, Maria the Maid (oops, Maria is voting for Obama), and asking for these hard working "Real Americans" to fork over their hard earned cash to the Republican National Committee (McCain took $84 million in taxes from us, so he can't technically receive direct campaign contributions), Sarah Palin ain't been paying for her new big city, upscale, (wait for it)... elitist high dollar wardrobe and matching accessories.
The RNC showed the Palin and family's wardrobe mark-over expenses as “campaign accessories" in its September monthly financial disclosure report under “itemized coordinated expenditures.” Palin got her new outfits at the following posh establishment:
* Saks Fifth Avenue in St. Louis and New York for a combined $49,425.74
* Neiman Marcus shopping spree in Minneapolis during the RNC National Convention - $75,062.63
* Hair and markup bill in September - $4,716.49
* Accessories from Barney’s of New York - $789.72
* Something to wear for her big SNL debut? Bloomingdale’s New York - $5,102.71
* Macy’s in Minneapolis, site of the RNC National Convention - $9,447.71
* Grand Total Cost to the RNC for the Palin and family wardrobe markover - $150,000
Shall we call these diversions in campaign finances Palin Wardrobe Pork??? If McCain/Palin are so excessively frivolous with campaign donations, what does this say about how they would manage the U.S. Treasury?
I hope all the Republicans who got all worked up over John Edwards’ $400 hair cuts will hold their candidates accountable for a change. This is probably to much to ask since most still think George Bush can do no wrong.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/159421/output/print
Palin Admin. Oversaw $26 Million ROAD to ‘Nowhere’A ProPublica investigation into the controversial earmark project.
Paul Kiel, ProPublicaSep 17, 2008 | Updated: 6:38 p.m. ET Sep 17, 2008When Lois Epstein approached Gov. Sarah Palin during a July 2007 meeting, she says she had a simple request: pull the plug on the construction of a $26 million dead-end gravel road that she saw as a waste of federal money. The road was part of the $398 million project to link Ketchikan and its airport on Gravina Island known as the "Bridge to Nowhere," and an earmark inserted by Alaska's congressional delegation had provided the funding. But construction had begun in June, and it didn't seem to matter that the infamous bridge--to which the road would have led -- would never be built. Every dollar spent on the project was a dollar wasted, Epstein thought.
Epstein, director of the nonpartisan Alaska Transportation Priorities Project, told ProPublica she handed Palin an editorial that had run the prior month in the Anchorage Daily News. The editorial, by Heritage Foundation fellow Ronald Utt, called the road a "wasteful" project with "little to no measurable benefit." It urged Palin to be "responsible and ethical" and "return the money to Washington" so it could be redirected to hurricane-ravaged Louisiana and Mississippi. Utt's piece reflected the consensus in Washington, D.C., and Alaska that no more money would be earmarked for the bridge project, which had become a symbol of pork-barrel spending.
"I gave her the Heritage Foundation piece and said this is not a good project and she should think about reappropriating the money," Epstein told ProPublica. Palin replied that her administration was "very close" on making a decision, Epstein said. Two months later, Palin announced the state would no longer pursue the $398 million design. The statement made no mention of the 3.2 mile access road to an empty beach, which by then was well underway.
Since her nomination as the Republican vice presidential candidate, Gov. Palin has stressed her reform credentials, singling out her handling of the "Bridge to Nowhere" as evidence. "As governor, I've championed earmark reform to stop Congress from wasting public money on things that don't necessarily serve the public interest," she said last week.
But a gravel road on an Alaskan island with 50 inhabitants doesn't serve the public interest, critics say. "This project isn't satisfying any specific transportation purpose or any public need," said Keith Ashdown of Taxpayers for Common Sense.
As ProPublica reported last week, Palin's administration is still planning to link Ketchikan (pop. 7,400) to its airport with the help of as much as $73 million in federal funds earmarked by Congress for the original "Bridge to Nowhere" project.
Palin declared in her acceptance speech she had told Congress, "'Thanks, but no thanks' to that Bridge to Nowhere," adding that if Alaska were to build such a project, the state would do so "ourselves." The campaign did not respond directly when asked by ProPublica whether Palin knew Alaska was stilling planning to use federal money to connect Ketchikan and Gravina Island.
Today, the McCain campaign issued a statement to ProPublica acknowledging that the project was ongoing and emphasizing that Palin had rejected the most expensive design for the bridge. The statement, however, did not address why Palin had not stopped construction of the $26 million road, which is called the Gravina Island Highway.
"Governor Palin opposed a wasteful, unwise, and irresponsible funding plan that was not the best means for fulfilling the local community's needs," said Maria Comella in an e-mailed statement. "Governor Palin understood that a more cost efficient, sensible solution could still be implemented to satisfy the economic and infrastructural demands of the community. The Department of Transportation is currently evaluating alternative plans to meet these same demands."
Alaska's Department of Transportation is currently analyzing nine different alternatives (six bridges and three ferries), only one of which connects with the recently completed Gravina Island Highway. The only other proposed solution that would use a substantial portion of the road is a bridge with a price tag of about $254 million, said Malcolm Menzies, an Alaska DOT official. The alternatives range from a low cost estimate of $80 million for one of the ferry proposals to about $360 million, Menzies said. CLICK HERE for a map of the access road, the original "Bridge to Nowhere" design and the alternatives being considered by the DOT.
Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein, a Democrat, faults the Palin administration for building the road, which he said some have taken to calling the "road to nowhere." But it would be an excellent site for a footrace, he said. "It's a nice flat road. It'll be perfect for a 10K race. ...
Politico story on how Sarah Palin is not as much of an anti-earmark reformer as was thought:
Senator John McCain recently told reporters that Alaska Governor Sarah Palin has “learned that earmarks are bad.”But not that bad, apparently. According to a “summary of requests for federal appropriations” posted to her budget office’s website earlier this year, Palin requested millions of federal dollars for everything from improving recreational halibut fishing to studying the mating habits of crabs and the DNA of harbor seals.It’s a position at odds with her recasting as an anti-earmarking champion, and with the tone of the biting scorn she’s employed toward the budgetary practice this week.
Senator John McCain recently told reporters that Alaska Governor Sarah Palin has “learned that earmarks are bad.”
But not that bad, apparently. According to a “summary of requests for federal appropriations” posted to her budget office’s website earlier this year, Palin requested millions of federal dollars for everything from improving recreational halibut fishing to studying the mating habits of crabs and the DNA of harbor seals.
It’s a position at odds with her recasting as an anti-earmarking champion, and with the tone of the biting scorn she’s employed toward the budgetary practice this week.
As a card carrying Republican, I know something about how these people think. We used to say, half-jokingly, that a crooked Republican won't steal nearly as much as an honest Democrat will give away. And Republicans believe this hook, line and sinker.
I love watching all the pundits on all the channels and blogs review and comment on performances and speeches, and the main Republican cry against Obama remains, "Sounds great, but how is he going to pay for it?"
One answer to that question hasn't yet been proposed and it is something that Democrats need to get in front of and OWN - REFORM AND GOVERNMENT WASTE.
Nothing is more musical to an Independent's or Republican's ears than crying out against waste and pledging to reduce it. For all those who are sitting on the fence = Obama and Biden can swing them over by examples of current administration acceptance and inaction of waste going on right now, as we speak.
Yes, my friends, it's time to hold up the 2008 version of the $400 toilet seat - (or was it $4,000?) We need props, we need stagecraft and concrete, honest-to-goodness real examples of fraud and waste that is occurring under the Republican's noses. You want to get a rise out of a crowd? - try getting them angry how their tax money is being wasted.
McCain/Palin are going to define themselves as reformers? Take it away from them. Expose the ugly truths. Show it over and over and over again. People need to see that Obama sees it and is offended by it. Offended for us.
Democrats need to own this issue - spell out the savings that will come from a watchdog Obama administration. Appoint a fraud Czar to every state! Save, save, save the people's money.
I'm telling you-it speaks right to Republican and Indy hearts and its music to their ears! And that will result, ultimately, in votes.
One of the major issues in this country is the waste we produce. This country was built on capitalism but capitalism is not perfect. We are a throw away society and we design things that have built in obsolescence. I am personally on my 6th o 7th computer. Where are all my other computers. There is tires, plastic products, old cars, garbage and more garbage. We will always have garbage so in a sense garbage is a renewable energy.
We recycle things to save the environment but it is expensive to separate plastic, metal, waste etc. Why not burn it. Until recently some muncipalities did just that but they use petroleum products to burn the garbage. This process is inefficient and produces emmissions.
Six months ago I read about the plasma converter. It uses a relatively old and proven technology to burn the garbage using electricity to raise the temperature of the plasma to the temperature of the sun and the garbage and toxic waste is molecularly dissociated and the results is hydrogen, a process gas, a metal slag, and a stone like material that Japan is using for their roads. And the best part of this power producing product is there is no emissions.
One quarter of the power produced is required to run the process and the heat is used to run a boiler to produce steam and run a generator and produce electricity.
I used to be a person interested in recycling but when I heard of this recyling is not an issue. Now having said that we still need to recycle paper.
The pro's are all the products are useful and the energy source is free.
The con's are most of the waste dumps are privately owned and there is no motivation to change a money making deal. It does take capital to make the change. The power utilities and the waste management companies live in 2 different worlds. The waste management companies no nothing about power and the power companies no nothing about garbage. What we need is leadership.
The last con is most waste dumps are not near water supplies and in fact where specifically put where the toxins in the waste dumps would least likely get into the water supply so burning existing garbage could be challenging.
Countries like Japan are embracing the technology because they do not have unlimited space to dump their garbage and they do have an energy problem.
This technology could supply power when the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining.
Can someone tell me why I am receiving letters signed by "Obama" asking me to become "a supporter of Obama for America." Not just one two-page letter, complete with four-color brochure but three different mailings.
I sent back the second mailing with a letter explaining that my wife and I made our first contribution to the campaign in November 07, and that we subsequently have contributed and raised almost $2,000 for the campaign. I have also made calls to Kansas and, I believe Indiana. I have this blog. And, to date, have not had the courtesy of a response to my note.
Can someone tell me why this campaign can not refine its mailing list, and is probably wasting tens-of-thousands of dollars sending mailings that treat supporters as if they have never heard of Obama, let alone supported his candidacy.
Why can't the candidate, who I described in an article by David Wallis, in SLATE, in December 2006, as "representative of the 21st Century," run a 21th Century fund-raising operation. I am tempted not to give or to raise another penny, should I receive yet another impersonal, machine-generated request for money.
I understand that campaigning consumes dollars like Americans burn fossil fuels, but I am beginning to abhor the waste—paper, postage, people's time, the arrogance underlying the practice—and, yes, the fact that the Obama campaign doesn't have a clue who I am, or what I have committed to the campaign.
When McCain was asked on NBC television yesterday— given the drop in Iraqi violence — if he had a better estimate for when American forces could leave the country.
"No, but that's not too important," McCain said. "What's important is casualties in Iraq.
"Americans are in South Korea. Americans are in Japan. American troops are in Germany. That's all fine. American casualties, and the ability to withdraw. We will be able to withdraw. ... But the key to it is we don't want any more Americans in harm's way."
The United States is a party to more than 80 such bilateral agreements in countries where American forces are stationed, but its proposals for the Iraq accord far exceed the terms of any of the others
Bush set a deadline of July 32 to get status of forces agreement setting out the legal rights and responsibilities of U.S. troops in Iraq and a broader "security framework" defining the political and military relationship between the two countries.
Signing the agreement would mean that the Iraqi government had given up its sovereignty by its own consent"
Maintaining 60 permanmnt bases, authority to detain and hold Iraqis without turning them over to the Iraqi judicial system, immunity from Iraqi prosecution for both U.S. troops and private contractors, and the prerogative for U.S. forces to conduct operations without approval from the Iraqi government, continued control over Iraqi airspace and the right to refuel planes in the air. That sounds like the United States is preparing to use Iraq as a base to attack Iran.
A recent article from the Washington Post illustrates how American lives are about to undergo a radical, fundamental shift, while most Americans remain completely ignorant not only of the upcoming shift but of the foundational dependence of our way of life on fossil fuels. This shift is a direct result of allowing the wealthy families and corporations that run the United States to focus on fossil fuels as their primary means of sustainance.
As the people of United States, we must not only change our dependence upon fossil fuels, but we must change the very foundational concept of what it means to us to be human. We can no longer live as if everything around us is removed from us and therefore disposable. If we are to continue to thrive, we must begin to see how we are an obstacle to the community of life on the planet, and then decide to significantly change how we live.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/23/AR2008052302456_pf.html
I'm in Japan wondering where the news report people get their numbers? I read a report that 2-1, Democrats think Obama is the best candidate. If that's the case, why is Barack losing states like Ohio and Pennsylvania?
I volunteered in Ohio going door to door. In my opinion, TOO MUCH effort was wasted on Republican's and Independents! I thought the idea of the primary was to focus on your own party? None-the-less, if Obama is winning the popular vote, pledged delegates, and contests by courting everyone except Democrats, it clearly indicates to me he IS THE BEST candidate come the general election for President!
I've contributed to Obama's campaign but can't afford to keep giving during the primary. If I do, I will not have any money to contribute to his general election fight! It seems senseless wasting all this money inter-party battling the smear tactics of the "Billary" divide machine.
I think the "Change Movement" is losing significant support and momentum the longer this drags out! I'm certain we are not going to win the White House with "Billary", our chances are dropping the longer this goes...put an end to it NOW!
Obama 08
(I originally composed this post (now slightly enhanced) as a comment in the discussion on EnvirObama.com ( http://envirobama.com/ ) entitled "Climate Change" ( http://envirobama.com/2008/02/21/climate-change/ ). A great site, by the way!).
There are many reasons why Barack Obama should reverse his stance on nuclear power and work instead to support alternatives to both fossil fuels and nuclear power. Let's do everything we can to let him know that on this issue, he's just plain wrong.
Nuclear power is not the answer to climate change or cost-efficient job creation. Among other objections, there are six that I consider especially convincing...
BlueFire Ethanol Fuels (BFRE.OB) is a company which converts municipal solid waste (otherwise known as garbage) into ethanol.http://seekingalpha.com/article/65880-bluefire-ethanol-fuels-converting-garbage-into-profits
The story with the above headline appeared in today’s New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/politics/03exelon.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
First, here's a link to Obama's fact check on this article, which correctly points out major flaws in the article, and that Obama has actually acted quite responsibly:LinkA reminder that the fact check section of this site can be very valuable in answering many charges made against Obama and as well as claims made by other candidates. To get there, click on "Learn" at the left edge of the top menu, then "Know the Facts."
As to the nuclear energy funding of Obama's campaign, it is an unfortunate fact that very little political money is completely clean. The nuclear power connection is a small blemish on Obama. But I really think that this is about the best that journalists and/or Clinton can do. This is their best shot at Obama – their Super Tuesday “O” bomb. Take this story and multiply it 20 times and that is what is waiting for Hillary in the fall.
Here are some comments that put the story in perspective, followed by the links to their sources:
Obama is the largest beneficiary of money from companies that have a stake in nuclear energy's future. The Braidwood plant's owner, Exelon Corp., has donated $275,000 to Obama over his career.Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, a co-author on the 2006 bill, is the second-largest recipient. Neither candidate has come out in opposition to nuclear power, unlike their onetime rival, former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina.. . . Compared with the unprecedented sums of money raised in this campaign, the amount delivered by executives and employees of utilities and other companies that own or are involved in nuclear power plant construction, operation and waste handling is modest. . . . Obama last year raised nearly $266,000, more than Gore and Kerry combined. Clinton raised more than $166,000. Sen. John McCain of Arizona leads Republicans with about $107,000.The bulk of Obama's nuclear energy-related money, $190,000, has come from Exelon's employees. The Chicago-based company is the nation's largest nuclear power plant operator, with 10 facilities representing 20% of the nation's nuclear energy.
Obama is the largest beneficiary of money from companies that have a stake in nuclear energy's future. The Braidwood plant's owner, Exelon Corp., has donated $275,000 to Obama over his career.Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, a co-author on the 2006 bill, is the second-largest recipient. Neither candidate has come out in opposition to nuclear power, unlike their onetime rival, former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina.
. . . Compared with the unprecedented sums of money raised in this campaign, the amount delivered by executives and employees of utilities and other companies that own or are involved in nuclear power plant construction, operation and waste handling is modest.
. . . Obama last year raised nearly $266,000, more than Gore and Kerry combined. Clinton raised more than $166,000. Sen. John McCain of Arizona leads Republicans with about $107,000.The bulk of Obama's nuclear energy-related money, $190,000, has come from Exelon's employees. The Chicago-based company is the nation's largest nuclear power plant operator, with 10 facilities representing 20% of the nation's nuclear energy.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-nuke3feb03,1,6067597.story
However, Bob Fullerson, the former director of Citizen Alert which helped turn Nevada into an anti-dumping state for nuclear waste, claimed the attacks on Obama's record were unfair."It's completely ludicrous and disingenuous to say that he is soft on Yucca Mountain," Fullerson said on the conference call.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/17/585257.aspx
But Obama's not the only candidate wading deep in a pool of contributions from the nuclear energy industry.Clinton has received $68,650 in 34 contributions from NRG Energy, and the company's chief executive, David Crane, is listed as one of her Hillraisers -- meaning he has brought more than $100,000 in contributions into the campaign. The Clintons' ties to the New Jersey-based power giant run deeper than that, though. The company committed $5 million to the Clinton Global Initiative in 2007, according to the web site of the charity run by former president Bill Clinton. The company's six-year commitment is $175 million. The commitments are not donations to the former president's charity, but promises made by the company to the Global Initiative to spend the money on projects that will "help increase the benefits and reduce the burdens of global interdependence, make a world of more partners and fewer enemies, and give more people the tools they need to build a better future."
But Obama's not the only candidate wading deep in a pool of contributions from the nuclear energy industry.
Clinton has received $68,650 in 34 contributions from NRG Energy, and the company's chief executive, David Crane, is listed as one of her Hillraisers -- meaning he has brought more than $100,000 in contributions into the campaign. The Clintons' ties to the New Jersey-based power giant run deeper than that, though. The company committed $5 million to the Clinton Global Initiative in 2007, according to the web site of the charity run by former president Bill Clinton. The company's six-year commitment is $175 million.
The commitments are not donations to the former president's charity, but promises made by the company to the Global Initiative to spend the money on projects that will "help increase the benefits and reduce the burdens of global interdependence, make a world of more partners and fewer enemies, and give more people the tools they need to build a better future."
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/01/18/for_both_clinton_and_obama_nuc.html?hpid=topnews
Part of Obama's Exelon connection may demonstrate old-fashioned ethnic politics as much as corporate connections. Rogers and Clark are part of Illinois' black elite and would probably back Obama no matter what their business interests.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/bal-bz.hancock25jan25,0,4656523.column
I give Obama the benefit of the doubt on that one. I am not concerned about his character or ethics, they are both top-notch.
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/2/3/02225/86830
