While I don't agree with everything said on this video (or how it is said) it does raise many points that we Obama supporters wish Obama's campaign ads would address.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Rambling Thoughts for October 29th
While listening to excerpts from John McCain's speech during his rally yesterday in Fayetteville I began to wonder just how relevant his military experience is. It certainly says something about his character but does his time as a fighter-bomber pilot and squadron commander during Viet Nam and the cold war make him that much more qualified for being President? I was on active duty for seven years and spent time in Germany, Panama and the Sinai Peninsula; I was the fire support officer for 1-508th Parachute Infantry and commanded an artillery battery in the 1-319th Airborne Field Artillery, both of the 82d Airborne Division. Would this qualify me for public office? I'm not sure. McCain's military experience certainly gives him some insight into that world but the military is a very different organization today. Even I, who left active duty in 1987, would be like a fish out of water were I to put on my uniform again (by the way, even the uniforms are completely different). McCain's time indicates that he can persevere. But how about Ed Viesturs? Ed is one of the few people in this world who has climbed all 8,000 metre peaks (this list includes Everest and K2) without supplemental oxygen. This guy can persevere; but is he a good candidate for president? Probably not. When we are asked to consider McCain's military experience should we also consider the recklessness he demonstrated (drinking binges, wrecked aircraft)? Who knows.
--------------------------------------
Why is it such a bad thing to advocate for the poor and less fortunate? Barack Obama mentioned "spreading the wealth" while speaking with "Joe the Plumber" (who, in case you didn't know, is neither a Joe nor a plumber) and the McCain campaign has latched onto this statement like a pit bull and this seems to be all you hear from them. Even Sarah Palin has intimated that an Obama presidency would veer toward communism. All because Obama advocates using tax dollars to help the less fortunate. Do I care if the government uses my tax dollars to help the working poor? No, I don't. However, what I don't want to see are my taxes providing handouts to those who refuse to work. If a refundable tax credit helps a poor single mother both work and attend a college or technical school what exactly is wrong with that? The McCain campaign has been advocating buying the mortgages of those homeowners who are in danger of foreclosure and then restructuring those mortages to make them affordable. How is this different from providing refundable tax credits? The government is still using tax dollars and is still helping out those in trouble but I guess there's a big difference in buying a bad mortgage and giving someone a tax credit.
--------------------------------------
Why is it such a bad thing to advocate for the poor and less fortunate? Barack Obama mentioned "spreading the wealth" while speaking with "Joe the Plumber" (who, in case you didn't know, is neither a Joe nor a plumber) and the McCain campaign has latched onto this statement like a pit bull and this seems to be all you hear from them. Even Sarah Palin has intimated that an Obama presidency would veer toward communism. All because Obama advocates using tax dollars to help the less fortunate. Do I care if the government uses my tax dollars to help the working poor? No, I don't. However, what I don't want to see are my taxes providing handouts to those who refuse to work. If a refundable tax credit helps a poor single mother both work and attend a college or technical school what exactly is wrong with that? The McCain campaign has been advocating buying the mortgages of those homeowners who are in danger of foreclosure and then restructuring those mortages to make them affordable. How is this different from providing refundable tax credits? The government is still using tax dollars and is still helping out those in trouble but I guess there's a big difference in buying a bad mortgage and giving someone a tax credit.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
.bmp)
Monday, October 27, 2008
A Hint of Things to Come (w/ a Dem in the White House)?
Animals that were formerly self-sufficient are now showing signs of belonging to the Democratic Party... as they have apparently learned to just sit and wait for the government to step in and provide for their care and sustenance. This photo is of a Democrat black bear in Montana nicknamed 'Bearack Obama'
-----------------------------
-----------------------------
See - this proves that I can find humor in something even though it doesn't fit in my set of beliefs.
Anchorage Daily News Endorses Obama!!
I saw this news scroll across the screen of my personal t.v. while pedaling nowhere this morning at the gym. Liberal media or not, this was pretty significant. If Sarah Palin cannot gain the endorsement of her state's largest newspaper what does that say about her effectiveness? I guess the impact of endorsements can be debated but some contain a hard-to-ignore message about the person not being endorsed (e.g. Gen. Powell's endorsement of Obama).
Friday, October 24, 2008
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
From the Alaskan Blog - "Mudflats"
Palin’s “Respectable Republican Leather Jacket” Must Go. 22 10 2008
Every once in a while, we need to cleanse our minds from matters of the inner workings of Alaska’s Personnel Board, 263-page reports from the Legislative Council, Workers Compensation claims by Alaska State Troopers, and take a break with something that requires little thought, or research. In this spirit, the big story yesterday was the outlandish $150,000 Palin wardrobe, provided to her by the Republican National Committee. Half of this staggering sum was spent at one store, the Neiman Marcus in Minneapolis. It’s against the rules for a campaign to pick up these costs (remember the John Edwards $400 haircut?), but due to a loophole (a button hole perhaps?), the RNC was allowed to foot the bill.
While I don’t claim to know what is going on in the minds of Republicans these days, I recall my Grandmother, who passed away in 1986. She was what I like to think of as a “good Republican”. She was fiscally conservative, quietly religious, and kind-hearted. She had no patience for scandal or dishonesty from politicians, and when presented with same, would sit herself down at the table in her sunny yellow kitchen and write a letter to the offending party, in small, perfect penmanship, giving them “a piece of her mind.” Sometimes the envelope would be reused, if she had received one in the mail in good condition. Why waste paper? She had raised a family during the Depression, and she understood the value of things. She donated to Republican candidates; not much, but she gave what she could. I never asked her personally how she felt about Richard Nixon. I suspect that Watergate gave her unending heartburn, but I also suspect that Nixon’s comment about how Pat Nixon didn’t have furs, but wore “a respectable Republican cloth coat,” resonated with her. My Grandmother had a respectable Republican cloth coat too.
I shudder to think what this principled woman, with whom I once shared a home, would think about Sarah Palin. What would be going through her mind if she had lovingly and dutifully written her $15 check, in her perfect penmanship, to the RNC, only to find out that it had been used to laminate Sarah Palin with a shiny red leather jacket and new stiletto heels? It would take 10,000 Republican grandmothers like mine to pay for that wardrobe.
It is surprising in some ways, that the “real Republicans” have not mutinied. Some have, but there hasn’t been the mass exodus one would expect. Too many Republicans suffer in silence, hoping that their party will come around; that they will spontaneously stop lying, race-baiting, subverting the constitution, and spending money like drunken sailors who like women in red leather. I think they’re going to have a long wait.
Meanwhile, back at the McCain campaign, we hear today that the six-figure wardrobe will now be donated to a “charitable purpose” after the campaign. So, keep your eyes peeled for a shiny red leather jacket at a Salvation Army store near you, and I’ll let you know if Sarah Palin comes back to Alaska in a respectable Republican cloth coat.
Every once in a while, we need to cleanse our minds from matters of the inner workings of Alaska’s Personnel Board, 263-page reports from the Legislative Council, Workers Compensation claims by Alaska State Troopers, and take a break with something that requires little thought, or research. In this spirit, the big story yesterday was the outlandish $150,000 Palin wardrobe, provided to her by the Republican National Committee. Half of this staggering sum was spent at one store, the Neiman Marcus in Minneapolis. It’s against the rules for a campaign to pick up these costs (remember the John Edwards $400 haircut?), but due to a loophole (a button hole perhaps?), the RNC was allowed to foot the bill.
While I don’t claim to know what is going on in the minds of Republicans these days, I recall my Grandmother, who passed away in 1986. She was what I like to think of as a “good Republican”. She was fiscally conservative, quietly religious, and kind-hearted. She had no patience for scandal or dishonesty from politicians, and when presented with same, would sit herself down at the table in her sunny yellow kitchen and write a letter to the offending party, in small, perfect penmanship, giving them “a piece of her mind.” Sometimes the envelope would be reused, if she had received one in the mail in good condition. Why waste paper? She had raised a family during the Depression, and she understood the value of things. She donated to Republican candidates; not much, but she gave what she could. I never asked her personally how she felt about Richard Nixon. I suspect that Watergate gave her unending heartburn, but I also suspect that Nixon’s comment about how Pat Nixon didn’t have furs, but wore “a respectable Republican cloth coat,” resonated with her. My Grandmother had a respectable Republican cloth coat too.
I shudder to think what this principled woman, with whom I once shared a home, would think about Sarah Palin. What would be going through her mind if she had lovingly and dutifully written her $15 check, in her perfect penmanship, to the RNC, only to find out that it had been used to laminate Sarah Palin with a shiny red leather jacket and new stiletto heels? It would take 10,000 Republican grandmothers like mine to pay for that wardrobe.
It is surprising in some ways, that the “real Republicans” have not mutinied. Some have, but there hasn’t been the mass exodus one would expect. Too many Republicans suffer in silence, hoping that their party will come around; that they will spontaneously stop lying, race-baiting, subverting the constitution, and spending money like drunken sailors who like women in red leather. I think they’re going to have a long wait.
Meanwhile, back at the McCain campaign, we hear today that the six-figure wardrobe will now be donated to a “charitable purpose” after the campaign. So, keep your eyes peeled for a shiny red leather jacket at a Salvation Army store near you, and I’ll let you know if Sarah Palin comes back to Alaska in a respectable Republican cloth coat.
Is This What the Framers Had in Mind for the VP Position?
[Subtitle - Is Sarah Smarter than a Third Grader?]
Governor Palin's Clothing Budget
Who knew it would cost so much to keep Governor Palin looking good on the campaign trail? Perhaps the RNC can now pay Joe the Plumber's back taxes and set him up in business. And now that it appears that the VP (according to Governor Palin at least) has extra-Constitutional powers she can force the Congress to add a clothing line to the country's budget in order to keep her in those fancy threads from Saks and Nieman Marcus. I guess the North Face is just a little bit beneath her now.
This from the Web:
Since her selection as John McCain's running mate, the Republican National Committee spent more than $150,000 on clothing and make-up for Gov. Sarah Palin, her husband, and even her infant son, it was reported on Tuesday evening.
That entertaining scoop -- which came by way of Politico -- sent almost immediate reverberations through the presidential race. A statement from McCain headquarters released hours after the article bemoaned the triviality of the whole affair.
"With all of the important issues facing the country right now, it's remarkable that we're spending time talking about pantsuits and blouses," said spokesperson Tracey Schmitt. "It was always the intent that the clothing go to a charitable purpose after the campaign."
But even the most timid of Democrats are unlikely to heed this call for civility. For starters, the story has the potential to dampen enthusiasm among GOP activists and donors at a critical point in the presidential race. It also creates a huge PR headache for the McCain ticket as it seeks to make inroads among voters worried about the current economic crisis.
Mainly, however, Democrats (in this scenario) are not prone to forgiveness. After all, it was during this same campaign cycle that Republicans belittled the $400 haircut that former Sen. John Edwards had paid for with his own campaign money (the funds were later reimbursed). And yet, the comparison to that once-dominant news story is hardly close: if Edwards had gotten one of his legendary haircuts every singe week, it would still take him 7.2 years to spend what Palin has spent. Palin has received the equivalent of $2,500 in clothes per day from places such as Saks Fifth Avenue (where RNC expenditures totaled nearly $50,000) and Neiman Marcus (where the governor had a $75,000 spree).
Beyond the political tit-for-tat, however, the revelation of the clothing expenditures offers what some Democrats see as a chance not just to win several news cycles during the campaign's waning days but to severely damage Palin's image as a small-town, 'Joe Six-Pack' American.
"It shows that Palin ain't like the rest of us," Tom Matzzie, a Democratic strategist told the Huffington Post, when asked how the party would or could use the issue. "It can help deflate her cultural populism with the Republican base. The plumber's wife doesn't go to Nieman's or Saks."
Indeed, the story could not come at a more inopportune time for the McCain campaign. During a week in which the Republican ticket is trying to highlight its connection to the working class -- and, by extension, promoting its newest campaign tool, Joe the Plumber -- it was revealed that Palin's fashion budget for several weeks was more than four times the median salary of an American plumber ($37,514). To put it another way: Palin received more valuable clothes in one month than the average American household spends on clothes in 80 years. A Democrat put it in even blunter terms: her clothes were the cost of health care for 15 or so people.
There are, in these cases, legal questions surrounding campaign expenditures. Though, on this front, Palin and the RNC seem to be in the clear.
"I don't think it's taxed," said David Donnelly of Campaign Money Watch. "I don't think she can keep it. It's owned by the RNC. They had to use coordinated funds to pay for the clothes."
And certainly the possibility exists that this issue can be effectively swept under the rug. Palin is not known for taking impromptu questions from the press. Moreover, the media, at this juncture, has other major story lines (see: upcoming election) to grapple with, thus denying the piece the relative vacuum that accompanied the Edwards story. Finally, there is little desire among conservative writers or pundits to litigate the matter, even if they were more than happy to jump on board when a Democrat was in the spotlight.
Several hours after Politico posted its findings, the topic remained nearly untouched by the major right-wing outlets. Though as Marc Ambinder at the Atlantic opined:
"Republicans, RNC donors and at least one RNC staff member have e-mailed me tonight to share their utter (and not-for-attribution) disgust at the expenditures. ... The heat for this story will come from Republicans who cannot understand how their party would do something this stupid ... particularly (and, it must be said, viewed retroactively) during the collapse of the financial system and the probable beginning of a recession."
This from the Web:
Since her selection as John McCain's running mate, the Republican National Committee spent more than $150,000 on clothing and make-up for Gov. Sarah Palin, her husband, and even her infant son, it was reported on Tuesday evening.
That entertaining scoop -- which came by way of Politico -- sent almost immediate reverberations through the presidential race. A statement from McCain headquarters released hours after the article bemoaned the triviality of the whole affair.
"With all of the important issues facing the country right now, it's remarkable that we're spending time talking about pantsuits and blouses," said spokesperson Tracey Schmitt. "It was always the intent that the clothing go to a charitable purpose after the campaign."
But even the most timid of Democrats are unlikely to heed this call for civility. For starters, the story has the potential to dampen enthusiasm among GOP activists and donors at a critical point in the presidential race. It also creates a huge PR headache for the McCain ticket as it seeks to make inroads among voters worried about the current economic crisis.
Mainly, however, Democrats (in this scenario) are not prone to forgiveness. After all, it was during this same campaign cycle that Republicans belittled the $400 haircut that former Sen. John Edwards had paid for with his own campaign money (the funds were later reimbursed). And yet, the comparison to that once-dominant news story is hardly close: if Edwards had gotten one of his legendary haircuts every singe week, it would still take him 7.2 years to spend what Palin has spent. Palin has received the equivalent of $2,500 in clothes per day from places such as Saks Fifth Avenue (where RNC expenditures totaled nearly $50,000) and Neiman Marcus (where the governor had a $75,000 spree).
Beyond the political tit-for-tat, however, the revelation of the clothing expenditures offers what some Democrats see as a chance not just to win several news cycles during the campaign's waning days but to severely damage Palin's image as a small-town, 'Joe Six-Pack' American.
"It shows that Palin ain't like the rest of us," Tom Matzzie, a Democratic strategist told the Huffington Post, when asked how the party would or could use the issue. "It can help deflate her cultural populism with the Republican base. The plumber's wife doesn't go to Nieman's or Saks."
Indeed, the story could not come at a more inopportune time for the McCain campaign. During a week in which the Republican ticket is trying to highlight its connection to the working class -- and, by extension, promoting its newest campaign tool, Joe the Plumber -- it was revealed that Palin's fashion budget for several weeks was more than four times the median salary of an American plumber ($37,514). To put it another way: Palin received more valuable clothes in one month than the average American household spends on clothes in 80 years. A Democrat put it in even blunter terms: her clothes were the cost of health care for 15 or so people.
There are, in these cases, legal questions surrounding campaign expenditures. Though, on this front, Palin and the RNC seem to be in the clear.
"I don't think it's taxed," said David Donnelly of Campaign Money Watch. "I don't think she can keep it. It's owned by the RNC. They had to use coordinated funds to pay for the clothes."
And certainly the possibility exists that this issue can be effectively swept under the rug. Palin is not known for taking impromptu questions from the press. Moreover, the media, at this juncture, has other major story lines (see: upcoming election) to grapple with, thus denying the piece the relative vacuum that accompanied the Edwards story. Finally, there is little desire among conservative writers or pundits to litigate the matter, even if they were more than happy to jump on board when a Democrat was in the spotlight.
Several hours after Politico posted its findings, the topic remained nearly untouched by the major right-wing outlets. Though as Marc Ambinder at the Atlantic opined:
"Republicans, RNC donors and at least one RNC staff member have e-mailed me tonight to share their utter (and not-for-attribution) disgust at the expenditures. ... The heat for this story will come from Republicans who cannot understand how their party would do something this stupid ... particularly (and, it must be said, viewed retroactively) during the collapse of the financial system and the probable beginning of a recession."
Monday, October 20, 2008
Colin Powell's Endorsement of Obama
General Powell's endorsement of Senator Obama was not only an endorsement of Obama but also a rebuke of McCain and the Bush Administration. General Powell eloquently addressed Senator McCain's helter skelter behavior with respect to the unfolding credit crisis, the failed attempt to link Senator Obama to Williams Ayers, and McCain's choice of Sarah Palin as a running mate. All of his arguments have been made before but they were discounted as coming from the liberal media. Now that they're coming from General Powell such arguments have to be taken seriously. Bush's war hawks put Colin Powell out on a limb when they sent him to the UN to make the case for war and this is wonderful payback.
ACORN Voter Fraud?
I'm not the smartest guy on the planet and I certainly wouldn't have the brains to organize and pull off a huge voter fraud scheme but I just don't get how the ACORN voter registration errors equate to voting fraud. Does John McCain actually think that someone will show up at a polling station and try to vote for Senator Obama as "Mickey Mouse"? And, wouldn't it be necessary for ACORN and the Obama campaign to enlist the help of hundreds, if not thousands, of people to go to the polls and actually vote using the phony registered names? I'm guessing it would have to work this way: Bill Smith (ACORN employee) completes 100 phony registration forms using the Raleigh, NC phonebook and mails them in. There are now 100 additional registered voters in Wake County, NC (what would happen if Bill picked my name from the book? I'm already registered). In order for voter fraud to occur someone would have to actually go to the specified polling place for these 100 "voters" and cast a ballot (or maybe an absentee ballot would be requested). Let's assume that Bill is not too smart and just starts at the beginning of the phone book and picks the first 100 names. Since those people are probably scattered all over Wake County, Bill (or a team of ACORN operatives) would have to go to a number of polling stations in order to cast the 100 phony ballots. It seems to me that in order for such a scheme to actually work and have an effect on the outcome of the election the scale of the fraud would have to be huge. The fact that the fraud would have to be large scale seems to make the probability of this happening very remote. Bottom line? There are some rogue ACORN employees who have tried to rip off the organization by generating phony registration forms. The McCain campaign and the RNC (with help, maybe, from the Department of Justice) are using this to their advantage and may be getting ready to perpetrate a fraud of their own.
Friday, October 17, 2008
Lighten Up Francis
God help me; I discovered Monty Python clips on YouTube. Introducing, "Friday Funnies".
"Deflating" Oil Prices
Good cartoon - Wonder if his buddy "Prime Minister" Putin is a little worried about decreasing oil prices and the Russian stock market which, I think, has been closed more than it has been open this past week.
"Maverick"
Just for fun I looked up the definition of maverick on Merriam-Webster Online and here it is:
- An unbranded range animal; especially a motherless calf;
- An independent individual who does not go along with a group or party.
So there you have it. By the way, the etymology is: Samuel A. Maverick, an American pioneer who did not brand his calves.
I have to admit that I'm a bit conflicted about John McCain and his maverick label. I even contributed to his campaign during the 2000 Republican primary. Not being a straight-party ticket type voter I naturally gravitate toward someone who doesn't blindly follow a particular dogma and this is what has, in the past, attracted me to Senator McCain. The problem I now see is that the senator's maverick tendancies coupled with his less than methodical decision making style is really not suited for the Oval Office. I mean, do we really want a lone-wolf (and one with an explosive temper) as president? Probably not. The McCain campaign has been hammering away with the question, "Who is Barack Obama?" but someone should also be asking that question about Senator McCain. How will this guy make decisions; how will this guy develop and execute strategies; how will he work with his cabinet and foreign leaders?
As much as I admire Senator McCain for his service and his past refusal to follow the GOP dogma I'm just not comfortable with his style.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Old Age (well, Middle Age) Just Plain Sucks
I just turned 50 a few weeks ago and I can tell you, the last 18 months have not been kind to me. Until July '07 I was pretty smug about my level of fitness and my general lack of aches and pains. Then one day (after having spent a few hours climbing at a gym in Durham) I felt a little twinge in the knuckle of my left index finger. The twinge turned into pain and I went to an orthopaedist specializing in hand problems. The steroid shot I received was particularly painful (the doctor tapped a much too long needle into my joint) and, in the long run did nothing to help. Unwilling to give up the rock gym and my daily trips to my other gym, I soon developed pain in my left wrist. When the orthopaedist suggested another steroid shot I decided to visit another doctor. The replacement is a terrific doc at Duke and he tried like hell to figure out what was wrong (without once mentioning a steroid shot). After several MRI's and Xrays we decided to give it some time and see what happened. About two weeks later my index finger swelled up, hurt worse and wouldn't bend. I went back to the doctor at Duke and three days later I was in the hospital having a "major dissection" of my left hand. Doctor Goldner cleaned things up and I fully expected to be pulling hard in the gym again but that just never happened. What did happen is that I now have a crooked index finger, a rheumatologist who, during my first visit, confirmed that I have arthritis and, in addition, discovered a swollen thyroid gland and so I now also have an endocrinologist.
So, as I pass the half-century mark my smugness is gone and in its place I have three doctors who are trying to keep things from getting worse. Oh, and during my visit to the dentist yesterday I was told that I need two crowns.
The silver lining in this cloud is that for the first time I'll be able to take an unreimbursed medical expense deduction when I do my taxes this year.
So, as I pass the half-century mark my smugness is gone and in its place I have three doctors who are trying to keep things from getting worse. Oh, and during my visit to the dentist yesterday I was told that I need two crowns.
The silver lining in this cloud is that for the first time I'll be able to take an unreimbursed medical expense deduction when I do my taxes this year.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
How to Support the Troops? (Hint: It's not a car magnet)
An old Army friend who is stationed in Germany after a tour in Afghanistan sent a link to a very good Atlantic Magazine article. The writer follows a number of West Point '02 grads and has written a book about what he has found. http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200810u/how-to-support-our-troops?ca=XuFBmB0%2BCyrUYeYGDsNS1h6EULhmNSHseMD3Md9XuaI%3D
I have signed up with the USO at the Raleigh Durham International Airport as a volunteer to drive troops home or to one of the many military installations in North Carolina. Unfortunately I tend to do this when it's convenient for me which means that I'm not really sacrificing anything (except my time, but again, when it's convenient). I need to do more.
I have signed up with the USO at the Raleigh Durham International Airport as a volunteer to drive troops home or to one of the many military installations in North Carolina. Unfortunately I tend to do this when it's convenient for me which means that I'm not really sacrificing anything (except my time, but again, when it's convenient). I need to do more.
Drill Baby, Drill?
Yesterday's Raleigh News & Observer carried an interesting editorial (http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/columns/story/1254079.html) supporting the idea of oil exploration and drilling along the nation's coastline. The writer's argument is that this will have both short and long-term benefits. Here's a quote:
"Despite claims to the contrary, this increased access promises both long- and short-term benefits. More access to domestic energy resources will ultimately bolster our longstanding energy goals: less imports, more economic activity, and more revenue for state and local governments. And the benefits are immediate.
Even before U.S. energy companies begin to actually produce the estimated 18 billion barrels of oil currently locked away in our outer continental shelf (OCS), investors will act. Expanding domestic access will attract more capital to American oil and gas companies, bolstering their position in the global market. More capital means more jobs. Employment opportunity in the energy industry -- ranging from infrastructure development to technological development -- will boom."
While this may be true I think the writer is missing the point. Fossil fuel (with the possible exception of natural gas) is in the mature stage of its life cycle. Why would an oil company decide to invest billions of dollars in infrastructure to produce a product that many people are hoping will be replaced by hydrogen and batteries? Wouldn't that be a little like the long ago horse-drawn carriage manufacturers investing millions to boost production of carriages just as the concept of the automobile was taking hold? I think the oil companies should, instead, invest just enough in their infrastructure to continue producing enough fuel to satisfy demand but put the real money into infrastructure for the future. If I'm an investor I'd much rather choose the company that is betting on hydrogen fuel cells or long-life batteries for hybrids or plug-ins. I realize that I'm oversimplifying but that's my perogative. I'm just here to ask the question.
"Despite claims to the contrary, this increased access promises both long- and short-term benefits. More access to domestic energy resources will ultimately bolster our longstanding energy goals: less imports, more economic activity, and more revenue for state and local governments. And the benefits are immediate.
Even before U.S. energy companies begin to actually produce the estimated 18 billion barrels of oil currently locked away in our outer continental shelf (OCS), investors will act. Expanding domestic access will attract more capital to American oil and gas companies, bolstering their position in the global market. More capital means more jobs. Employment opportunity in the energy industry -- ranging from infrastructure development to technological development -- will boom."
While this may be true I think the writer is missing the point. Fossil fuel (with the possible exception of natural gas) is in the mature stage of its life cycle. Why would an oil company decide to invest billions of dollars in infrastructure to produce a product that many people are hoping will be replaced by hydrogen and batteries? Wouldn't that be a little like the long ago horse-drawn carriage manufacturers investing millions to boost production of carriages just as the concept of the automobile was taking hold? I think the oil companies should, instead, invest just enough in their infrastructure to continue producing enough fuel to satisfy demand but put the real money into infrastructure for the future. If I'm an investor I'd much rather choose the company that is betting on hydrogen fuel cells or long-life batteries for hybrids or plug-ins. I realize that I'm oversimplifying but that's my perogative. I'm just here to ask the question.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Sarah Palin and the Alaskan Independence Party
Is there any significance to Todd Palin's membership in the Alaskan Independence Party or to Governor Palin's video address to the Party as they were meeting for the annual convention? You be the judge. Be aware, though, that the goal of the AIP is the independence of the state from the United States. These folks have no use for our country (except, perhaps, for the pork sent their way by Congress) and leaders of the AIP have referred to US soldiers stationed there as occupying troops. I cannot understand how the mainstream press has not gotten hold of this.
Governor Palin's address to the AIP Convention:
About the founder of the AIP:
Governor Palin's address to the AIP Convention:
About the founder of the AIP:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
