Thursday, March 20, 2008
Obama's Speech
As with all links, I don't know how long this will stay posted. However, it's the full speech & not just snippets as shown on most networks. For more info on his issues, go to http://my.barackobama.com/issues. To check the facts, go to http://my.barackobama.com/factcheckaction. For campaign videos, go to http://my.barackobama.com/youtubechannel.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Gassing up and no place to go
It's time to hit the streets, folks. Is anyone getting sticker shock when they fill their gas tanks? Let's take those protest signs over to the nearest Commodity Futures Trading offices and raise a stink....What? Not to the local gas station?
Sure, go ahead. You'll probably get more press if you & your buddies protest outside a visible BP station. But, who's the real culprit? A list of suspects:
1. George Bush & Congress
2. Environmentalists
3. Big Oil companies
4. Local gas stations
5. OPEC
6. China
7. Commodities trading
1. It's a fact that GB is an oilman from Texas and his trust assets are simply growing by leaps & bounds while he's in office. So, what does he do? Invade Iraq, claiming WMD's & then, when that proved a lie, claiming Al-Qaeda bases (even though Saddam Hussein hated Al-Qaeda & wouldn't let them in the country). In case anyone missed it, the real reason for invading was, & has been, oil. So, we've had 5 years in there & still can't get control of the country nor it's key asset? Not to worry--McCain says we can do it in 100 years. Congress has been unable to do much, esp. while it has been Republican-controlled for 16 years. So what has been done to help? I must've missed it--prices at the local pump are now hovering around $3.50 a gallon.
2. Whenever there's an energy crisis, right extremists immediately blame environmentalists. Go to http://digitalartpress.wordpress.com/2008/03/01/liberalsdemocratsenvironmentalists-responsible-for-high-gasenergy-prices/ for one such example. It's easy to blame environmentalists, especially because they get lots of press trying to protect the environment from all the damage done extracting minerals & oils. So often, companies go to the federal government because it's cheap. Our government will sell the rights for $1. Go to a homeowner & offer a dollar and see what you get! Is it possible to drill in a more environmentally friendly way? I'm sure there is, but these companies won't do it unless forced to do so. Right now, they take advantage of regulatory loopholes that allow them to be major sources of pollution. http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/environment/2007-10-31-energy-pollution_N.htm. It's true that not all environmentalists have a real understanding of energy. Some have even blocked alternatives, like wind energy. http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1258373/environmentalists_appear_to_be_winds_biggest_enemy/
Environmentalists can be credited with many things: getting DDT banned, pushing for the Clean Air & Clean Water Acts, vehicle emissions standards, and much more. Let's keep an open mind that environmentalism and energy production aren't necessarily polar opposites.
3. Let see, $40.6 BILLION earnings for Exxon Mobil in 2007 (http://www.usnews.com/articles/business/economy/2008/02/01/exxons-profits-measuring-a-record-windfall.html). That's for one oil company in one year. "If Exxon Mobil were a country, its 2007 profit would exceed the gross domestic product of nearly two thirds of the 183 nations in the World Bank's economic rankings. It would be right in there behind the likes of Angola and Qatar—two oil-producing nations, incidentally, where Exxon has major operations." On top of that, Congress has yet to repeal the special oil company tax break pushed by Bush during his first term. When OPEC first arose in the 70's and gas prices drastically escalated, Nixon (a Republican, btw), enacted a special tax called Windfall Profits. Go to this link to get more info on WP taxes: http://www.taxhistory.org/thp/readings.nsf/cf7c9c870b600b9585256df80075b9dd/edf8de04e58e4b14852570ba0048848b?OpenDocument
It's not all the fault of Big Bad Oil, of course, but I haven't seen any move by them to spend some of those profits on new production or new refineries. Nor have they appeared to invest heavily in more environmentally sound energy sources--but I admit to not having all the details on this topic.
4. Local gas stations. These poor guys have to essentially place a bet on how much gas will cost them next time they fill up. They also have to be competitive with everyone else around them. I don't know what the markup might be, but I also don't see too many gas-station owners in Congress (so they can't be that rich).
5. OPEC. Leave a bad taste in your mouth? Go to http://www.opec.org/aboutus/history/history.htm for a history lesson. They control the flow of oil out of the biggest producing countries. We've had over 40 years to create replacement products and reduce consumption. We answered the call with SUV's, huge energy-hogging homes, and few green initiatives. While household energy consumption has gone down, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/txt/ptb0204.html on data thru 2001, imagine how much more it would have gone down if we'd enacted construction changes, size limitations, energy efficiency and tax credits for older homes. Last I heard, 40% of the energy consumed in the US is from our homes. Let's do a better job or removing OPEC from the picture.
6. China. It's all about supply and demand. Demand is way up in China and it's looking for more supplies. http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050901faessay84503/david-zweig-bi-jianhai/china-s-global-hunt-for-energy.html. That means they're competiting in a market where the US is the #1 consumer and they're #2. I read somewhere China may be #1 in the next 6 months. An article in Asia Times talked about how China (back in '03) wanted to move from less coal use--due to pollution concerns--to gas or natural gas. You can't deny that more demand has affected supply and hence prices.
7. Commodities? Go to http://www.wtrg.com/ for the latest prices. Note the news on speculation. I rarely hear anything about the commodities market & how speculation has led to the increase in prices. On the radio today, I heard them say the price isn't up because of supply--there's plenty in stock pile. So, why don't we stop the trading? Go back to #1. Nice circle, huh?
Sure, go ahead. You'll probably get more press if you & your buddies protest outside a visible BP station. But, who's the real culprit? A list of suspects:
1. George Bush & Congress
2. Environmentalists
3. Big Oil companies
4. Local gas stations
5. OPEC
6. China
7. Commodities trading
1. It's a fact that GB is an oilman from Texas and his trust assets are simply growing by leaps & bounds while he's in office. So, what does he do? Invade Iraq, claiming WMD's & then, when that proved a lie, claiming Al-Qaeda bases (even though Saddam Hussein hated Al-Qaeda & wouldn't let them in the country). In case anyone missed it, the real reason for invading was, & has been, oil. So, we've had 5 years in there & still can't get control of the country nor it's key asset? Not to worry--McCain says we can do it in 100 years. Congress has been unable to do much, esp. while it has been Republican-controlled for 16 years. So what has been done to help? I must've missed it--prices at the local pump are now hovering around $3.50 a gallon.
2. Whenever there's an energy crisis, right extremists immediately blame environmentalists. Go to http://digitalartpress.wordpress.com/2008/03/01/liberalsdemocratsenvironmentalists-responsible-for-high-gasenergy-prices/ for one such example. It's easy to blame environmentalists, especially because they get lots of press trying to protect the environment from all the damage done extracting minerals & oils. So often, companies go to the federal government because it's cheap. Our government will sell the rights for $1. Go to a homeowner & offer a dollar and see what you get! Is it possible to drill in a more environmentally friendly way? I'm sure there is, but these companies won't do it unless forced to do so. Right now, they take advantage of regulatory loopholes that allow them to be major sources of pollution. http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/environment/2007-10-31-energy-pollution_N.htm. It's true that not all environmentalists have a real understanding of energy. Some have even blocked alternatives, like wind energy. http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1258373/environmentalists_appear_to_be_winds_biggest_enemy/
Environmentalists can be credited with many things: getting DDT banned, pushing for the Clean Air & Clean Water Acts, vehicle emissions standards, and much more. Let's keep an open mind that environmentalism and energy production aren't necessarily polar opposites.
3. Let see, $40.6 BILLION earnings for Exxon Mobil in 2007 (http://www.usnews.com/articles/business/economy/2008/02/01/exxons-profits-measuring-a-record-windfall.html). That's for one oil company in one year. "If Exxon Mobil were a country, its 2007 profit would exceed the gross domestic product of nearly two thirds of the 183 nations in the World Bank's economic rankings. It would be right in there behind the likes of Angola and Qatar—two oil-producing nations, incidentally, where Exxon has major operations." On top of that, Congress has yet to repeal the special oil company tax break pushed by Bush during his first term. When OPEC first arose in the 70's and gas prices drastically escalated, Nixon (a Republican, btw), enacted a special tax called Windfall Profits. Go to this link to get more info on WP taxes: http://www.taxhistory.org/thp/readings.nsf/cf7c9c870b600b9585256df80075b9dd/edf8de04e58e4b14852570ba0048848b?OpenDocument
It's not all the fault of Big Bad Oil, of course, but I haven't seen any move by them to spend some of those profits on new production or new refineries. Nor have they appeared to invest heavily in more environmentally sound energy sources--but I admit to not having all the details on this topic.
4. Local gas stations. These poor guys have to essentially place a bet on how much gas will cost them next time they fill up. They also have to be competitive with everyone else around them. I don't know what the markup might be, but I also don't see too many gas-station owners in Congress (so they can't be that rich).
5. OPEC. Leave a bad taste in your mouth? Go to http://www.opec.org/aboutus/history/history.htm for a history lesson. They control the flow of oil out of the biggest producing countries. We've had over 40 years to create replacement products and reduce consumption. We answered the call with SUV's, huge energy-hogging homes, and few green initiatives. While household energy consumption has gone down, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/txt/ptb0204.html on data thru 2001, imagine how much more it would have gone down if we'd enacted construction changes, size limitations, energy efficiency and tax credits for older homes. Last I heard, 40% of the energy consumed in the US is from our homes. Let's do a better job or removing OPEC from the picture.
6. China. It's all about supply and demand. Demand is way up in China and it's looking for more supplies. http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050901faessay84503/david-zweig-bi-jianhai/china-s-global-hunt-for-energy.html. That means they're competiting in a market where the US is the #1 consumer and they're #2. I read somewhere China may be #1 in the next 6 months. An article in Asia Times talked about how China (back in '03) wanted to move from less coal use--due to pollution concerns--to gas or natural gas. You can't deny that more demand has affected supply and hence prices.
7. Commodities? Go to http://www.wtrg.com/ for the latest prices. Note the news on speculation. I rarely hear anything about the commodities market & how speculation has led to the increase in prices. On the radio today, I heard them say the price isn't up because of supply--there's plenty in stock pile. So, why don't we stop the trading? Go back to #1. Nice circle, huh?
Obama Mania
So I guess I'm one of the minority of women who supports Barack Obama. Yes, I'm an Obama Mama. According to polls, more women are voting for Hillary, while men are fleeing the country. Just kidding. I think the last I heard, more men are going for Barack or McCain. Gasp. Yes, only the uninformed (or extremely conservative) would vote for McCain. Think Supreme Court, folks. Anyway, I just found a website called Women for Barack which I'll check out. No idea how valuable it is, so fair warning. http://www.womenforbarackobama.com/.
Ok, back to the Big B. Much mudslinging & out-right lies have been tossed at his feet. How do I know this? Well, I live in IL and I know his voting record. Let's run through a few of them:
1. Does he have the experience to be President? He has just as much as Hillary, and, if you go back in history to another favorite Illinoisian, good old Abe. He worked under Lieberman (well, he learned about how the right thinks, since Lieberman is pretty much a Republican in Dem clothing). He was a state rep, now a senator.
2. Can he answer that Red Phone in the White House? Part of what makes Big B a nice change for the White House is he's intelligent. I think he has the brains to appoint staff & advisors who can walk him through what he needs to know. I would assume, as with any President (ok, present one excepted), that various disaster scenarios are role-played in advance. I certainly trust him to be more thoughtful in his decisions than any other candidate.
3. He's a Muslim. Wrong again. His father was not religious, while his mother was a Christian. Big B was raised a Christian and has attended the same Christian church for 20 years. Give it a rest, folks (that includes you, Mr. Limbaugh). See http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2007/12/24/obama-adressess-muslim-background/ for his interview.
4. He doesn't have a position on anything. Then you are misinformed. Go to http://obama.senate.gov/ and check out his Issues. I do admit that, as he's my senator, I wish he were in Washington more so he could vote more. However, he has voted on the most important issues, for which I have to be content.
5. His voting record while an IL rep was poor. Again, you don't know the story & are listening to right-wing scare tactics. Many times he was asked to vote a certain way in order to produce a certain result--like tabling an issue. That's called politics, babe.
Don't get me wrong. I'll vote for Hillary if she wins the nod (back to that Supreme Court issue, remember). But, get the facts before you speak. Remember, there's always 2 sides to any story. Here's another website that purports to be a Fact Hub to disinformation: http://facts.hillaryhub.com/. And may the best person win.
6. He's not really anti-war. Wrong again. I can remember hearing him talk about it. I also emailed him during this time to tell him how much I appreciated his stand when he voted against going into Iraq. He actually read the damn thing before the Senate vote. Can't say the same about some other legislators we know.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)