Not much of a choice

We like to pretend like there is a real choice in politics, but there isn’t. Because of decades of gerrymandering safe districts, the two-parties have infected national politics with the old stereotypes of entrenched ward bosses with near lifetime appointments in both houses of Congress.

Our Presidential choices aren’t much better either. In the primary races, candidates pathetically pander to a small fraction of their party’s base that is ideologically driven and has the loudest bullhorn, no matter how much of the party they truly represent. After a candidate is chosen, they then spend the next few months and hundreds of millions of dollars pandering to just 4-6 million “undecided/swing” voters. These people largely vote with their pocketbooks in mind and are far less independent than they would have you believe.

There are, of course, the “3rd” party candidates that run too. Occasionally they are successful but usually at city-council and state legislative levels. People will tell you that you’re throwing your vote away when you vote for them, and that the mere fact that they dare to challenge the status quo of the 2 party duopoly makes them a potential “spoiler”, which is like labeling someone as being a leper.

It isn’t any wonder that people are generally fed up with politics today.

I heard this one today: “Romney and Obama are both stranded in the middle of the ocean. Who gets saved? America.”

But is it really just an either-or, two sides to the same coin choice? Looking at my options, I really don’t think so. I stand firm that I’m a limited-government type of guy, but not in a rigid Ron Paulite type of way. I’d much rather the government left me alone to make my own choices and didn’t tax me to pay for land wars in Asia to feed the coffers of plutocrats. But when asked to vote Republican, 9.9 times out of 10 I have to say no.

You can chose to blame some of what I’m about to say as one-off crazies or individual lunacy that doesn’t reflect the party as a whole. But I call bullshit. While I’m all for smaller, more efficient government, voting for a Republican on the federal level means that I support the following:

Trickle-down economics – this is of course the theory that if the already wealthy just had a bit more money and were burdened with taxes less, that they would just hire all of the unemployed people out there and the economy would have room to grow. We know this doesn’t work having tried it on more than once occasion in the last century. Currently we’re in a demand-slump. Meaning that it is weak consumer demand that is slowing down the economic recovery. The rich spend less of their income, while the middle and lower class tends to spend more of it. Until those people are spending more, we won’t see continued growth. And if wages continue to be stagnant, we’re going to be living in a Walmart economy for decades.

Science denial – Only 6% of scientists associate with the GOP. Why? Maybe because a plurality believe that the world is less than 10,000 years old and that we came about from the literal garden and a magical talking snake that told us knowledge was a bad thing. Or that they deny the very well established science on global climate change.

Crazy – The GOP has enacted or tried to enact laws that force a women to have a vaginal probe stuck in her if she’s considering an abortion. One of their reps thought that women couldn’t get pregnant if she was “legitimately raped”. A one time front-runner for POTUS claimed that the HPV vaccine made people retarded. A majority of republicans believe that the current President of the US was either born outside of the US or is a Muslim.

Imperialism – Many want to go to war with Iran preemptively, ignoring a decade of a similar failed policy in the US. Paul Ryan calls for an annual increase in military spending – indefinitely (with seemingly no way to pay for it).

Destroying the Environment – Republicans have even included it in some of their official platforms that the dissolution of the EPA is one of their priorities, as well as repealing the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts. A vast majority don’t accept the overwhelming evidence that humans are the primary cause of global climate change.

 

I could go on, but I won’t. I could also point out stupid shit democrats do like react to everything bad that happens with a ban, such as the large soda ban that has taken place in New York. Their constant lip service to responsible spending while never (on their own) tackling the long-term problems we will face when it comes to entitlement spending and the growing national debt. Yes, I know exactly how we got to the mess we’re in now, but dealing with it is a whole other issue.

So, when given the choice between someone that understands science and someone that thinks rape babies don’t happen, or given the choice between someone that understands that unions have been a positive impact on the middle class for the last century versus someone that still believes in the myth of trickle-down economics, I generally, reluctantly, raise a blue flag.

 

 

*I’m drafting a post on alternative choices, as well as a sort of meta-post on where I personally stand on the important issues of the day. As always, constructive comments and suggestions more than welcome. Cheers.

Tenets of Deep Ecology – part 1

As it should be clear, Deep Ecology has had a profound impact on my views regarding the environment, ecology, economics, philosophy, and policy decisions. In order to explore this a little deeper, I’ve decided to write a few posts going over the eight main tenets of Deep Ecology as expressed by Arne Naess. Let’s start with number 1:

The well-being and flourishing of human and nonhuman life on Earth have value in themselves (synonyms: intrinsic value, inherent value). These values are independent of the usefulness of the nonhuman world for human purposes.

There is a reason that this is the first tenet. It is certainly the most important. The underlying basis for Deep Ecology is that our value system is skewed in a direction that is completely unsustainable, is in dis-harmony with our environment, and will lead to ours and our planet’s destruction. While this was developed in the 70’s and 80’s, we’ve now become what I like to refer to as a “throw-away” culture. We value things less because they generally have less value. We’ve invented plastic eating utensils and paper plates that we just throw away in a landfill somewhere. Nothing is repairable anymore. Furniture doesn’t last and often is unable to be repaired for most consumers. Electronics and (especially) children’s toys are generally single-use items, made to be thrown away once they’ve become damaged or broken. Everything just gets thrown away and replaced from our big-box retailers.

Unfortunately, this “throw-away” mentality has permeated nearly every aspect of our lives and become a great economic achievement in the eyes of many. What this has led to is the devaluation of the entirety of nature in the minds of consumers. It isn’t easy to place that blame squarely on the shoulders of consumers though. Everything in our lives has become externalized. I’m not just talking about economic costs (which I will be posting about soon enough) but the whole process of consuming. Everything comes to us in neat, plastic-wrapped brand name packaging on nice clean shelves. Our meat is dyed a certain color so that it looks more attractive in our grocery stores. Death happens away in a hospital; birth behind a closed door in a hospital room. Our energy is produced in some far away plant, and our garbage goes away in a truck, never to be seen again. We lack value because we lack the experience associated with our consumption and our culture.

Alder forrest near the Stillaguamish River – typically this area floods a bit during the rainy season, and is frequently home to creatures big (bears, cougars) and small (beavers, frogs, pygmy owls).

Deep ecology then, asks us to experience these things for ourselves. It asks us to be dependent upon local sources of materials and energy. It asks us to be engaged in the communities we live in. It asks us to value nature the same way we do the homes we live in. It is primarily a shift in values that will bring about the change that deep ecology seeks. It begs us to ask questions like “Do I need this?” “What happens when this thing will break or my children outgrow it?” “Where was this food grown and how far has it traveled” “Who made this, and how was it made and brought to me?” “Is it sensible to fill up a recreational swimming pool when I live close to rivers, streams, lakes and the ocean?”

Asking such questions is just the first step. Shifting your world view is the goal here, and asking the tough, deep questions will help get you there. Where “there” is, is when we can come to view our forests, top soil, coral reefs, and rainforests as being at least (but likely more) valuable than television, urban sprawl, cheap plastic everything. Trees are valuable because they are trees. Not just because they give us oxygen or because they are a source of building material. Here in the Pacific Northwest, trees form their own tiny ecosystems. Ferns grow on branches where a sort of tree-soil has formed with moss. In the Redwoods, this is even more developed as there can be inches of soil on top of branches, which provides a tiny ecosystem for small plants, bugs and critters. Trees keep soil intact and prevent erosion. When they die and fall over, they actually are home to more life/pound than they were once alive. They become “nurse logs” which are home to an amazing array of life. Current Republican Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney has said that he doesn’t know what wilderness areas are for, or how they are valuable other than the oil/gas/timer deposits they have there. Mr. Romney, wild areas are valuable because they are wild. They have value in and of themselves, not to mention that large wilderness areas are the only hope for speciation and evolution to continue to work, along with the only possible way to preserve biodiversity. Humans are valuable because they are humans. Not because of their economic output, or their place in society.

I’ve written more than intended here, so I’ll pick up with some of the other tenets soon. Cheers.

The government which governs best…

Just yesterday I was listening to NPR and they were talking about how President Obama had recommended combining several government agencies into one, thereby reducing government waste, bureaucracy, costs to taxpayers, and government workforce. The agencies involved are all related to the Commerce Department and are all business related. The Commerce Department itself would cease to exist, but this plan actually provides for a practical solution as to what would happen to the department and it’s functions after the re-alignment of agencies, something that libertarian and conservative ideologues like Ron Paul and Rick Perry have yet to provide.

This should be an almost no-brainer, depending upon all of the particulars of course. I’m a huge advocate for these types of moves, and if successful I’d like to see more of it. For instance, we could combine the EPA and Department of Agriculture with the Department of the Interior. We could merge the Departments of Transportation and Energy, and I’m sure there are other agencies out there that we could combine to be more efficient, intrude upon our liberty less, and function as a valuable service for citizens and business owners. (I’d also do away with Homeland Security altogether but that’s another post…)

Maybe this has always been on the President’s agenda, since he did talk about this in his last State of the Union address. Maybe it’s a new idea born of general concern for the behemoth of beaurocracy that our government has become. Or maybe he’s just doing it because it’s good politics in an election year.

Personally, I don’t give a shit why he’s doing it. Just do it. Really, it’s a great idea.

Of course, our Republican friends might not agree. No doubt they’ll use this as another political football, even though we all know if it was a Republican President proposing this, it would have received nearly unanimous approval. I’m eager to see where this actually ends up going, and maybe Washington State could take a page out of this book. I’m looking at you, Departments of Ecology and Department of Natural Resources.

 

 

 

The mistake was what he did say, not what he didn’t…

Last night in the 3,756th Republican debate, Texas Governor Rick Perry made what many are calling a “gaffe” by drawing a blank when talking about the three government agencies he would do away with when elected President. He was able to name the Department of Education, and the Department of Commerce, and when offered help by his fellow candidates, said that the EPA needs to be rebuilt, but that it wasn’t one of the agencies he’d get rid of. The talking heads are saying his campaign isn’t likely to recover, all because he stumbled during a “debate”.

First, this wasn’t a debate. This was a highly commercialized hour of campaigning brought to you by CNBC and their many sponsors. There was no honest discussion because candidates are not held accountable for the nonsense that they are uttering.

Next, why was the “pause” the greatest mistake that Perry made? He’s talking about shutting down the Department of Commerce for cryin’ out loud! Let’s take a quick peek at what the DoC does:

• They oversee international trade, and gather labor and other important economic statistics and data that is vital in shaping domestic and foreign trade and monetary policy.

• They oversee NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Shutting this agency down would be bad.Very bad. This isn’t just a bunch of nerds sending weather balloons in the air. NOAA forcasts hurricanes and other major storms, and provides time-critical information to local authoritites to advise them on evacuation procedures. This is a risk to life, property, and the economy. There is a lot of other things that NOAA oversees as well (like weather forecasts that farmers and companies that transport goods rely on, or assessing the damage from the BP oil spill), all of which directly impacts the environment, lives, and the economy.

• The Department of Commerce issues patents and trademarks.

• The Department of Commerce has under it agencies like the National Insitute of Standards and Technology, which puts scientists and engineers to work developing technology and setting standards in the scientific community. This is something that goes way back to our founding fathers, and how they saw a need to have a set standard for weights/measures and other matters of science.

Why isn’t this a much, much larger issue than his forgetting another agency to shut down? Or how about the Department of Education? What possible good could they provide to the public?

• It helps to fund Gallaudet University – the only deaf college in the United States

• It issues student loans and pell grants so that people can afford to go to college

• Sets standards for schools at a federal level

• It makes sure that students have equal access to educational opportunities (though improvement is still clearly needed here)

In my opinion, the Dept. of Education doesn’t go far enough, and is probably a bit too decentralized. While local communities should have the most influence over their children’s education, a strong agency like the DoDE needs to set higher standards in Math and Science if we ever want our children to be able to compete on a global level once they enter the job market. I’d also like to see a national apprenticeship program, but that might be another post altogether. Reform these agencies and get rid of waste? Of course! Close them down entirely? Insanity!

Yet none of these things apparently matter in these debates. According to Governor Perry, we can just shut down the DoC and offer no viable solutions for issuing patents. How does a market economy drive innovation without a guarantee of patent protection?

I guess those types of questions don’t fit on a bumper sticker though. And that’s all we’ll hear going into this 2012 race; bumper sticker politics. Change. Hope. Less Government. Job Creators. Taxes bad. Support the Troops.

Aren’t the issues we face much more complex?

Cheers.

Voted.

Last week I was able to vote in my underwear, and no one seemed to mind. Thankfully, my state has mail-in voting, where nearly all ballots cast are done by mail. There are still a few polling places around for people to go in-person ( I believe they can also fill out a provisional ballot if they haven’t registered as well) if they want though.

Personally, I think this system is fantastic (though could be more successful if postage wasn’t required, though you can drop your ballot off at a few different ballot boxes in each county) as far as allowing as many people as possible to vote. In many places, voting still takes place in person, on a Tuesday during the day. This is prohibitive for many working people to find the time to go and vote throughout the day, and isn’t a very efficient process. Also, I find that I am able to make a more informed vote from the convenience of my home, with my laptop open next to me. I can take a look at who is sponsoring a particular initiative, follow the money used in campaigns, and do some thorough research of the candidates and the claims they make.

Right now, we’re seeing quite a few efforts at voter suppression guided by the GOP and powerful moneyed interests. Other than move to mail-in ballots and maybe changing the election day (either to a week-end or having a national holiday on election day), what are some other ways to increase voter turn out?

Why I support the Occupy Movement

My paternal Grandfather arrived home from his tour in Europe during WW2 and started an HVAC business in my hometown of Saginaw, MI. My father worked for him for a bit, and he employed a few people, some white and some black. He and my grandmother had enough money to invest in a few houses around Saginaw, and rented them out. My grandmother took care of most of the property management, and when times were tough, she told me that she would sometimes barter with people if they weren’t able to make a rent payment one month. I got the sense that my grandparents kind of saw their tenants as some sort of extended family. They were able to afford a nice home in the suburbs, and sent two daughters to nursing school, and another off to college to become a teacher. My father followed his father in the world of skilled trades, and was able to get a job at the GM Steering Gear Plant as a tinsmith. My grandparents would retire at a decent age, and move to Virginia. My Grandfather died earlier this year, and my grandmother is able to survive off of the money they saved, social security, and the fact that their house has been paid off for years. They were the 99%.

My maternal Grandfather was stationed up in Alaska during the end of WW2 and Korea, mostly helping to land planes and sitting around playing poker all day. When he was done with his service, he worked at a factory until he retired, and my grandmother would pick up an odd job here and there like housecleaning, babysitting, or selling Avon products. They raised two children, took vacations at least once a year, and cared for the many grandchildren that made their way through their home. My Grandfather passed away 2 years ago, and my grandmother never once had to worry about money thanks to the investments my grandpa was able to make. My grandmother passed away a few weeks ago, and she left her children and grandchildren with no debt. Going on camping vacations was one of my favorite childhood memories of my grandparents, and we were able to do that at least once a year. They were the 99%.

My Father literally worked hard – 50+ hours a week in a hot and noisy factory, working with his hands and machines all day long. He would go to night school at a local community college to learn different skills and trades (like autoCAD) so that he didn’t have to spend the rest of his career on the low end of the totem pole. He is now in charge of the entire plant’s CFC. He is salary, though still works his ass off (like 60+ hours a week) so that he can retire before the company fails. Because, he isn’t working at Steering Gear anymore. GM spun that factory off in the 90’s and it was Delphi. Then Delphi went under and it was sold to a (I believe) Korean company, which was then sold to who the fuck knows now. I don’t even know what the place is called anymore. But I do know that in my youth, Steering Gear made Saginaw run. In a town of 80,000-100,000 people, it employed over 20,000. Now it employs between 4,000-6,000. All of the people at that factory, including my father, are the 99%. My father busted his ass all those years to give me the things I had, pay the bills and have enough fun money that we could buy some old used snowmobiles or dirt bikes and go tear up our country lot. We’d take a vacation once a year that usually involved camping, and I was lucky enough that he could afford braces for me. He bought my first car for $600, an El Camino with the caveat that we both would fix it up a bit before I drove it. That was a big thing for my dad, to always do everything you can for yourself. I can only think of like 1 time my dad ever hired anyone to do anything. He raised me to be proud to be where I came from, to be proud of the working class values he instilled. I am.

My mother and father divorced when I was 8. My mother worked at a bank 4 days a week, and then also worked at a grocery store 3-4 days a week, both on the shitty side of town. By shitty I mean her bank was held up like 6 times, and even her grocery store was held up. Who robs a Kroger? Seriously? Eventually she became the Assistant Manager there, and then they sent her off to one of their discount chain stores as an Assistant Manager, making probably 12 bucks an hour. At this point, she was supporting herself, and had custody of my sister, and she had visitation with me on every other weekend. Not much money left over after the payments on her mobile home, the rent on the space, and the rest of the bills. Even considering this, she made it a point to take a vacation with me at least once a year. Even if it was just a trip to Toronto that included some city sight-seeing, Niagra Falls, and the zoo for 3 days, or the time we went to Sea World in Ohio. I had a blast. My mother quit her job to take care of my grandmother, but since she died earlier this month, my mother will have to go back and look for another job. She’ll be turning 50 next year, and I can’t imagine that the prospects for an out-of-work ex-retail store manager in Saginaw Michigan are going to be too bright. I’m extremely worried that she won’t be able to find anything, but my mother is humble enough that she’ll take whatever job she can get. She is the 99%.

Currently I work full time at a company that provides video relay services for deaf and hard of hearing individuals. They pay and benefits are alright. Enough to feed my family, pay the bills, and every once in a while have some fun money. My wife is a stay at home mom, and for that I am extremely grateful. We live modestly because we have to. We have internet but no cable. A home phone and my wife has a cheap pre-paid cell phone. Thankfully my work provides me with a cell phone, or else I likely wouldn’t have one. We live in an apartment because it was all we could afford, but are hoping to secure a USDA loan and purchase a cheap home next year. In addition to working full time, I’m also going to school full time. In 2014 I should be able to graduate with a BA in Environmental Policy. Right now, I’m the working poor and I’m the 99%.

But I don’t hate capitalism. I think people that earn higher wages often deserver higher wages. Not all the time, as is the case with CEO pay, but most of the time. I don’t hate Wall Street, nor do I hate banks. But I choose not to use banks. A bank’s primary incentive is to make as much profit from their customer’s money as is possible, regardless of the people involved. A credit union, on the other hand, has its primary incentive in its customers themselves; keeping them happy, and creating as little risk as possible, because there is no profit involved with a credit union.

I also happen to think competition is a good thing. Competition drives innovation, and drives people to succeed. I think communism is generally stupid, as is socialism. I think neither of these systems could ever work unless you created a small, sustainable island community with a small population. But I digress.

I also think that students that take on student loans should have to pay them back. I’m all in favor of overhauling the entire education system, but there is no reason that people that willingly took on these loans shouldn’t have to pay them back.

Why am I in support of the Occupy movement? Why am I proud to be part of the 99%? Because the lives that my grandparents lived are now something of a myth. The idealized middle-class American dream is slipping away. The idea that I could now get good job at a factory, put in my 40 hours a week, and retire at 65 with a good pension and retirement are all but dead. The idea of getting a good job at a factory and having job security is all but a myth. The very idea of a pension is all but a myth anymore. Hell, I’m not very confident that I’ll be able to retire before 70 at all.

I support the Occupy movement because of the level of greed and corruption in politics. Democracy cannot succeed when only a few powerful moneyed interests control the government. I am strongly opposed to oligarchy and plutocracy, both of which our country is heading towards.

We continue to reward companies that have sent our jobs overseas, and continue to reward a dirty energy industry that creates greater negative externalities than their value added. All because they have bought our politicians and influenced legislation in ways no ordinary American can.

We continue to spend billions and trillions on wars overseas and building an Imperialist state around the globe while we step over homeless people here at home, while Native people here in the US live in conditions as bad as they are in Haiti.

I stand with the Occupy movement because the movement is inclusive, and fits many voices within it. There is no “one” message, other than maybe that the majority of Americans have been excluded from the processes that affect our lives in the greatest ways, and we’re sick of not having a voice anymore. The institution of democracy has been stripped away from most Americans, and left in the hands of a privileged few.

I’ll likely have more posts on this topic, but right now my only thoughts on how to affect any type of change really comes down to just one word: vote. Many of the people at these protests either have never voted or don’t often vote. I know many of you feel disenfranchised by our two-party duopoly, but that is no reason to not still vote. Voting in the primaries and non-major elections is the best first step, especially if you want to advocate for “third” parties. And even when it does come down to a Democrat vs. a Republican, there is a real choice there. Yes, both parties have been bought out by powerful interests, but to compare them as apples and apples is an exercise in willful ignorance.

Anyway, I’m glad that this movement has begun. It seems to me like people are fighting for the America that my grandparents lived and thrived in, the one that they envisioned their grandchildren could do even better than they did in.

Cheers.

Justice?

Last night as I was working on homework, I saw my twitter stream go nuts. Within less than 30 second there were 45 new tweets (this is a lot for my stream, I’m only following like 380 people). Reports were coming in that Osama Bin Laden had been caught or killed. No, definitely killed. US has his body. Obama to give conference soon…Then Obama gave his speech, confirming that yes, we had finally caught the man behind the USS Cole and 9/11 (and many other attacks).

During his speech, Obama made the statement “Justice has been done”.

“Justice”? Revenge? Yes. Justice? Hardly. I don’t see how this is justice. First, how is there any justice found in death? For a few reasons I am against the death penalty, but mainly because I don’t see how it is a punishment. What punishment is found in death? I can find none. Remember when we found Saddam? And he looked like this:

 

He basically became a laughing-stock. Look at him! We showed the world that this despot had no power left, and had been reduced to hiding out *literally* in a hole in the ground. He was then tried and sentenced to death in front of the whole world. This is what we do with even the most vile and lowly among us here in America. We give them a trial. But with Bin Laden, that ending never had a chance to happen. Instead, he went down in a blaze of glory, fighting his enemies to the bitter end. A martyr. Rather than demonstrate our own ideals of democratic justice, we ended up just killing the man. The SEALS obviously did their jobs, and returned fire like they should have, I’m not questioning their decisions, nor Obama’s. But I think somehow an opportunity was missed. We fed into the shoot-first-ask-later stereotype we’re associated with globally. Coupled with Bin Laden’s heroic death, our actions may just end up giving our enemies something new to fight for, one more thing to hate America over.

Back to the point of justice, how does this one death provide justice for all the lives he helped to destroy? How does it right the wrongs that led up to the attacks on the USS Cole and 9/11?  How does it right all of the wrongs carried out since? I don’t think it does. I think Osama Bin Laden was a real piece of shit. And there isn’t any doubt that the world is a bit better off today now that he isn’t in it. But I can’t find a shred of justice in his death. Maybe peace and comfort to some, and vengeance for others. But justice is sorely lacking in this situation.

I believe that rather than celebrating this death, we should attempt to examine the situation at hand on a little more of a global scale, checking our nationalism at the door. Let’s acknowledge that the world is just a little less evil than it was the day before Bin Laden was taken from it. But let’s also acknowledge the fact that the systems in place that created Bin Laden are still present today, and that our country still faces threats to our liberty both foreign and domestic. Maybe we can use this opportunity to examine how it is that Bin Laden came out as the winner in this situation.

Before I end, let me be clear. It’s not that I’m upset about this happening. I’m not. Like I said, the guy was a colossal piece of shit, a total waste of existence. I’m just not up for celebrating death, especially when it is being used as some kind of national rallying cry. I think I’ll save my celebrations for when we end the Patriot Act and bring our troops home. Then you might see me waving a flag in the streets.

Cheers.

Time to make progress

 

via Treehugger

This is a picture of a dead bird. This bird died because it ate all of that plastic you see there. Plastic that you and I threw away, and ended up in the ocean, or washed up on the shore. This bird doesn’t know any better, because evolution in our feathered friends hasn’t had time to adjust to the industrial revolution. Evolution has also failed to equip this bird with the ability to digest any of this plastic, so it just sits inside the bird, and the bird will either starve or hemorrhage or choke to death.

 

These are the stomach contents from a dead sea turtle. Again, a ton of fucking plastic. Chances are, the turtle found the plastic here:

This is a small part of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, a swirling mass of floating plastic and other garbage that is twice the size of Texas in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. This is where my trash ends up. This is where your trash ends up. We’ve made this garbage patch.

This is another dead fucking bird. It died due to the oil that spilled in the Gulf of Mexico last year from the BP spill. That oil was being pumped for you and for me. We were going to use it to get to work, heat our homes, make our blue jeans, and to create a bunch of plastic, the same type of plastic the bird and the turtle died from.

This is one of the ways in which we source the oil that killed the bird and produced the plastic that created the trash that killed the other bird and that fucking turtle whose stomach contents are pictured above. We just fucking take it from other people. We make up all kinds of excuses for war and our international relationships and dealings, but it so much of it comes down to securing our unlimited access to oil and the profis that oil will afford a select few.

 

This is natural gas, and it is what some people are proposing we use to help get us off of oil. This is a picture of someone lighting their god damned drinking water on fire, because of the practice of hydraulic fracking for natural gas. Fracking allows natural gas to leak into the wells and aquifers that people use for drinking water, agriculture, and farming. Then the water is pretty much ruined forever. Though this is a pretty kick ass party trick. If you’re throwing a ” I can’t drink my fucking water any more” party, that is.

Meanwhile, while we’re burning all these fossil fuels, we’re making the Earth warmer. “Isn’t that a good thing?’ a total idiot might ask? No, it isn’t. One of the effects it is having is on the forests in British Colombia. “Who cares, because it’s only Canada?” you might ask? Well, that’s also something a complete idiot would ask. All those trees in the picture above aren’t supposed to be that color. They are brown and red because they are infested with bark beetles. Those bark beetles are experiencing warmer, shorter winters thanks to global warming, and that means that their offspring aren’t dying off during due to frigid temperatures, and their population is exploding. These trees are part of a system that forms an enormous carbon sink. But because they are dying, that carbon can’t be stored there. Which creates more warming. And more warming will cause more severe weather. So you’ll probably want to turn up the heater a bit more in the winter depending on where you live. And you’ll want to turn up the A/C a bit more in the summer. And that’ll require a bit more energy, which will end up using more oil.

Please, please do at least one thing today to change this. And then do it again tomorrow, and the next day, and the day after that…

One thing you might even do is write to your representative. Let them know that the EPA needs to be able to regulate greenhouse gases, including CO2. While you’re at it, let them know that you don’t want mercury, sulfur dioxide, and other particulates in the air you breathe.

Just do something, stick with it, and make progress. We need it.

“…progress,

man’s distinctive mark alone,

Not God’s, and not the beast’s;

God is, they are,

Man partly is,

and wholly hopes to be”                     ~ Robert Browning Hamilton

 

 

Cheers.

The steeper bill to pay

The bill that House Republicans are proposing that will set the budget through the end of the fiscal year (Sept ’11) “loads up every piece of the far-right social agenda in one bill, from restricting a woman’s right to choose to preventing government from protecting the air we breathe and the water we drink.” – quote from as Rep. Jared Polis, D-Colo. in Huff Post today. While I find many of the proposals distasteful, it is the ones concerning the environment that I would like to draw your attention to. As some of you reading this know, I’m currently in school, pursuing a degree in Environmental Policy and Planning. These issues are important to me, and often I’m shocked that there is so little regard paid to them.

I found a list of the environmental riders on the budget bill at the Sietch Blog. You can read them here, and there is a pdf version here. My thanks to the writers there for posting this. I’ll list just a couple of the ones that I found particularly appalling:

Section 1746: Taking Away EPA’s Authority to Enforce the Clean Air Act – states that zero funds may be used by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to enforce or promulgate any regulation related to the emissions of greenhouse gases due to concerns regarding climate change. This far reaching legislation prevents EPA from regulating carbon pollution and protecting Americans from the impacts of climate change. This section stops EPA from requiring new power plants, oil refineries, and other major new sources of carbon pollution to begin reducing their carbon emissions. It also prevents EPA from setting minimum federal standards for power plants and oil refineries, and severely interferes with EPA’s permitting process for new or expanded facilities. In addition, this section prevents the public from learning how much carbon pollution is actually being emitted by the largest polluters. This legislation ties EPA’s hands and allows carbon pollution to continue or even increase unabated – endangering public health, food and water supplies, wildlife habitat, species, forests and coastlines throughout our nation.

Section 1747: Blocking EPA Efforts to Clarify the Scope of the Clean Water Act – halts the EPA’s ongoing effort to make clear which waters remain protected by the Clean Water Act in the wake of confusing court decisions and subsequent Bush administration policy. This provision leaves millions of acres of wetlands and thousands of miles of streams without clear Clean Water Act protection. These streams provide at least part of the drinking water for 117 million Americans. It jeopardizes EPA’s ability to enforce the law against oil spills and waste dumping in these waters.

 Section 4008: Limiting Enforcement of the Cement Kiln Air Toxics Standard – EPA is prohibited from using any funds to implement or enforce a health standard to control mercury and other pollutants from cement plants. Cement plants are the third leading source of man-made mercury emissions and have evaded controls prescribed under the Clean Air Act for over 13 years. EPA finalized these life-saving standards in September 2010 with a compliance deadline of September 2014. These overdue standards will save 2,500 lives, prevent 1,000 heart attacks, and reduce 130,000 missed days of school and work each year, according to EPA estimates. EPA also projects that this rule would save $18 billion in health costs just from reductions of fine particulate matter. Defunding implementation of this critical reduction of mercury, lead, particulate matter and other hazardous pollutants will not remove any regulatory obligations. In fact, this amendment deprives states and cement manufacturers from getting technical assistance and support in developing compliance plans. Barring EPA from providing critical guidance for this protective health standard puts the public at risk and leaves industry without critical compliance input.

 Section 4015: Blocking EPA from Regulating Emissions from Stationary Sources – issues a “stop-work” order to the EPA for any regulation of carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, sulfur hexafluoride, hydrofluorocarbons, or perfluorocarbons from stationary sources for any reason, including their impacts on ozone, climate change, or any other public health threat. The broad impacts of this amendment, therefore, include blocking work underway to address dangerous carbon dioxide pollution; a de facto construction ban on power plants and factories; interference with the

Renewable Fuel Standard; preventing EPA from implementing a three-year study of biomass greenhouse gas emissions; interference with the EPA’s acid rain program; preventing enforcement of rules covering emissions of HFCs and perfluorocarbons from refrigeration and other equipment.

This stop-work order would accomplish nothing other than to ensure that more dangerous pollution is dumped into the air and that U.S. companies fall behind in the global competition for clean energy markets.

The rest of the list is just as disgusting. Everything from defunding NOAA to gutting funding for important studies and our involvement in the IPCC. Many of these measures will not only create conditions of unparalleled environmental destruction, but cost thousands of jobs, and directly (and indirectly) impact the health of tens of thousands (or more), and the potential to contaminate the drinking water of hundreds of millions.

 

This is all being done in the name of controlling the deficit. But I doubt that the motivation behind such actions is really just fiscal responsibility. For whatever reason, it has become the party line of the Republicans that any government proposals that are aimed at benefiting the environment are somehow inherently evil. While I don’t doubt that this meme was started in the interests of businesses not wanting to spend a few extra bucks complying with environmental standards that protect the air we breathe and the water we drink, I believe this new round of cuts is born out of something else entirely. It’s almost as if the new partly line is simply “fuck the liberals, let’s pass reactionary legislation that will drum up hysteria and unite our base”. They’re even bringing back styrofoam into the congressional lunchroom. Yeah, styrofoam, that substance that has been banned in several cities and is toxic throughout its entire millennial life span. Oh, and there is that state rep in Montana that is introducing legislation that would declare global warming beneficial to the welfare and and business climate of his state. The Republicans are basically taking their ideological positions to the extreme, in an effort to gut government of any type of power to protect its citizens from the dangers that industry can impose upon us.

Unfortunately, Republicans are living in the delusion of ”now”. All of their proposed cuts to environmental spending are looking at the short-term deficit impact. None of these cuts address the long-term economic impact (hint: it isn’t good) nor do they address the long-term health-effects, or the long-term environmental impacts (which will impact the other two). Republicans love talking about how we can’t pass the deficit bill on to our children and grandchildren, but when we craft policies that demonstrate a total disregard for the environment, we leave them with a much steeper bill to pay.

Some like to claim that the green/lib crowd is trying to scare people with doomsday-type scenarios about climate change and other environmental issues. But the facts remain:

We are running out of fresh water

We are affecting global climate change, and the Earth is getting hotter

We are running out of arable land

We are dumping hazardous chemicals into the land, air and water that are screwing with our health and depleting the amazing amount of biodiversity found on this wonderful planet of ours.

These facts should be of grave concern to everyone, regardless of political persuasion. But they aren’t. Because in the culture of capitalism we currently find ourselves in, there are those that value the future balance sheets of our children’s bank accounts more than we do their health and livelihoods.

That’s all for now. Cheers.

There were 19 victims in Arizona

 

I really don’t have much time to post lately, and I have thoughts of closing the blog down for good as I really don’t see myself being able to make time to commit to posting. More on that some other time perhaps.

I wanted to post today just a thought or two on the Arizona shooting that took place on Saturday. I’m sure by now you’ve heard the whole story, so I’ll spare going into any details here.

My only thoughts are this: 19 people’s lives were directly and permanently altered on Saturday. The shooter brought lots of ammo with him. While his main target certainly seemed to be Congresswoman Giffords, there were 19 others that were shot, 6 of which died.

Federal judge John Roll, 63, left behind 3 sons, a wife, and 5 grandchildren.

30-year-old Gabe Zimmerman, a Gifford’s staffer who was engaged and had a wedding date set for 2012.

Phyllis Schneck, 79 leaves behind 3 children, 7 grandchildren, and 1 great-grandchild.

Dorwan Stoddard 76 – this is from Huff Post: “When the shooting started Saturday, he dove to the ground, covering his wife Mavy, who was shot in the leg three times. The couple had been grade school sweethearts growing up in Tucson. After their respective spouses died, they independently moved back to retire, became reacquainted and fell in love all over again. Mavy Stoddard talked to her husband, who was shot in the head, for 10 minutes while he breathed heavily. Then he stopped breathing. He had two sons from his first marriage, and Mavy has three daughters.

Dorothy Morris, 76 whose husband was shot in the rampage, but is in the hospital also left behind a few daughters (I’ve seen 2 and 3, so don’t know for sure).

And then, what to me is the most tragic result of this mad man’s terror, Christina Taylor Green, only 9 years old. Apparently she had just been elected to Student Council and had an interest in politics, which is why she was at that Safeway to meet Congresswoman Giffords. She apparently wanted to have a career where she would be of service to others (I think I wanted to be a pilot at that age….). She enjoyed athletics. She leaves behind an 11-year-old brother. She leaves behind parents, and grandparents.

It isn’t too hard to read about the people the elderly victims leave behind. It’s generally expected that parents and grandparents outlive their offspring. It is tragic and sad, yes. And I certainly don’t want to value one life above another here.

But she was only 9 years old.

She was only 9 years old.

I understand the outrage pouring out over this incident. I just don’t understand how the conversation was so quickly turned into a left vs. right ideological battle. Within hours of the massacre people were trying to figure out who was to blame. We heard from pundits about other pundits and about that half-term quitter governor from Alaska, but we didn’t hear about Christina, and her story (other than the little I’ve shared here). We didn’t hear about her aunts and uncles and friends from school and 9 year old team mates that now have to deal with the fact that their loved one isn’t coming back.

It isn’t that I don’t agree with some of the political statements being made out there. Some of them, I do. And I do so adamantly. But their bodies weren’t even cold and all we could hear about was some redneck’s map and what Rush Limbaugh had to say and what books were on the shooter’s MySpace book list.

I remember when Kayla Rolland was shot. It was in my community. My mother worked with a close friend of the family (or Aunt of Kayla’s or something….) and I remember it vividly. Shock. Terror. Unimaginable sadness. A 6-year-old shot another 6-year-old. And I remember that very day, people carrying signs in favor of the 2nd amendment on some busy cross streets in my hometown of Saginaw, MI. Yes, we have freedom of speech in this country. I respect that. But just because you have the right to do/say something, doesn’t always mean it’s the right thing to do.

I also remember my teachers waiting a week or so before we started talking about the greater themes that revolved around the shooting like gun rights, poverty, drugs, homelessness and other broader social issues that contributed to the tragedy.

Already the 6 victims that were killed and the others that were wounded are being forgot. They’re being pushed down in the headlines in favor of partisan rhetoric, blame games, conversations on society’s role in all this and yadda yadda yadda. It’s not that I don’t think some of those points are important or valid. I do. My fear is that this intense personal tragedy will just get churned into fodder for the left vs. right meme machine. In 5 years most of us will probably remember that Congresswoman Giffords was shot, and that there were others shot that day too (I bet we’ll forget how many). Some of us will remember Christina, but I bet it will be the minority. If you don’t believe me, ask yourself if you knew who Kayla Rolland was reading that first sentence, without having to click on the link. It was one of the most tragic killings this country has ever seen, and I don’t know that anyone outside of Flint (and Mid-Michigan) still thinks about it.

Can we try holding off on the politicizing for just a few days? Maybe direct our efforts toward compassion for the victims and their families, even for just a few days? Is the “noble discussion” about whose fault it is and what role everyone plays in it that urgent that it can’t wait a few days? Maybe if we shine the spotlight on the victims for a bit longer, we won’t forget quite so soon this time.

I’ll leave it to others to cry outrage!

Right now, all I can come up with is tragedy!

  

Cheers.