As the blame game is playing out, we can see that the Feds and the leftists in power are doing their share of finger pointing in the oil spill. As it stands right now, they seek to use this as an excuse to deny new offshore drilling.
The Interior Department exempted BP's calamitous Gulf of Mexico drilling operation from a detailed environmental impact analysis last year, according to government documents, after three reviews of the area concluded that a massive oil spill was unlikely.
The decision by the department's Minerals Management Service (MMS) to give BP's lease at Deepwater Horizon a "categorical exclusion" from the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) on April 6, 2009 -- and BP's lobbying efforts just 11 days before the explosion to expand those exemptions -- show that neither federal regulators nor the company anticipated an accident of the scale of the one unfolding in the gulf.
Emphasis on the date was added my me. But as you can plainly see, this cannot be blamed on the Bush Administration. The Obama Administration has complete ownership of this fiasco.
Naturally, BP or any other company would lobby for an exemption. But does it make any sense for the the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee to use this as a fundraising opportunity, when it was an agency under the supervision of the Democratic Administration responsible for this oversight?
Here is the e-mail they sent out:
[H]ere's a perfect example of why we must keep fighting:
Last week's deadly oil rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico has unleashed an oil spill that threatens livelihoods, pristine beaches, and wildlife along America's coast. The spill could eclipse the damage done by the 1989 Exxon-Valdez disaster.
The Obama administration has vowed to "keep a boot on the throat" of BP to ensure the corporation is held accountable for the spill. But Republican Leader Rush Limbaugh has a different plan. He said there's no need to clean up the spill because "the ocean will take care of this on its own," and that oil is "natural. It's as natural as the ocean water is."
Sign our petition. Stand with President Obama to hold BP accountable for this disastrous spill. Rush Limbaugh is entirely wrong: This oil will not clean itself up. Corporations must be held accountable for their actions....
The Obama Administration did not keep a boot on the throat of anything.
As has been the case so many times before this, they were sleep walking. It's just another example of why America must throw out the Democratic Congress, this year.
Someone needs to be awake on guard duty. And from countless events in this realm, and in the world of Homeland security, it is becoming more and more clear that Obama will not be the one to do it.
Addendum:
Maybe there is a logical explanation for why BP was exempt from this impact study. It is being reported that, evidently, BP has given a goodly sum of cash to Obama and the Democrats in the past.
While the BP oil geyser pumps millions of gallons of petroleum into the Gulf of Mexico, President Barack Obama and members of Congress may have to answer for the millions in campaign contributions they’ve taken from the oil and gas giant over the years.
BP and its employees have given more than $3.5 million to federal candidates over the past 20 years, with the largest chunk of their money going to Obama, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Donations come from a mix of employees and the company’s political action committees — $2.89 million flowed to campaigns from BP-related PACs and about $638,000 came from individuals.
Isn't it great to not have an oilman in the White House, anymore? Isn't it great that special interests no longer have influence in Washington?
I respect the earth because it is my home. My little portion of it has been entrusted to me for the days I am here, so I do whatever I can to preserve it. It's only right. I have to drive to work and various other places, but I do it responsibly. I use energy and eat food, but I do not waste. It does irritate me when I see others do it purposefully, without any regard as to how precious either commodity may be someday.
If there is any one thing I would consider a pet peeve, it would be littering. Maybe it's because I am old enough to remember the Lady Bird Johnson ecological campaign of the 60s, Every Litter Bit Hurts and Don't Be A Litter Bug. I do not accept any excuse for anyone throwing trash around outside, especially when (in this day and age) there is a trash can nearly everywhere you go.
But, time has worn on. Things have improved. For the most part, I think there is much less trash lying around than when I was younger. It's not perfect, there are still some smug jerks who are self-absorbed enough to think they are above the rest of us. But overall, it's not as prevalent in most areas, as it was before the awareness was raised.
Still, there those who are hell-bent on keeping the ecology movements alive. They have done this by politicizing these issues and by allowing their organizations to be infiltrated with Marxist ideologues -- along with corporations that stand to make a killing in sales from wind turbines and other "green" technology. They want everyone to believe that we are in dire straits and time for life on the planet will be greatly shortened, if we do not allow them to set policy.
So, hows that for a mixture? Anti-capitalists and capitalists joining together to empower themselves. Ironic, isn't it?
Speaking of irony, I happened upon this post a few days ago. It was put up as a sarcastic commemoration to Earth Day and I recommend you take a look at it. It takes us all down memory lane, to some things said to commemorate the first Earth Day in 1970. Consider these gems:
“We have about five more years at the outside to do something.” • Kenneth Watt, ecologist
“Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” • George Wald, Harvard Biologist
Funny how we hear the same thing now. It's as if it were written 40 years ago.
We only have a few years left.
Time is crucial.
We MUST act now.
Blah, blah, blah.
We hear it so much, many of us are already numb to it.
All of this translates to: "GE is ready to market its "green line" of products and time's wasting. Hurry before their stock takes a bigger hit." Never mind that the CEO is primarily responsible for GE's woes, let's keep manipulating the public as a smokescreen.
Anyway --- like I said, I do my part to take care of the planet. I just don't lose contact with reality while I am doing it. I do it privately and quietly, without public fanfare and I do not denigrate others who don't. I have found it best to lead by example, which is all anyone can do without becoming an annoyance to others.
George Carlin didn't get too bent out of shape over it either. Remember that this is Carlin and there are some salty words in this:
Overall, the message is clear. He didn't think the crap put out by Al Gore (and associates) was warranted, he just didn't mention him by name. But we do here.
Recently,the Goracle spoke the usual Gore-speak to Congress and many of those louts ate it all up.
How many of them, do suppose even heard what the man said?
The man proposes reality-based solutions to the environment without massive amounts of regulation and government control. You'd think he'd get a standing ovation. But instead, they demonize him. How dare he disagree with the Democratic Party's solution? No Republican or Conservative could ever have a better plan, because it would reward rather than punish. It would use positive reinforcement, rather than negative. This would keep the government out of the equation more.
One of the issues Americans will carry into the voting booth this fall will be the high price of gasoline. The candidate that comes up with the most cogent solution stands a good chance of winning the White House.
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama sought to tap into Americans' anxiety over high gasoline prices by pledging to seek a windfall profits tax on U.S. oil companies if elected.
"I'll make oil companies like Exxon pay a tax on their windfall profits, and we'll use the money to help families pay for their skyrocketing energy costs and other bills," the Illinois senator said on Monday according to Reuters.
This is consistent with traditional liberal ideology, in that they think they can tax their way out of a problem. Got a problem? Create a tax. But what Sen. Obama is not telling us is who ultimately will pay the tax. Anytime a tax is levied on a company, it is passed on to the consumer. Taxes are costs and built into the price, the consumer pays. So to solve the high gas price quandary, his solution is for us to pay more.
Note to Obama - This does not help. The Robin Hood approach will not solve the problem in the short term and will only create more problems for the long-term.
Sen. John McCain called yesterday for an end to the federal ban on offshore oil drilling, offering an aggressive response to high gasoline prices and immediately drawing the ire of environmental groups that the presumptive Republican presidential nominee has courted for months.
The move is aimed at easing voter anger over rising energy prices by freeing states to open vast stretches of the country's coastline to oil exploration. In a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, nearly 80 percent said soaring prices at the pump are causing them financial hardship, the highest in surveys this decade.
"We must embark on a national mission to eliminate our dependence on foreign oil," McCain told reporters yesterday. In a speech today, he plans to add that "we have untapped oil reserves of at least 21 billion barrels in the United States. But a broad federal moratorium stands in the way of energy exploration and production. . . . It is time for the federal government to lift these restrictions."
There is no magical solution to this problem. As long as we are dependent on oil for energy, the demand will be high. Add to this the surge in Chinese and Indian demand and you can clearly see that OPEC has the world in a bind. As long as it only costs OPEC a few dollars to pump a barrel of oil while charging $140, they will own the entire developed world. But while flooding the market with non-OPEC oil will certainly make an impact, drilling for new sources will only be part of the answer.
We need to develop new forms of energy. We've done this with ethanol, but silliness has prevailed in the form of using food sources to do it. Common sense tells intelligent people, don't mess with the food supply. And as I watch the floods in the Corn Belt destroy a significant portion of this year's corn crop, I can only surmise that we can expect more rises in the prices of food this year. This is because much of the corn futures are destined to become fuel, not feed for livestock or integral ingredients for many of the foods we eat. Supply down, prices up, this goes for both ethanol and food.
The greater the supply of anything leads to lower prices. Taxes do not. We need to take a good serious look at all forms of energy, not just bio-fuels. All measures that create more sound energy sources should be given a serious look, especially those that will not take food out of our mouths. This will create more choices, for consumers. More choices equals more supplies.
Despite McCain's plan not being a panacea, it is more far sound than Obama's. It is a step in the right direction. If nothing else, it certainly draws a marked distinction between him and his socialist opponent.
Temperatures are rising, the polar ice caps are melting, the penguins and polar bears are in danger. Soon cities like NYC and Boston will partially be under water and global warming will all be our fault.
South America this year experienced one of its coldest winters in decades. In Buenos Aires, snow fell for the first time since the year 1918. Dozens of homeless people died from exposure. In Peru, 200 people died from the cold and thousands more became infected with respiratory diseases. Crops failed, livestock perished, and the Peruvian government declared a state of emergency.
Unexpected bitter cold swept the entire Southern Hemisphere in 2007. Johannesburg, South Africa, had the first significant snowfall in 26 years. Australia experienced the coldest June ever. In northeastern Australia, the city of Townsville underwent the longest period of continuously cold weather since 1941. In New Zealand, the weather turned so cold that vineyards were endangered.
The last couple of years here, in the heartland, temps have been higher at this time of year. But this year we've had a couple of winter storms already and the low has fallen to as low as 3 degrees F. But when someone points this out, the subject shifts from global warming to "climate change". Never mind that the climate is a dynamic and ever-changing phenomenon, despite what man does or doesn't do.
So, I guess amid all of this confusing rhetoric, I have this figured out now. In summer, it's global warming. If it's an unusually cool summer, it's climate change. If it's winter, it's climate change. If it's an unusually warm winter, it's global warming. At least that seems to be the pattern, as I have noticed.
I call this talking in circles.
Another interesting thing to note is something I can thank PYY regular reader Amerloque for sharing in the comment section, of a previous post.
Bjorn Lomborg hardly calls himself the anti-Gore - he believes that global warming truly exists and that human beings are the central factor in its growth - but he does get labeled a climate-crisis denier. Considering the diction, that sounds like an attempt to place him in the category of a David Irving, who did jail time in Austria for Holocaust denial.
Lomborg, a Danish professor of statistics who describes himself as "a slight lefty in Denmark, which makes probably makes me incredibly left in the U.S.", offers a non-hysterical analysis of climate change in books (like "Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming") and lectures.
Basically, without apocalyptic screech or a debunker's mocking contempt, Lomborg says the real discussion is "about how much we can do."
I have said it before and I will say it again: If we take care of the planet and cut back on energy consumption, it's a good thing. But, let's stop with the scare tactics and the politicization of the entire issue. There is nothing wrong with keeping the planet clean and certainly nothing wrong with educating people on how to do so. But let's not turn this into a socialism issue by punishing wealthy countries (while giving the "so-called" developing countries that are spilling tons of pollutants into the air, a free pass). It really makes no sense.
China insisted Friday the U.S. and other wealthy nations should bear the burden of curbing global warming, saying the problem was created by their lavish way of life. It rejected mandatory emission cuts for its own developing industries.
Environmental activists, meanwhile, labeled the United States and Saudi Arabia the worst "climate sinners," accusing them of having inadequate polices for climate problems while letting greenhouse gas emissions rise. But the activists also said no country is doing enough.
Nothing new here, it's fashionable to blame America these days.
Su Wei, a top climate expert for China's government attending the U.N. Climate Change Conference, said the job belongs to the wealthy. He said it was unfair to ask developing nations to accept binding emissions cuts and other restrictions being pushed for already industrialized states.
Because they are developing, China believes they deserve a pass. How misguided are they? Take a look at this. Then come back and tell us all how it's the West's responsibility to curb emissions. If this doesn't convince you take a look at this report from the BBC:
Los Angeles in it's smog heyday couldn't compete with this scene.
Meet Chris Carlos. His is a story that defies reason.
If you are from the Atlanta area, you may recognize that last name. But now, he is becoming famous for something else other than liquor distribution and tax problems.
Neighbors are outraged that the man, who lives in his five bedroom, seven bathroom home alone, has used enough water to fill a dozen standard swimming pools, while the rest of the city is so thirsty for water.
"I think it's absurd. I really do," said resident Ken Scott.
In fact, last month Chris Carlos used 15 percent more water than he did in October 2006, fueling more frustration.
Now, you may have read or heard somewhere that Atlanta and northern Georgia are in a critical water shortage. So, I think it should go with out saying, what this means to people in this area.
Some sense of community Mr. Carlos must have that he feels the need to do what ever he damn well pleases, regardless of the situation in the community. How utterly selfish and self-important he must feel, for him to think he is entitled to disregard any conservation measure that doesn't suit him.
This qualifies him for the PYY Community Ego-Centric Citizen Award.
I see nothing wrong with tie-in promotions. It's always been a viable marketing tool, in the business world and always will be. Snacks as part of (or near) a beer display, during football season has worked wonders for snack companies all over. Here is a memo (via Drudge) reportedly sent to CNN employees from Joe Klein:
Joe Klein: Great job on the 8 o'clock special on Friday; great job on the fire coverage. We shouldn't irresponsibly link this to Global warming, but this is a nature story, so we should be able to use it to push to the Planet in Peril special tomorrow night.
I must say it surprises me that Klein is using some caution here. But be that as it may, he is. And he should be applauded for it.
“One reason why we have the fires in California is global warming,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told reporters Tuesday, stressing the need to pass the Democrats’ comprehensive energy package.
Not only is this irresponsible, it ignores the real reason that fires are getting bigger and harder to control out west, these days. Here's where the real responsibility lies:
Whenever someone tries to suggest clearing underbrush out of these areas so as to reduce the amount of material that can burn, some crazy environmental group pitches a hissy fit, mainly due to the fact that some species of animal will be endangered. That's not the sad fact of it all, because that's just the nature of these radical elements.
The outrageous part of this whole thing is, the government actually listens to these bozos and in some areas they pass laws prohibiting residents from doing this on their own property. And every fire season, many people lose everything because of this poor judgment.
There is a song from 1970 that made it to #4 on the US charts. It was song by a soul singer named Brook Benton and it was called, A Rainy Night In Georgia. Having lived in Macon for a couple of years, I distinctly remember there would be stretches of 2-3 weeks, where it would rain, over and over again.
Today, it's not that way. What the residents wouldn't give to see 2 weeks of solid soaking rain, right now.
Having friends and family in Atlanta, we often get detailed descriptions of how life is playing out there at any given time. And I have to say, from where I sit, it isn't looking good there at this stage of the time continuum. People simply cannot imagine how critical the current water shortage really is. As of this writing, Lake Lanier will be dry within three months. And I mean bone dry. (This is a lake with a 692 mile shoreline.)
But as I say all of this, as I highlight all of this discouraging news, it might not be as bleak as it looks right now, if certain people would look at priorities in a different light. A viable short-term solution could be implemented to ease (at least) some of the hardship, of this catastrophe. But alas, it's not.
You see, Georgia has two huge man-made reservoirs, Lake Lanier and Lake Allatoona. They are run by the Army Corps of Engineers (ACE), normally a fine federal entity. I say this because, they are not doing a fine job, right now. They have within their power, the opportunity to ease some of the hardship caused by a severe drought in this part of the country.
So how can this be eased, you ask?
ACE could just slow the rate that the runoff is dumped out of the dam, thus conserving precious H2O, necessary for the maintenance of homeostasis in the human body. But they aren't. They could give the word and it would be done. But they won't. They could do something to help citizens of the United States of America that pay taxes and contribute greatly to the country, as a whole. They simply do not want to.
Why would they not help their countrymen? The answer can be found in this article.
Florida has complained the state is not sending enough water downstream to protect endangered and threatened mussels on the banks of a drying river. And Alabama Gov. Bob Riley has urged the corps to release more water from Georgia's lakes to help his state cope with the dry conditions.
On the surface it would seem like Alabama has a case. But in the case of Florida, I have to ask, who laced Florida officials' drinks with "stupid potion"? Since when did the needs of lower orders of life, become more of a priority over the immediate needs of man? I bet if the roles were reversed, Florida would complain just as the citizens of Georgia are.
Meanwhile, back to the fine people of Alabama and their need to "cope with the dry conditions". From what I have heard, there are no provisions in Alabama law to ban excessive and unnecessary water usage, in times of crisis. And they are not doing it. Florida isn't, either. In fact, the only areas with a ban in force are areas in northern and central Georgia.
You might be tempted to say this doesn't effect me, as I do not live in Atlanta or the surrounding environs. But as the shortage continues to play havoc on the people that live there, many things will be effected.
Do you drink Coca-Cola? Guess what? No water in Atlanta, means no Coca-Cola throughout the eastern part of the U.S. (and yes, this means you people in Alabama and Florida). But that's not the half of it. All industries in the greater Atlanta area that need and use water as part of their process, will not be able to operate.
This means many things will not be available, which means supplies will go down, which means prices will be going up.
How about the workers that work in the areas that use water as part of the industrial process? No water for production, means no work. Massive layoffs may occur, meaning many people will be losing their jobs.
This will create a huge ripple effect across the board to other industries or businesses that do not depend on water for their business. (And not only in the Atlanta metro area, but all over the country.) No jobs mean no purchases of any value. No purchases of any value means, other companies may feel the pinch and have to layoff, or will be forced to raise their prices to take up the slack.
But more than any economic concerns this may generate, there is a humanitarian issue at stake here. The people of Atlanta will not be able to have drinking water to survive on, unless you count the already price-gouged bottled water. No bathing, no drinking, no jobs.
So to those of you in Florida that are looking at this through ego-centric glasses, be proud of yourselves. You are saving mussels and sturgeon, but you are about destroy a city and an entire part of the nation that depends heavily on that city. And to you people from Alabama that are doing the same, you too can be proud of yourselves. Your failure to see the plight of your neighbor and your refusal to conserve (because there is no provision in the law of your state to do so) will be also contribute greatly to the second fall of Atlanta.
Note: The lawsuit filed by the state of Georgia against the ACE was filed and will be heard in, Jacksonville Florida. Do you think there will be some bias there?
Addendum:
In the market for some new carpet? Better not delay, better get it now. The carpet mills the northern part of the state are already about to really feel the pinch, which means price will be rising soon. Check it out here.
