Barack Obama is opening up new areas for off shore drilling. Aside from the to-be-common excuse as reaching out to Republicans, the real reason is the government needs money. To do off shore drilling, a company bids for a lease on the rights to drill in a certain area. It comes down to finding a new way to pay for (what will probably offend some who hear it, but after my past few months of examining the coming to power of Communists and Socialists around the world throughout history I am justified in saying this) Obama's Socialist revolution in America.
He needs Republican votes on cap and trade, and this one way to get that done. Republicans are not as unified on cap and trade as one would think, and now this proposal for opening up off shore drilling is his way of "buying" Republican votes on cap and trade. It worked with Democrats in health care so the thinking in D.C. is why not Republicans also? The only way this wouldn't work is if all of a sudden every Republican found their morality and refused to be bribed by topically merged bills.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Friday, March 12, 2010
Come One Come All Candidates
If you are a candidate for any public office and write a short piece about 5 of your positions and 2 ways in which you are different than your opponents you will get a free post here. Begin!
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Concept
Instead of capping private sector workers, how about we cap all government jobs to a max of $99,999 a year no matter what position it is? When the average American is earning barely above poverty level and Congress is earning close to $200,000 there might be a problem with that. If I had it my way I'd have federally elected official's pay capped at the average annual income of the rest of the country.
I'd also limit bills to ten pages. Think about FDR's bills, and their impact, and then tell me ten pages is too restrictive.
Limit all federal officials to two terms. That way we can recycle the corruption before it begins (examine the case of Susan Collins two terms and increase in pork barrel spending).
I'd also limit bills to ten pages. Think about FDR's bills, and their impact, and then tell me ten pages is too restrictive.
Limit all federal officials to two terms. That way we can recycle the corruption before it begins (examine the case of Susan Collins two terms and increase in pork barrel spending).
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Guest Writer's Question Answered
There is an archived post on another blog by someone I was able to know before I knew of their archive. In one post they ask a very intriguing question. I've gotten their permission to repeat their post here and answer their question in my own way. Enjoy.
Joseph Dill's post from 2006:
"Amazing just how easily influenced children truly are. A wonder that any of us are able to sift through it all and attempt to create what we might call our 'own thought'. Development of the mind should certainly be constant and progressive for humans. But some difficult factors I've recognized as I raise my own children is how quickly they learn, how quickly they change their mind, how they believe many things, at once, even if much of what they believe is contradictory, and how quickly they can forget...
We are all children in the mind. I've yet to believe that I have encountered a 'fully developed' mind. I do believe that the climax of mental development is the last instant of being able to recognize self and life, before death. Until that point is reached, I believe, it would be difficult for one to say, 'I know all that I need to know,' or, 'There is nothing left for me to learn'.
With the concept of being immature, or a child, there comes the burden of authority.
Some believe we need sorts of authority to guide children, to help them recognize who they are, what they are, where they are, and what not to believe, and what to believe. The authority which is allowed to guide children is intended to aid progressive, positive development, I believe. But how well does that work in this era.
That was what I found so amazing about influence, how easy it is to believe what is said, from the authority to the childlike mind, the mind seeking exposure, seeking 'development'.
What is the result if occasionally the 'child' mind seems to exceed the 'development' of the authority?"
My response:
The answer is revolution. If the child mind does not exceed the development of authority is is evolution. For human society evolution to a goal will result in revolution as the evolved expansion of authority will eventually slow itself down to the point where only revolution can recycle and come out more evolved than even evolution brought forth.
The progressive agenda politically speaking is evolving us towards totalitarianism. Only revolution, peaceful in nature, can keep America free. Revolution, a term often connected to violence, is really just a radical change. Very rarely is there a radical change to totalitarianism.
It happens slowly. It took hundreds of years for Rome to become a dictatorship. However once inherited the evolved control of authority becomes stale and yet holds on brutally. The countless millions killed to maintain authority in the world are forgotten, their revolutions failed in uprising. Yet some succeed. Some are peaceful.
Joseph Dill's post from 2006:
"Amazing just how easily influenced children truly are. A wonder that any of us are able to sift through it all and attempt to create what we might call our 'own thought'. Development of the mind should certainly be constant and progressive for humans. But some difficult factors I've recognized as I raise my own children is how quickly they learn, how quickly they change their mind, how they believe many things, at once, even if much of what they believe is contradictory, and how quickly they can forget...
We are all children in the mind. I've yet to believe that I have encountered a 'fully developed' mind. I do believe that the climax of mental development is the last instant of being able to recognize self and life, before death. Until that point is reached, I believe, it would be difficult for one to say, 'I know all that I need to know,' or, 'There is nothing left for me to learn'.
With the concept of being immature, or a child, there comes the burden of authority.
Some believe we need sorts of authority to guide children, to help them recognize who they are, what they are, where they are, and what not to believe, and what to believe. The authority which is allowed to guide children is intended to aid progressive, positive development, I believe. But how well does that work in this era.
That was what I found so amazing about influence, how easy it is to believe what is said, from the authority to the childlike mind, the mind seeking exposure, seeking 'development'.
What is the result if occasionally the 'child' mind seems to exceed the 'development' of the authority?"
My response:
The answer is revolution. If the child mind does not exceed the development of authority is is evolution. For human society evolution to a goal will result in revolution as the evolved expansion of authority will eventually slow itself down to the point where only revolution can recycle and come out more evolved than even evolution brought forth.
The progressive agenda politically speaking is evolving us towards totalitarianism. Only revolution, peaceful in nature, can keep America free. Revolution, a term often connected to violence, is really just a radical change. Very rarely is there a radical change to totalitarianism.
It happens slowly. It took hundreds of years for Rome to become a dictatorship. However once inherited the evolved control of authority becomes stale and yet holds on brutally. The countless millions killed to maintain authority in the world are forgotten, their revolutions failed in uprising. Yet some succeed. Some are peaceful.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
The Richest 1 Percent
Many people have been saying the richest 1 percent should pay for all of the new government spending. Well, if that happened we would probably still have the richest 1,000, but most of the 3 million richest 1 percent would be demoted to barely above the poverty line.
My data for this is completely unscientific, as the average annual income of the richest 1 percent is hard to come by in anything except a percentage compared to the lower 90 percent. I found the dollar value described by a GDEA article linked below as being "just above $1 million" in 2001. After an hour and a half of searching that was the ONLY figure I could find, and its rather ambiguous. However, relying on that and considering if the richest 1 percent paid for all of 2009's federal spending it would average out to be $1,166,666 per rich person if I round the total government spending down by 17 million dollars. So if the average top 1 percent is earning "just above $1 million" and the average cost to them would be over a hundred thousand above a million.
Place yourself in their situation. If you worked in a country and earned a good living but had to give it all back to the government to support 300 million other people would you stay in that country? How much like slavery does that sound? Now, will you ever again call for only the rich to pay for every public opportunity you benefit from?
http://ase.tufts.edu/gdae/about_us/roach_cs_monitor_12_03.htm
My data for this is completely unscientific, as the average annual income of the richest 1 percent is hard to come by in anything except a percentage compared to the lower 90 percent. I found the dollar value described by a GDEA article linked below as being "just above $1 million" in 2001. After an hour and a half of searching that was the ONLY figure I could find, and its rather ambiguous. However, relying on that and considering if the richest 1 percent paid for all of 2009's federal spending it would average out to be $1,166,666 per rich person if I round the total government spending down by 17 million dollars. So if the average top 1 percent is earning "just above $1 million" and the average cost to them would be over a hundred thousand above a million.
Place yourself in their situation. If you worked in a country and earned a good living but had to give it all back to the government to support 300 million other people would you stay in that country? How much like slavery does that sound? Now, will you ever again call for only the rich to pay for every public opportunity you benefit from?
http://ase.tufts.edu/gdae/about_us/roach_cs_monitor_12_03.htm
Monday, March 1, 2010
Russia's Tank Faux Pas
In an interesting sign of the mind set of Russian's military that may explain why Russia's various insurgencies still have plenty of weapons....200 Russian tanks have been found fueled, ready to go, and abandoned in a forest. I wonder who's head Putin will make roll for this one.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/7338097/200-Russian-tanks-found-abandoned-in-forest.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/7338097/200-Russian-tanks-found-abandoned-in-forest.html
Interview: Me
A long time ago I had pacified some requests to answer questions on "whohub" and just today I decided to indulge three very persistent people who desired I answer more. So if you really want to know a little more about what makes my clock tick go read the following:
http://www.whohub.com/rhkinc
http://www.whohub.com/rhkinc
Birds of Afghanistan
Today was going to cover several gubernatorial candidates and how I will defend until my death every statement made about them, their quotes, and my opinion of them. However, I noticed a much more amusing article about how Afghanistan has an "EPA" of its own.
Excerpt:
KABUL — Afghanistan's fledgling conservation agency moved Sunday to protect one of the world's rarest birds after the species was rediscovered in the war-ravaged country's northeast.
The remote Pamir Mountains are the only known breeding area of the large-billed reed warbler, a species so elusive that it had been documented only twice before in more than a century.
Excerpt over. Aside from this warbler there is a sparrow like "Afghan Snowfinch", a rather colorful "Bohemian Waxwing" which, while not native to Afghanistan, does call it home, and Afghanistan is also known to have flamingos, which if you don't know what they are crawl out of your rock and go to Disney World.
AP article:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jX2YfnI6k7kVgsWt1NsjBzQVtdOwD9E54HJ80
Other birds from wikipedia.
Excerpt:
KABUL — Afghanistan's fledgling conservation agency moved Sunday to protect one of the world's rarest birds after the species was rediscovered in the war-ravaged country's northeast.
The remote Pamir Mountains are the only known breeding area of the large-billed reed warbler, a species so elusive that it had been documented only twice before in more than a century.
Excerpt over. Aside from this warbler there is a sparrow like "Afghan Snowfinch", a rather colorful "Bohemian Waxwing" which, while not native to Afghanistan, does call it home, and Afghanistan is also known to have flamingos, which if you don't know what they are crawl out of your rock and go to Disney World.
AP article:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jX2YfnI6k7kVgsWt1NsjBzQVtdOwD9E54HJ80
Other birds from wikipedia.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
