With every passing day, the disasters facing America get more disgusting.
Of immediate, to me at least, is the huge and growing disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. What we have with this damaged well in the Gulf is NOT an oil spill. More than one comment has said so on other web sites/blogs. An oil spill implies that the oil was in some sort of container and that container was damaged in some way or other and spilled some oil. This is NOT, in any way, a spill. It is an outright disaster. I have no other word to describe it.
Living here in central Louisiana it is the lead story on our news. It is impacting this state and all the states on the Gulf today. OK, maybe not Texas so much, yet. It will begin to have an impact on the rest of the US very soon. Most of the fishing/shrimping areas in the Gulf are shut down. This will, of course, lead to much higher prices for sea food in the entire country. This will in no way be "fixed" any time soon. Even if the oil were to magically be cleaned 100% today, it would still take a long time before the fish, shrimp, and other sea food from the Gulf to recover and be safe enough for consumption.
This disaster will have long lasting effects folks. No matter what is done, no matter how good the clean up is or even how soon it is cleaned up, we will be effected by it for years to come. It will take some time for the sea to recover from this disaster. And I am not even taking into account the damage to birds and other critters that live in or near the Gulf.
We have tropical storm Alex out in the Gulf now. According to the "Weather Underground" web site, Alex is not projected to hit much further North than the Texas Gulf coast below Galveston. That would spare the Louisiana coast, but I have noticed that this projection has been revised to show landfall further North this afternoon that it was yesterday. This is not unusual as predicting the storm path is never that accurate and the projections always change, some times many times in a given 24 hour period. Alex could take a turn North yet and impact the coast of Louisiana directly. Even if it remains on its current projected path, it will make an even bigger mess of the Louisiana coast due to the high winds and waves it will generate.
Of course a direct hit would be the worst case. Remember, this is only the start of our hurricane season, it runs until November.
I have read one report that said the reservoir this well was drilling into could possibly be a very large one. One estimate was in the billions of barrels potential. BILLIONS of barrels. This means that if this well is not capped, it could dump oil into the Gulf for decades.
There are other reports that say there is possibly a huge methane pocket under this well. This could lead to the release of a huge methane bubble that could sink every ship and rig in the immediate vicinity of this well. Methane is also a much worse "green house" gas than CO2. Methane also "eats" up the oxygen in the water which is very bad for any sea life. As in very deadly to sea creatures.
No matter how we look at this disaster in the Gulf, it is very, very bad for all living things, people included.
Thank you ever so much for this "gift" BP.
Back to "our" useless damn fool wars of choice.
By now, you all have heard that Stan "the man" McChrystal has "lost" his old job as the top general in Afghanistan.
Well, he and his "Team America" did talk to the reporter from Rolling Stone magazine. They apparently did not care that he was going to write what they told him. That is called insubordination by some. Some of their comments surely were disrespectful to the commander-in-chief. Being disrespectful to your boss is never a good way to get a promotion, let alone, keep your current job.
My guess is that Stan wanted out. Being the commander of US forces in Afghanistan, he had to know that the war is not going according to plan. He had to know also, that the time table of July 2011 was never going to be met. I think that he just decided that giving the interview with Mr. Hastings from Rolling Stone and letting Go-bomb-them fire him was better than staying until the bitter end and going down in history as the guy who "lost" the Afghan war.
Yes, discretion IS the better part of valor. Rather than admit defeat and quit, he chose to give an "all out" interview and get fired. This way he can retain his "standing" with the wing nuts who still fall for the idiotic endless wars of the empire. No doubt the "tea party" is still in love with Stan "the man" McChrystal.
Before you all stand up and cheer, look at who will take over from Stan. Yes, "king" David Petraeus will now be the commander of the Afghan war. All that has happened here is that "we" changed the guy running this dog and pony show. We should have changed the strategy. Instead, we get same war, different general leading it.
I got a request to stop calling the president Go-bomb-them. Instead I have been asked to call him "drone-bomb-them". Well, it does give a nice description of "dear leader" for sure. While it is an accurate description, I don't think it would be proper for me to use that "name" for him. If I were to rename him, I would rather call him Go-bomber. To me, this would be even more accurate. My reasoning is because the president claims he can "take out" anybody, anywhere, including Americans right here in America. Now, if he were to use only some form of air power, the name "drone-bomb-them" might be accurate. I seriously doubt this will be the case. After all, the "special ops" guys would not get any of the "action" that way. No, I think there will be small warms used to "take out" (kill) those the president deems to be "hostile" to the empire. True, a rile bullet is not a bomb, I think Go-bomber is still a better name for "dear leader".
Yes, I do think that Go-bomber is the better description as it includes ALL manner of "taking out" of the "enemies" of empire, by drone or other wise. A more "all encompassing" name for sure. Any opinions?
A comment left here got my attention. Regarding the "Matthew Shepard Act", Mr. Lee said it provides for criticism of Zionism as a "hate crime". It also gives "any enterprising local prosecutor access to limitless federal funding to prosecute such 'hate crimes' and to start their own career as enforcer for The Lobby." Well, I need to thank Mr. Lee for this information. I was unaware of the "Matthew Shepard Act", my mistake in not keeping up with things better.
While it now seems that being the least bit critical of the Zionist entity can now be considered a "hate crime", I will continue to voice my opinion on any topic. To the best of my knowledge, the first amendment has not been repealed, yet. We still have the Constitution, though that may be subject to change.
How it can ever be considered a "hate crime" to be critical of Zionism is way beyond me. This goes even beyond "political correctness" and delves into the realm of totalitarianism. Shades of the old Soviet Union in the 40's and 50's when it was unlawful to be critical of "uncle" Joe Stalin. It also tells me, that the Zionists are running scared. Well, after the "raid" on those ships trying to bring humanitarian aid to Gaza on 31 May of this year, they just might have reason to be frightened. World opinion is not at all on the side of the rabid Zionists. Imagine, the illegal boarding of ships in international waters and killing at least nine unarmed civilians and the "pirates" who carried out this crime are not getting any sympathy. That the criminals were from the Zionist entity makes this "lack" of sympathy even more news worthy. Of course this does not include any of the US based main stream media, they, of course follow the Israeli line 110%, as always.
Well, I am too damn old and stubborn to quit my ways. I will continue to state my opinions and take the consequences.
Finally, I have one more comment to comment on.
Again, from Mr. Lee; "The bottom line is that we the people are allowing this to happen. We all know that it will continue and grow unless we put an end to it. Our political machine is a drone itself.
Yet we do.....nothing."
Well sir, I do what I can. Being an old, disabled guy, there isn't much that I can actually DO about much. I don't have much money to contribute to outfits like the ACLU. I DO try to give money to the local food bank as I know where it goes and I know the need. I write here at the old "corner" and will continue to do so until I no longer have anything to say. I would join a protest march if there were any in the area. New Orleans is a bit beyond my driving range these days. About the farthest I am comfortable driving is just a bit over 100 miles, then I need to rest the old, broken body. Also, with diesel climbing back towards $3.00 per gallon here, New Orleans is nearly out of my financial range as well. Events in central Louisiana, no problem, I'll be happy to help any way I can with that. I also talk to anybody who will listen to me. True, I have not had many "takers" of late, but I am willing to talk to any who have the courtesy to listen and not get into a shouting match. Beyond that, I am not sure what else I can do.
I do know that I refuse to just give up and roll over. I will continue as long as I can, doing what I am able to do.
8 comments:
You go right ahead Charlie. We need more truth sayers as yourself. You made some excellent points as usual. The dumbing down of America continues. A lone voice in the wilderness as your own, is superior to the pulpit in D.C.
Go-Bomba is fine with me. No one has yet used the "hate-crimes" bill in the way I fear that it might be used... but even paranoids do have enemies. I am not taking you on, Charlie, when I despair at our collective inaction. I certainly do no more than you do myself.
But I still do envision a participatory democracy. It would not take a lot of effort on all of our parts... just some. I imagine that it could sweep the country, if it could just get started.
I usually put a link to http://www.uspvp.org or http://www.28amen.org in the box when I choose an identity. I have been pushing a campaign finance reform amendment for 15 years, and Mike Gravel introduced me to the idea of a national initiative during his run in 2008.
My effort is not THE essential effort... but AN effort is essential. It could be a new day, things could turn around very quickly, if we would just stoop to pick up the tools available to us. Here in Thailand things would change overnight if they had the democratic machinery available that we Americans ignore.
The scope of the Gulf disaster is potentially just as you say it is, yet Go-Bomba is still intent on making offshore drilling the new growth industry.
If we would all consciously seek out candidates for office who do not take money from the special interests, who do make it point of running personal campaigns, if we do make those campaigns possible and successful, right under the radar of the mass media, we can regain control of our nation.
I'd vote for you Charlie. You would be a tremendous improvement over any present Louisiana Congressman or Senator. Most of us would in our own districts.
There are 300 million of us. If one in 100 got active there'd be 3 million active American democrats nationwide, and that would be enough to soon make it 300 million democrats nationwide.
Consider the alternative.
RZ, thank you for your vote of confidence in me. Not sure if I always tell the truth, much of what I write here is just my own opinion. Well, at least it will always be my own honest opinion. Maybe that counts for something.
No way am I any sort of lone voice, your blog and many others are on the same page as I am, some of you folks even more so.
Mr. Lee,
Thank you for your comments. I have not heard of that bill being used in such a manner either. Of course, as I said in the last post, I didn't even know that bill had passed. Actually, I do not recall ever hearing of it before you mentioned it in your comments here. Shame on me for not keeping up to date. No real excuse as I do have the time being disabled.
I have been to uspvp.org and found it worth looking into.
I'd vote for a candidate who refused special interest money also. Of course, the way the system is set up today, that person would have a hard time winning, unless a whole lot of "regular" folks got behind the campaign. I agree that we, the people have the ability to make real change happen. Again, that is IF (little word, yet huge meaning) we would get off our butts and work for it.
I did not take your comments on the earlier post as "taking me on". I thought it was a challenge to all of us collectively. Thanks for proving me right on that one. Again, I agree with you.
Having followed the 2008 primaries, I thought Mr. Gravel had some good ideas. Of course, he could not be elected as the "ruling" class does not want people like him anywhere near real power. Another missed opportunity.
...unless a whole lot of "regular" folks got behind the campaign...
That's the key, isn't it.
Well... what have we got to lose?
Some people might have bought the duopoly's past paen : ya gotta vote for one of us... it's the lessor of two evils or... the greater of two evils. But I think that quite a few more of us have finally seen through that one at this point.
I can remember an old friend's reminiscence of his mom. He was the youngest in his family and so found himself at home with his mom more often than his older brothers and sisters. His mom would often look to him to get things done around the house. When he'd complain that her requests were beyond his ability she'd reply... "Well, you're the only one here."
And now, deserted by our political class, we're the only ones here.
We ought simply to "Whistle while we work", clean our house up, put it back in shape.
And rely more upon ourselves in the future.
It's clear that we have our country to lose to inaction.
John is fine, Charlie... Mr Lee sounds like my grandfather!
OK, John it is then.
I liked that story about your friend. We are the only ones left for sure. As you have said before, if not us, then who? Well, I will continue to do what I can to put things right. I just cannot sit here and pretend all is OK with the country. Not in my nature to do that. Also part of the old Marine training, never surrender.
As to that "lesser of two evils" thing, maybe it should be the "evil of two lessers". The last few elections neither the donkey nor the elephant seemed to rise above the status of lesser in my opinion.
I think that is one things that bothers me the most. When I look at the current crop of possible candidates for higher office, just who out there seems worth voting for?
Maybe I am getting too old, cynical, and sarcastic.
I've voted for the lesser of two evils for the absolute last time. In November, I'm voting for a candidate worthy of my vote, which probably means I'll have to go for a write-in. If there's a Green Party candidate in my state, I'd probably do that route.
Post a Comment