The Sp(Oils) of Politics. Tragic and blameful.

I’ve decided to break off again from writing my book to weigh in a bit on the catastrophe in the Gulf that is rapidly threatening to spread out even farther. Let’s first take a look at this from a consumers standpoint and we will eventually come full circle.

In 2007, the US was the #1 consumer of oil. We used approx; 20 bbl/day. (billion barrels of oil per day). China was #2 at around 7 bbl/day and Japan 3rd with around 5 bbl/day. In 2008 China actually overtook us at #1 and we moved to #2. Complete statistics are now muddled in truths/untruths and profits.

The AAA Atlas of Population & Environment list the US as the Worlds largest consumer in absolute terms. On the list of the Worlds 20 major traded commodities, the US takes the greatest share in 11 of them. We like our big cars and energy. We want our heat in the cold as we must be comfortable. We have a need and desire to have all we want when we want it. I know I do. Do you? This creates demand. Demand creates opportunity to supply. This is where it gets corrupt my friends.

Snapshot of the last 10 years or so:

Bush’s regulations and Cheney’s deregulations & Clinton’s lack or foresight enabled the current state of events. The current Administration’s Interior Department inherited a cesspool of corruption from the back room meetings and backdoor deals that went on during the Bush Administration. BP didn’t start drilling and changing their practices over the last 16 or so months. The relationships between Big Oil companies and the Federal Government had been a love-fest during the Bush/Cheney years. Personal relationships between Cheney & executives from BP, TransOcean and Halliburton had been widely known. Cheney had secret Energy Commission meetings with Big Oil Execs &  hunting trips with Supreme Court Justices. Did those meetings help the Big Oil companies get the OK to pass on the $500,000.00 remote shut-off switches that could have prevented this spill from being as bad as it was? Is this type of information getting any play on Fox News or at Tea party rallies? If oil starts showing up on the beaches in Florida, would that be enough to really find out who is really at fault.

Also, to call this catastrophe Obamas ‘Katrina’ is not really appropriate in my opinion. This event can and will probably have an impact on a Generation of people who make their living in the waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Restaurant owners and employees and more. I am in no way minimizing the impact now or to come. However, with Katrina, people were dying in the streets. They are two totally different measure of tragedies. I believe that Bush inherited a very much broken FEMA, as Obama has inherited a very much broken Minerals Management Service.

Everything now relies on how we respond right? Here’s a response for you. GOP Rep. Joe Barton from Texas during the Congressional hearings with BP CEO Tony Hayward last week said ” I think it is a tragedy in the first proportion that a private Corporation can be subjected to what I would characterize as a $20 billion shakedown”. He of course was referring to the $20 billion escrow account the President demanded of BP to pay out claims against BP by people of the affected Region. Republican Rep Barton then went as far as apologizing to BP on Americas behalf. I REPEAT: “Apologized to BP on Americas behalf.”

Who do you want in your corner America? Again, don’t let petty prejudices and misdirection allow you to vote, think, compromise and protest against your own interests.

Something to think about anyway.

“Next stop….Scaryville USA…All Offboard”

While I have been writing my book I have stayed away from writing any new posts regarding todays politics. I thought I would sit back and just see if the hatred for Obama being voted in as President would eventually just kind of fade away and politicians for the most part would begin to move toward doing the right things for their constituents. NOT!
It’s still very apparent that the hatred of equality, racism and indiffence still seem to have a place in power. I see myself as middle of the pack intelligent. I have my issues with doing the right things in my own life. However, my actions affect myself, my friends and my family. I am not in a place of so much power that my daily ignorances can affect the lifes of so many. Ladies and gentlemen this is where our elected officials are the most important. We expect and hope that they will allow our best interests to drive their opinions and effforts. This is the basis of voting someone into office. Our elected officials are now for the most part what I believe is what is holding this Country back. I know that my idea will not be widely embraced, but I believe that we should have another round of elected officials. Those without party distinctions, but common sense. It is apparent that there will be no accord between Republican and Democratic Politicians. Partisan objectives show no sign of slowing down and that is apparently never going to stop. If a Black President can’t be enough motivation for politicians to come together then they never will. It is now up to us citizens to just accept that and move on with another branch of Government. We can call them ‘DemoRubs’. Sorry Independents just sounds too weak for me. As DemoRubs what we would be called on to do is to actually evaluate matters of importance and change in this Country and spread those actual facts to the American people. That doesn’t mean that I would gather a bunch of brothers in an auditorium and say, “man we need reparations’, just as I wouldn’t expect a room to be gathered to say that we need to break off from the rest of the Country because there is a scary Black man in the White House. It’s a two way street. We cannot allow the wheels of evolution and progress in this Country to be decided by white men between the ages of 55 to 75 years old. I wouldn’t expect a group of black men between the ages of 55-75 would be a basket of fairness either. That’s is just not common sense. No offense mind you. I’m not a racist at all. However, men that have had the majority of their adult lives with the reality of most other races being below them can’t be expected to see things completely equally. How can they? When I was a kid, if you went into any of the barber shops that my dad took me to, believe me, you wouldn’t expect those guys to be very partial if they were in a position to control votes and speak for so many. They wouldn’t be fair minded about it. Even if they didn’t want to admit it. Human nature is exactly that. Human. That doesn’t make it right, however, it does make it so. I’m not in anyway implying that people over the age of 55 are all racists regardless if they are black or white. I am saying that it may be inherently harder for them to change. I mean, without the help of many white people, slavery would never have ended. Civil rights would never have been passed and lastly, Obama would never have been elected. However, politics just like everything else in this World, needs to evolve as well. I propose that people of all races and ages above 21 should throw their names in the hat for a seperate form of elections. Call it a kind of watchdog group or civilian oversight group. People would have to still be vetted. However, lobbyist and Corporate entities cannot be a part of the process. I think we can get a lot more done if that were the case. At the very minimum, it would cut down on the amount of mis-information and rebel rousing. To those naysayers that would believe that it would be too hard to get that implemented. WHAT ELSE IS BEING IMPLEMENTED RIGHT NOW OUTSIDE OF SEPERATION AND HATRED?
Let me know what you think America.
NOTE: For all you radical conservatives out there who will look at this without thought process, let me help you out.
I definitely drink too much. I probably smoke too much weed. I can be a little self centered at times. However, I’m a great son, friend, brother and father. I am also the LAST person you want to have a public debate with. Think about that before adding an ignorant comment or response. Add a contact website or email address so that my response can’t be hidden for lack of bullshit.
Friends?

Should Marijuana be legalized for medical uses?

The IOM report, Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base, released in March 1999, found that marijuana’s active components are potentially effective in treating pain, nausea and vomiting, AIDS-related loss of appetite, and other symptoms and should be tested rigorously in clinical trials. The therapeutic effects of smoked marijuana are typically modest, and in most cases there are more effective medicines. But a subpopulation of patients do not respond well to other medications and have no effective alternative to smoking marijuana…

Because the chronic use of marijuana can have negative effects, the benefits should be weighed against the risks…

Most of the identified health risks of marijuana use are related to smoke, not to the cannabinoids that produce the benefits. Smoking is a primitive drug delivery system. The one advantage of smoking is that it provides a rapid-onset drug effect. The effects of smoked marijuana are felt within minutes, which is ideal for the treatment of pain or nausea. If marijuana is to become a component of conventional medicine, it is essential that we develop a rapid-onset cannabinoid delivery system that is safer and more effective than smoking crude plant material.
The options for medical marijuana should be weighed from both sides. I will try my best to do that below.

The Pro:

After deferring to the DEA, your release reads that, ‘FDA is the sole federal agency that approves drug products as safe and effective for intended indications.’ Why then has the FDA failed to respond to the 1999 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report which concluded that marijuana’s active components are potentially effective in treating pain, nausea, the anorexia of AIDS wasting, and other symptoms, and should be tested rigorously in clinical trials?

It perplexes us that even though the FDA is responsible for protecting public health, the agency has failed to respond adequately to the IOM’s findings seven years after the study’s publication date. Additionally, this release failed to make note of the FDA’s Investigational New Drug (IND) Compassionate Access Program, which allowed patients with certain medical conditions to apply with the FDA to receive federal marijuana. Currently, seven people still enlisted in this program continue to receive marijuana through the federal government.

The existence of this program is an example of how the FDA could allow for the legal use of a drug, such as medical marijuana, without going through the ‘well-controlled’ series of steps that other drugs have to go through if there is a compassionate need.

The Con:

Marijuana is listed in schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), the most restrictive schedule. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), which administers the CSA, continues to support that placement and FDA concurred because marijuana met the three criteria for placement in Schedule I under 21 U.S.C. 812(b)(1) (e.g., marijuana has a high potential for abuse, has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and has a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision).

Furthermore, there is currently sound evidence that smoked marijuana is harmful. A past evaluation by several Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) agencies, including the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) and National Institute for Drug Abuse (NIDA), concluded that no sound scientific studies supported medical use of marijuana for treatment in the United States, and no animal or human data supported the safety or efficacy of marijuana for general medical use.”

Should the Big Three car manufacturers be bailed out by the US government?

The Pro:

Much has been said about the impact of the credit crisis on U.S. auto makers, and whether or not the government should assist the industry during this extraordinary financial turmoil. In these discussions, many critics simply ignore the substantial changes that U.S. auto companies have already made — changes much like those the critics are calling for as part of any aid package…

The auto industry may be historically anchored in Detroit, but it reaches into every state and community in our nation… GM, Ford and Chrysler last year purchased $156 billion in parts, materials and services, supporting jobs in all 50 states…

The future of the domestic auto business is critical to the health of the U.S. economy. It is a vital engine of economic growth and a foundation of economic stability. It remains a path of upward mobility for millions of American families. For America to compete in the global marketplace in the 21st century, it needs a strong manufacturing base and a vital domestic auto industry…

Short-term government support to bridge the current financial crisis will enable GM to continue as an engine for prosperity and as a creator of vehicles and technologies that America needs. Such assistance will save millions of jobs now, and produce enormous benefits for years to come.

The Con:

I believe bankruptcy is better than a bailout for American consumers and taxpayers…Bankruptcy would help GM and Ford become more competitive by abrogating significant parts of their labor contracts with the UAW. One of the greatest needs would be sizable reduction in their health costs through sharp increases in the deductibility and co-payments, and a reduced coverage of medical procedures. Bankruptcy should also help bring the wage rates of GM and Ford in line with those of foreign producers in the US. Some of their pension liabilities may be shifted onto the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corp, but even that would be preferable to an overall bailout…

Is GM ‘too big’ to fail? I do not believe the company is too big to go into a reorganization — which is what bankruptcy would involve. Such reorganization would abrogate its untenable labor contracts, and give it a chance to survive in long run. A bailout, by contrast, would simply postpone the needed reforms in these labor contracts, the business model of GM, and its management.