Seafood and oil in the Gulf of Mexico

Should there be health advisories about eating seafood in the U.S. due to the BP Gulf oil spill/disaster? If 30% of American seafood comes from the Gulf of Mexico, how much of that is contaminated by this spill? Even if not directly, once oil enters the food chain and the global industrial supply chain, it could show up anywhere, right? Is that too alarmist? Or six months from now will there be a "suprising" epidemic linked to people who ate contaminated seafood? Maybe we should stop eating seafood (I'll miss you sushi and lox).

Obama raps about whose A** to Kick

Oops, it's all dead now, let's drill!

From a comment on ClimateProgress.org:

“If BP can “accidently” kill off most of the life in the gulf, then there would be little life to protect from future drilling in the area. So it would in the long run be easier to argue for more drilling in the area because there wouldn’t be much environment left to impact.”

I’m quite sure this thought has occurred to oil executives and their K street buddies. Can’t we send these people out on little boats to the Gulf so they can fully appreciate the splendor they have caused?

The Taliban and Al Qaida terrorists, even if they should build an A-bomb, can never hope to equal the sheer destruction that BP and their corporate partners have caused. These terrorists are sitting on their hands, eating sugared dates and figs, laughing at us and our corporatist system that does their horrible work for them.

Dear Kerry-Lieberman Apologists

The macro-economic birds-eye view says that it doesn't matter if we give billions in subsidies (free allowances) to BP and Exxon (or utilities that are burning coal) rather than to the American people. This is looking at "costs" but not "transfers." I think it is stupid to pre-distribute 40 years of allowance value. When Congress created the Federal Reserve, they didn't pre-set interest rates for the next 40 years. Anyway, the political alliances are too fragile to last, and the edifice will crumble under its own weight. And I won't cry for you, Economists. It's time to value people, not corporations. Three cheers to the Nobel committee for recognizing this with the recent award to Elinor Ostrom.

Our goal is to drive up the costs of fossil fuels, but Exxon and BP will invest the ridiculous windfall profits in climate denial and purchasing Congress following the "Citizens United" ruling. We may need to form a Citizens Energy Consumer Cartel to bargain with OPEC and Exxon and BP. This new cartel will say, we'll let you have rising prices in the face of our falling demand for fossil fuels, but we'll need to divide the windfalls and much of it will return to the people to help us make the changes we need to make.

Sure, they won't like it. They may scream socialism, etc. They may flood the airwaves and fund retrograde candidates. But this is a battle for democracy, the Earth, and civilization.

The Last First Past the Post

The only thing I really know about Nick Clegg, the 3rd party candidate in the UK, is that he is asking for the UK for change to proportional representation in order for him to agree to form a coalition with one of the two other parties. And I think that's great. Most Americans don't know that only a few countries still have first-past-the-post elections. Most countries in Europe and elsewhere have proportional representation. And if the UK switches, in this very public way, it would help educate many Americans about electoral reform. Sad that the 2000 election came and went and the only thing people remember is butterfly ballots and blaming Nader, when they could have seen that a real solution exists, an instant runoff voting system, where you rank your candidates 1,2,3.

PR is just better than FPPE. I won't explain all the intricacies other than providing this link to FairVote. Those guys have been working at this for years, and the Nick Clegg situation must be seen as a huge opportunity for education. Not that anything can really penetrate the Freedom Fries eating USA #1 minds of Amurkins. But who knows, maybe Simon Cowell will start making fun of Amurkins for being the only democracy without PR, and we'll eventually expand our electoral choices beyond McDonalds and Burger King.

Dinosaur Bones in Coal Minds

This cracked me up! A climate denier comment on a recent Huffington Post article about climate deniers:

09:42 PM on 4/26/2010

"Oil and coal are not fossil fuels. If they were, we would have ran out of those energy sources long ago.
How many dinosaur bones have been found in coal minds? How many fossil remains have been pumped out of oil wells?

Oil and coal are naturally occurring products.

Concerning coal-fired powers plants: as a truck drive I often deliver to one in my state. The only thing that is released from it into the air is steam; and no pollutants are released into the ground or the water supply.. Electric plants have come a long ways in creating energy without polluting the environment."

Why Graham's Tantrum might be Good for the Climate

The Kerry-Graham-Lieberman (KGL) climate bill, a mythical bill that no one has even seen but everyone keeps talking about, sort of like a unicorn, may not ever come to exist after Graham suddenly got furious when he found out that immigration might come before climate on the Senate's docket over the weekend.

KGL has changed many times depending on the polls and the business lobbies that its three sponsors met with over the last, what, 6 months, longer? Each change has resulted in more giveaways to coal, nuclear, and offshore oil drilling. I don't recall ever hearing about a change where they said, now that we've met with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, we are strengthening the emission reduction targets, returning even more permit auction revenues back to consumers, and investing even more into new cleaner technologies. But maybe I missed it.

So KGL, RIP. It played a key role in delaying real action on climate for at least 6 critical months, and distracted the Beltway Green Groups from motivating their members, mounting protests and blockades and putting real pressure on lip-service Senators. Now that the Dems 1 year opportunity is passing us by, KGL's delaying tactic was brilliant. Graham may be rewarded by Mitch McConnell for taking one for the team by faking partnership.

Or I could be wrong. All the liberal press keeps saying, Oh, Lindsey Graham was acting in good faith and it was Harry Reid who torpedoed this. How do we know this bail out wasn't planned all along, and this immigration thing isn't just a convenient excuse now that it's getting down to the wire and Graham would have had to finally put his name down on paper.

Anyway, adios KGL, hello CLEAR. The Cantwell-Collins climate bill has been around since December, but in all the anticipation for KGL, remained a runner up...until now. Now it is the last one standing. It is bipartisan. It reduces emissions, gives most of the permit auction revenues back to consumers, invests the rest in clean technologies, and lacks the freebies to coal, oil, and nuclear. Oh, and I almost forgot to mention, it actually exists!

I'm not sure if actual existence is a pre-requisite for the media to take something seriously, or for Senators to start considering supporting something, but maybe it should be.

Good interview with Joe Romm on Deniers, er, Disinformers

I dissed Joe Romm a few blog posts ago for not liking dividends.
But I'm balancing it out with a link to this interview with him, where he talks about deniers, or as he calls them, disinformers.

http://www.guernicamag.com/interviews/1687/700_club/

The Green Police!

Great 80's style music.

Joe Romm hates dividends

Joe Romm hates dividends. Doesn't want the money. Would rather give it to coal companies? Maybe that's going too far. But definitely has the same distaste for giving money to people as I do for fake offsets and giveaways to utilities (he likes those though). In my mind, lobbyists are the problem. In his mind, they are part of the system and must be accommodated.

I tried to comment on his blog, but I got moderated (censored). Luckily, the blogosphere is a democratic forum, so, Joe, here you go:

First they ignore you, then they fight you, then they try to convince you that you don't want a dividend check and that a carbon price will only be "a postage stamp a day," then they lose the Massachusetts Senate seat, then you win.

Exxon behind bin Laden climate tape

I haven't done a conspiracy theory post in a while. Well, OK, maybe I have (some past favorites included Sarah Palin and anthrax), but if so, then here's another one, just for fun.

So, Bin Laden Rebukes U.S. on Climate Change

I can already hear the teabag-climate-denier refrain: “I knew that Al Gore and Bin Laden were friends, and I always thought Gore was a secret al Queda operative, climate change isn't real, I'm an idiot, I don't read books, Sarah Palin is hot, blah blah blah…”

Superficially, Saudi Arabia’s wealth comes from oil, which causes global warming. But oil is also the cause of Western interference in the Middle East. So Bin Laden wants to return to the pre-Western days, by getting the U.S. off Middle Eastern oil?

Seems consistent, but I think there's more to it.

According to Joe Romm, bin Laden called for the “wheels of the American economy” to be brought to a halt to stop global warming. Hmm, this sounds like something the Chamber of Commerce, Fox News, or the chief of Exxon might say about any potential climate legislation. Now we're getting into conspiracy theory territory.

What if the same people who are using bin Laden as their puppet to scare lawmakers into approving trillion dollar defense budgets year after year (remember the Cold War ended back in 1989), and billions in Homeland Security no-bid contracts to look at people naked at airports, and wiretap people's iPhones and blog-tap people's computers, and keep those oil profits coming in until the wells run dry...what if they're now using bin Laden to try to derail climate legislation? Right when the Senate may have the best solution in front of their noses. That's pulling out the big guns (even if the guy is on life support hidden away in some bunker under Abu Ghraib).

Just when the Middle Class is about to get a dividend, a politically supported carbon price to reduce our reliance on foreign oil, and to save our coastal cities from eminent extreme weather events (Bechtel I'm sure wanted those lucrative rebuilding contracts), only a proclamation by Bin Laden could scare people into voting against their own best interest, or at least bridge the gap until the next election cycle when the corporations will unleash a bailout's worth of campaign finance, thanks to the Supreme Court of Robotic Enslavement. Here another link to the judiciary-robot theme.

Weird to think that Bin Laden could have a climate policy. Sitting in his cave, reading James Hansen papers? Almost makes him seem like a real human (not a hologram projection created by Rumsfeld's DIA?). Next will we find out he has an opinion on universal health care, or banking reform? I assume it would involve blowing things up, kind of like the Joker in the “Dark Knight,” but I’d start to get worried if he suddenly came out for universal health care and public floggings of Goldman Sachs executives and their puppet Treasury Secretaries. The Supreme Court definitely sided with McWorld the other day with their campaign finance ruling, and if Jihad starts putting out statements favoring people over corporations, they might attract some interest from the semi-populist teabaggers, and that’s kind of troubling. (note to NSA wiretapper: reference Benjamin Barber’s book Jihad vs. McWorld)

How Obama can get back on track

Take a risk or two.

Make it clear you represent the people, not the special interests.

Break the gridlock by showing some leadership, getting tough, and not waiting around for Congress. If some Senators are giving you a hard time, let them know that you will be supporting their primary opponents in the next election.

Fire Bernanke and Geithner. They smell of Dubya economic policy, Wall Street Bailouts, and Goldman Sachs bonuses. Corporations already have too much power, time for you to represent the people, and appoint some pro-people, not pro-too-big-to-fail banks, economists (if there are any).

Make it simpler. Sure, they are complex problems, but many of them have one sentence answers. For example:

Health care: Expand Medicare to cover all Americans. There, you did it. Was that so difficult? Some of the elderly might vote against it because they don't care about their own kids or grandchildren, but it seems like every human being (not corporation) would support it. You'll need those votes, after that Supreme Court ruling.

Climate Change: The CLEAR Act. Auction permits to polluters and return the revenues back to people as a cash dividend. The CLEAR Act is only 39 pages long, unlike the 1500 page pork-fest that the House passed.

Iraq: War is over, if you want it. Bring 'em home. Make a spectacle out of it. No need to land an airplane with a "Mission accomplished" banner, but do something honorable and classy, and tell us about the peace dividend and the balanced budget. Sorry to say it, Obie, but same for Afghani-quagmire. Your approval went down after your Peace Prize "War is good" speech. People like you because you can use words and diplomacy and don't need to use guns and swagger like that previous guy. We have problems at home, and stop using these Dubya-inspired wars as excuses.

Guantanamo: Close it. Yesterday. Find a loophole, do what you need to do. This represents an unfulfilled promise, an image of powerlessness, and it bothers me.

Jobs: Disaster prep and relief (Haiti), rebuilding New Orleans, energy retrofits. Make it happen, on the fast track.

Military spending: Cut it by about 50%, balance the budget, and pay for all the domestic programs above. This will take some guts. Do you have it?

I'm telling you, if the State of the Union is the same ol' "The State of the Union is strong, settle down America, eveyrthing is just fine, G-d bless America" eloquent but without substance, we won't be impressed, and we'll be back to yearning for change we can believe in, and I wish that change was the Green Party, but our Coke and Pepsi political system only seems to allow for two parties, and so the other one, the one with no solutions, will benefit, and the American people will suffer.

Governor Schwarzenegger Issues Statement on Cap-and-Trade Program Recommendations

Governor Schwarzenegger Issues Statement on Cap-and-Trade Program Recommendations

Posted using ShareThis

Notes from an Imaginarium

I saw the Terry Gilliam movie "Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus." Very Gilliam-ish, non-linear, and creative. It was great, but weird. I had to watch ESPN SportCenter for an hour afterward to get back to reality.

Here are some notes of my thoughts about themes which are open to interpretation in the movie. If you haven't see it yet, you may want to stop reading now.



The main theme was the father's (Parnassus's) fear of his daughter growing up and losing her innocence. When she turned 16 she could start making choices, and so had the capacity for "sin" which meant that the devil could take her (At the end, the "his" mirror for Valentina said "sin" in the reflection (the "H" had a slant that became the "N")). Parnassus wanted to prevent her from becoming an adult and preserve her childhood, but that would be impossible. She just wanted a "normal" life, and at the end Dr. Parnassus had to acknowledge that this was OK.

Tony (the Heath Ledger character) may have been Valentina's projection of her perfect man. So there was an element of the Fight Club two characters in one. She only slept with Tony in her imaginarium. Anton was intimidated by Tony's presence. When Anton "dies" in Tony's imaginarium, this is Anton and Valentina growing up. Then Tony is killed by Parnassus in P's imaginarium. Tony represents the transition to adulthood for Anton and Valentina, which is Parnassus' fear.

At the end of the movie, Valentina grows up, and she realizes that she really wanted a real person, Anton, not Tony from her imagination, and Parnassus lets her go live her own life.

Does this make any sense?

CNNMoney.com covers Dividends and Elinor Ostrom on the Commons

Good job CNNMoney.com for totally being on it.
The article "Fight global warming, get $1,100 a year" covers Maria Cantwell's CLEAR Act. A bit too much air time to the traders who are like, "But I want the money." But otherwise, it's the best article they've ever done.
Here's the link:

http://money.cnn.com/2009/12/23/news/economy/cap_and_dividend/

Plus it includes a great interview with Elinor Ostrom, the winner of this year's Nobel Prize in Economics. Hooray for Elinor! She's great.

Climate Scoreboard

More cool climate widgets.

What remains broken about the health care system: Fee-for-service, malpractice, lack of competition

Here's a brief health care bill analysis, excerpted from the Votemaster, a website I recommend for insider political info at http://www.electoral-vote.com/.

"When all is said and done, we may have a bill, but it really doesn't reform what everyone agrees is a broken system. What it does is have the government buy poor and semipoor people insurance within the framework of the current system. The fee-for-service paradigm, which encourages doctors to do unnecessary procedures thus driving costs (and their income) up, is still fully intact. The malpractice situation, which drives doctors to practice defensive medicine by ordering all kinds of useless tests to cover their tushes in the event of a subsequent lawsuit remains the same. The fundamental lack of competition between insurance companies, most of whom have something close to a regional monopoly does not change. In short, while 30 million people will get health insurance as a result of this bill, the factors driving health-care costs ever upward will not be broken."

My own editorial is simple: expand Medicare to all U.S. citizens.

Cap and Share (Copenhagen is Over)

Cap and Share (Copenhagen is Over)
Sung to the tune of “Happy Christmas (War Is Over)” by John Lennon and Yoko Ono
- - - - -
So this was Copenhagen
And what have you done
Another COP over
A new decade just begun
And so this was Copenhagen
I hope you had fun
The protests and speeches
But nothing got done

We face a scary future
Starting with the New Year
Let's hope it's a good one
But I have some fears

And so this was Copenhagen
The UN is not strong
The rich watch the poor drown
The world is so wrong

And so glaciers melting
Refugees and drought
Hurricanes and diseases
Makes me want to shout

A very scary future
And a happy New Year
Let's hope it's a good one
Without any fear

And so this was Copenhagen
And what have we done
Another COP over
And a new decade just begun

And so this was Copenhagen
I hope you had fun
Next time Cap emissions
and give Shares to everyone

A very scary future
And a happy New Year
Let's hope it's a good one
Without any fear

Cap and Share it
If you want it
Cap and Share
Now...

Story of Cap & Giveaway

This video is about 10 minutes, by the Story of Stuff folks.

The Story of Cap & Trade from Story of Stuff Project on Vimeo.

Grist has a counterargument here.

I agree with the Story people that giveaways are bad, offsets are mostly a sham, and there's potential for Enron-type shenanigans. But I see why David Roberts of Grist is worried that overly broad critiques of cap and trade may sway the political outcome so much taht we'll end up with nothing, which is Exxon's divide and conquer strategy.

In the end, c'mon Obama and the Democratic majority. Do something, how about Cap and Dividend, Contraction & Convergence, or something. With Obama's 30,000 more troops being sent to slaughter, I'm at a personal all-time Obama-era low in hope for change we can believe in, just in time for Nopenhagen.

Sacrificing 30,000 troops for Lieberman's health care vote

Everyone knows the war in Afghanistan is pointless. But Lieberman is so bloodthirsty, that he probably extracted the additional 30,000 troops in exchange for his vote on health care. I can see why Obama may have taken the deal. 30 thousand American lives in exchange for health care for 30 million Americans.

But why waste the time and money? Would it be cheaper to just fly the troops to Connecticut, maybe line them up in front of Lieberman's district offices or his house, and shoot them dead now, rather than wait for them to trickle in 5 a day? Maybe this would appeal to Lieberman's budget hawk tendencies.

Oh well, thank you to the brave soldiers who are being sacrificed so that the rest of us can have health care.