Bring It On! National News

Solar Power is going to be a big part of your future life whether you like it or not. With the cut throat politics of big oil, the future is going to be very different. America much like in the past will change the world with our direction. Not from some group in some far away lands demands, but on our own terms. American’s are a funny people, we will buy your product on our terms if it is affordable and reliable. That includes our energy needs. While the nice folks sitting on mega trillions of oil think that they have “We the People” over their barrel, creative Americans are turning those same barrels into wood stoves and home made bio-fuel tanks.

I love the New York Times and I have to thank my friend Jeff from Worm Town Taxi for turning me onto this story. The New York Times writer could not find his back side from his elbow on this topic. Rather than reporting on the true research they condemn solar power as a fad for this generation. Different paper, different generation but the same is true, Solar power is not good enough once more over at the NYT…

A link between Moore’s Law and solar technology reflects the engineering reality that computer chips and solar cells have a lot in common.

“A solar cell is just a big specialized chip, so everything we’ve learned about making chips applies,” says Paul Saffo, an associate engineering professor at Stanford and a longtime observer of Silicon Valley.

Financial opportunity also drives innovators to exploit the solar field. “This is the biggest market Silicon Valley has ever looked at,” says T. J. Rogers, the chief executive of Cypress Semiconductor, which is part-owner of the SunPower Corporation, a maker of solar cells in San Jose, Calif.

Mr. Rogers, who is also chairman of SunPower, says the global market for new energy sources will ultimately be larger than the computer chip market.

“For entrepreneurs, energy is going to be cool for the next 30 years,” he says.
Optimism about creating a “Solar Valley” in the geographic shadow of computing all-stars like Intel, Apple and Google is widespread among some solar evangelists.

“The solar industry today is like the late 1970s when mainframe computers dominated, and then Steve Jobs and I.B.M. came out with personal computers,” says R. Martin Roscheisen, the chief executive of Nanosolar, a solar company in San Jose, Calif.

Nanosolar shipped its first “thin film” solar panels in December, and the company says it ultimately wants to produce panels that are both more efficient in converting sunlight into electricity and less expensive than today’s versions. Dramatic improvements in computer chips over many years turned the PC and the cellphone into powerful, inexpensive appliances — and the foundation of giant industries. Solar enterprises are hoping for the same outcome. - New York Times

This is where the article should have ended but it didn’t. You can read the rest of it if you like but it is more or less if you can’t have the whole loaf of bread then you don’t want even one slice.

When it comes to our nations energy needs in the future you can no longer put all your eggs in one basket. You need to look at all options and Solar Power is just one option of many for your individual energy needs. There isn’t a person involved in the real life business of solar power that will tell you it will serve all of your energy resources. That kind of science and technology just doesn’t exist… YET! When you think of solar power you have to think of your vegetable garden, it offsets your grocery bill with food grown by your own hand that you know will help your family budget. It’s only the vegetables. As in the old commercials from long gone by political campaigns “Where’s the BEEF?”

The beef is in the current research that will mass produce the solar panels to the point where Joe and Joanne Sixpack can afford to install a solar panel on their home. That is where Moore’s Law meets the common consumer. That is where engineers and scientist break the back of OPEC and pretty much look at locations in the middle of the desert here in America with sunshine year round that are not in the Middle East for our nations electric power needs.

Solar Power was not a fad in the 70‘s, or the 80‘s, or for that matter in the 90‘s. It is and will be part of your life, it is only a question of what part it will be producing power for your families needs. Ten years from now you could probably pick up a whole house solar panel unit that you plug into your outdoor outlet that powers your entire home from Home Depot or Lowes. Then again Walmart might have those nasty falling prices and outsource the American designed technology to China to mass produce it. Any way you look at it, the technology will be cheaper and our nations energy needs will come from somewhere else and solar power is just one piece of the puzzle.

The only thing that will hold solar power back is the people most afraid of it and how much of their bottom line it will take away. Those are the people that this story in the NYT’s should have looked at more closely. That is when you will smell the sense of smoke in the air and new patents for new energy smoldering on the bonfires of big energy R us. Capitalism at its worst.

Papamoka

Feel free to link to this post or borrow it…

Cross posted at Papamoka Straight Talk

The punch drunk wimp on the receiving end of his blows is the Western press and their self-censoring cowardice as illustrated by two particular incidents: obituaries of Earl Butz and two rounds of opportunities to run the infamous Muhammad cartoons. Of this latest cowardly cringe of omission, Hitchens writes:

The cowardice of the mainstream American culture was something to see the first time around. The only magazines that bucked the self-censorship trend, or the capitulation to undisguised terror, were the conservative Weekly Standard and the atheist Free Inquiry—two outlets (for both of which I have written) with a rather small combined circulation. Borders thereupon pulled Free Inquiry from its shelves, with the negligible consequence that I will never do a reading or buy a book at any of its sites ever again. (By the way, I urge you to follow suit.) I think it’s pretty safe to say that most Americans never even saw this sellout going on. But that was because their own newspapers were too shamefaced to report a surrender of which they were themselves a part.

In Canada, only two minority papers reprinted the cartoons. The Western Standard, now online only, and the Jewish Free Press were promptly taken before a sort of scrofulous bureaucratic peoples’ court describing itself as the Alberta Human Rights Commission. If you think that’s a funny name, try the title of the complainant: the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada. Who knows how long such a stupid “hate speech” case might have dragged on or how much public money and time it might have consumed, but last week the Islamic supremes decided to drop it. “I understand that most Canadians see this as an issue of freedom of speech,” said Syed Soharwardy of the case that he had originated, adding “that principle is sacred and holy in our society.” Soharwardy went on to say, rather condescendingly perhaps, that: “I believe Canadian society is mature enough not to absorb the messages that the cartoons sent. Only a very small fraction of Canadian media decided to publish those cartoons.” Without the word not and without the sinister idea that Soharwardy’s permission is required for anything, that first sentence would have been a perfectly good if banal statement. But with the addition of his remark about the “small fraction” and the concomitant satisfaction about the general reticence, we have no choice but to conclude that Soharwardy is satisfied on the whole with the level of frightened deference to be found north of the U.S. border. I mention this only because the level of frightened deference to be found south of that border is still far in excess of what any censor, or even self-censor, might dare to wish.

I don’t always agree with Hitchens but this here is a knock-out punch to the cowardly lion that is the free (to censor itself) press in much of the West. Kudos to the few outlets that have published the cartoons. To the rest…go kiss the mat and take your 10 count!

Protected from those nasty lawsuits and actions brought about by the physicians refusal to provide medical procedures or medications that they deem against their religious beliefs. From the RawStory writeup:

Pennsylvania Senate Bill 1255, also called the Conscientious Objection Act, would absolve medical care providers of liability in cases where reproductive care was denied based on a practitioner’s religious or moral beliefs.

Services a provider would be free to withhold, with immunity, include performing an abortion, artificial insemination, and prescribing birth control or emergency contraception (also known as the “morning-after pill”).

Notice it’s all about reproductive procedures and medications. Nothing else. Surely there are other types of procedures and medications that some physicians would find against their religious beliefs.

Leave it to the Republican’s to narrow it down to reproductive issues. Must be an election year..

Remember this?

Two weeks ago, when word of this investigation leaked, Central Florida school districts pulled beef from their menus. Smart move on their part.

A disturbing undercover video showing cows too sick to stand being shoved with forklifts or dragged with chains across a cement floor at a Southern California slaughterhouse has sparked the largest beef recall in the nation’s history.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture ordered a recall of 143 million pounds of beef Sunday evening from Chino-based Westland/Hallmark Meat Co., which is the subject of an animal-abuse investigation. The recall affects beef products dating back to Feb. 1, 2006 that came from the company. — ABC

So, did they put animals too ill to stand into the national food supply?

The USDA said it had evidence Westland did not routinely contact its veterinarian when cattle became nonambulatory after passing inspection, which violates health regulations.

Federal regulations call for keeping downed cattle out of the food supply because they may pose a higher contamination risk from E. coli, mad cow disease or salmonella.

So far, no illnesses have been linked to the recalled beef and officials said they believe the majority of it already has been consumed. — ABC

I’m guessing, that’s a yes with a side of retch. To put this into some perspective, if you get 900 pounds of meat off a carcas, that’s @160,000 steers whose lives were wasted in order to shave a few bucks off the top.

I raise a small amount of livestock for personal consumption. I get that what I do on my small farm in terms of care of my animals is not what works on large scale farming, but dammit, it IS possible to raise animals for food without abuse. I have toured commercial egg facilities and while I’m sure my birds are much happier, the birds in cages are clean, fed and watered. My pig and steer are regualrly wormed and fed a wholesome diet appropriate to their species. They taste good, and are appreciated at my dinner table. My kids know where meat comes from and are involved in caring for these animals we will eventually consume.

We could learn a few things from Native Americans about how we look at the food we kill in order to survive. We are so disconnected from the circle of life we don’t see or respect it.

The Bush adminstration has routinely gutted the FDA to the point of complete inability to police our food supply. We aren’t much help when we don’t respect the animals enough to demand better.

Comedian George Carlin used to do a gag called, “Seven Dirty Words You Can’t Say on TV“. He used the words prolifically to make the point that they were simply words - not bombs nor bullets nor anything else that might cause lasting harm. In fact, I’d say that 99% of the adult US population has used at least one of those words at some point and the remaining 1% are liars.

So here we are, several decades down the road. We’ve weathered wars, natural disasters, terror attacks, and dozens of other momentous events, but we’re still apoplectic when poppa says a bad, bad thing. In fact, a bad word slipped just this morning. It was the word that begins with a “c” and ends in “unt”. It happens to be the title of one of the monologues in the Vagina (not “va-jay-jay“) Monologues and that is exactly how Jane Fonda used it when she let it slip on the Today Show.

And That Goes Double for F*ck
Fonda isn’t stupid. She knew what the reaction would be. It appears that she simply didn’t parse the word carefully before saying it and the NBC censors didn’t hit the 10-second delay button in time. NBC cut the offensive language in the west coast edition of Today and apologized to viewers for the slip up. There was a similar stink, and attendant apology, last month when Diane Keaton inadvisably said f*ck on the air. One would think those apologies would be sufficient, but of course, that would be much too simple.

Conservatives are p*ssed and jumped on the story like flies on sh*t - NewsBusters and right wing diva, Michelle Malkin to name two. Newsbusters put it this way, “Besides her left wing activism, famous North Vietnamese propagandist Jane Fonda spouts foul language on morning network television, when some children almost certainly saw it.”

Um, yeah. I wonder what word the commenter uses to describe Fonda in private?

Oh, Go F*ck Yourself
True, children could have seen it, but they also could have seen or read it on the NewsBusters and Michelle Malkin websites, both of which carried the monstrous offense to humanity verbatim. The kiddies could have also seen more traumatic fare, like death footage from Iraq, but I didn’t hear the moth*rf*ckers pis*ing and moaning about that.

I’ve toned the words down in this post out of respect to those who find them offensive, not because they offend me personally. But I have been known to say, co*cksu*ker when I’m aggressively cut off in traffic or the word t*ts in the throes of passion. I’m not perfect and neither are those who choose to make an issue of it, not even Dick Cheney. After all, he delivered a pithy message to Senator Patrick Leahy on the floor of Congress a few years back.

The Big Dick told Leahy to, “go f*ck yourself” (NSFW).

‘Nuff said.

President George W. Bush has done it once more. He’s taken the Constitution and pretty much shredded it this time. He wiped his backside with it over wire tapping, tromped on it over the Patriot Act and pretty much stuffed it in the trash with his personal war in Iraq. For a man that took an oath to uphold the Constitution before the people on his inauguration as President he sure finds it to be a pesky little thing to deal with. Apparently, none of the photographs showed his other hand that was not on the bible had his fingers crossed. This is not my President, not your President, this man thinks and acts like a damn King!

As a lame duck President he is enacting laws that no matter who is elected the next President will have a difficult situation to change. W is back room dealing to guarantee our military presence in Iraq permanently and without Congressional approval.

Over at the Washington Post they have this opinion piece on it…

An Agreement Without Agreement

By Bruce Ackerman and Oona Hathaway
Friday, February 15, 2008; 4:30 PM

The Bush administration is so intent on securing its legacy in Iraq that it is once again ignoring the Constitution. Without seeking the consent of Congress, it is well on its way toward a long-term agreement with the Iraqi government that threatens to deepen the American commitment without the congressional support the Constitution requires.

President Bush’s plan to cut out Congress has provoked a growing chorus of criticism, joined by both Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. In response, the administration has begun to back-track from its vision of a sweeping military and economic agreement. Speaking to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said that the agreement would not contain a security guarantee committing the country to fixed troop levels or permanent bases. Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates, speaking before the Senate Armed Services last week, stated that the agreement will be “like other Status of Forces Agreements,” which deal with the rights and obligations of the military when operating on foreign soil. Such agreements, the White House is quick to point out, are not usually subject to congressional approval. That is true. But this truth will not suffice, since the administration is still aiming for an agreement that moves far beyond the traditional scope of these limited military accords. We should not allow false advertising to serve as a cover for a constitutional fait accompli.

Snip the Constitution

Worse yet, the administration is keeping most of its plans secret. (Much of what we have learned comes from leaks reported in the press.) Congress has held two hearings — on Jan. 23 and Feb. 8 — on the legitimate scope of the Iraqi agreement, and the administration has twice refused to testify. While Gates and Rice have made a few reassuring remarks, they have fallen far short of full disclosure.

This is unacceptable. Sen. Joseph Biden, as chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, is a strong critic of the administration’s unilateral approach. But if the stone-walling continues, he should make it his committee’s business to sponsor a congressional resolution declaring invalid any military agreement that seeks to go beyond the traditional limits of the standard Status of Forces Agreement. No president has the unilateral power to impose broad international obligations on the nation without congressional support. But it is especially wrong for a lame-duck president to make such commitments about a controversial policy that is at the very center of the debate among the candidates vying to succeed him. - Washington Post

What is next for W? Is he going to annex Canada because he really likes their bacon? Then he moves on to Mexico because he just happens to like taco night at the White House and we all know them brownies make the best tacos. I didn‘t coin that phrase, the Bush family did… (No offense to Mexican American’s intended… I’m on a rant). W will probably next rename Iraq Haliburtonville in one of his notorious “Screw the Constitution Signing Statements” and his buddy Dick Cheney will have a shorter commute to work from the headquarters in Dubai when they leave office in 2009.

One thing that every President of America had in common prior to Bush was faithfully taking the pledge to defend the Constitution. In doing so George Washington built the Presidency from the ground up not as a King but an office based on the greater good. Thomas Jefferson propelled our nation out of a religious based government into a man made government. To which some today think and believe is wrong but isn’t that what Iran and every Middle East government is. How’s that looking lately? Abraham Lincoln divided but united our nation in the midst of a states rights issue that cost hundreds of thousands of lives but his integrity and place in history is sound because he believed in the greater good for all. Read any news report and you can clearly see that President Bush has no intention of legally upholding the office he was elected too. Full speed ahead for Bush and damn the consequences as he lets the chips fall where they will. There is no historical value to any action he has performed as President that is for the greater good. In all of his actions he has turned the people on themselves and not for the same reasons as Lincoln. He is a rogue President and if the Congress will not reel him in then they are a body without power and Bush has succeeded in his mission.

This is the reason why Republican’s will not see the White House in the next election. Our so called defender of our Constitution thinks it is just a piece of paper and it is not. In the same respects that our flag is just a piece of cloth, burn it, shred it, stamp your dirty boots on it will never kill or mame the meaning behind it. He hijacked our nation and his own political party to serve his own personal, political and financial gains. AKA Dick Cheney and his net worth going through the roof on a VP’s public servant salary. President Bush does not like our form of government and he has proven it over and over again and still he is not called to task for it. Both political parties should be screaming at the top of their lungs over this sidestep of the Congress ensuring our military presence in Iraq for any time the secret documents will make law. If our President is never to be held accountable then he does in fact have a monarchy. Should that fact alone inspire you to contact your representative in government with your anger?

Our Constitution is our government. That is the foundation of America no matter how we look at it from any perspective. No matter who you are as an American it still starts out with “We the People…”

W, W, W, what are we going to do with you? In less than a year there will be no problem with the door hitting him in the back side as the ghosts of Lincoln, Jefferson and Washington will be the ones slamming those doors on the White House as he exits. Thanks for visiting W. Somebody else will clean up the mess you left behind.

Papamoka

Originally posted at Papamoka Straight Talk

Feel free to link to this post or borrow it…

One of the nice things about Valentines Day is that you really get to show the love. Congress today showed President Bush exactly how much they love his tossing executive privilege around and at the Congress. President Bush has his executive privilege piled up so high around the nations capitol that it’s like a knick knack junk attack that people cherish and place up on the mantle, on top of the fridge, over the television, the back of the toilet, over the medicine cabinet, in the medicine cabinet, on top of the stereo, on the back of the headboard, all over the bedroom bureaus and on every flat surface in their home.

One of President Bush’s favorite EP’s is that not one soul past or present in service to the executive branch can be subpoenaed by the Congress no matter what laws were broken. Just for back up he made sure his Justice Department pick backed him up. Contempt of Congress only works if the Justice Department backs up the Congress, Bush pulled that chip off the poker table and put it firmly in his pocket. Snickered and winked at his opponents as he held a solid pair of deuces.

Today, Congress grabbed a trash bag to get rid of some of his knick knack EP’s and the first to go was Harriet Miers and Joshua Bolton for contempt of Congress. Over at the Washington Post they have more on it but read on afterward…

House Approves Contempt Citations Against Bolten, Miers

By Paul Kane
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, February 14, 2008; 4:57 PM

The House today approved contempt of Congress citations against White House Chief of Staff Joshua A. Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet E. Miers for their refusal to cooperate with an investigation into the mass firings of U.S. attorneys and allegations that administration officials sought to politicize the Justice Department.

The House voted 223-32 in favor of the citations, the first against the executive branch since the Reagan administration. The vote came after a morning of tense partisan fights over procedural motions and bickering over parliamentary rules, capped by most House Republicans walking off the floor and refusing to vote. Republicans said the chamber should instead be approving a surveillance law passed by the Senate and supported by President Bush.

But Democrats said they were left with no choice but to engage in a constitutional showdown with Bush because he has refused for nearly a year to allow any current or former West Wing staff members to testify in the congressional inquiry. Citing executive privilege, the president has offered their testimony only if it is taken without transcripts and not under oath.

Snippet and here is the power punch!!!

Testifying at his confirmation hearings last October, Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey said that current and former White House officials who refused to testify in a congressional inquiry likely did so based on the Justice Department’s ruling that Bush’s assertion of executive privilege was proper. That meant the Justice Department could not now criminally charge someone for defying Congress based on its own prior legal advice, he said.

The resolutions approved by the House contain a second mechanism that, if Mukasey and Taylor refuse to impanel a grand jury, would allow the House general counsel to file a civil lawsuit in federal courts seeking a declaratory judgment against Bolten and Miers that would compel their congressional testimony. - Washington Post

Talk about a power punch! For the record this power punch was brought to you and the American people by one man that was fed up with all the corruption and cover up politics of Bush and Company.

Congressman Robert Wexler of Florida has been ticked off and leading this fight not just behind the scenes but right up front. This from the Super Congressman in my email box today…

Today, thanks in great part to your advocacy and persistence, the House of Representatives took a major, tangible step towards holding the Bush Administration accountable.

In a vote on the House floor, we acted to enforce the law and our Constitution, and hold former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten in Contempt of Congress. (Please click here to watch my speech on the House Floor calling for contempt.)

Bolten and Miers have ignored congressional subpoenas for nine months and thumbed their noses at Congress and the American people.

Executive privilege has never permitted officials to avoid appearing altogether when subpoenaed. This behavior is unprecedented and outrageous.

Now, these two renegade officials must face up to their blatant disregard of the law and constitution.

Our message of accountability for Bush/Cheney is finally resonating on Capitol Hill.
Judiciary Chairman John Conyers fought hard to bring this to a vote, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi herself took the floor to support contempt. - Congressman Robert Wexler Email to Papamoka

This is what justice is all about. Not raising a vigilante group of thugs but taking the steps necessary and legally to take on Bush and his King like political tactics. Time for the scales of justice to tilt a little back to the center. Thank you Congressman Wexler!

Papamoka

Originally posted at Papamoka Straight Talk

Feel free to link to or borrow this post…

On September 12, 2001, George Bush stood atop a pile of rubble in New York and announced the world had changed forever. For the most part, it’s changed in ways few foresaw and without many rational, presumptive changes ever quite taking root, but it has changed, just as he promised.

For most of us, the biggest change has been in how little Dear LeaderTM cares for the individual freedoms he swore to defend and protect. For others - most notably families that lost someone that day - the world changed in a more fundamental and visceral way. Now, these seemingly different types of loss have converged.

El Jefe and the congress are once again at loggerheads over FISA laws. Since Day 1, the flaccid republican and democratic congresses have repeatedly given in to the President’s whims and then some. Congress has proposed a measly 15 day delay in considering a FISA renewal, but the Defender of His FateTM has threatened a veto. And as usually happens when he doesn’t get his way, he launched another fear bomb to justify it, “Terrorists are planning new attacks on our country … that will make Sept. 11 pale by comparison.” Sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

The Prez Who Cried Wolf
This terrorist threat is identical to dozens of other admonitions. Under that blanket excuse, he’s rolled back just about every civil liberty we once enjoyed, while the final word has never been validated by the courts. He admits he’s spied on US citizens in an apparent contravention of the Constitution. However, instead of an apology he simply demands more power, like Congress giving telecom companies protection from prosecution if they broke the law (which they already have).

His justification?

“If these companies are subjected to lawsuits that could cost them billions of dollars, they won’t participate. They won’t help us. They won’t help protect America.”

Loyalty, At a Price
In other words, we must pay multinational phone companies to retain their loyalty, rather than being the upstanding, selfless citizens we expect ourselves to be. That sounds a lot like buying off an Afghan warlord to be our BFF (and likely with similar results). It’s the type of behavior we’ve come to expect from the administration and is directly linked to the dubious premise that prisoners can be held without trial and without adequate legal representation. That’s hardly a fairness exemplar for “emerging democracies” like Iraq.

As some of the Guantanamo “disappeared” start preparing for trial, it’s obvious that “trials” in Bushspeak mean something very different than what most of us expect under the law. In Dubya’s steely legal mind, “trial” means take away anything good for the defendant and allow the prosecution to do anything they damn well please. This seems curious behavior for an administration that claims to have mountains of evidence condemning the detainees, yet can’t allow the defense to see any of it, even under strict secrecy provisions. It suggests the World’s Sole Remaining SuperpowerTM” might have some intelligence that doesn’t stand up in a legitimate court of law - which brings us to the families victimized by September 11.

(more…)

I have written before that in general conservatives operate on fear while liberals operate out of necessity.

Let me briefly review this idea. In general conservatives are the successful wealthy business people who fear losing what they have - money. Or, conservatives are the morally upright religious zealots who fear that society could go down the toilet at any moment. These two groups represent the majority of conservatives. Progressives however, feel that the world has already caved in all around them. Progress is anything that can help them dig out of this mess. Progressives are willing to try almost anything to fix the problems in society, while conservatives fear that anything new will lead to the downfall of everything they have come to love.

Since the people who are happy with the way things currently are is usually a smaller number than those who believe that they are up to their necks in shit conservatives needed to craft a way to convince those in need to vote to change things to the way they have been. The idea that change back to the “old ways” was a progressive change was championed by the Reagan revolution. Fear and progressive change have been the guiding principles of American politics for a long time.

Well, it actually turns out that the majority of people actually reside somewhere in the middle. These moderates fear change that is too rapid, but they want some change to help them out of the doldrums. For these people “fear” and “change” are words that can move them to support a candidate. Reagan used “change” to move these people to his side. George W Bush used “fear” to keep them there in 2004.

The truth of the matter is that we should worry a bit about change. But, we should also recognize that change can happen for the better.

It is easy for people to become fearful of terrorism. Obviously seeing 3000 people killed in one day in an orchestrated terrorist effort is scary. I don’t need to say this, but we all know that death is a bad thing. But, death does not only come from terrorist attacks. Death comes in many preventable ways. And, progress happens when we can reduce unnecessary death no matter where it comes from.

But, how can we know which efforts to defeat unnecessary death should be taken on, and which efforts should not? We have limited resources and we can only do so much. This is known as risk. We can calculate risk by what we observe. For example, we can count the number of people killed by terrorist attacks and divide by the number of years that we examine. We can quickly see that even before the security measures taken on by the government we have had relatively few people die in terrorist attacks per year. We can compare this to automobile accidents and we quickly realize that driving our cars is much riskier than going back to our old level of security before 9/11/2001.

But, fear rules and conservatives are controlled by their fear. Our conservative government has told us to be afraid and to do whatever we can no matter what the cost in order to protect ourselves from terrorism. We have spent billions of dollars in Iraq fighting a war out of the fear that terrorist will attack us again. We have spent billions of dollars trying to prevent terrorist attacks that rarely happen. We could calculate how many lives have been saved by counting the number of deaths due to terrorism occurring in the seven years leading up to 9/11 and compare that to the number of lives lost in the prevention of terrorism since 9/11. We can include the amount of money spent and we will quickly come to the realization that we have lost more lives and spent more money based on irrational fear than before 9/11. The risk of terrorism was small and it is still small. We have lost more lives. It is almost as if we are paying terrorists to kill our soldiers. If we used a balance sheet that would be the conclusion.

But, the sad and frustrating part of this wasted effort is that the money could have gone to save lives instead. One example is our health care system. It turns out that roughly 18,000 people die each year because of lack of health care. That is equivalent to six 9/11s per year. Many of these people could have been saved if they had the health care that a civilized country like the United States has available to every citizen. With preventative care and regular checkups many lives could be saved or enhanced. The billions of dollars that we are wasting in Iraq to bring that country up to the twenty-first century could have been used to bring our poor and needy up to this century instead.

The foes of open borders continue to complain that immigrants too easily have access to services provided by our country. However, we freely give this same aid to Iraqis in an effort to appease them so that they will not join the insurgents. This may be working, but if we weren’t their in the first place it wouldn’t have even been an issue. And, if we had assessed to risks in a proper way we would never have gone into Iraq anyway.

Fear can be tempered by considering the risk involved. Fear of driving to and from work is almost zero for most commuters. The risk of this drive is far greater than to probability of being attacked by a terrorist. Roads could be made safer, but fear has persuaded the hand of government to spend more money on the terrorist “threat” and less on our roads.

The biggest problem that we face is not terrorism, or roads, or even health care. The biggest problem that we face is the education of our children. It turns out that we could make very good decisions based on the calculation of risk. However, our education system has cheated so many people in our society from having a useful education that politicians, if they actually can think, are able to persuade the public to fear risks that are as tiny as the threat of another terrorist attack. If we don’t educate our society to think, we will surely become a society where the wealthy and well-to-do minority will be able to control the rest of us through our ignorance. The erosion of our education system will ensure that any progress that we have made over the last 50-some years will erode as well.

—————————————————–

Don’t forget what Stephen Colbert said, “Reality has a well-known liberal bias.”

Cross Posted @ Bring It On, tblog, Blogger and BlogSpirit

Reflection

An exclusive interview with Hillary Clinton reveals her shocking secret ambition: “You think I give a flying F$&# about the White House?? THIS is what I really want!”