Day: June 25, 2008

Info Ink Environmental Opinion

Ten years ago, James Hansen warned the world that global warming would destroy the planet if it was not put in check.  Now he is back to rub Congress nose in the fact that they were an ostrich on this subject.  He is telling them that drastic measures are needed and now is the time before it is too late.

We all depend upon the Earth’s atmosphere. Yet we continue to treat it as though it were a free, limitless and indestructible rubbish dump.

With little more than our fingers crossed, we seem to cling to the hope that the atmosphere will be able to absorb all of the greenhouse gases that we pump into it without changing its chemical structure.

Unfortunately, the available scientific evidence tells us this is not the case, and that humanity’s emissions have already increased the risk that dangerous, perhaps abrupt, climate change will hit billions of people over the years ahead.

The time has come for us to stop freeloading and to find a fair, affordable and effective way of valuing, in dollar terms, the maintenance of a stable climate.

Put simply, we need to make it cheaper to help the environment than to harm it.

The principle of costing carbon emissions is not new – the international carbon trade, led by the EU market, turns over billions of dollars a year.

But the majority of the world’s countries, companies and citizens play no part in the exercise. It is remote and aloof, so we need something that touches everybody.

I agree that now is the time and now is the issue.  Time to realize that too much longer and the damage cannot be repaired.

Are You Experienced?

No! Really! Sen. McCain are you truly experienced?

Gen. wesley Clark Weighs in on the experience thingy that McCain and his entourage are claiming.

In a wide-ranging interview with The Huffington Post, Clark offered opinions on the current state of American foreign policy, the Democrats’ emergence as a more “full-service” party on security issues, and — lest anyone doubt his potential use as a running mate for Obama — the shortcomings of Sen. John McCain.

“I know he’s trying to get traction by seeking to play to what he thinks is his strong suit of national security,” Clark said of McCain while speaking from his office in Little Rock, Arkansas. “The truth is that, in national security terms, he’s largely untested and untried. He’s never been responsible for policy formulation. He’s never had leadership in a crisis, or in anything larger than his own element on an aircraft carrier or [in managing] his own congressional staff. It’s not clear that this is going to be the strong suit that he thinks it is.”

Resume aside, though, Clark also took issue with the Arizona Republican’s instincts on national security. “McCain’s weakness is that he’s always been for the use of force, force and more force. In my experience, the only time to use force is as a last resort. … When he talks about throwing Russia out of the G8 and makes ditties about bombing Iran, he betrays a disrespect for the office of the presidency.”

Citing the issue of Iran’s nuclear program, Clark suggested a prime window of opportunity may have been missed early in the Bush presidency, before the election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. “I think Iran has come out of the Bush administration as a much stronger power,” he said. “First of all, we eliminated the primary blocking force to their west in Iraq. Secondly, we have been ineffective in using the broader tools of U.S. diplomacy and moral suasion in the region — and that’s allowed Iran to capture Hamas, displace Fatah and strengthen [its] grip on Hezbollah. … Without effective diplomatic engagement of Iran, we’ve allowed them to pursue a nuclear program that is likely aimed at achieving nuclear weapons. But we’ve refused to sit down and talk to them about it. … I still favor an effort to engage Iran, but the clock is ticking on their probable nuclear program. This makes everything much more complicated and difficult now.

Gen. Clark is becoming an outspoken critic of McCain and his claims to experience. Does he, Clark, have a plan for the future; maybe VP or Sec of Defense?

Biofuel And Poverty

Oxfam says so-called green policies in developed countries are contributing to the world’s soaring food prices, which hit the poor hardest.

The group also says biofuels will do nothing to combat climate change.

Its report urges the EU to scrap a target of making 10% of all transport run on renewable resources by 2020.

Oxfam estimates the EU’s target could multiply carbon emissions 70-fold by 2020 by changing the use of land.

The report’s author, Oxfam’s biofuel policy adviser Rob Bailey, criticised rich countries for using subsidies and tax breaks to encourage the use of food crops for alternative sources of energy like ethanol.

“If the fuel value for a crop exceeds its food value, then it will be used for fuel instead,” he said.

“Rich countries… are making climate change worse, not better, they are stealing crops and land away from food production, and they are destroying millions of livelihoods in the process.”

I ask which direction will the crop go after the floods?  The recent flooding in the Midwest has destroyed thousands of acres of corn, especially.  Will the remaining crop go for biofuel or for food?  The answer will be–where is the greatest profit?

The Midwest Floods

The flooding in the US Midwest, which has caused billions of dollars in damage and left tens of thousands homeless, has exposed the neglect and incompetence of the state and federal authorities charged with protecting lives and property along US waterways.

More than 20 levees have failed, topped or breached by floodwaters, with cities and towns along the upper Mississippi and its tributaries inundated and hundreds of thousands of acres of prime agricultural land underwater.

Damage to agriculture is still being assessed. One official with the US Department of Agriculture estimated that 160,000 acres of cropland in Illinois alone have been affected. Previous estimates indicated that 9 percent of Iowa’s corn crop and 8 percent of its soybean crop were flooded. The impact on already spiraling food prices is expected to be significant.

The wholesale failure of the flood protection system in the upper Midwest points to deep systemic problems that highlight the chaos and irrationality endemic to capitalism. There have been a number of media reports pointing out that the failure of the flood protection system had been long predicted.

The human impact of the floods has been severe. The paltry amounts of money doled out by federal disaster relief programs will not begin to compensate for the damage suffered by thousands of homeowners and small businesses. According to a report in the Associated Press, when the town of Gulfport, Illinois on the Mississippi flooded, only 28 homeowners had flood insurance. They were told by FEMA they didn’t need it because the levees were secure against a 100-year flood.

According to a report carried by AP “some FEMA floodplain maps are 20 years old and seriously outdated, based on old evaluations of levees and river conditions.” Nationally, only a tiny percentage of homeowners carry flood insurance, which is often exorbitantly expensive.

Now that floodwaters are subsiding, the attention of the big business politicians and the media is shifting away from the flood-devastated regions, leaving tens of thousands of ordinary people to try to put their lives together as best they can.

The wholesale breakdown of the flood protection system is not simply the result of policy failures of this or that administration. The capitalist system and its political representatives are incapable of implementing the kind of systematic response that is needed which would include upgrading levees, wetland restoration, diversion channels and a range of other measures.

The Midwest floods again demonstrate that the complex needs of mass society are incompatible with a system that subordinates production and economic development to private profit. The stranglehold of private wealth over all facets of economic and political life in the United States insures that no appropriate lessons will be drawn from this round of catastrophic flooding—any more than they were from 1993 and Katrina—and that future and even worse disasters are inevitable.

The Forgotten War

Insurgent activity is increasing sharply in Afghanistan and has spread into once stable areas, with attacks up almost 40% in the eastern provinces alone, according to new American military data that have prompted alarm among senior Pentagon officials.

Rising attacks against Afghan and NATO troops in the east represent the latest in a series of troubling developments that have led to markedly higher U.S. casualties and have prompted the military’s top leadership to order a review of its strategy in Afghanistan, including how to make do with limited numbers of American troops. Any significant troop increase in Afghanistan would be dependent on future force drawdowns in Iraq.
Southern Afghanistan has long been the most violent part of the country, and U.S. officers have complained that shorter tours of NATO commanders in the south have hampered the counterinsurgency effort. The current southern commander, Canadian Maj. Gen. Marc Lessard, is serving a 10-month tour. Incoming commanders would serve at least 12 months under the new pact. More broadly, senior U.S. military officers hope to hammer out a “comprehensive campaign plan” with NATO allies, which would include agreements on military strategy as well as such efforts as counter-narcotics programs and reinforcing the Afghan government.
Despite the unexpected rise in violence in eastern Afghanistan, Schloesser did not call for additional forces in his region. American-led forces there are facing a patchwork of Sunni Muslim groups, unlike in the south, where the Taliban is resurgent. Schloesser attributed the increase in attacks in part to more aggressive patrols by Afghan and allied troops into previously untrod areas.

You would think that the only war being fought today that can be justified, would have more support from the rest of the world.  Americans need to pay more and closer attention to this war.

McCain Wants To Green Up Washington

In a speech in Santa Barbara, Calif., McCain (R-Ariz.) vowed to “put the purchasing power of the United States government on the side of green technology” by buying fuel-efficient vehicles for its civilian fleet of cars and trucks and by retrofitting federal office space. The pledge comes months after Obama (D-Ill.) outlined a more detailed and ambitious proposal on the subject, virtually ensuring that the next administration will take significant steps to lower the government’s output of energy and pollution.

A greening of the government would probably have a major impact on the Washington region, as the modernizing of buildings would spark a mini-construction boom and ease energy demands. Cleaner vehicles would also reduce harmful auto emissions, environmentalists say.

Saying that the U.S. government ranks as “the single largest consumer of electricity in the world” because it holds sway over “3.3 billion square feet of federal office space” worldwide, McCain said he plans to reduce the government’s carbon footprint by updating its buildings and demanding better standards in new ones.

“By retrofitting where possible, and by applying a higher efficiency standard to new buildings leased or purchased, we can save taxpayers billions of dollars in energy costs and move the market in the direction of green technology,” he said.

McCain did not provide details about his plan, causing some public watchdog and environmental groups to question how much energy would be saved.

As with most proposals by politicians specifics are few and far between.  It is a grand plan, but how will he pay for this proposal?

Tit For Tat Statement

Barack Obama and John McCain turned up the heat on their debates over energy and terror Tuesday, with some calling on the Republican to fire a top aide who suggested another attack would be a political boon.

McCain adviser Charlie Black has expressed regret for telling Fortune magazine that another terrorist attack “certainly would be a big advantage” to McCain.

But regret wasn’t enough for some, including an umbrella union group with some 6 million members, Change to Win, that has backed Obama and called on McCain to fire Black.

This comment ping pong is truly irritating.  Thanks to youtube and the like, no candidate or surrogaste can say anything without it streaming on the web.  How long will this game continue?  There are more important issues at hand than the he said, they said game to continue.

Personally, I think that Black is dreaming.   Why?  The Bush Administration has thumped its chest about there have been no new attacks on our soil and the McCain campaign is tied large to the Bush policies and the statement on national security.  An attack before the election would likely favor Obama and not McCain.  Obama could point to the attack as proof that a new thinking was needed in foreign policy and that he would have kept the US safe.

Say It Ain’t So, Don Imus

Don Imus, responding to criticism about racial remarks made Monday on his radio program, said on the air yesterday he was trying to “make a sarcastic point” about unfair treatment of blacks in the criminal justice system – in this case the arrests of suspended Dallas Cowboys cornerback Adam Jones – but had been misunderstood. “What people should be outraged about is that they arrest blacks for no reason,” Imus said yesterday. “I mean, there’s no reason to arrest this kid six times. Maybe he did something once, but everyone does something once.” He called the flurry of criticism surrounding the comments “ridiculous” and said that his program’s cast is now more diverse than ever – and includes a black producer and two black cohosts, a man and a woman. During a conversation Monday about Jones’s run-ins with the law, Imus asked, “What color is he?” Sports announcer Warner Wolf said Jones is “African-American.” Imus responded: “There you go. Now we know.” (AP)

Now think about this, would not you think hard and long about making a screw up after being chastised by the world for your last one?  Many of Imus peers have gone on record that he is NO racist.  After the first one, I could have believed that statement, but after the last one I doubt its validity.  If Imus is not a racist, then he is an arrogant fool that thinks he can say anything he likes and then explain it away.

WABC has said that it is unlikely that Imus will be punished for his latest comment.