PICK ONE: Mother Earth vs. Keystone XL Pipeline

The picture above is what my mind sees when I talk about clean environment.
Then I read the news headlines and see this?

Most In U.S. Support Keystone XL Pipeline, Stricter Greenhouse Gas Limits

http://houston.cbslocal.com/2013/09/27/pew-most-in-u-s-support-keystone-xl-pipeline-stricter-greenhouse-gas-limits/

Say what?  
Are folks confused?  What part of this conflict did those surveyed miss?  If you want stricter greenhouse gas limits, then you do not want the Keystone XL Pipeline.  You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Keystone XL Pipeline will carry one of the world’s dirtiest fuels: tar sands oil. Along its route from Alberta to Texas, this pipeline will devastate ecosystems, pollute water sources and jeopardize public health. 

(1) GREENHOUSE GAS - During tar sands oil production, carbon dioxide emissions are three to four times higher than those of conventional oil, due to more energy-intensive extraction and refining processes.

(2) POLLUTION OF WATER SUPPLIES - 95% of the water used to extract the oil, which is about 2.4 million barrels per day, is so polluted that the water must be stored in large human-made pools. As the tarry bitumen from the water sinks to the bottom of these ponds, the toxic sludge, full of harmful substances like cyanide and ammonia, works its way into neighboring clean water supplies. We are already facing the risk of limited potable water globally in future generations.  You can't drink oil or money.

(3) SPILLS - TransCanada's first pipeline spilled a dozen times in less than a year of operation.  The probability of spills from this pipeline is more threatening than conventional spills, because tar sands oil sinks rather than floats, making clean ups more difficult and costly. 

A group called Friends of the Earth sued the State Department in federal court for failure to turn over records detailing the contacts between lobbyists for the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline and folks in the State Department.
.
I truly understand the GOP's typical pro-business/corporate support for the pipeline. Having said that, I also believe that Congressmen supporting the pipeline have sold their soul.

But I would have thought that the DEM party would stand firm to promote green America, ....  and apparently, I was wrong. Their souls are also for sale.  Read this.
http://www.foe.org/news/news-releases/2013-07-friends-of-the-earth-sues-state-dept-over-kxl-lobbying-records 

Folks, we have no friends in Washington.  Our only hope is for We the People of our country rise up en masse to say "NOT ON OUR WATCH".  

Mother Earth is ours to honor and protect, for the future of our children and grand-children.  Its a matter of health, safety, and even more, it's love for all mankind and nature.

GOP Health Equity and Access Reform Today Act of 1993 vs DEM Affordable Health Care Act 2013

How would the current GOP react to their own Health Reform Plan from 1993? 
Not well, it would seem.

Take a look back 20 years. The year is 1993 and this is the GOP alternative to 'HillaryCare'.

Summary Of A 1993 Republican Health Reform Plan

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/stories/2010/february/23/gop-1993-health-reform-bill.aspx

Senate Bill 1770 (sponsored by GOP)

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d103:S1770:

The major provisions in the bill are:

• Universal access to health care insurance coverage, in part through premium assistance to low-income individuals who don't qualify for Medicaid
• A mandate on employers to provide health insurance plans to employees
• Requirements for qualified heath plans to meet standards of 
  • guaranteed eligibility, availability, and renewability of health insurance coverage
  • nondiscrimination based on health status (i.e. eliminating pre-existing conditions)
  • benefits offered  
  • insurer financial solvency
  • enrollment process
  • premium rating limitations (allowing variation in premiums based only on age and family)
  • risk adjustment
  • consumer protection
• The formation of individual and small employer purchasing groups
• Requirements that the Secretary of Health and Human Services, in consultation with the Secretary of Labor, establish standards for large employer plans similar to requirements applicable to small employer plans
• Formation of a Benefits Commission to develop a standard (minimum) benefits package that any qualified health benefits plan must offer
• Enumeration of state responsibilities in implementing state insurance market reforms
• An individual mandate requiring all citizens to be covered by a health plan
• Certain alterations to tax law, including an excise tax for excess contributions to medical care savings accounts
• Quality assurance programs, including the creation of a national health data system
• Medical liability reform, including a requirement that states adopt an alternative dispute resolution method for the resolution of health care malpractice claims
• Efforts to fight fraud and abuse in federal health programs

Does this sound at all familiar?  

Compare the content of this GOP plan to the content of 'Obamacare' and convince me that the current partisan bickering is anything other than smoke and mirrors.

And I was always heard that elephants had long memories.  
Apparently when people become politicians, they all turn into jackasses.

Recommended TED Talk - Rise of the new global super-rich

TED Talks:  Chrystia Freeland discusses the rise of the new global super-rich

Reference:  http://www.ted.com/talks/chrystia_freeland_the_rise_of_the_new_global_super_rich.html

Drawing comparisons with the nineteenth century Gilded Age when great wealth followed rapid industrialisation, Freeland argues that our second ‘gilded age’ of advancing technology has helped create a new class of phenomenally wealthy individuals - the 0.1 percent - who can exert significant influence over politics and policy. (The Telegraph, UK)

Folks, what we have now is called a dysfunctional Plutocracy.

"A mere 0.5% of the world's population owns an eye-popping 38.5% of its total." wealth. (Business Insider, Oct 2011)

But please, consider taking just 15 minutes to view the Ted Talk above.  

Finally someone looks at our current economic turmoil and gets the similarity to what occurred after the Industrial Revolution.  Furthermore, she sees the light at the end of the tunnel and realizes its not a train heading straight at us, but actually a future out there.  Like Chrystia, I also believe that future generations will benefit from globalization and the Technology Revolution that has also brought disastrous unemployment, crippled 401Ks, and high suicide rates to people caught in the transition. 

Having said this, I also believe that globalization should not have caused the pain and suffering that has occurred.  Seriously, how much money does an ultra-mega-rich person need to live even the most outrageous jet-set lifestyle?  Did you see how much money was donated and spent on the 2012 campaigns?  Surely I am not the only person who felt such spending was shameful when children are going hungry in our own country.

Would it be so terrible to 'share the wealth' with the workers who actually do the work that creates the high-level profits?  Were the unions bankrupting the large corporations who pay CEOs 100M/year?  Did we lose the concept of fairness and loyalty to our country and its people since globalization?

Would it have been so terrible to respect and honor the every-day-Joe (or Josephine) trying to feed his (her) family and maybe even afford dance or music lessons, or sports activities for his (her) children?  Did the ultra-mega-wealthy need to not only rise but basically stomp all over the 'lessers'?

The American dream used to include a mortgage payment, as well as food, medical care, and education, even college, for their family.  People made enough that they could even afford to be moderately generous to their local charities, to help those in need.  And since they were not working 2 or even 3 jobs, they had time to coach little league, perform in local theater, give time to Habitat for Humanity, deliver Meals on Wheels, etc.   People could retire based on age and years of service with a pension that had been well-managed by a professional, which employment opportunities.  It really seemed to work.   Or maybe it was just me that was dreaming and believing.

Just suppose that corporations cared more about employees and environment than dollars.  Suppose they invested in re-training long-term employees instead of outsourcing?  Have they not noticed that productivity has literally INCREASED in the US, despite lagging increases in salary/wages?  

It will all work out during the coming years, but historical transitions take time.  As in historical times, we have to pull together, remember to share when we can, and remember 'this too shall pass'.  

Oh yes ... and educate our children so that they can learn from this and find alternatives, rather than repeat the same mistakes.  It really didn't have to be this way.