Don't believe in man-made climate change?

Fine, be against any claims of man-made climate change or global warming.

But when you look at how we humans are living here on this planet and how we're using it and polluting and trashing it, literally, you have to recognize we can't continue this.

That's all we're saying.  This isn't sustainable. We have to change.

And ultimately, it would only mean we use less, which is "conservative" and true conservation, and pollute less.

Is that so difficult?

And the sooner, the better.

Part 2: Public lands, private profits

Link: http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2012/07/public_lands_private_profits.Html

The Grand Canyon, under siege

Part two of the video on our national parks:



Link: http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2012/07/public_lands_private_profits.Html

First the NY Times, today, the Star

A couple weeks ago, I wrote about an article The New York Times wrote on the little town of Treece, Kansas and how it had been exploited by companies and corporations for its lead and zinc and then abandoned. (http://moravings.blogspot.com/2012/05/kansas-corporate-america-and-their.html).

Apparently, it inspired our own Kansas City Star because today, they ran virtually the same article: http://www.kansascity.com/2012/06/01/3638174/life-goes-on.html.

I don't know if it was a guilt trip or professional embarrassment or what.

Maybe the folks at the Star figured, sure those New Yawkuhs beat 'em to the punch but it was "their" story so they should do one.

Or whatever.

Kudos to the staff at the Star, though, really. New York City beat you to what should have been your story.

I guess I'll get a Times tomorrow and see what the Star will be bringing me in a few weeks.

Or months.


Have a great weekend, y'all.

Unfortunately, Missouri and Kansas are on this national ranking list

With the Gulf oil spill at the forefront of our minds, The Daily Beast came out with a list yesterday of the top 28 (why not 25?, I know) most polluted places in the US.

I was hoping maybe we weren't on the list but, lo and behold, there we are, Missouri and Kansas.

I think it's important to be aware of these, generally, so we know what we're dealing with locally.

I think, too, that it's important we're aware of this kind of thing so a) we learn from the past and past mistakes and so b) we hold corporations and our government accountable for this kind of thing, so they don't pollute and foul the earth, water and/or air, make huge profits and then walk away.

I know, America, it's tough but we have to start learning lessons eventually.

Our two state sites:

#24, Joplin, Missouri: Oronogo-Duenweg Mining Belt

Acres: 6,400; Population: 10,000; Toxic chemicals: 4

History: One of a few Superfund sites located in the tri-state mining district which encompassed parts of Missouri, Kansas and Oklahoma, the Oronogo-Duenweg area is spotted with mine shafts, waste piles and abandoned underground mines. Water in the area was found laced with lead.

#26, Galena, Kansas: Cherokee County

Acres: 73,600; Population: 50,000; Toxic chemicals: 13

History: As part of the Tri-State Mining District, along with parts of Missouri and Oklahoma, Cherokee County, Kansas was the site of extensive lead and zinc mining in the late 19th century. Hundreds of mines were thriving in the early 1900s, but activity slowed by the 1930s. Though much of the toxic byproduct from decades of mining and smelting in the area has been removed, and water treatment and soil removal has been completed, the ground and surface water still contain traces of cadmium, lead and zinc.

At least it's good to see that we're further down this list and not too close to the top where the even uglier polluting went on. We have that in our favor.

If you can take a moment, you might go to this link and read about some of the other sites, nationally. What these corporations did and left behind for the country is truly disgusting.

Link to original story:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-05-19/americas-28-most-polluted-places/

Four insanities, to me, anyway

The reason I started this blog was because, during the George W. Bush administration, there were such crazy, insane things being proposed and even, too frequently, passed into law that I couldn't take it. This blog was a catharsis for me, to state what was wrong.

So today, in that vein, I'd like to point out four more things, going on now, that I believe strongly have no basis in logic or intelligence.

1) There is a woman in the Bush administration--Nancy de Parle--who heads up President Obama's health care inititative to change our system who made $2.3 million in the last year or so, from those same health care corporations.

This is insane.

That woman--any person--who is from the health care industry should not be in charge of changing the system.

She will not, in fact, change it. Not enough, anyway. Not the way we need. Not to benefit us, the users of health care in the United States. She's too invested in its maintenance.

2) Quote from The New York Times today: "The Supreme Court ruled Monday that the Clean Water Act does not prevent the Army Corps of Engineers from allowing mining waste to be dumped into rivers, streams and other waters."

Insanity.

This is so insane it makes me angry. I have to not think about this, it makes me so angry.

People will regret that corporations were allowed to do this--to dump mining waste into rivers, streams and other waters. It will be regretted and sooner, not later.

3) The Obama Administration is continuing to imprison people at Guantanamo Bay without charging them with any crimes, with no evidence of any wrong-doing and, on top of both those things, indefinitely.

As The Times says today--Bob Herbert, to be specific--this is not who we ever were. It's not who we should be.

4) Finally, Citigroup, which has done so horribly, business-wise, in the last year to two years (so much so that comic, satirist Bill Maher calls it "ShittyGroup") that it had to accept billions of dollars in tax money from you and me through the Federal Government is now planning to increase its pay to its employees--some by as much as 50%--because it can't hand out juicy bonuses (in your and my tax moneys) to those same employees.

So Citigroup has been a horribly-run business, it wanted to hand out bonuses, it can't so it's going to do an end-around and just hand out pay raises instead.


I would like less insanity in the world. All our worlds.

Links to related stories:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/wire/sns-ap-us-health-czar-boards,1,5907802.story
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/23/us/23alaska.html?scp=1&sq=&st=nyt
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/23/opinion/23herbert.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=&st=nyt
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/business/24citigroup.html?scp=1&sq=Citigroup%20has%20a%20plan%20to%20fatten%20salaries&st=cse