Random Thoughts

I'm busy this week with other tasks and work. While I did have time to read the newspapers and listen to NPR and PRI's news shows, I don't have much time to converse here with my opinion. It would be hypocritical of me to say I hate pundits, and I do to the talking and writiing heads, but I'm a part-time one and not even a good one at that. But it won't stop me from ranting at the pundits because they're too involved in their fields to see the whole world and reality outside their world. In short, in part, they just don't get it.

Anyway, some thoughts?

To the oil companies, use what you got. I don't see how we can approve leasing the off-shore coastal water for oil exploration and drilling when they still have 68 million acres inland to explore and drill, and all the studies show there is natual gas there and many acres have oil. They need to explain that first. Known resources not being used. Why?

Why should we give them the rights to access public lands (meaning both land and water) when they really don't plan to explore or drill it for years, and even then it won't help the supply for another 3-5 years minimum and 5-7 years realistically. They simply want the leases in their pocket while they explore in other countries. They'll use the leases in 20-30 years.

So, to them, use or lose it and then we'll think about new leases. Congress is considering that and they should do that, reclaim any mineral and oil lease of some minimum size that hasn't been explored and used in the last 5 years. It's the same for individuals, if we want a lease public land we have to prove it has mineral economically worth extracting and then extract it, every year, or we lose the lease and the right to live and work on the land.

The same should apply to oil companies. Now the ball is in Congress' court and the public expect answers, not political answers but real answers for America and Americans.

The Housing Bill? It seems George reniged on his veto threat. But is it a good bill? Why do ecomonic experts say it can but won't necessarily do much because of the caveats with and in the bill? That's because the mortarges we have to buy a house isn't owned by financial institutions but owned by those who hold securities the institutions sold to make money over your mortage.

The Bill gives homeowners the right to renegotiate their loan except the mortage companies will have to treat it like a new loan since they don't own let alone have the loan anymore. They'll have to find a way to pay off the first loan in the securities package before they give you a new loan, and that means fees and more fees, fees you'll have to pay. And the experts say that could and likely will be one factor why it may not do much for homeowners.

But the Bill bails out the financial corporations, again. It's a corporate sponsor bill with dollars for them and nickels for you. And yes, you nickel is more important and critical, if you can get a new government insured loan, but the experts aren't holding their breath it will work.

But they've been proven wrong too.

Anything else?

The US military arrested an Iraqi journalist working for international newspapers today in Bagdad. They've arrested him before but released him citing no evidence. This time, the hooded and handcuffed him and said nothing where they're taking him or that he even was taken. Not even his family or employer know. The Iraqi citizens in their own country have no rights or protections from the US military? Only because they think he's a potential or even possible terrorist? So, if that's true, stand up in court and show us.

Is this a good example of democracy and human rights?

Senator Ted Stevens? The truth be told. Per capita (person) to represent their state, he's the king of the earmark, which being a republican seems counter to their philosophy about government - but then it all went to corporate sponsors. That and he got a new house and cars in the deal. He deserves what he gets and should resign immediately.

And he was chairman of the Senate Ethics committee? No wonder there are no ethics in the Senate, look who decides and defines ethics. And they have questionable morals too, but then they don't have a Morality committee.

And to Alaska residents? Ahh, suck it up like the rest of us.

Well that's it for now. My brain is full of other matters of the day and work. So, what's the part jesture? How about this cat. Certainly knows how to chill out.