The Inconvenient truth about Al Gore?

"The man [Al Gore] is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science," states Dr. Roy Spencer, Principal Research Scientist at The University of Alabama in Huntsville in an article which claims that, contrary to Mr. Gore's assertions, many climate scientists do not believe Gore's global warming claims.

While I believe that the possibility of global warming is real and worth fighting against, when Mr. Gore obscures reality - providing deceptive and misleading data - he only strengthens the view of those whom disagree with global warming. Personally, with Gore's resources, I'd respect him much more if he developed companies, or helped promote companies, that are developing products which give consumers a real chance to fight global warming.

Leave the one-side documentaries to Mr. Moore, Mr. Gore.

In reality, Mr. Gore had a chance to accomplish real change when he was VP, but I guess he prefers to talk about global warming rather than to take real action to fight global warming. Sounding the alarm bell is the easy part, giving consumers the ability to act is the hard part.

America cannot conserve its way out of this problem, nor can the world. While conservation can help, only innovation will solve this problem. America needs leaders focused purely on innovation and solutions not on promoting problems.

In hindsight, Mr. Gore, stay in the movie business.

Could Independents hand the election to Democrats

Yesterday there was one important election in California between a Democrat and a Republican. While Republicans won the race, the vote was very close - even though it was Republican territory. It seems a good number of Republicans voted either Democrat or for an Independent candidate. Will this carry over to the general election and cause a change in leadership in the House, Senate or even both?

Why I didn't vote in today's primary and why I will vote in the real election.

Did you vote in today's primary? I didn't. Wanna know why?

I'm a registered Independent, so there wasn't too much for me to vote on in this primary. Still, the Democrat Party would have allowed me to vote, but I didn't take them up on the offer.

Why?

My wife is a registered Democrat and my phone has been ringing off the hook all day and every day trying to tell me for whom to vote. Every day my mailbox is full of ads for Democratic candidates trying to fight each other for a place on the ballot. In fact, yesterday, I received 11 different full color glossy ads from the SAME candidate.

While this might be worthwhile if it were two different parties competing against each other, these people are from the same party. Yet the candidate with the most advertising - the most money - is almost certain to win. Is this expense justified?

Still, I know almost nothing about any of these candidates, and what I have learned isn't always great, such as a candidate moving into my neighborhood just in time to run for election. How can you know my issues if you haven't lived here? Yet the party bigwigs can still support such a candidate.

How much money is being spent by Democrats to fight other Democrats? Who funds these battles within the party? How much money is spent?

And this isn't just Democrats, it is Republicans as well.

Suddenly it seems just a tiny percentage of Americans are determining the candidates for the entire political system.

That's why I'll be voting Independent, or for a third party, for every candidate. No I don't think that my candidate will win, but I don't believe in the American political system - a system completely determined by money - and voting Independent is a vote for change.

Blame both political parties for high gas prices

O.K., so Republicans have ties to big oil, that's obvious. But can you really blame high oil prices completely on Republicans, especially when the price of oil is decided in the open markets by traders trading future shares of oil every single second of the business day? How do you manipulate that? Still, Republicans deserve criticism for their close oil ties.

In addition to oil, Democrats ridicule the President's minor CAFE updates, and they are minor. In fact, they are essentially worthless. Yet, less than a year ago, when Congress had a chance to significantly update CAFE, did Democrats make a stand? Heck no. How would Democrats funded by the labor unions that 'protect' autoworkers explain this to the Union leadership, to the workers that would lose their jobs - and to a huge endorsement and source of campaign money?

In reality, when it comes to high gasoline prices, Democrats are very dirty.

That's what makes the new Harbour Report North America 2006 so darn interesting. The Harbour report studies the efficiency of automobile production in the U.S. Surprise, surprise Japanese automakers, even those in America with American autoworkers, are more efficient than American automakers.

While Detroit is closing the gap, this gap still exists and has existed for decades. Today it takes the most efficient Japanese automaker 7.33 hours less per vehicle in labor hours compared to the least efficient American automaker. Less than 10 years, in 1998, the number was 16.56 hours.

What does this number mean? Ultimately, if you spend less time per vehicle, it is because you have less problems, or better quality. Thus, American workers working for American automakers have been spending far more hours producing vehicles of far less quality than American workers working for Japanese automakers.

Again, this has been going on for DECADES. Is there really any wonder why Detroit has faltered over the years?

Detroits problems are far larger than just currency, or benefits, such as skyrocketing health care costs. For decades American automakers have been producing inferior products while spending a lot more time - thus money - doing it, and labor unions have been a huge part of that problem.

Sure labor unions have helped provide good wages and benefits for American autoworkers, but they have also contributed to creating an uncompetitive, inefficient American auto industry.

According to the Detroit News much of the recent gain in American automaker efficiency has "come as a result of progressive operating agreements the company has negotiated with the United Auto Workers union. The deals limit job classifications and rely on a team-based approach to manufacturing."

Shouldn't this have been handled a decade or two ago?

Consequently, for decades, Democrats have significantly contributed to the trend of gas-guzzling in the USA. Despite their rhetoric, and perhaps unintentionally, Democrats are probably more responsible for the SUV craze in America than Republicans. While American automakers do produce fuel efficient vehicles, most of them are produced outside of the United States. U.S. automakers largely produce ONLY foreign oil gas-guzzling vehicles in the States, and to a large extent, Detroit has had no choice. Only gas-guzzling SUVs provide enough profit to keep the Unions happy and the company afloat.

When it comes to America's foreign oil, gas-guzzling culture, there is plenty of blame to go around.

Even worse, as we head into 2008, little seems likely to change. Recently Hillary Clinton sided herself with Detroit and has skewed her focus more towards oil companies and their lack of E85, rather than the monstrous gas-guzzlers coming out of Detroit.

Ironically, even oil man, President Bush, has told Detroit to build more "relevant" vehicles, such as hybrid cars. Without more fuel efficient vehicles, E85 will be a program that America spends billions of tax payer dollars on, yet it will result in little change.

Well, I guess that sounds about right for big party American politics.

A call to those that don't vote

So you don't think your vote will count? Or, maybe you don't think there is really any difference between Republicans and Democrats - both are just controlled by well-funded lobbyists? Well, that is no excuse not to vote. If you fit either one of these categories, get out and vote, dammit. Vote for a third party candidate. Even if you have to vote for a Democrat or Republican, then vote against the incumbent. Vote for someone new. If millions of us vote third party and/or against incumbents we could make it much harder for lobbyists and special interest groups to control the outcome of elections. So register to vote. You can make a difference!

E85 and Hybrid Cars: Hollywood, Democrats and Republicans

I just finished replying to a CNN Commentary by Robert Redford on Kicking the Oil Habit. Lately, the idea of kicking the oil habit has become a hot topic, but there is growing partisan spin using this platform for political gain. I find this unacceptable. Ultimately, both parties have enabled America's oil addiction, and most Americans have happily helped. Lately the favorite buzzword of many politicians has become E85 or ethanol. Yet, far too many scientists note that ethanol will never end America's oil addiction, nor even foreign oil dependency, if we don't move towards significantly more fuel efficient vehicles, such as hybrid cars. Yet, it seems that not only are politicians misguided, but even cultural leaders, such as Robert Redford, whom are too focused on partisanship, rather than real leadership and solutions for such a serious issue. (Full Story)

Peggy Noonan's Third Time: Ready for a New Political Party?

When those not voting outnumber the voters of either Democrats or Republicans, you know there is a problem. Add in 90%+ incumbency and you know it's time for a change. So, can a new political party be the answer? Perhaps according to a new article from Peggy Noonan, "Something's happening. I have a feeling we're at some new beginning, that a big breakup's coming, and that though it isn't and will not be immediately apparent, we'll someday look back on this era as the time when a shift began," she states regarding a Third Party. Still, my favorite quote is, "The problem is that the parties in Washington, and the people on the ground in America, are polarized. There is an increasing and profound distance between the rulers of both parties and the people--between the elites and the grunts, between those in power and those who put them there."

If we can't have a new party, I say vote against ALL incumbents. The few good politicians we lose are worth the gain of cleaning our political house!