Government Takes A Big Step Toward Biofuels

This originated at Electablog.

 Biofuel Purchase Advances President Obama’s

Energy Security Goals

WASHINGTON, December 5, 2011 — Today, U.S. Navy Secretary Ray Mabus and U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced that the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) signed a contract to purchase 450,000 gallons of advanced drop-in biofuel, the single largest purchase of biofuel in government history. While the Navy fleet alone uses more than 1.26 billion gallons of fuel each year, this biofuel purchase is significant because it accelerates the development and demonstration of a homegrown fuel source that can reduce America’s, and our military’s, dependence on foreign oil. The Defense Department will purchase biofuel made from a blend of non-food waste (used cooking oil) from the Louisiana-based Dynamic Fuels, LLC, a joint-venture of Tyson Foods, Inc., and Syntroleum Corporation, and algae, produced by Solazyme. The fuel will be used in the U.S. Navy’s demonstration of a Green Strike Group in the summer of 2012 during the Rim of the Pacific Exercise (RIMPAC), the world's largest international maritime exercise.

As part of his energy security goals, outlined in March 2011 in the “Blueprint for a Secure Energy Future,” President Obama directed the Departments of Agriculture, Energy and Navy to work together to advance a domestic industry capable of producing “drop-in” biofuel substitutes for diesel and jet fuel. Responding to that challenge, in August 2011, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Energy and Navy announced an intention to invest up to $510 million during the next three years in partnership with the private sector to produce advanced drop-in biofuel to power military and commercial transportation. While that investment awaits Congressional action, today’s announcement uses the existing authority – leveraging Defense Department procurement – to support this energy security goal.

From Nation of Change...Walmart Is Larger Than Norway

"In a report released last week by The World Hunger Organization 17.2 million U.S. households were food insecure in 2010, the highest level on record, as the Great Recession continues to wreak havoc on families across the country. On a global scale, the World Bank reports that over half the global population lives on less than $2.50 per day and over 800 million people go hungry daily. And according to UNICEF nearly 8 million human beings died in 2010 because they were simply too poor to stay alive. Meanwhile, the U.N. reported in 2005 that the richest 500 people in the world earned more than the poorest 416 million. According to the same report the richest 350 people in the world own assets commensurable to more than 50% of the world’s population. And finally, according to a 1998 UN Development Report the wealthiest 15 people on the planet have assets that exceed the total annual income equal to the poorest 98% of those living on the African continent."

To read the entire article, go here.

OWS...WHAT'S IT ALL ABOUT????

Newt Gingrich Quotes That Disqualify Him From Ever Being President

I never trusted Newt Gingrich. He doesn't look people in the eye when he speaks. He looks down at this belly button, or his shoes. When he's on a roll, he rarely looks up. That is just wrong.

You know he thinks he's one smart cookie, right?  He thinks he is smarter than most everyone in the country. That's why he's running for President. Problem is, he says some pretty stupid and dangerous things. For example, this is what he thinks of himself...

“I have enormous personal ambition. I want to shift the entire planet. And I’m doing it. I am now a famous person. I represent real power.”

 “Gingrich – Primary mission, Advocate of civilization, Definer of civilization, Teacher of the rules of civilization, Leader of the civilizing forces.”

and this...

“The most serious, systematic revolutionary of modern times.”

And there's more...To read the entire article, go here.

I'm Relieved...Failure Is Good

I like Paul Krugman. The man writes so anybody can understand, and he does it so well. I just had to post this one...well, because time is ticking against the supercommittee that is supposed to come up with some great plan for reducing our deficit and all that jazz.

Krugman says he's betting they won't come to an agreement, and that's not a bad thing.  "Failure Is Good" is the name of his most recent article from the New York Times. He writes:

"It’s a bird! It’s a plane! It’s a complete turkey! It’s the supercommittee!

By next Wednesday, the so-called supercommittee, a bipartisan group of legislators, is supposed to reach an agreement on how to reduce future deficits. Barring an evil miracle — I’ll explain the evil part later — the committee will fail to meet that deadline.
If this news surprises you, you haven’t been paying attention. If it depresses you, cheer up: In this case, failure is good. "
Read more here...

And don't forget to check out the comments for the most highly recommended post there. It's post #13 and is written by Meredith. She nailed it.

You say social programs “serving the moral imperative of providing basic security to our fellow citizens and helping those in need.”

It’s much more. Why are there so many needy in the first place? We are seeing a downward spiral toward lower economic classes. In mid 20th century social programs created a launching pad for Americans to develop themselves, releasing energies, ambitions, and talents that millions previously didn’t even know they had. This individual development through expanded opportunities lifted up the whole society.

The success of America wasn’t due to a few superior ambitious people coming from out of nowhere, starting businesses, inventing things, and working hard to create. It was due to millions of people becoming capable of doing these things. But where did they come from? Their ancestors way back tilled the land, could hardly read, and looked up to a thin layer of advantaged gentry safely separated from the hard labor of getting food out of the ground. Only in the 20th century did the great mass of people really further their own development. It was social security, the GI Bill, unemployment insurance, labor unions with work safety, 8 hour days and 5 day week, health insurance, and accessible public education that freed up the next generation to aspire to higher education and become professionals, and workers in skilled occupations. They got the security and leisure to do things beyond just work, eat and sleep and thus develop appreciation for the finer things, arts and culture, hobbies—things not directly related to basic survival. Standards of living rose to a level unique in history, leading to a more stable, advanced society we were proud of. And a spiral of mass purchasing power supported big and small business, multiplying jobs.

So it’s not just doing a favor to keep alive the poor unwashed masses that we should keep govt programs. Voters who elect anti govt politicians don’t have any idea what their lives would be like without the very programs they disdain. Their naiveté makes them vulnerable to predators who want to privatize everything for their own profits.

They must learn that Social Security spread elder support through the whole society, so freed up the individual youth from crushing burdens that left no surplus for their own advancement. Thus elders could live with dignity, while also the whole society could advance.

Before all these govt programs, most working people didn’t aspire to college, but looked for work or apprenticeships after junior high or maybe high school. Today’s emphasis today on college prep for the masses, on test taking, huge student loans, on resumes, is all very recent--after we evolved to a majority middle class, enabled by the govt programs and unions. It’s very incomplete to just frame this in terms of moral duty to the poor unfortunate vs the gop line that govt programs unfairly take away assets from the well off to benefit the less deserving masses. If these programs are gutted, America will spiral down to ever lower economic classes, with less skills, less purchasing power, and ever lower horizons.

(Recommended by 915 Readers at post) 

I'm bracing myself against the media blitz against this supercommittee and its charge. With the deadline  less than a week away, they will slice and dice the topic to microscopic proportions. Usually I'd buy into all the hype about what is going to happen if they don't agree on something significant. But after reading Paul, I'm thinking I won't bother to worry. It's really okay if they don't agree. Maybe the vote will go to the people, and we'll get to vote for ourselves. Think of that.

Memories

Friends of Rick Perry: Mr. & Mrs. Gramm, by Nomad

Sometimes I run across a great article that sort of wraps up a bunch of stuff up in a nice tight package. What a treasure! This blog post over at PoliticalGates was written by Nomad. I only have good things to say about the obvious research and craft that was applied to this post. Tight and powerful.

Let me introduce you to Mr. Phil Gramm. You see, he is good friends with Rick Perry. Yep, that Rick Perry...the one that is running for President of the USA. Well, it seems that Phil Gramm is his fairy godmother. Yep, but that's not all. You remember who Phil Gramm is, don't you? Yeah, that Phil Gramm.

Well, I learned a few things about Phil Gramm that I didn't know before. I think you will, too. Enjoy!
Read the first article here.

And then watch for three more articles that follow....

Mitt Romney's Mouth Is Getting Him In Trouble

He's kind of cavalier...He routinely says off the cuff remarks that make you go "Huh???" Yep, Mitt needs to keep his mouth shut. Here is what one commenter posted:

Mitt Romney, the multi-mill­ionaire, in his own caring words:
-- Dick Cheney is the kind of person I’d like to have for VP - a person of wisdom and judgment.
-- I'm a Detroit guy, so, you know ... I have a couple of Cadillacs, at two different houses. You know, small crossovers­.
-- I'm 110 percent behind the anti-union efforts.
-- Corporatio­ns are people, my friend.
-- I should tell my story. I'm also unemployed­.
-- Don't try and stop the foreclosur­e process. Let it run its course and hit the bottom, allow investors to by homes...
-- After I speak you're going to hear from Ann Coulter...­I think it's important to get the views of moderates.
-- I'd like to see Roe v. Wade overturned and allow the states to put in place pro-life legislatio­n.
-- I will issue on my first day in office an executive order paving the way for waivers from ObamaCare for all 50 states.
-- I appreciate the extraordin­arily difficult situation President Obama’s lack of leadership has placed Republican Members of Congress in.
-- I applaud Rep. Paul Ryan. He is ... getting spending and entitlemen­ts under control.

Go here to read the article...

This is Why We Support Occupy Wallstreet!...with UPDATE!

It's growing...and we support the movement. Occupy Wallstreet Now!



And this clip was posted a half hour ago....Gas canisters at the Occupy Wallstreet event in Oakland, CA

Republethugs Debate in Vegas...Let's Talk About Cutting Foreign Aid

The Republicans' debate tonight in Las Vegas spent some time on foreign aid. Following a debate on illegal immigration, the tide turned to foreign aid, when all of a sudden Rick Perry and Ron Paul jumped into the fray. The bird was battered about with much ferver, but then I remembered that the actual percentage of the United States budget allotted to foreign aid was pretty small... between 1.0-2.5% Google revealed.  What? These bozos are debating foreign aid and won't touch the Defense Budget??? Oh, no. And don't mention the economy or the job creation issues. Holy cow!!

Yep, look at this article that outlines how our perception of foreign aid is not based on reality. Don't spend your time worrying about this. We need to help feed those who are starving. We need to help those who cannot help themselves. We are ONE. No ifs, ands, or butts.

Asked to estimate how much of the federal budget goes to foreign aid the median estimate is 25 percent. Asked how much they thought would be an "appropriate" percentage the median response is 10 percent.

In fact just 1 percent of the federal budget goes to foreign aid. Even if one only includes the discretionary part of the federal budget, foreign aid represents only 2.6 percent.

This set of questions has been asked repeatedly since the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) first asked them in 1995, and it was subsequently asked by other organizations as well. Over the years the most common median estimate was that foreign aid represented 20 percent of the budget, most recently in a 2004 poll by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs.

Thus the most recent number represents an increase of 5 points in the median estimate. Steven Kull, director of PIPA comments, "This increase may be due to Americans hearing more about aid efforts occurring in Iraq, Afghanistan and Haiti over the last few years. There have been some increases in foreign aid under both Presidents Bush and Obama, but, of course, nowhere near to the perceived level."

The median amount proposed as appropriate has consistently been 10 percent in other polls including the 2004 Chicago Council poll.

In the current poll estimates of foreign aid vary by education, growing more accurate with higher levels of education. Among those with less than a high school education the median estimate was that foreign aid represented an extraordinary 45 percent of the budget, those with only a high school diploma 25 percent, those with some college at 20 percent.

 However, even those with a college degree or higher still overestimate by a wide margin, with a median estimate of 15 percent of the budget.
 
Steven Kull comments, "It is quite extraordinary that this extreme overestimation has persisted for so many years, even among those with higher education."

Written a year ago, Go here to learn more!!!

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brunitedstatescanadara/670.php


 Hmmmmmmm?