Gore Goes To Bali

I just got this in an email:

Dear friend,

In nine days I'm going to Bali, Indonesia to address the UN Climate Change Conference. In front of representatives from the world's countries, I will speak about the need for a visionary treaty to be completed, ratified and brought into effect everywhere in the world by 2010. I need you, your friends and family to sign this petition calling for a new, positive leadership role by our elected leaders. I will bring your signatures on stage with me as a clear demonstration of our resolve.

This petition shows our commitment to solutions to the climate crisis. Please add your voice today and urge your friends to add theirs. The time for action is now. Only together can we make the change.
Sincerely,

Go sign the petition!

Obama/Paul? Paul/Obama?

The latest buzz seems to be that Barack Obama and Ron Paul ought to be running mates, in one fashion or another. Let's do a comparison and see how that might work out.

Lobbyists
Paul voted NO to H.R. 437, to require lobbyist disclosure of bundled donations, May 2007.
Barack Obama has spoken out against such bundling.

Energy Independence and Environmental Impact
Paul Voted NO to H.R. 6
Obama voted YES to H.R. 6
to move toward energy independence and security, to increase the production of clean renewable fuels, to increase the energy efficiency of products, buildings, and vehicles, to promote research on and deploy greenhouse gas capture and storage options, January 2007.

Paul Rated 5% in 2003 by the League of Conservation Voters, indicating anti-environment votes.
Obama rated 100%, the highest environmental rating by the LCV.

Paul Voted NO on raising CAFE standards and providing incentives for alternative fuels, August 2001.
Barack Obama believes that we can meet energy needs while also protecting our environment, with such things as a Cap and Trade system, finding alternative fuels, and that the way to achieve that is to invest in them.

Paul Voted NO on the Kyoto Protocol, Jun 2000.
Barack's energy policies are in alignment with the Kyoto Protocol.

Big Business vs. The People
Paul spoke out against Network Neutrality.
Barack Obama is most certainly for Network Neutrality.

Paul Voted YES on restricting bankruptcy rules, making it harder for the average American, while protecting business, January 2004.
Barack Obama spoke on the Floor of the Senate against such restrictions.

Individual Rights
Paul Rated 0% by NARAL in 2003, indicating a pro-life voting record.
Barack Obama has a 100% score from NARAL.

Paul Rated 100% by FAIR (Federation for American Immigration Reform), indicating a voting record restricting immigration.
Obama wants tough, practical reform, but not an end to immigration.

Paul Voted NO on H.R. 2, to increase minimum wage to $7.25 in January 2007.
Barack voted YES to minimum wage.

Paul Voted YES on banning gay adoptions in DC in July 1999.
Barack Obama believes LGBT couples should have the same rights as everyone else.

Government Reform
Paul wants to close the Departments of Energy, Education & Homeland Security.
Obama wants to overhaul and improve them, not destroy them.

Paul wants to abolish federal Medicare and leave it to states.
Obama will give all of us healthcare that works.

Paul Voted NO on strengthening the Social Security Lockbox, May 1999.
Obama promises to fight for and strengthen Social Security.

Paul says he'll abolish the IRS immediately after taking office.
Obama has a tax plan to both cut taxes and ease the hassle of filing.

In considering the above differences, and these are just a few, I do not believe that our country would benefit from a ticket including both of them. We need progress, and Ron Paul's idea of progress is quite different from Barack Obama's. Ron Paul's voting history tells me he wants to protect businesses and eliminate government, while Barack Obama wants to protect the people of America, while eliminating government waste. Our President and Vice President should be working towards the same goals, not against each other with opposite goals.

I agree that Obama must work across party lines, which is usually the argument for this, but that doesn't mean he needs to get in bed with them. He could pick Richardson, Edwards, or whoever it is that he's inclined towards, and still be able to work just fine with the Republicans. That's just who Obama is, and he doesn't need a GOP running mate to do it.

No. Really? 60 MPG Hummer with 600 HP?

Sit down, this may be shocking news.

Detroit has been lying about what they can do to increase gas mileage.

Yep, they have. Even to their own engineers, apparently.

An amateur mechanic named Jonathan Goodwin has proven that it's possible to get far higher MPG along with far higher HP in just about any vehicle. He can turn a Hummer into a hybrid that gets better gas mileage and better horsepower.

And yet, any notion of Detroit or government interference with this type of technology is considered to be nothing more than conspiracy theory. I bet this gets ignored just like past proofs of these happenings.

I wonder how much he'd charge to convert a Jeep to a hybrid?

(h/t Kos of DailyKos)

Lights Off Utah Accomplished Something

I've seen a post or two around that implied Lights Of Utah would accomplish nothing. I'm here posting to prove you wrong.

I'm not sure how many cars we made up for tonight by turning off our lights, but I'm glad we did it. I'm in the middle of a move, and I was packing kitchen stuff as my phone reminded me it was 10 minutes until Lights Off. I didn't hear it. I also didn't hear my boyfriend calling. I did happen to see my phone lit up, and called him back. He told me he wasn't ready for Lights Off, because he had more work, but that he would turn all the lights off, and only use his computer. I rather panicked, because moving is a bit difficult without light. Then I realized that I'd invited at least 5 other people to take part, who said they would, so I couldn't bail. Besides, I worked my ass off cleaning up the kitchen after my housemates, even though I haven't used said kitchen in weeks (I won't even go into the old chinese food dumped over dishes filling both sinks).

So, I turned out all the lights in the house, and waited out front for my sister to pick me up (my Jeep's in the shop).

Upon arriving home (my boyfriend's, where I'm moving, not the old house I'm moving from), I was informed that after my boyfriend turned out all the lights, he realized the coffee pot was boiling.

I love coffee. In fact, I think that my bloodstream has about 50% coffee at all times. Without coffee, I've been known to punch people. For no reason.

I recently bought a "2 minute coffee pot". Turns out, it keeps the water hot at all times, like commercial makers do. So, when I flip the switch, I have coffee faster than I can brush my teeth.

Except it heats the water at all times. I kept thinking about feeling guilty, but I justified to myself that a "little" environmental waste was nothing next to killing people because I didn't have coffee, right?

But, it boiled when he turned the lights out. So he turned it off. And I'm going to leave it off. I'm going to buy a coffee pot that has a timer and makes coffee at the time I tell it to, rather than one that heats water all day for no reason.

So, I don't know how many cars that would equal, but I know that it's making me waste less power heating water for the sake of heating water. And my boyfriend, who normally can barely put up with my activism, did have the lights turned out, though candles were lit and he had a flashlight going. But, he heard about this from more than just me, and felt it important enough to participate without my prodding. And he will eternally make fun of me for leaving lights on now, which will make me even more anal about turning them off. And I won't make fun of him for unplugging the toaster anymore.

So, to all you naysayers, something positive did happen because of Lights Off Utah. And if it takes babysteps to make a difference, I'm more than willing, no matter how insignificant you think it may be.