Comment on " Foreign U.S. Work in The Middle East"

I fully understand your conflict in regards to US presence in foreign countries. I too have struggled with the notion of our government trying to tell others how they should run their own countries. I mean it’s not like we are doing such a great job with ours.
I have often had to remind myself of just how free I am here in America. The idea of democracy that government and non-profit agencies are trying to teach in other countries is necessary. These countries are full of corrupt regimes and governments. The people who live under them can spend their whole lives in fear and submission. Don't they have a right to know there is another way? I don't think our country should run around and say, ‘hey do it our way because it’s the best”. I do however believe that we should offer the knowledge to those who wish to listen. This is especially true in countries that have been destabilized by war. Having a presence in those countries of governments that are chosen by the people is important. Letting them know that this can be done without coercion or force is also important. Beyond giving them the knowledge, I think we should stay out of their governments.

Arizona "Birther Bill"

So this week Arizona’s House of Representatives passed a “Birther Bill”, which if signed into law, will require presidential candidates to provide proof of U.S. birth to the Arizona state secretary. If the proof is sufficient only then could the candidate be placed on the state ballot. It is argued that this may be an unconstitutional act due to the full faith and fair credit clause.  

Is this just another crack at President Obama? I thought the “Birthers” had been silenced. Obviously if this law is passed, Obama would have to provide “sufficient” proof he was born in Hawaii for the 2012 elections. The reason that Obama’s U.S. status was ever even an issue is because of the time he spent as a child in a Middle Eastern country. It seemed to me to be a fear driven movement rather than a legitimate argument. Is it reasonable or responsible for our states to pass laws such as this one? How do we know when we have crossed the line of legitimate concern into breaking the laws of our constitution? Why must our laws become about proving a point instead of the common good.

And if this bill does get signed into law what’s next a change in our constitution. If we can’t have faith in our neighboring states to provide us with accurate information, the whole of our country could break down.

Comment on "Hurray for High Prices?"

I really appreciate your post "Hurray for High Prices"

I would argue that the line of thinking of republicans about Obama's motives, are not completely off base.  Though, I don’t think he is ignoring the issue in the immediate, rather he is trying to do more than put a band aid on it. Renewable and clean energies should be considered the new frontier. A race should be on to advance or claim in the property, much as the whole of Europe raced to claim the America’s. We need that kind of grand thinking about alternative fuels and geothermal, wind, and solar energies.  I think a majority of Republicans stand on the side of science that disagrees with the impact on our environment from our addiction to fossil fuels.  This further aides their need to have government stay out of people’s rights to run whatever kind of business they want.

The true turning in events for this will be as you said, when people decide they want a renewable future. That is really what it’s all about. I don’t think enough people put thought into where there dollars go. Money holds the key to reform. People need to invest in clean renewable energy by buying renewable products and supporting companies that use renewable resources.  This is one of the things I love about social networks. When you find out a company is doing something good or bad when it comes to the environment, you can let all of your friends know and they can let all of theirs and so on. This information can then go straight to register.