HOW CAN THIS BE?

How is it possible that climate change did not become a major topic in the presidential debate? 

With droughts and floods threatening the world's food supply; the death of the oceans from acidification; the; the 6th great extinction in progress due largely to human destruction of the environment; hundreds of birds falling from the skies and fish washing up on our shores; lakes turning toxic and into death chambers for fish and animals; diseases resulting from air pollution that add to temperature rise; the shifting of the Jet Stream and Pacific Westerlies; the polar meltdown; just to name a few, how can this not be the topic of the day?

Over the next few years, if we last that long, climate change will be the defining topic regarding national security. It will require massive investments to aid climate refugees; massive expenditures to save or even relocate major cities; could result in wars over things like water and agricultural lands; will and has required massive public resources to help those who have suffered from droughts, floods, and sever weather.

THIS IS A MAJOR POLITICAL FAIL.

Our politicians have failed to help save humanity from the current extinction trends. We are out of time and will reap what we have sown. The best we can hope for, as recommended in several major studies, is to plan for coping with effects. But, if our leaders won't talk about the issue, perhaps they have thrown the sheep to the wolves. Why are they silent? Do they know something that we don't? Are they afraid of mass panic?

THE NOT AS GOOD AS WE THOUGHT BUT COULD BE MUCH WORSE ELECTION

Hopefully, all eligible voters will soon be heading to the polls to choose a U.S. president and to vote for those seeking congressional seats. Here's my take. When Obama was elected there was a sense of almost Camelot euphoria. Big changes were supposed to come in every aspect of society. Many of these changes never really materialized. In fact, numerous key issues regarding the environment and climate change didn't even get discussed. Perhaps this is what Obama meant when he said that you can't change the system from within. In other words, there are too many interests with too much power to create any real change once you get in the system. This is a form of forced co-option. No matter who sits in the oval office, they do not have the power most think they have. Money still reigns supreme in American politics. The inner system eats you up and uses you for their purposes, allowing only scant free reign to accomplish your own agenda. No matter the president, these forces are ever present.

Granted, the President faced an antagonistic House. At every turn, efforts at change were blocked or amended  in such a way as to render reform meaningless. If there is ever to be true change, it must come not from with the political system, but from without. In other words, the people must require that change occur. They must use their votes, their consumer dollars and information to expose the dangers and peacefully force a change. In other words, we are responsible for what our government does or doesn't do. If the President used the office to expose the way the system really works to rally the people, things might be different. Although, that path can be dangerous-shades of JFK.

However, while power, until we wake up, will remain in the hands of monied interests regardless of who is elected, there is still a choice. That choice rests in the fundamental philosophies of the candidates.  These choices include:

• Under Obama, there will be a hesitancy to pull the trigger or drop the bomb. Not so much so under Romney.
• Obama at least is making an attempt to have some form of universal health care. Romney will sell your health to the lowest bidder.
• Obama understands the importance of education and public schools. Romney would segregate the rich back into private charter schools like the good old days of the 18th and 19th centuries.
• There might be some discussion of alternative energy and climate change with Obama. With Romney oil and coal producers will get free rein to continue to ravage and rape the planet.
• The middle class has a fighting chance under Obama. Romney will sacrifice the middle class to aid the rich.
• Obama has a genuine concern, although not through actions, for the poor. Romney has no use for the poor. 
• More truth from Obama; less truth from Romney.
• More consistency from Obama; Romney, whichever the money blows.
• Obama has heart and soul; Romney has soul but little heart.
• Obama has a greater intellect than Romney and thinks things out more than Romney.
• Obama has empathy and sympathy. For Romney, sympathy can be found under 'S' in the dictionary.
• Both have ties to the wealthy and neither seem able or willing to stand up to big money. However, Romney is deeper into the club.

Something to consider is that most issues are now global. Climate change, economies, terrorists, environmental collapse, etc. will not be solved by either Obama or Romney. So many tipping points have been reached and we, the planet, is in big trouble. We will soon be looking at much "gnashing of teeth." When it all begins to crash, I guess I just trust Obama to help put it together than I ever would Romney who would probably try to restore the monarchy.

WHAT DO THE FRENCH AND THE DUTCH KNOW THAT WE NEED TO KNOW?

French, Dutch Politics Rumble European Markets-NYTimes

"Europe’s financial markets showed the strain early Monday after a run of unsettling political news over the weekend from France and the Netherlands raised uncertainties over the commitment of core euro-zone countries to fiscal discipline as austerity policies are weighing on the region’s economies." (http://blogs.wsj.com/eurocrisis/2012/04/23/dutch-french-politics-rumble-european-markets/?mod=google_news_blog)

So what has happened? Basically, President Nicolas Sarkozy lost the first round voting to a socialist and in the Netherlands, budget talks concerning austerity measure collapsed. The French and Dutch are saying NO to austerity-job cuts, tax hikes and appeasing markets-and Yes to jobs and growth. A key quote from De Jager:

"For me it is important, as a message to financial markets, that no matter the circumstances, the Netherlands will continue to strive for budgetary discipline."

And then we have this morning's top Huffington Post story about Mitt Romney: 

MORE FOR WAR,
CUTS FOR THE POOR

 So do you see what's happening? Europe is discovering that "Market Appeasement" policies have been a disaster and a nightmare. Just nod if you can hear me!

LACK OF CONSENSUS AND THE 2008 ELECTION

Americans lack consensus. A society is whole when its people share values, ideals and purpose. It is obvious from the political campaigning that such a consensus is lacking in the U.S. And, while the job of a good politician is to build consensus, all of the candidates are facing one hell of a job.

Once upon a time there was a nation that was formed because its people shared a common vision. They wanted to build a country based upon freedom, liberty and justice for all. At least that was the common wisdom even though the reality greatly lagged behind the dream. That nation, with its people sharing a common goal, became one of the greatest and most powerful nations on earth. It has had its moments. When values were in conflict, the nation experienced internal conflict. It suffered a civil war, fought in the streets for true freedom, equality and justice. But it managed to stay together. It battled throughout the world to help others gain or keep their freedoms. Because of its resolve, it almost always prevailed.

This nation welcomed diversity. It opened it arms and its heart to those of foreign lands to come and share in its vision. People helped people and the mix of cultures and the freedom of expression enabled this nation to grow, prosper and to lead. One of its great leaders said that a “nation divided cannot stand” and over time itself held together and stood proud in the gathering of nations. Its people demanded excellence of its leaders and if the leaders did not represent their will. They “threw the rascals out.”

To an extent, this nation has been somewhat of a myth. It was not perfect, newcomers were not always welcomed, freedoms were not really for all and its motives in dealing with others were certainly suspect. However, regardless of its imperfections, everyone still believed in its basic founding principles.

What has changed? Do we still believe in basic freedoms? Have we not allowed massive government intrusion into our lives? Do we still welcome the weak, the poor and the hungry? Do we still accept new cultures and seek out their strengths to add to our own. Instead of helping others do we now look to government to solve all of our problems? Are we one voice on the economy, health care, the environment, justice, foreign policy, education and basic rights and liberties for all?

We have come to believe that “others” will solve our problems and we have given others the responsibility to do so. In that process, we have lost freedoms and our basic values. In the upcoming elections we look to the candidates to see who have the best “programs” to alleviate our suffering. We look for the quick fix while failing to see that only we can fix ourselves. Obama, Clinton, McCain and others cannot solve our problems. Every time we look to others to do so, we end up disappointed. If we really wanted universal health care; if we really wanted to lead the world in saving the environment; if we really wanted our children to be able to read, write and think; if we really wanted to feed and house the poor, there is no force on this planet that would stop us. Our politicians have debated and promised resolve on these issues for decades and yet they still persist.

It is our lack of consensus and unity of thought and purpose that prevents the resolution of the issues that concern us. One merely has to look at recent events to see that simply changing politicians and political party domination does not result in the solution and resolution of the issues that confront this country. While the inner chambers of our system bicker and while we, as the people, lack a shared dream, the world is moving past us. Regardless of what you read, it is not President Bush that is getting us into all kinds of trouble. And, regardless of what they say, it will not be Clinton, Obama, McCain or Romney that will change our standing in the world. It is we, the people, who must make those tough decisions to once again lead the world into a new era. It is we, the people who must find a common dream and present that dream to the world. While is may be convenient to blame our politicians for all that ails us, it is really each of us who must take the responsibility for the ways we interact with each other and the rest of the world.
Regardless of who wins in 2008, do not expect miracles unless we all decide the kinds of miracles we would like to see manifest.