Wrong Answer Part 1
Obama this, Obama that. Hillary this, Hillary that. McCain this, McCain that.
Which of these is the answer?
None of the Above.
Seriously. Nothing is going to change whomever above is voted into office come November.
Obama is not the answer. He's young. He's inexperienced.
Hillary is not the answer. She's part of the established crowd.
McCain is not the answer. He's part of the established crowd.
None of them can bring about the changes needed in this country. Why? Because we have 535 elected officials who hold the purse strings to this country, and for the past 3-4 decades, have wasted billions, possibly trillions of dollars on non-essential PORK.
The Enemy is at our gates, and is patiently awaiting the Fall of the Roman Empire Part Deux.
There are many reasons for the fall of the original Roman Empire.
- Internal decay of infrastructure.
- Political Corruption
- Economic Factors
Etc...
Sound familiar?
Internal decay of infrastructure. The USA is facing a crisis that our Government has not addressed, but which needs to be addressed in the next decade, if not immediately. Our highways, bridges, electrical grids, etc... are all old. The bridge collapse in Minneapolis last year is a good example of this.
The rolling black-outs in California are another example.
But, not only is our grid in sorry shape, but our reliance upon COAL for our electricity has got to end. You tree-huggers who protested nuclear energy back in the 70s? Idiots. All of you. You forced us to continue to use coal, which, I might add, contributes to your latest cause en force... Global Warming.
We need nuclear power. We need nuclear reactors. There has not been one death linked directly to nuclear power in the USA ever.
Yet, it is estimated that coal contributes to appx. 10,000 deaths per year, not counting deaths caused by mining accidents. It is estimated that it would take 25 nuclear melt-downs to equal that number.
Meanwhile, 70% of France is powered by nuclear energy. France. France is technologically superior in providing energy to its people.
Nuclear technology is not what it was in the 70's and 80's. It's in its third generation of technology and offers simpler, smaller, and more rugged reactors then its predecessors. The odds of an accident occurring have gone from 1 in 20,000 to 1 in 800,000
So why are we not building more nuclear reactors?
There's so much more that could be argued, but what's the point? There is no movement towards addressing the issue of our infrastructure at the moment. Which leads to Part 2 of this rant.
"It ain’t the things we don't know that gets us into trouble. It's the things we know that just ain’t so." - Artemus Ward
Tomorrow: Part 2 - Political Corruption