Art and Politics

I wonder how many people have listened to songs before without really listening. For instance what is the popular group Guns and Roses saying about Civil War. 

My first thoughts were about race. 

Because the United States has been in a civil war before, and having being raised in a individualistic society, I assume it is about the United States civil conflict. 

 It is involved but I believe the song is not about race so much as humanity. If you watch the video you will notice flags of other countries that have had civil war. There is even a communist flag. 

Axl Rose the lead singer sports red, white and blue with the word rebel screaming across his jacket. Again, a reference to Americas civil war. But maybe he is stating America is rebel or oppressor and our involvement in foreign affairs is a infridgement on human rights, instead of just racial rights, he encompasses both. I believe he is speaking to us on a global scale not just in American scale.   

At the beginning of the song, there is a clip from Cool Hand Luke, the movie, with the late great Paul Newman. In this movie Newman, played Luke a stubborn prisoner, who would not stand down to the prison guards or other prisoners while maintaining his dignity through his wits. In the clip, the man speaking is the prison warden who tries to repeatedly break Luke. No matter what horrendous treatment Luke endures, his spirit is not broken. What Axl says by using this in his song is that people treated unfair by the government can maintain their spirit through fighting back and not giving up. The government can tell us what to do but they really can't control our thoughts. Only we can.

The lyrics are interesting.  It seems politics spurn artist to create. And artists  lead people to rebel and see the truths of humanity.

While we 'shift from side to side' like zombies, people die in war.  

The Cure for EVERYTHING is Renewable Energy

So our country is in peril. One could say the country and all its inhabitants are sick. We can place the blame on ourselves, and our ancestors. But we could also just blame government. Not just our government but all governments have contributed to the declining health of our world. This is U.S. Government class though, so I will refrain from commenting on other governments. Ours is the government that is decomposing and sick, while others are growing, our markets are failing. 

Sounds harsh and depressive but there is a simple answer for everything that ails us. Our economy, the war, and our health can be cured with renewable energy. 

Some may scoff and think, how can renewable energy fix our government? For one, our economy would be boosted with a shift in the stock exchange moving towards renewable energy and away from fossil fuels. Our troops could be brought home to build and design new ways to energize the world. And also build and create new forms of transportation such as railway systems, which could make coal and oil an obsolete and undesirable investment. If you notice where the U.S. has holdings in the world, they are always near oil fields. We would not have to be wanting as a nation, but could again be leaders and heros for the world, in helping all its' inhabitants health by ending the pollution.  

I know this is very dreamy of me to make the problems seem so simple. In life and death situations, the answer is always simple. Invest in life, and disregard the fossil fuels. You may get richer with oil and coal, but rich doesn't keep you from your death when you've been poisoned with an environmental pollutant. Be in it for the long term investment and a long life, and make your stock choices in renewable energy. In 40 years, you who invest in renewable energy are going to be loaded.

Canada is leading us. I hope our government can lead us to renewable energy. So we can be independent from Canada in the future. 

RES Americas Inc.

My View of J.A.'s View: Obama going "Green"

In regards to environmental issues, any steps that our government takes to protect people in the world is a step in the right direction. "However, Obama fails to mention who America would be "partnering" with to make this green dream a reality;" from Virgin Blogger: Obama going "Green" 

 Union labor is going to be hard to avoid.  And is something that should not be avoided. Welcome to Union Built  With unification of labor, our country and its labor force has been able to build. Building is a sign of better days for our country. It employs many people in the United States. And when common people prosper there is a stimulus to the economy. 

Unions have protected the people on the job so that they have representation in issues of importance, some often life preserving. Membership - Union and Non-Union Wages & Benefits

 

Unions recommended not joining NAFTA. Now look at our economic state.  We the people need to unite with ideals and politics in these times. Economyincrisis.org - America's Economic Report - Daily

 And if unions and non-union companies are not able to work together then the better skilled will win and get the bid. Or will they hire cheap labor and again our economy becomes deeper in debt? Economyincrisis.org - America's Economic Report - Daily

Coal Industry: Lacks Government Regulation

The coal industry and how it disposes of coal ash waste needs to be regulated by the Environment Protection Agency to protect our health now and in the future. The use of coal and lack of regulating coal waste affects land, air, water and people by jeopardizing our health and our environment. Despite the Green-Washing campaign to make coal seem like a right choice for our energy crisis, there are serious repercussions for using coal as a solution. Primarily, there are no regulations from our government or the Environmental Protection Agency on how the waste from coal production is stored, leaving us exposed to deadly toxins now and from future accidents. 

In The Article The Dirty Truth About Coal > Coal > Sierra Club the facts about how the coal waste can effect us and the environment is revealed. "Coal waste contains elements of lead, mercury, and arsenic in toxic doses causing illness and death in plants and animals. Direct exposure to the toxins causes lower cases of reproduction, tissue disease, and death. Plants and vegetation near the coal waste disposal areas die or become unhealthy." (para.)

Water can be affected by the coal waste containment methods because there is seepage to ground water;  and runoff when the coal waste overflows such as heavy rains or flooding. When the waste is dumped in above ground storage methods the likelihood of exposure to humans and our water is even greater.  For example, "In 2005, there were 24 acknowledged cases of environmental pollution from leaking landfills and impoundments and many more suspected cases."

Peoples' greatest threat is drinking contaminated ground water. "The toxins found in coal wastes have been linked to organ disease, respiratory illnesses, neurological damage, and developmental problems."  

With all these health and environmental issues related to the disposal of coal mining waste, you would think that the Environmental Protection Agency and our government would put strict regulations on the mining of coal. A legitimate argument could be made for stopping coal mining altogether based on the history of acid rain in our country caused from the coal power plants but our government seems to ignore or overlook acid rains history, in exchange for the energy and money coal provides.

 So if we as a country are going to accept coal as an energy source then shouldn't the EPA  just stringently regulate the way coal waste is contained? Yes! Why is something so simple not regulated? Bruce Nilles: Questions & Concerns Linger Over the TVA Spill   If this waste is not monitored and contained safely then it is like our government saying, "Who cares? It is just the health of the people and our environment, in exchange for the wealth of the coal companies."(Me)

There are over 100 unregulated coal ash ponds according to  List of power plants with coal ash ponds : National News : Knoxville News Sentinel.  We need regulations on coal waste to prevent spills from happening again and again. In Texas alone, there is four coal companies in Goliad County, Fayette County, Harrison County and Milam County storing approximately combined total of 537,810 tons of waste.  Considering Texas is in the Great Basin meaning flooding is considerable, this is scarey thought. 

Citizens of the United States should demand regulation on coal waste containment by the government and EPA. 

Breaking News: Change is Gonna Come: EPA Halts Mountaintop Removal Permits

 I found an article addressing all in the nation who will read,  Jeff Biggers: BREAKING NEWS: Change is Gonna Come: EPA Halts Mountaintop Removal Permits in blogs from the Huffington Post, showering us with  great news, giving us a bit of light at the end of the tunnel, so to speak. In the article he tells of the Environmental Protection Agency calling a halt to hundreds of mountaintop removal permits, in order to address their impact on water quality. (Huge News. And a huge step in regulating the health and environmental hazzards created by coal companies blasting the tops off of mountains for coal mining and their management of the waste products being dumped or 'accidently' spilled into drinking water.)* 

"The EPA sent two letters to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers expressing concern regarding the environmental impact these projects have on fragile habitats and streams." said Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. "I have directed the agency to review other mining permit request. EPA will use the best science and follow the letter of the law in ensuring we are protecting our environment." (It is about time. Seems the pressure of two sludge spills in the last 4 months, must of been an indicator of a problem. Although coal production has had caustic and fatal tragedies throughout its long  history, coal keeps producing big energy, bringing in big money, to our government and the big coal businesses, while notoriously and flagrantly disregarding people, our health, or environment. Pressure from individuals and environmental groups affected by the spills, seem to finally woken up the EPA. Or possibly, Obama put the pressure on them to do act, since EPA seldom goes against government without direction.)* "EPA is corrdinating its action with the White House Council on Environmental quality and with the other agencies including the Corps."  (The fight isn't over yet, but as Jeff Biggers says, "It is a huge step forward in our country."  Considering so many lives are on the line, why did even this first step take so long. I have to agree with Biggers, this is huge step.)* 

Appalachia's Agony: My Review of the View

I imagined my view on the precipice destroyed in this article Editorial - Appalachia’s Agony - NYTimes.com 

Consider this important issue. Do we as a people destroy the beauty of our country or do we find solutions. The solutions in regards to coal use have advanced but there are other solutions to our economic and environmental future. Unfortunately, the transfer of monies going towards environmentally more sound and less destructive energy solutions seems to be moving too slow. People depend upon the few jobs and energy created with coal, making it a keystone in our economy. I doubt the use of coal will ever stop completely but the regulations must be followed in regards to harming people or the environment according to 40 CFR: Protection of the Environment | Laws, Regulations, Guidance & Dockets | US EPA 

Appalachia's Agony: My Review of the View

The editor starts by addressing the public and President Obama. "The longstanding disgrace of mountaintop mining is now squarely in President Obama's hands." 

(Is he blaming Obama for disgrace or just giving him the responsibility of all future disgraces? Good attention grasping statement. What the fight about is unclear yet. We just know it is something to do with mountaintop mining.)*

  

Next a "recent court decision has given the green light to as many as 90 mountaintop mining project in Appalachia's coal-rich hills, which in turn could destroy more then 200 miles of valleys and streams on top of the 1,200 miles that have already been obliterated. 

(Green light means that the production of coal will not be stopped. This most be what he wanted Obama to stop but still not clear if it can be stopped. The editor gives suggestion to the administration: 'stop the projects until the underlying regulations are revised so as to end the practice altogether.'  So the true intent of this article is to influence Obama to end mountaintop mining altogether and rally support.)* 

Mountain top mining according to the editor is when "Enormous machines-bulldozers and draglines- scrape away mountain ridges to expose the coal seams below. The coal is then trucked away, and the leftover rock and dirt are dumped into the adjacent valleys and streams."

(Mountains are big and would need 'enormous' machines. Seems like an obvious description. 

Scraping and exposing of seams are very convincing and sound invasive and scary. Raping the land may have replaced it but the description and drama pulls me into the story. Also mentioned and key to this story is that the leftover rock and dirt are dumped into adjacent valleys and streams. Leaving me wanting to know more.)*  

During the 2008 campaign Obama promised to end the practice of disposing of the waste improperly. (And the editor whispers)* "neither Democratic or Republican have been willing to take on Robert Byrd, West Virginia's senior senator, or the coal companies, which insist without proof that there is no other cost-effective way to dispose of the waste." (The amount of money involved is what the real issue is. Coal companies have a long history of winning their battles regardless of human life or the environment.

 Also "The Corps of Engineers, could under the law, suspend the mining permits in public interest. This in turn would give the administration time to review the rules and issue new ones that would be more protecting of the environment. But the Corps of Engineers, always reluctant to reverse itself and historically friendly to industry, will not act without orders from on high.  Again the editor is pleading with our President Obama to push them in the right direction and to keep his campaign promises.)*

Mr. Obama promised to find better ways of mining coal "then simply blowing the tops of mountains."  (The editor promts: "The time to do so is now."

I agree with the editor. Something needs to be done. How can the courts have given them the go ahead, so shortly after the sludge spill in Tennessee. A sludge waste spill is having a catastrophic impact on the environment comparing Chernobyl Disaster's Agricultural and Environmental Impact: Part two of a series (EnvironmentalChemistry.com) 

Another disturbing issue, not mentioned in this article, was the cover up by the local and national media, for 4 days. until Christmas eve, leaving the people in the dark, not knowing what the sludge was going through their backyards and seeping to their drinking water. Why the media cover up? Obama, Corp of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency and the media has some explaining to do.)     Nightmare before Christmas: Coal sludge spill 50X worse than Exxon Valdez | CEJournal

*My Opinion in orange 

Justice for American Indians: New York Times Editorial, 2-22-09

In the Editorial - Justice for American Indians - NYTimes.com, published on February 22, 2009, the editorialist addresses the Navajo Nation, and the American people and our past and present government by writing:

"The federal government has a long history of cheating American Indians, and not all of this dirty dealing is in the past."

( Mainly I believe the editorialist is trying to persuade Obama and rally support on behave of the Navajo Nation.

In this statement the editorialist mentions "a long history" without giving specific examples.) *

Peabody Coal had a lease to mine from areas of Arizona, New Mexico and Utah which is where Navajo's reservation is located. 

"The United States holds the lands in trust and manages the large coal deposits." 

(Implies that the United States has a vested interest in the financial gain of Peabody Coal.) *

The Navajo had appealed to the United States Supreme Court because in the original agreement between the States and the Navajo Nation, Peabody Coal was supposed to pay a "royalty rate to 20 percent of gross proceeds" starting in 1984 and Peabody Coal protested about the increase in paying so much. The interior secretary during the Reagan years met with Peabody  Coal and didn't notify the Navajo and a deal was made without the Navajo represented. 

The increase was blocked by the Interior Secretary forcing the Navajo into negotiations and under financial strain of their people, they accepted a "rate of 12.5" that cost them as much as "$600 million in royalties".

(The author's creditability is backed by a three-judge panel.  The figures given are vague and what the award amount is not stated. )*

According to the editorial, the Federal Circuit, United States Court of Appeals stated that our government did not follow through on the agreement, was "indefensible" as described by four former interior secretaries who had "submitted friend-0f-the-court briefs to the Supreme Court."

(The Interior Secretary who met with Peabody Coal was not mentioned by name. And neither was the four interior secretaries who made submissions as friends-of-the-court mentioned by name. This would of added to creditability.)*

Also, the writer suggests that Obama's administration should not follow Bush's administrations lead by not standing up for misdeeds of our government. 

(This ending seems to surface a new agenda not previously mentioned by the writer and seems to be goading Obama instead of just trying to bring information about an injustice that was done to Native Americans.)* 

For the final evaluation, the author reached his intended audience of the American people who read the New York Times. Maybe he did not reach the Navajos on the reservation. That would be dependent on how many Navajos of that area read the New York Times. The government and judicial bodies would most likely have a higher percentage who would read the NewTimes than those who are poor and lack funds for an extra newspaper or internet service in such a rural area.

The editorial does a good job of pointing out an injustice that was done to the Navajo. Although he doesn't give specific examples of the long history of the broken treaties and mistreatment of the Indian Nation, it is a feasible and coherent argument since so few Native Americans are still living. Genocide generally isn't fair and just treatment. 

I agree with what he states the Supreme  Court says about the Interior Department having "interests adverse to" the Navajo, and "had misled the Navajo about its actions."  This seems to be the most plausible argument against our government. 

And although I do not feel Obama is responsible for this injustice, I believe that he should make right what was done wrong in order to see the Navajo People's contract upheld.  If Peabody can't pay up then they are not financially responsible and should lose their federal funding or whatever benefits they receive by being in business with the Government who was supposed to have its people's rights in mind before basically changing the percentage rate.  If  Peabody Coal holds people responsible for their goods then what would they do if everyone that did business with them decided to pay them 7.5 percent less interest then what they currently charge. The consumer would be cut off or taken to court for redemption. And it wouldn't take approximately 24 years to rectify.     

Overall I liked this article and like to see Native American rights hopefully winning for a change and also being acknowledged. *

*My View in Orange Bold