Posted 8/17/2008 3:53 PM CDT
Russia's nationalistic surge has led them
to begin countering the increasing westernization
& democratization of former Soviet bloc countries
in Moldova, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Kazakhstan,
Uzbekistan and now Georgia. They're also
considering the eventual return of Crimea
(part of the Ukraine) to the their control.
This is all being financed by Russia's being the
Oil King of the world. Europe is already extremely
dependent upon Russian natural gas and oil.
Add the fact that the international oil pipeline
which accesses central Asian oil runs through
Georgia to the Turkish Mediterranean coast and
you can readily understand the incentive for the
Russians to have sponsored secessionist
activities in several Georgian provinces, armed
secessionist forces, bestowed Russian
citizenship upon secessionists, and (in general)
provoked an arrogant Georgian response.
Along with Russia (and China) supporting
and encouraging Iranian bellicosity and our
efforts to install a missile shield over Europe,
we're in for some interesting international
future events... and whoever controls the oil
'has the upper hand'.
to begin countering the increasing westernization
& democratization of former Soviet bloc countries
in Moldova, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Kazakhstan,
Uzbekistan and now Georgia. They're also
considering the eventual return of Crimea
(part of the Ukraine) to the their control.
This is all being financed by Russia's being the
Oil King of the world. Europe is already extremely
dependent upon Russian natural gas and oil.
Add the fact that the international oil pipeline
which accesses central Asian oil runs through
Georgia to the Turkish Mediterranean coast and
you can readily understand the incentive for the
Russians to have sponsored secessionist
activities in several Georgian provinces, armed
secessionist forces, bestowed Russian
citizenship upon secessionists, and (in general)
provoked an arrogant Georgian response.
Along with Russia (and China) supporting
and encouraging Iranian bellicosity and our
efforts to install a missile shield over Europe,
we're in for some interesting international
future events... and whoever controls the oil
'has the upper hand'.
Posted 8/16/2008 3:33 PM CDT Because Texas takes funds under the 'No Child Left Behind' Act, it must teach abstinence-only education (even though the state has the highest number of teen pregnancies). Twenty-two states rejected federal funds from the No Child Left Behind Act so they could teach real sex education. Texas' ranking first in the number of teenage pregnancies is followed closely by STD ratings. http://www.mineralwellsindex.com/local/local_story_224122743.html |
Posted 8/15/2008 12:01 PM CDT Bush and the religious right-wingers are trying to redefine "abortion" so as to include birth control. The proposed definition of abortion is so broad that it would cover many types of birth control, including oral contraceptives and emergency contraception. It would also require all recipients of aid under federal health programs to certify that they will not refuse to hire nurses and other providers who object to abortion and even certain types of birth control. This means health insurers wouldn't cover birth control, rape survivors would be denied 'emergency contraception', and doctors will be allowed to withhold information about birth control if it offends their personal belief system -- thus jeopardizing basic health care for millions of women. And since it's being pushed as a "rule change" it doesn't need congressional approval.http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/15/washington/15rule.html?_r=3&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin Health and Human Services Secretary, Mike Leavitt, in handling this proposed rule change is trying to dodge the issue & creating much confusion. We need to tell him that : "Birth control is NOT abortion. The Bush administration's proposal to change the definition of abortion and reduce women's access to birth control must be stopped." Take Action: http://pol.moveon.org/contraception/ p.s.- Bush's daughters don't use birth control??? |
Posted 8/14/2008 1:17 PM CDT When I was born, the population in the USA was less than 150 million people. It is now over 300 million. Currently, our citizenry of all groups is stable (their rate of growth is barely discernible); however, the influx of new immigrants (both legal and illegal) is huge & their birth rate is dramatic… with our population forecast to hit 500 million (half a billion) by 2050. Call it whatever you like --- but when I see millions of ‘uninvited’ guests showing up & staying, I call it an invasion. Perhaps the word ‘uninvited’ is not entirely correct – after all, no political party (other than the biblical Constitution Party), fully supports enforcing our immigration laws. And that’s because too many Americans profit from the cheap labor & suppressed wages that these ‘uninvited’ guests bring. Don’t bash the illegal immigrant when it’s our own greed & inaction that’s the root cause. [Remember that it was this same greed that lead to millions of slaves being used to make people rich in both the North and the South.] Perhaps it is an inevitable part of globalization & primitive human nature, but that doesn’t mean that I have to like it. So, I’ll support an organization that looks at the big picture (urban sprawl, disappearing farmland, shrinking resources, etcetera that overpopulation brings) in a non-bigoted way --- NumbersUSA. p.s.- It doesn’t have to be a cultural war as La Raza might have it. They state that it’s a ‘war’ that they’ll “win in the bedroom”…. which only fuels a stronger neoconservative reaction. It’s more of a quality of life issue / too many people. Take Action: |
Posted 8/13/2008 12:55 PM CDT
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, mass
immigration is driving
population growth in America today. The
Pew Hispanic Research Center projects that
82% of all population growth in the U.S.
between 2005 and 2050 will be a result of
immigration and births to immigrants.
If we want to start healing our environment,
we've got to slow (or stop) population growth.
More people mean more cars, more sprawl,
higher energy demands, more air pollution,
more demand for water and more paved-over
farmland. With America's population growing
at its current rate, every time we make an
environmental gain, our population increases
and the gains are erased. Reducing immigration
is the key to slowing future population growth.
The "inconvenient truth" is the fact that population
growth and environmental degradation are related.
People drive cars, create sprawl, destroy forests
and pollute. There are times when hard choices
must be made for the greater good...
and that time is long overdue.
http://www.capsweb.org/content.php?id=433&menu_id=8
In a 'nutshell':
http://www.capsweb.org/content_elements/recent_advertising/Fuel_print_2008.pdf
Take Action:
http://capwiz.com/caps/home/
immigration is driving
population growth in America today. The
Pew Hispanic Research Center projects that
82% of all population growth in the U.S.
between 2005 and 2050 will be a result of
immigration and births to immigrants.
If we want to start healing our environment,
we've got to slow (or stop) population growth.
More people mean more cars, more sprawl,
higher energy demands, more air pollution,
more demand for water and more paved-over
farmland. With America's population growing
at its current rate, every time we make an
environmental gain, our population increases
and the gains are erased. Reducing immigration
is the key to slowing future population growth.
The "inconvenient truth" is the fact that population
growth and environmental degradation are related.
People drive cars, create sprawl, destroy forests
and pollute. There are times when hard choices
must be made for the greater good...
and that time is long overdue.
http://www.capsweb.org/content.php?id=433&menu_id=8
In a 'nutshell':
http://www.capsweb.org/content_elements/recent_advertising/Fuel_print_2008.pdf
Take Action:
http://capwiz.com/caps/home/
