Offshore oil drilling has been insane from inception: Deepwater Disaster Blues

Tom Usher wrote or added | This is a great, very important, urgent message from Greenpeace.

Offshore oil drilling has been insane from inception. It never should have been allowed and wouldn't have been if I had been making the decisions. We would have been solar, wind, and geothermal decades ago if I had had my way. There would also already be no nuclear energy plants because the other methods would have received the research and development efforts to make even the next so-called generation of nuclear long since obsolete.

Barack Obama is a terrible President relative to how a truly smart, wise, and good leader could be and should be. It's up to the people the leaders they choose to follow.

The Tea Party approach is dead wrong, although I sympathize with their frustrations. Keynesianism after the crash was right in the mundane sense, but Obama's people deliberately sabotaged it by plowing the money into parked Treasuries rather than investing in Main Street. They bailed out the banksters on the people's backs.

Larry Clark

Do you enjoy facebook? Youur computer? Your auto? Your stove that heats your food? The furnace that heats your house? The job you have? All possible because of oil. Yes, we have a responsibility to do all we can to protect the environment but until our government gives real incentives for companies to earn from new energies we will be relying on oil. Unfortunately wind and sun energy generation will not produce what we need. Nuclear and natural gas could help reduce that need. I believe we need to rethink how we tap oil in the deep ocean.

Tom Usher

Larry Clark,

Ah, Larry, you're a real, live, oil-industry shill (witting?) or someone who knows little to nothing about clean, sustainable, alternative energy systems that could easily have satisfied the world's electrical needs long ago.

Did you read my post? I said we would have been off oil long ago had I had my way about it. Foot dragging for the sake of the superrich, greedy, oil-industry, Pentagon, and foolish Empire is the only reason we haven't been completely off oil for decades now.

By the way, my energy is hydro and wind, so please don't tell me about my energy sources. I've purchased 9 gallons of gas since February of 2007. The gauge still reads nearly full and it's not broken.

The oil industry stinks. I loathe it. It's not necessary, and hasn't been, ever. The sooner it's gone the better.





The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe

  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.