Wednesday May 4, 2016
Jump to content
The end use of uranium is for obvious reasons, very strictly controlled by the Federal government. Since the Feds are the predominant end user of most all the uranium (even that which we are currently purchasing from IRAN), the Federal government should be the ONLY entity producing/extracting/marketing that material. Of course uranium has many uses beyond "bombs", but I don't see where it's use in industry would be affected in the least by them having to procure the final product from the Federal government. They would probably get it even cheaper from the Feds.
Having said all that, I am very sceptical any time the "government" takes on another program. Appreciating that such material is HIGHLY regulated, does it not fall to that very Federal government to answer for why they let private mining interests simply walk away from the dire results left to our Native American brothers/sisters on THEIR lands. Not unlike the EPA's Gold King Mine Mess which is estimated to take decades to resolve. Once again, I think we can fairly point to where a huge part of the blame lies. But, anyone have any viable solution as to how we change the attitudes in Washington DC? They certainly are NOT responsive to what those on the "Reservations" want, nor the rest of us who share those lands. Willing to entertain most any approach that would not make things even worse.
It's called "kicking the can down the road". I fully appreciate the editors quandary regarding this issue. As with many such things, if the solution was simple or easy, everyone would most likely be onboard that lifeboat. I agree with Mr. Eby that we have to be very careful that we don't, trying to fix things in the short term, make things even far worse in the future. I suspect that is exactly what we will experience with this Prop.123 approach. In light of the information coming from the State Treasurer's Office, the money to comply with the wishes of the voters AND the State Supreme Court, is there. A complete puzzle to me, why those folks in the legislature are having such a difficult time doing the right thing. I have yet to hear their excuse as to why, in light of the availability of the funds, they are adamant that they use this ruse to keep from doing what the voters clearly told them to do. Could be a sea change in the "party politics" of this state if they don't come to their senses. I came from Kalifornia over 18 years ago, and that state as well, is pretty reflective of "one party" rule. Seems regardless of party, politicians are all cut from the same bolt of cloth.
Seems that is endemic in politicians of ALL stripes. There is no small reason why politicians (and their media) have some of the lowest public approval ratings now than at any time in this nation's history. I suspect we simply need to be ready to react/respond to whatever shenanigans they try to get out of their duly elected responsibilities. Not like we haven't had tried and true (although very messy) examples of how to deal with these folks. The French/Russian Revolutions come to mind. I pray we, as a nation, never have to resort to such approaches simply to get us back on track.
Read the article. It pretty much simply substantiated what has been out there for some time. The one thing that continues to come through to me regarding the media, is their desire/need to attract the greatest amount of "customers", read that as "followers". It has become no more than a business clocked in a veiled pretense that they are serving a public need. The "4th Estate", as with the "poll" that was done for that article, caters/plays to a specific segment of society, often based entirely on that media/polling outlets socio/political ideology. Along with media's lack of trust in their accuracy, more folks are also seeing the same thing as regards "polls". I believe everyone has a perfect reason to be sceptical of what they read/see, regardless of medium, today. Like the politicians, the "media" has brought this distrust upon themselves. Will take decades to change the attitudes, if it is even possible.
With all due respect, it is this type of rationalization that our supposed "representatives" are counting on. I like the lifeboat analogy, but all it does is for stall the inevitable. I suppose it comes down to pure survival instinct. Die today or die tomorrow, you are still just as dead. I am fully cognizant of the foot dragging that will take place via the legal system over this issue. Even though the State Supreme Court has ruled on the merits of Prop.301 and what the legislature must do at their (courts) direction, why are those very legislators not being held in contempt for NOT complying? If they keep getting their way, they will continue down this very same road with other types of voter approved initiatives. At some point, we ARE going to have to draw that "line in the sand" which they shall NOT cross with impunity. Currently we (voters) have the court on our side. I say we stand our ground and not let this sham approach overrule the wishes of the voters. I have already voted....No on Prop. 123.
Pretty much an indictment on our elected representatives. The voters spoke some time ago about funding education, and the supreme court have demanded the state comply with that vote. Yet, not unlike the Feds, they simply turn a deaf ear to what "The People" want and set about going their own way. When I see what the Arizona legislature is trying with this approach (Prop. 123) I am reminded of the town hall debates that took place leading up to the passage of the Affordable Care Act. How could they miss the anger and frustration being expressed at the grassroots level about what was fixing to take place? They didn't miss it, they simply ignored it.
Now the Arizona legislature is pretty much doing the same with its constituents. We made our position very clear with Prop. 301. Do we have to descend upon them with pitchforks and hoes before they do what the people have directed them to do? It would appear so. Now, where did I put that pitchfork?
You know me to be somewhat of a cynic ( noun: a person who believes that people are motivated purely by self-interest rather than acting for honorable or unselfish reasons). I would encourage the Senate to go ahead and hold hearings on this nominee. If the GOP cannot prevent him from being confirmed, and he rules on the case mentioned as they suspect he will, then so what? This nation is simply a shadow of its former greatness. In my view it began this precipitous decline about the early to mid 60's. This particular issue with President Obama (overstepping his constitutional authority) and this Judge Garland (an obvious progressive/socialist based on his court rulings) are simply symptoms of a greater illness in this nation.
Wringing our hands over these types of political machinations and believing that we can actually change the direction of this train, that is clearly headed for destruction, to me is simply wishful thinking. I would not deny others their right to be as hopeful of a better outcome than the one I perceive, but I also will offer them a crying towel when it goes in the opposite direction than that which they wished for. I live my life with as much joy and happiness as I can find for whatever time I have left. I observe these things, but refuse to let them take away the pleasant things of this life I do have control over. And today, even with the clouds and showers, is going to be a beautiful day!
I only replied to your post due to your using the circumstance that Mr. Paulk brought up, to take an obvious political shot at Gov. Ducey. I don't argue with the rest of your assumptions, but the one you put in there to show your disdain for the governor was too obvious and I felt needed a small amount of explaining as to how you arrived at such a connection. Certainly there are many things that the Governor does that deserve criticism ( Prop 123 for example) but blaming him for DPS choosing to use that stretch of 87 as a "speed trap" is a bit of a reach, don't you think?
And I am totally relaxed, breathing quite well thank you, and I don't drink anything stronger than iced tea. You might use those "stiff drinks" for yourself to soothe your angst towards the reality that you live in a Republican controlled state. Your choice.
I suppose there is some link between DPS officers actually doing their job, and paying off Ducey's cronies. But for the life of me, I simply cannot make the logical connection. Perhaps you can clear it all up for those of us who are not "haters" of someone duly elected to office and those public servants simply doing what their paid to do. Give it your best shot for us.
I don't argue that the "fireworks lobby" are pushing this change. But I will say this, that "lobby" is not just those outfits that manufacture these products. It might be surprising as to just how many civic organizations are also in that "lobby". The Lions Club, VFW, Shriners, Police Benevolent Organizations, and yes, even some FireFighter Associations. They make a lion's share of their funds every year selling these things. Yes, those earned monies are used to help those programs supported by those organizations and do benefit the community at large. But I really don't think that once they have been personal witness to the potential of the products they are selling to earn funds, they would be so quick to fall back on them. As Robert said, there is a huge profit margin in the products and when they go on sale, it seems people will spend whatever the market will bear to have their few seconds of noise, smoke, and fire from these things. What folks don't seem to appreciate is the costs of death, injury, and lost homes from these very products. I would suggest those costs far exceed any profit the civic organizations make on the sale of fireworks. How does one place a value on a life, an eye, or lost fingers,someone's home and all their belongings, or someone getting badly burned? Personally, from experience, I simply don't think they should be marketed to the public.
Last login: Friday, April 29, 2016