A young activist (Lukianoff) describes how universities became the most authoritarian institutions in America:
Click image to go to the Wall Street Journal article:
.
Excerpts:
The trouble is that students are usually intimidated into submission. The startling majority of students don’t bother. They’re too concerned about their careers, too concerned about their grades, to bother fighting back…
A 2010 survey by the American Association of Colleges and Universities found that of 24,000 college students, only 35.6% strongly agreed that “it is safe to hold unpopular views on campus.” When the question was asked of 9,000 campus professionals—who are more familiar with the enforcement end of the censorship rules—only 18.8% strongly agreed.
We can ask ourselves in hindsight, “Why are we not surprised when kindergarteners vote for lollipops, instead of voting for healthy meals?” Ask Michelle Obama about that. Not sure she has an easy time with Barack’s nutritional choices.
.
One thing we keep forgetting is that the prerequisite, for the success of democracy, is an ethical population.
In the absence of an ethical population, self-indulgence rules, and those least committed to justice and equality rapidly find ways of helping themselves to the national treasury, on every level, political and individual. When the number of such individuals grows too large, the nation begins to sink.
We can allow ourselves a moment of self-pity and regret.
Then we roll up our sleeves and start to patch the boat.
We can remind ourselves that humanity has done this for millennia- made mistakes, rolled up sleeves, and salvaged the wreckage with the help of God. From the Old Testament tribulations of the Jews to the trials suffered by our parents and grandparents in World War II. Apparently our assignment or “war” is the cultural war, which seeks to replace the Judeo-Christian foundations of the Constitution of the United States, with self-indulgent secular values, which discard the Ten Commandments. We have lost a battle, but the war goes on.
As throughout the rest of history, God remains on our side.
Come to me, all you who labor and are burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am meek and humble of heart; and you will find rest for your selves. For my yoke is easy, and my burden light. – Matthew 11:28
.
The good news is that half of America still understands the importance of Judeo-Christian values.
The other half, like most young people, need to make some mistakes and suffer a few bruises before they figure out where they are going wrong.
If we’re at all honest, we say “Been there, done that.”
And our job is to tolerate them, to love them, to pray for them, and to help them.
Don’t get me wrong, not to facilitate. But to watch for opportunities to provide constructive help.
The dream of achieving paradise on earth is always a tempting one, but in reality, no nation has ever achieved it, so we should not be surprised that we struggle to do so.
God will see us through.
.
And now, for my moment of personal self-pity before I roll up my sleeves once again:
A great note from my Pastor, Monsignor Holmes, in the parish bulletin today;
Monsignor Holmes:
I certainly intend to exercise my right to vote on Tuesday – in fact, I would crawl the four blocks to my polling place over broken glass in order to vote this year. And I trust that you will too – vote, that is.
Personally, I am hopeful about the current elections. I am optimistic that we will have a good number of newly elected leaders who will be more sensitive to our moral concerns and our freedom of religion. And, God willing, sufficiently prudent decisions will be made so that we can avert the national collapse that appears (at least to me) to loom on the horizon…. click to continue
(See former Hillary Clinton aide postscript at end.)
Pitching politics has been counter-intuitive for me for most of my lifetime.
I have never belonged to one political party, and still refuse to join one.
I refuse to be a groupie following one charismatic individual, and I do not relinquish my free will to control by any organization or group.
Admittedly, I have been quite conservative most of my life; although there have been exceptions to that, too, particularly during my college days.
A Realistic View
My view of politics is a realistic one; nothing’s black, nothing’s white. Nobody is 100% right, nobody is 100% wrong. I like to enquire, to think, and to adopt the best of what everyone has to offer. That includes ideas from more than one political party.
The United States seems limited to two major parties. Not a bad system, from the viewpoint of avoiding governance by a minority, smaller than 51%. Since one party is not likely to encompass all the ideas of a particular individual, we have to weigh the pros and cons offered by the two major parties at each election, and choose the party that satisfies our most important considerations at that historical time.
But Aren’t You a Republican?
Anybody reading this blog must have noticed that my writing seems to be very pro-Republican in 2012. But those who read carefully will notice that I rarely use the word Republican. I rarely use the name Romney. Instead, I use the word conservative.
What About Most Americans?
Few Americans are extremists.
Few people are radically conservative or radically liberal.
Most of us are in the middle.
Even those who are quite conservative, like me, believe in the right of others to reject my beliefs. Religious Christians respect the gift of Free Will given to us by God, and we respect the freedom guaranteed to us by the Constitution of the United States.
Few liberals are callous, insensitive to the bankrupting of America, or to the extermination of 54 million unborn American citizens by abortion, a problem particularly affecting black communities.
Few conservatives are callous, insensitive to the plight of the poor, or to the horrors of war.
Most Americans appreciate that good people can view things from different perspectives, and those who disagree with us probably have noble motivations. Even if we believe that our opponents have their facts mistaken, we can admire them for their dedication to justice and to fairness, which we share.
Most Americans are independent in spirit, and have voted for candidates from both political parties over the years.
For many years, the differences between Democrats and Republicans were not overwhelmingly large; both supported Judeo-Christian principles, and both supported the rule of law as outlined in the Constitution of the United States. Did you know that as recently as 1999, Harry Reid opposed abortion? So did Joe Biden, Al Gore, Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy.
But 2012 is different.
What’s Different in 2012?
Barack Obama is the difference in 2012.
Barack Obama, unlike previous Presidents, and unlike most Americans and most liberals, has shown himself to be a rigid, inflexible idealist.
The unification, transparency, and justice that he promised, and on the basis of which he was elected, have been replaced by a dictatorial, extreme and unaccountable set of policies, executed by czars, which have pushed America into gridlock. His policies and mandates do not follow the rule of law.
President Obama’s ideals don’t represent those of most liberals or most Americans, yet he tries to mandate compliance with his ideals. He issues mandates without approval of the House, Senate, or Supreme Court. When the legislature refuses to pass what President Obama wants, he bypasses them with a mandate. Then he promises Vladimir Putin that he will have “more flexibility” after this election.
How Has Barack Obama Reneged On His Promises and Violated the Rights of Americans?
President Obama has reneged on a number of the duties to which he was sworn at his inauguration, and on a number of campaign promises he made in 2008.
Barack Obama has imposed his will on our country in many areas:
Such a radical promotion of abortion and contraception no only renders our society inhuman from the point of view of morality, but also has economic consequences, since shrinking and aging populations will face rapidly mounting debts.
Barack Obama has not passed a single budget in four years, and submits budgets to the legislature so unrealistic, that they get ZERO Democrat votes in the Senate, which is held by Democrats.
Sometimes it appears that the President doesn’t understand the math.
Recently, he admitted on national television that he struggles with 7th grade math. This cannot be good.
Barack Obama has raised the national debt by 50% in just 4 years with his spending, creating a per capita national debt of over $50,00 for each of us, when it was just $33,000 four years ago. Since only half of us pay any federal income tax, that means a per capita debt of about $100,000 for each person who pays federal tax, and a per household debt of over $250,000 in the United States today. Since the average household income in the United States is $50,000, that’s already quite a debt, a debt of five years income for each of us. If Barack Obama is reelected, the national debt is projected to go up an additional 47% over 10 years, bringing the household share of the national debt to over $375,00. That will be a debt of seven and a half years income for each of us ten years from now. If you think you have paid off your mortgage by then, you can start a new mortgage on a $375,000 house. That’s for the average family earning $50,000 per year. If your income is higher, your extra debt will be higher.
Scrooge McDuck
Quite some plan Barack Obama has for us, considering that our per capita national debt is already worse than Greece’s today, at the outset, right now.
Barack Obama’s plan to tax the rich is so naive that it betrays the fact that he struggles with 7th grade math. There are not enough rich people in America to get appreciable income from increasing their taxation, and his recent proposal would require DOUBLING the taxes of all people earning $250,000 per year; a move that would wipe out the ability of small businesses to hire workers or to expand. The President seems to be reading too many comic books.
The jobs these students would have been getting in the absence of Obama’s naive policies are destroyed by ObamaCare costs for employers and Obama’s intention to double taxation on small business owners, who will not hire and expand.
Barack Obama insults the intelligence of these young people by offfering them free abortions and free birth control pills (value $500 and $9/monthly) in exchange for their votes, in return for a future of unemployment, debt and low pay. With poor people, he tries to buy their votes with free “Obama-phones.”
Foreign Policy
In the light of recent events in Benghazi, the most positive possible interpretation of Barack Obama’s negligent actions in failing to protect our Embassy staff would be that he did not provide security for the Benghazi because he did not expect anyone in Libya to touch Americans, perhaps because we are such nice people. Can anyone be that naive?
Barack Obama acted as though we are in Libya handing out candies to trick-or-treaters, and he did not expect them to come out wielding knives, or heavy weapons such as the ones which were used against the Benghazi embassy – automatic weapons, mortars and rocket propelled grenades. When caught criminally unprepared, coverup followed.
An even less flattering explanation of Barack Obama’s actions would include Obama sacrificing our global standing intentionally. Obama has been accused of an anti-colonialist mentality, which considers that the US needs to be downsized globally in it’s lifestyle, it’s power and it’s wealth. The movie 2016:Obama’s America documents these claims by Dinesh D’Souza, a University President who bases most of his claims on Obama’s autobiography, Dreams of My Father, as well as research into Obama’s life. 2016: Obama’s America is showing in theaters now, has grossed more than $33.45 million in the United States. The movie is now the second biggest political documentary in film history. Yet this record-setting film is virtually being ignored by the mainstream media, which protects Obama from criticism routinely and shamelessly.
Another less flattering explanation of Barack Obama’s actions would include accusing him of intentionally reducing US Power because of the secret Marxist ideology taught to him by Marshall Davis, a Communist Party USA propagandist who is mentioned in Obama’s autobiography . This theory is based on the documented fact that Obama’s mother posed for pornographic photos taken by Marshall Davis, who, it is suggested, could also be Barack Obama’s father. These suggestions are explored by the movie Dreams from my REAL Father, which can be watched instantly on Netflix. If you have not seen this film, I suggest you watch it this weekend, before you vote.
Finally, a third movie, The Hope and the Change, is available to watch for free on Hulu at http://www.hulu.com/watch/409925. The Hope and the Change is a documentary about independent and Reagan Democrat voters who cast their ballots for Obama in 2008 and will not do so in 2012. These voters feel betrayed by Obama’s false promises of hope and lofty rhetoric.
.
Immigration
Barack Obama has refused to enforce immigration laws at the US border with Mexico, and has sued Arizona when Arizona tried to enforce laws themselves. In this, and other areas, Obama has failed to defend the Constitution of the United States and to enforce its laws.
He has demonstrated a naivete in economics and in foreign policy that has placed our nation in tremendous danger.
The Point
So the point is: Barack Obama is not your normal Democrat.
Barack Obama does not respect the voice of the American People, 2/3 of whom oppose ObamaCare, 2/3 of whom oppose federal funding of abortion, and 2/3 of whom oppose Obama’s recent violations of the religious liberty of Catholics.
Barack Obama does not respect the division of governmental power between Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches.
Barack Obama does not respect his own promises of 2008.
Barack Obama is not who he told us he was.
Barack Obama does not plan to work with all Americans, he just plans to continue pushing his extreme agenda, with which even Democrats disagree.
“For most of my life, I’ve been an active Democrat. I am proud to have worked for President Bill Clinton and then-Senator Hillary Clinton, and, during that time, I saw firsthand what can be accomplished by strong, bipartisan leadership. I know what it means to work across the aisle on issues that are important to the American people. And that’s why I am supporting Mitt Romney. Governor Romney has a plan to restore the prosperity this country deserves and expects. He will work with people of good will no matter what their party, and he will pursue the policies that are in the best interest of our country, no matter who proposes them. That’s what President Obama promised to do four years ago. But like so many of his promises, bipartisan cooperation is just another one he has broken. We can’t have four more years of failed policies and two parties that can’t work together. We need the change Mitt Romney is offering.”
My Catholic pastor in today’s Cathedral Parish Church bulletin: I certainly intend to exercise my right to vote on Tuesday – in fact, I would crawl the four blocks to my polling place over broken glass in order to vote this year. And I trust that you will too – vote, that is. Personally, I am hopeful about the current elections. I am optimistic that we will have a good number of newly elected leaders who will be more sensitive to our moral concerns and our freedom of religion. And, God willing, sufficiently prudent decisions will be made so that we can avert the national collapse that appears (at least to me) to loom on the horizon… (see above link to finish reading)
The Purple Heart is a medal awarded to soldiers for being wounded or killed while fighting an enemy of the United States.
I’ve already seen several Catholic Bishops this week, courageous spiritual warriors who have risked all in defending the values encoded in the Constitution of the United States – the defense of life, liberty and property. The wounds they suffer may not be physical, but courageous Catholic Bishops suffer death threats, and many other forms of abuse.
I am sure there will be more reports of courageous Bishops before November 6th. Send me reports, and I will add them to this list.
Bishop #1
Bishop Robert C. Morlino of Madison, WI
Bishop Robert Morlino of Madison, WI – for a courageous election homily delivered on October 28th, 2012, entitled Lord, I Want to See. Audio at Madison Cathedral Parish website.
Transcript below at end of this article.
Bishop Morlino spoke about the November 6th election, on Benghazi, on gay marriage, on cafeteria Catholics, on abortion, on the Wisconsin State Journal, on the media, on a candidate who promotes abortion without restraint and at no cost:
As a result of this election, our country could become more and more inhuman in it’s soul, and the consequences of that, foreseen and unseen, would be catastrophic.”
“This is the most important election in my lifetime, the essence of what it is to be human is what’s at stake. That’s far more important than the economy. Because if humanity is under attack, nothing can go right with the economy.
Bishop #2
Bishop Thomas John Paprocki of Springfield, Illinois:
Your vote will affect the eternal salvation of your own soul. – Breitbart.com
When I started on this article, I had 3 Catholic Bishops.
Now I have 5.
More and More and More!!! … …
I thought I was finished with this article… Breitbart.com informs us that many Catholic Bishops are beginning to unite publicly against the Democratic Pary’s championing of abortion.
Archbishop Chaput of Philadelphia Pennsylvania is included, #6
Please note: that this was the MORMON
Tabernacle Choir. 😮
.
.
Transcript of Bishop Morlino’s Election Homily on October 28th:
Lord, I want to see.
Bishop Robert Morlino’s Sunday Homily, October 28, 2012
Based on the Gospel reading, Mark 10:46-52
Bartimaeus was not born blind, like the man in the gospel according to John, whom we always recall one of the later Sundays during Lent. Bartimaeus was not born blind. He had his sight for many years, and then lost it. So he knew what he did not have. And on top of it, he was reduced to begging by his blindness and disability, so that he was without human dignity.
Bartimaeus is sitting there in his misery, and along comes Jesus. And Bartimaeus can’t control himself, because all of a sudden, hope invades his misery, and he cries out to Jesus. Jesus says “Bring him over here. What do you want from me?” Bartimaeus is s plainspoken man. “Lord, I want to see.” He receives his sight, and what does he do? Go back to his former life? No. With his new sight, he immediately follows Jesus.
That’s what our New Evangelization during the Year of Faith is all about. So many once had their sight, but have become blind. The problem is, they don’t know enough to say, “I want to see.” And somehow, we are to be the instruments of the hope of Jesus Christ that moves them to say that. But we have a major problem in our country and in our society, with people, including many Catholics, who simply do not want to see.
There is an article in the State Journal today, and you can almost conclude from that that it’s unreliable, but it is, by a sociologist, about Vatican II. And Vatican II brought life to lay people. Vatican II took lay people seriously. All of that is right.
How did Vatican II take lay people seriously? Vatican II pointed out that lay people don’t simply obey the Church any more. They’re adult. They’re too adult for that. So what Vatican II said is the lay people are obligated to find out what the Church teaches, and then make up their own mind about it. Find out what the Church teaches, and then say yes or no. In other words, this sociologist, whose observations are included in the State Journal article, believes that what Vatican II did for the Church is make possible “cafeteria Catholicism.” Vatican II pushed “cafeteria Catholicism. O, you have to find out what the Church teaches, but then you decide whether you have to follow it or not.
If one is called to be Catholic, one follows what the Church teaches. That is the correct understanding of conscience. And if one really cannot follow what the Church teaches, then one’s conscience requires that one leave the Church. But one’s conscience does not require that one make up one’s own personal religion from A to Z, finding out the Church’s teaching, and then saying, “Well that’s O.K., that’s O.K., that’s O.K.; over here, I don’t like this, I will cast my line-item veto, on what the Church teaches.
Cafeteria Catholics were not always blind, but now they are, and they don’t want to see. And the reason they don’t want to see is that there are people around telling them the whole point of Vatican II was to create cafeteria Catholicism. How could that ever be true?
There are many Catholics who happen to be Democrats, who don’t want to see. There are many Catholics who happen to be Republicans, who don’t want to see.
What is there to see?
A candidate who promotes abortion without restraint and at no cost.
Promotes abortion. And on top of it, it’s free. Promotes artificial contraception. And it’s free.
Sometimes I think to myself, “It would make sense that someone would not worry about the effects of colossal death on future generations if their policy discourages future generations. If abortion is promoted, free, if artificial contraception is promoted, free, who are going to people future generations? The birth rate goes down, down, down, down, down. And so you worry less about handing on a debt to future generations because there might not be any, if we just abortion and artificial birth control ourselves as a culture and a society into oblivion.
This is very serious business. And yet there are many who call themselves Catholics who don’t want to see.
Written in our very human nature, in the language of our body, by the Creator, is that marriage means one husband, one wife, one lifetime, with openness to children. Every human being has the right to marry the person he chooses, or she chooses, of the opposite sex. No one’s right to marry a person of the opposite sex is threatened. But there is no right to redefine marriage as same-sex marriage.
To redefine marriage is to attack the essence of being human. “God made them human, male and female.” And He made them for marriage. He gave their bodies a nuptial meaning. That’s who we are as human. We are male and female. If that doesn’t matter, then humanity as it was created starts to ebb away. And now we have people who want to play some kind of a game that is deadly to humanity, that says, “Well, let the child be born, and after some years, let him or her decide whether he wants to be he or she.”
Instead of being what God created me to be, I become what I think I am. God is no longer in charge, what I think is in charge. I don’t want to see.
Many Catholics, unfortunately, are caught up in that. And if someone does not want to see, there’s no hope for healing. Because they don’t know that they need to be healed, obviously. And look at the press and the television, the mass media. We’re getting an overdose of it every day. “I don’t want to see what happened in Libya, in Benghazi. I don’t want to see it—at least until the election is over. Then, maybe. ”
Bartimaeus’ salvation turned out to be in those four words,, “I want to see.” Our country, and our culture, including many Catholics, proclaim, “I don’t want to see.”
That’s the challenge of the New Evangelization. And that’s the challenge that awaits our country that we have to face, ready or not, on November the 6th, and I’m terribly afraid that we’re not ready to face it. Because an electorate that doesn’t want to see, including Catholics, cannot elect wisely.
You and I have to be instruments of waking people up out of their blindness. They’re blind, and they think it’s fine. At least for right now. That blindness could lead our country more and more in the direction of inhumanity. As a result of this election, our country could become more and more and more inhuman – in it’s soul – and the consequences of that foreseen and unseen would be catastrophic. This is the most important election in my lifetime, the essence of what it is to be human is what’s at stake. That’s far more important than the economy. Because if humanity is under attack, nothing can go right with the economy.
We have to pray hard, and we have to speak up, in the next nine or ten days, to our friends, our neighbors, our fellow family members who don’t want to see. If the can discover that in not wanting to see there is no hope, there is no joy, maybe they would repent, by God’s grace. And so above all, we have to pray for them, pray for our country, pray for those who do not want to see. That they will decide in the favor of hope, and for the long-term future of our country they will choose life, rather than death, for humanity.
Catholic Belief Now Defined by Media and Sociologists?
Doug Erickson and Michele Dillon
This Sunday, reporter Doug Erickson and Sociology professor Michele Dillon attempted to define Catholic beliefs without consulting the Catholic Church.
The Wisconsin State Journal Progressive, in its usual presumptive manner, has bypassed reality and offered their Wisconsin readership a fantasy, in which Catholic Church doctrine is not longer determined by the teachings of Jesus Christ or by the Magisterium of the Church with the Pope and Bishops, but doctrine is declared up for grabs by the individual, and “Cafeteria Catholicism” is encouraged.
Doug Erickson’s article on the 50th anniversary of the Second Vatican Council bypasses contacting the Catholic Church, the Bishop of Madison, or the Vatican, and relies on the word of one dissident Catholic, a professor of sociology from New Hampshire, to interpret the meaning of Vatican II. And MIS-interpret she does.
Cafeteria Catholicism as about as valid as cafeteria mathematics, cafeteria medicine, or cafeteria law. The teachings of mathematics, or of medicine, or of the law are not subject to the whims of individuals, and those who misrepresent a discipline are doing a disservice to all.
The Catholic Church has actually organized a year’s worth of events to commemorate the 50th anniversary of Vatican II. The commemoration is called the Year of Faith, is listed on the Vatican website, and Doug Erickson missed this; the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops provides information and videos on the Year of Faith, and Doug Erickson apparently missed these.
The Diocese of Madison has a year’s worth of events scheduled around the Year of Faith, listed on the Diocesan web page, and Doug Erickson also missed this.
Madison’s Cathedral Parish has a year’s worth of homilies and discussion groups planned on the documents of Vatican II, listed on the website, and Doug Erickson, again, has missed this. . This hat-trick is remarkable.
Bishop Morlino stands with Pope Benedict
.
Listen to Bishop Morlino’s homily today for his reaction to this article and on their misrepresentation of Vatican II.
For additional accurate information on Vatican II, Monsignor Holmes, rector of Madison’s Cathedral Parish, has also scheduled about 20 homilies on the documents of Vatican II. The first two of this series are available on the parish website at Revelation and Faith and at Scripture, Tradition and Magisterium.
The Wisconsin State Journal and Doug Erickson should stop masquerading as religion reporters who “explore matters of faith, values and ethics in Wisconsin”, and should be truthful about their attempts to misrepresent Catholicism and undermine the wisdom of the Catholic Church, or they should at least do a little research.
An 18-wheeler diesel-engine truck would have to drive 143 miles on the freeway to put out the same mass of particles as a single charbroiled hamburger patty.
This factoid struck me as remarkable. A modern 18-wheeler apparently produces impressively low levels of pollution. (Alternatively, we are all producing a shockingly large quantity of pollution every time we cook dinner!) In actual fact, during the last two decades, engine researchers (like my husband) have reduced the pollution emitted by on-road vehicles 100-fold.
The Cost of Clean Exhaust
In order to achieve this remarkably low pollution, the after-treatment system on the 18-wheeler now costs as much as the engine itself, and doubles the cost of the engine. The cost of a $10,000 engine rises to $20,000, with the addition of after-treatment equipment, which eliminates pollutants.
If transcontinental diesel trucks now produce less pollution than cooking a dinner, at what point should the government stop requiring additional expensive emission controls? Should the rising expense of after-treatment systems motivate us to limit the degree to which we seek to eliminate pollution? Our entire economy relies on shipping and associated costs, so it’s important to ask this question. When is the exhaust of a vehicle “clean enough?” and when does it become too expensive to clean exhaust any further? Are we “there” yet?
What Else Will Be Regulated For Pollution?
Will They Regulate Hamburgers?
We all appreciate the 100-fold reduction in on-road vehicle emissions achieved through research in the last few decades. Our air in the United States has really been cleaned up. A series of Clean Air Acts have resulted in very significant reductions of pollutants, including the reduction of particulate emissions by about 80%.
But the UC Riverside Today article, after remarking on the low emissions of 18-wheelers, embarked on discussing the regulation of particulates emitted by commercial char broilers in Los Angeles.
This raises quite a few questions; one wouldn’t think that people making dinner could contribute significantly to pollution, could it?
Is such regulation really necessary?
What will people do if cooking emissions come under government regulation?
Will Burger King’s char broiling machinery go up $10,000 in cost?
How much more will the Whopper cost? Will the cost double?
What else in our daily lives pollutes, and what else may eventually become subject to regulation?
How much regulation is really necessary?
Getting Some Perspective
I did a bit of homework on emissions to put things into perspective, to see how much we might be contributing to particle emissions when we cook hamburgers for dinner, or through other daily life activities.
I collected and summarized United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) particulate emissions data in the table and pie chart below:
Here are the main sources of particles, which pollute the quality of our air in the United States, and the percentage each contributes to the pollution:
Particulate Emissions in the U.S.
National PM2.5 Emissions
Source
Total Emissions(Short Tons)
% of NationalEmissions
Dust
1,186, 795
34%
Unpaved road
812,512
24%
Construction
220,151
6%
Paved road
154,132
4%
Fuel Combustion
864,238
25%
Residential
359,068
10%
Electric Generation
339,735
10%
Industrial Boilers
87,573
Industrial boilers, ICEs
61,702
Comm/Institutional
16,159
Mobile
417,354
12%
Non-Road
184,533
On-Road
107,384
3%
Commercial Marine Vessels
95,639
Locomotives
25,129
Aircraft
4,668
Miscellaneous
389, 781
11%
Waste Disposal
303,934
Commercial Cooking
82,770
Misc. Non-Industrial NEC
3,057
Bulk Gasoline Terminals
15
Gas Stations
6
Industrial Processes
315,622
9%
NEC
114,088
Pulp and Paper
36,882
Ferrous Metals
33,808
Mining
26,570
Chemical Manufacture
23,670
Petroleum Refineries
22,805
Storage and Transfer
19,598
Non-Ferrous Metals
17,579
Cement Manufacture
13,628
Oil and Gas Production
6,993
Agriculture
145,969
4%
Crops and Livestock Dut
138,478
Livestock Waste
7,490
Fires
130,988
4%
Prescribed Fires
107,925
Agricultural Field Burning
23,063
Solvent
2,798
>0.1%
TOTAL NATIONAL
3,453,545
Which are the Biggest Polluters?
Dust seems to be the biggest culprit, contributing 34% of all particulates in the U.S.
But it seems like dust would be challenging to control; how would we control dust? By controlling the weather? Or by prohibiting vehicle use on roads?
Dust is also the most inert of particles, and is the least harmful to our health.
This might be the reason people rarely talk about controlling dust particulates.
Next comes non-automotive fuel combustion, including furnaces and boilers, which contribute 25% to the nation’s pollution. Clearly an area where some improvement could be achieved, if improvement is needed. But at what cost to the homeowner? And would after-treament systems be affordable by the average American?
The two items we started out discussing, diesel trucks (on-road mobile) and char broiled hamburgers (commercial cooking), seem at this point in time to be the lowest contributors to pollution, contributing only 3% and 2% respectively.
A pie chart makes it easier to visualize:
This picture illustrates that both on-road vehicles and commercial cooking are now minor contributors to pollution in the United States. If, indeed, we need to continue further air cleanup, you would not think from the above pie chart that on-road vehicles or commercial cooking would be the place to look for more reductions.
Some Questions Raised by these Charts
The initial surprising suggestion by UC Riverside Today was that government may start regulating pollution produced by a hamburger.
First of all, we have to determine whether further air cleanup is necessary.
We’ve already cleaned up 99% of the on-road automotive pollution, and reduced particulates by 80%.
Isn’t that enough cleanup? Can we quit?
In Madison, WI, where I live, the answer might be yes.
The air always looks and smells clean.
People not only cook hamburgers, both inside and barbequing outside, but they use fire pits as well; kind of like an urban campfire, just for fun. We would be pretty upset if the government tried to tell us that we could no longer broil a hamburger in our backyards.
US Air Quality; Green =low pollution, Red = High pollution
But there are places where smog and air quality problems still do exist, like Los Angeles. Clearly, air quality there should continue to be of concern. Based on the pie chart, however, I would wonder whether going after commercial cooking (2% of national pollution) is the right way to go. Shouldn’t they be looking at furnaces and boilers (25%), industrial processes (9%), agriculture (4%), and so on?
To Regulate or Not To Regulate, That Is the Question
There are trade-offs between a clean environment and the potential economic disaster caused by increasing the price of cars, char broilers, home furnaces and other sources of pollution. And national politics should not dictate the healthy balance. This should rather be done locally, through supply and demand, not by government mandates, which are developed for downtown Los Angeles and are then applied indiscriminately to Wisconsin farmlands.
We face the question: At what point do we decide that our air is clean enough, and that parents don’t have to put their children in day-care and get a second job to pay for government-mandated green gadgets on the family car and home furnace?
Requiring an entire nation to buy high-tech solutions regulating every aspect of daily life, including the cooking of hamburgers, which are actually only needed in a few specific locations, is tremendous potential source of waste.
Time to Take It Local?
This is one of the reasons why federal control of our lives is never optimal, and we should seek opportunities to make local choices. Local control of everything, from medical care, to pollution control, and to choice of sex ed curriculum in schools, benefits the nation. Customization eliminates the need for supplying costly materials to those who don’t need them, and imposing expensive or otherwise cumbersome regulations on those who do not need them.
Good Time to Back Off Regulation?
2012, with present unemployment levels and the state of our economy, might be a good time to consider whether we have had enough government regulation. The question should be reexamined before regulatory agencies get carried away and double the price of everything we need to buy. Cars already have a prohibitive price tag. Do we add to that doubling the price of furnaces, stoves, lawn mowers, electricity, and food, clothing and shelter, which depend on the transportation of materials across our nation?
Looking at the pie chart at the beginning of this article makes it clear that living pollutes.
Cooking pollutes.
Staying warm pollutes.
Growing crops pollutes.
People pollute.
Existing pollutes.
So, unless we propose forced limitation of population growth (forced contraception and abortion; hello, China!), or unless you propose that we all move into caves (but we’d still be polluting with our campfires), or unless you propose that we forbid travel to reduce road dust, we have to face the fact that humans pollute. How much of our “pollution” is natural and acceptable, and when is enough regulation enough?
Finally, when should regulation be returned to the local level?
More Things to Consider
Pollution or particulates are not the sole consideration governing our use of energy and it’s regulation. Questions of limited supply, foreign dependence, CO2 production and possible global warming, are also considerations.
These will be the subjects of future blog posts; stay tuned.
Are We There Yet?
For now, the answer to the question “Are we there yet?” might just be, that for much of the United States, “Yes, we’re almost there.” At least regarding pollution.
Without too much of a spoiler, a hint: we’re doing a lot better in the other areas than the media would have us think.
The Obama campaign is now approving sexually suggestive You Tube advertising aimed at 18 year old girls.
That bears repeating. A 51-year-old President is pitching sex to 18 year old girls.
NOTE: Now in 2018 YOU TUBE lists this link as “Video Unavailable.” Somebody figured out this was not a good idea.
Transcript of Obama’s words available at OBAMA CAMPAIGN TO GIRLS
Obama’s ad, “The First Time,” is more straightforward than Putin’s. Young actress Lena Dunham faces the camera and says, “Your first time shouldn’t be with just anybody. You want to do it with a great guy.”
The Obama campaign might have thought the now-infamous ad would be “cool,” or might attract young women’s votes.
Miscalculation! Attract attention, yes. Votes? No.
Obama has managed to gross America out:
Obama is promoting promiscuity. Parents won’t like that.
Obama is flirting with 18-year-old virgins. He is 33 years older than them. YUK! Obama is double-crossing his wife. Is Michelle loving this?
Obama is scandalizing his daughters. Imagine your father trying to being publicly “sexy?” Double YUK!
With girls almost your age? Triple YUK!
Obama is trivializing democracy and the vote.
Obama is insulting the intelligence of young women.
Obama is betraying his too-close association with Vladimir Putin, reminding us that he will “have more flexibility” after the election.
Who is likely to respond positively to this ad?
Of 132 million voters who voted in 2008, who will find this ad persuasive?
Men? Strike 61 million votes. Mothers? Strike 35 million votes.
Young women?
Strike the serious Christians, the fiscally responsible ladies and all pro-life women.
What does that leave Mr. Obama with? Maybe a handful of promiscuous flakes who have a thing for men almost 3 times their age.
This ad betrays more about Obama than we want to know.
To Obama, women are just a bunch of “lady parts” attached to a very low-I.Q. head, whose vote he thinks he can buy for a few free pills or for a few cheap thrills.
Barack Obama called himself “eye candy” on “The View”
Bad move, Mr. President.
You are grossing the nation out.
Breitbart.com summarizes the Obama campaign- “more interested in binders, Big Bird, birth control, and “bullshi**er” as opposed to exploding gas prices and increased poverty.” .
Now we can add “Perv” to Obama’s list of embarrassing interests.
Early Friday morning, Oct 19th, a young man was beaten by Democrat thugs in Whitewater, Wisconsin. He was beaten because he caught two thugs removing the Romney/Ryan sign in his front yard at 2 AM, and he demanded they return it. After being choked and beaten, he was rescued by a neighbor, who called an ambulance, and the young man was hospitalized with possible skull and eye socket fractures. The young man happened to be Sean Kedzie, son of Wisconsin State Senator Niel Kedzie. A young man who saves lost dogs and shares his bedroll with them.
Sean Kedzie with Mazzy, the dog he saved
This was not reported by the Wisconsin State Journal. Breitbart.com, a national conservative website, reported it first, on Monday, October 22 (caution: graphic photo; Wisconsin Senator’s Son Beaten to a Pulp by Obama Thugs).
As of this morning, the Wisconsin State Journal , or the WSJ Progressive, as I have renamed it, had still not reported it. Around noon today, a short article was published at Madison.com, entitled Police Investigating Attack on Senator’s Son. The article is just 6 lines long, gives little information, and does not mention Democrats or hate crimes. The title and the “article” are designed to help sweep this event under the rug. In Madison, liberal thugs are always protected.
Let us hope that Democrats lose extraordinarily on November 6th!
Wisconsin cannot take this any longer.
The United States cannot take this any longer.
We need civilized people at the helm.
The Democrat party, which used to champion many important social causes in the past, including pro-life positions held by Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, Joe Biden, and Al Gore, has in recent years turned into a group of uncivilized radicals who lie, cheat, and fight dirty. They are about to turn the United States into a one party system, because America is
Thug-in-Chief
getting disgusted with their paid union thug tactics, their Alinsky tactics, and their lies. Even President Obama has shown an unprofessional level of petty aggressiveness and lies, particularly in the recent debates.
The Democrat Party is shooting themselves in the foot. I predict an abysmal failure for them in the coming election. America has had it with them. During President Romney’s next two terms, I hope Democrats can purge themselves of union radicals, of progressives, and of pro-aborts, and return to offering a compassionate and civilized alternative to voters in the United States. The Democratic Party needs a major revamping. They have gone over the edge.
Our thoughts, our prayers, and our best wishes are with Sean Kedzie and his family.
A political martyr in Wisconsin.
Who would have believed that?
Of course, few will find out, the way the Wisconsin State Journal handled it.
Let’s see how well the police do in catching the thugs.
Syte Reitz grew up in Queens, New York, in a family of Lithuanian immigrants who fled Nazi and Soviet domination during World War II. Her education includes a Ph.D. in Biochemistry, and post-doctoral work at Princeton University. Syte left her job as an Assistant Professor at Oakland University, Michigan, to devote herself to raising her children, and ultimately homeschooled them through the end of high school. She is a member of Madison's Cathedral Parish.
Syte Reitz grew up in Queens, New York, in a family of Lithuanian immigrants who fled Nazi and Soviet domination during World War II. Her education includes a Ph.D. in Biochemistry, and post-doctoral work at Princeton University. Syte left her job as an Assistant Professor at Oakland University, Michigan, to devote herself to raising her children, and ultimately homeschooled them through the end of high school. She is a member of Madison's Cathedral Parish.
