Bob Brinker Sez...

Today, as I was driving my parents home from dinner we were listening to Bob Brinker on the radio.  It was his programme "Money Talk."  He was on because our professional baseball team wasn't losing ... er ... PLAYING.  Yeah.  They weren't PLAYING.

To be fair, Mr. Brinker does have his detractors.  He also has his followers.  But today I'm not going to be commenting on his financial advice because, frankly, I'm not as versed in financial matters as he is.  I'll be straight up and honest about that.  I'm not as versed as he is.

But he made a few comments today in his programme that I wanted to comment on.  He commented on the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Ben S. Bernanke being called to Wa$hington to answer questions from $enator$.  These elected officials are quite proud of themselves and, in my opinion, are too interested in getting re-elected than in actually serving the American people.  (Now there's a thought.  Serve the People instead of yourselves.  But I digress.) 

Mr. Brinker said that the average elected official doesn't really have that much of an understanding about how the market and the economy works.  And, he's right.  Frankly, an Andorian Sprit-Dancer with a Scrabble set and an Ouijia board could probably do a better job than the average American politician.  Mr. Bernanke will be called to the Di$trict of Corruption to answer questions from idiots who will be more interested in posturing and getting re-elected than in actually getting anything substantial done.  I've said it before and I'll say it again ... they've got one hand in the pork-barrel and the other up each other's rectums.  And sadly, in economic matters, they have as much understanding as your average brain-damaged cockroach. 

Mr. Brinker said that we needed to get off of foreign oil ... indeed off of oil completely.  ::DING::  That was one of those moments when you're listening to somebody and think "Duh."  But he's right.  We do import 12 million barrels of crude a day ... and that's a lot of our money going to governments and countries that aren't exactly friendly to us.  I've written that before, too. 

He said we need to switch to a more well-rounded source of energy, including nuclear.  This is where I'm going to disagree with him.  Not because it's dangerous (it is if handled incorrectly) and not because of the environmentalists (some years back, a misguided environmentalist pointed a bazooka at the Pheonix Breeder Reactor in France,) and not because of nuclear waste (of which, all the nuclear waste from all reactors since the first one went on line...all of that waste would fit inside a high school gymnasium.)  No, I'm more concerned about safety, the lack of oversight, and the threat from terrorists.

We know, from their own documents, that the 9/11 hijackers had the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant targetted, but decided against it in favour of the World Trade Centre.  Again, their own documents state this.  They don't name it by name, but it is the only nuclear plant in that geographic area.  2 and 2 makes 4.  Had that plane hit Indian Point, it would've taken out about 15 - 20 million people. 

Then, there's the lack of security (REAL security) at nuclear power plants.  Some years back, the NRC tested the security at a still-unnamed plant.  To test it, they encased an unloaded handgun in plastic and put it into a suitcase.  The goal was to see how far it would go.

They went all the way into the main control room ... with a gun.  (Again, it was unloaded and encased in plastic so nobody could have fired it.)  But they made it all the way to the control room with a gun.  This does not breed confidence. 

Just to make matters worse (and again according to the NRC documents) power plant workers at another unnammed plant were given the answers to a security and training test.  Given the answers?!?  Yup ... given the answers.

Mr. Brinker said we needed to use more alternative energy sources including solar and windpower.  Again, he's right.  But ... we're going to run into the environmentalists (again!) who are already complaining about windmills killing birds and about how humans are already using more than our share of solar power (!!!).  Don't believe me?  Google it. 

I won't deny that environmentalists have done good.  I cannot and will not deny that.  But a good percentage of them are far too radicalized and out on the fringe that they give the more moderate ones a bad name. 

Does anybody remember when some environmentalists spiked trees with railroad spikes so that the logger's chainsaws would jam?  Yes, there were injuries.  Yes, there were a few deaths.  "You can't kill that tree!  We'll kill you before we let you kill that tree!"

And then there are the wackos out there committing arson to car dealerships, to genetic researcher's homes ... and then there are the death threats.  No doubt, a few of the more militant (shit, I'm TIRED of them being called 'militant'.  Let's call them what they are ... eco-terrorists.  Or just terrorists.)  No doubt, a few of the more vocal eco-terrorists will now want me dead, too.  "How dare you speak out against us!  DIE!!!"  "How dare you decry our methods!  Don't you know that a tree is more important to us than you are?!?  DIE!!!  ...wait.  I already said that.  DAMN YOU AND STILL DIE!!!  Oh, to hell with him and just shoot him already.  We've got more houses to burn."

I know at this point that I'll have triggered several watch words that will cause this post to be analyzed by a three-letter government agency.  Hopefully, the agent(s) reading this gets a good laugh.  Hopefully, it'll make them think.

Hopefully, I've made you think as well.  We need to get off of oil, but we need to do it together.  This is, as Dr. Michio Kaku said, make or break.  Mr. Brinker said we need the "Manhattan Project" of energy projects, a phrase coined some years back by Dr. Peter Ward.  They're all three of them right.

We have some hard choices to make.  Drilling is, at best, a short-term solution.  We've got 25 - 30 years (a few estimates are now saying 35) of oil in ANWR and off the continental shelf ... and then we're right back where we started.

Why not get off of oil completely?  Remember those 12 million barrels we're buying each day?  Remember where most of the oil comes from?  We're giving unfriendly countries money with which to poison their people's minds against us. 

Unfortunately, since we now buy so many goods from China, we're also arming China.  We're paying for their coal-fired power plants ...and that'll be a topic I'll cover in detail as well (assuming I don't get questioned by a three-letter government agency first.)

Until then, thank you for reading.