There are a lot of things that impress me about Barack Obama, but his desire to use technology to create transparency in government is one issue that truly does set him apart.

His campaign updates his YouTube channel about a half dozen times per day, often including in-depth interviews with promoters, footage of promotional stops, and many well-edited and mixed TV interviews. Hillary updates 3-5 times a week, mostly with ads and TV excerpts. I couldn't find an official John McCain outlet. His website includes community webware (think MySpace), and I'm sure helps the people within it organize more effectively.

So when he says that he wants to expand the workings of the first bill he passed as a congressman, his "Google for Government" program, to organize and make transparent the government's workings through technology, I believe him. That transparency can be seized upon by a concerned America, because the government isn't great at policing itself. Barack knows that.

In this way, his message is different from Hillary's: "We" versus "She." She wants to fix things. It's a noble sentiment. But Barack knows that no politician in Washington can fix the nation. WE have to do it, and we have to be enabled by political communities like on his website, and OnTheIssues.

There are other good examples of technology being used as part of sensible, positive change. He went to Detroit to insist that they change their technology (despite the tepid applause). He promised to help them by subsidizing R&D costs in exchange for progress and commitment from them and the American people. The Obama health care plan wants to streamline and digitize our medical records, most of which are inexplicably still on paper.

The lack of these credentials and ideas in the propositions and efforts on the part of the current administration (who prefers the destructive status quo), as well as that of McCain (who has no interest), and Clinton (who has no excuse, really).

Labels: cars, Obama, oil, politics

I want to say first that, cynical as I've become, you've always surprised me with your candid, sensible approach to governing. I understand your decisions - even when I dont agree with them. You have a supporter if youd like to become President.

I have three things I'd like to point out to you: taxes, energy, and Jon Stewart.

I believe IRS Commissioner Mark W. Everson has done well and deserves the money to continue properly taxing. In particular, I would love to see the evasion of taxes involving mutual funds, off-shore accounts, etc, come to an end. People like me, who can't afford anything we havent fought bitterly for, feel cheated when shown things like this:

"On March 30, 2004, Congress was told that 78 percent of known tax cheats in investment partnerships are not even asked to pay because there are not enough tax collectors to go after them. While letting rich tax cheats run wild, Congress did finance a crackdown on the poor. The working poor, most of whom make less than $16,000, are eight times more likely to be audited than millionaire investors in partnerships." (source)

Let him do his job well, and the deficit will be cleared just that much faster.

Energy. I have never been so sad and yet grinned so wide when I read your statements (1, 2)about the Energy Bill. In all seriousness - THANK YOU for recognizing it for what it is. More importantly, thank you for recognizing that what weve done so far is inadequate, in particular with fuels and ethanol (gasohol). Most of the current solutions involve one of two things: New forms of transportation (electric, hybrids) or radically modifying our current cars (bio-diesel). I applaud your work with Senator Lieberman on encouraging new technologies. However, while new technologies should be employed in new vehicles, consider the ratio of new vehicles to old. It will be a long time before the new-technology vehicles are enough in number compared to old-technology for them to do significant good.

What we need is something that will run relatively clean on current and older cars. Weve spent $200 Billion on Iraq why dont we give $20 Billion to scientists from DuPont, Harvard, and the military and say make a substance that burns at a spark smoothly at 92 octane, does not freeze above -20 degrees F, nor evaporate below 140, and runs my 62 VW as well as a new Corvette, at a total cost of less than $1 per gallon to the consumer. I just refuse to believe that its impossible.

Energy independence is something that is well worth the cost of research. Imagine if tomorrow, we sent a diplomat to all of the nations in the squabbling Middle East and say, "we dont need your oil and were selling our new substitute to Europe for a buck a gallon." Instant reform. They would have to their whole economies are based on oil. Thats how they can have ridiculous poverty and no women working.

I understand that this is armchair politics, easy from where I am sitting and much more difficult to actually do. Please, help take the momentum of the unanimous public assertion that the Energy bill was terrible and help propose putting money where America can use it best - a product we can sell to improve our economy that also severs our umbilical cord to the Middle East.

Finally, look for the clip from The Daily Show with Jon Stewart in which your conversation with General Richard Myers. You received resounding applause.

[signed]

Currently listening : Rattle and Hum By U2

Labels: environment, gas, government, irs, money, oil, politics, rant

What we need is self-sufficiency in fuel for our cars.

More than anything else, I'm convinced that this one, seemingly simple thing is where it's at for the U.S. for security, for our economy, Hell, for our sanity or what's left of it after all this terrorism-fear military-industrial complex hysteria.

Right now, we (that is, Americans) are in a position of very little real power. I am living in a weak country. How can I say that, with such a huge military power? Simple - that's not real power. Real power is when you've got something others want. And right now, the only really enviable thing about the U.S. is our colleges and our sense of eternal optimism: that if you work hard, you can make a better life for yourself here. Mind, those are two very enviable things but most of the people that really loathe the U.S. aren't interested in either one (especially the former).

I live in a weak country because it has nothing tangible to offer the world. Our electronics have long since been surpassed by Japan. Cars are behemoth gas-guzzling status symbols. And we can't support our own oil usage by a long margin. As far as the Middle East is concerned, we're no more powerful than a junkie is to his dealer. How to solve this?

It seems to me, there are a lot of smart people in this country. At least at the University level, where we don't have to teach just people from our own public school system. If you gave DuPont and a few dozen really great Universities, say, 10 Billion dollars, and told them to make a substance with the following qualities:
- Minimum octane of 94.
- Freezing and boiling temperatures of <-15F and > 140F.
- Total logistical cost, from manufacture to delivery of <$0.80.
- Minimal harmful emissions.

I believe it could be done. Or if it couldn't, give them 100 Billion dollars. That's how much we've spent in wars in the Gulf so far (according to Wikipedia, anyway).

Then picture what happens next in the Middle East - we send a diplomat to tell them that we don't need them anymore and that if they don't play ball, we won't let them sell our alternate fuel. Suddenly, every two-bit dictator from the United Arab Emerites to Pakistan has no choice because the only thing that's kept them in power - the money from oil - is gone. We have their balls in a fist.

Thomas Friedman is with me on this one, too: he pointed out that the only reason that the oil baron terrorist countries haven't collapsed is because of oil. After all, if it weren't for that, how could they lose half their work force (women), stifle education and skilled workers through religion-oriented learning, and trade nothing but drugs in the international market? (sources: 1, 2, 3)

At that point, my hope is that we would use our new found power for good instead of revenge, but at least it would be much more effective than popping dictators and invading for a few years.

Currently listening : All These Things That I've Done By The Killers

Labels: cars, gas, oil, politics, rant