(Oba)Más Gas

Why are gas prices so high? With the price of crude oil hovering around $100 a barrel, it is no wonder that concern is growing about the gas prices being so high. After all, modern economies are kept active by this lifeblood.

One of the main catalysts for the monotonous increase in gas prices has been one of the most fundamental economic reasons – the juggling that takes place between supply and demand. One of the main reasons for this is the continuing rapid economic growth of China and India, the two largest economies of the developing world. With a population of over a billion in each of these countries, both consumers and manufactures are devouring up energy at incessantly increasing rates. According to some projections, by the next 25 years, the demand for oil is set to go up to as much as 140 million barrels per day. As a result, the conventional pattern of the countries of the Middle East being the suppliers of oil and the countries in the West being the consumers has altered. Thereby adding another element to the equation of supply and demand, which determines the prices of gas and oil.

Along with the demand for oil rising, many disruptions to the supply have created obstacles. For example, the war in Iraq has resulted in reducing oil production there. The continuing nuclear weapons wrangle with Iran and the government increasing its control over industry in Russia has given rise to misgivings about future supplies. In addition, the production of crude oil in America has also become costlier since the places that have been easiest to drill have largely gone dry. This means that oil companies have to go increasingly into offshore oil producing areas such as the Gulf of Mexico, which cost much more to drill in. With oil companies having to access harder to reach locations, the demand for oil has skyrocketed.

Although issues on gas prices has risen and questions are constantly building up, Obama made some promises of his own on how he would cut the cost of fuel. "Gas prices are killing folks," Obama said. "I got an email from a friend of mine; it says ' just in case you're not living in the real world, being driven around by Secret Service, it just cost me $85 to fill up my tank.'"
Obama, a proponent of ethanol, said the country needed to do more to increase production and incorporate ethanol that used sugarcane not just corn. "We should also be investing in new technologies,” he said, “so we can replace the internal combustible engine, which has served us well, but it’s time for us to move on, because we want to get rid of fossil fuels.”

"When John F. Kennedy said we were going to the moon, the engineers and all those guys with the pocket protectors and the glasses at NASA, they all pulled out their slide rulers and said, 'How are we going to do that?’" Obama said. "They didn't know how it was going to get done. But once we set a clear goal and Americans buy into that goal, then nothing can stop us. The same is true on energy."
Can Obama fix this agonizing issue? We sure hope so.

Limbaugh calls Obama an "Oreo" today- (7/27/09)

In a Daily Kos post, "Limbaugh ... 20090727", an editor posts a commentary about a situation of discrimination. The author had listened to the radio earlier today to hear that Rush Limbaugh (radio host/talk show host) made a very racial reference. Limbaugh states "...The next thing that you know, they will come after your Oreos, but only after Obama is out of office." Taking offense, the author believes that this epithet is blatantly racist and is loathed by all races. And I couldn't agree more.

The author states that Lambaugh deserves immediate termination and abrogation of his contract for misconduct. But because Lambaugh is bringing in money, his handlers won't do so any time soon. The money that goes to him and his sponsors is the reason why Lambaugh is still the radio host he is today. The author believes that Lambaugh doesn't deserve the subscriptions to his sites or the donation money he receives. The more provocative he his, the higher his ratings will go. And thus, his show will be alive and healthy with non-stop incoming money. More money, more problems.

In this topic, the author's audience would be everyone in the nation because we are all different races and none of us like discrimination against our own kind (except Lambaugh). The racial terms towards a specific race is discriminating and degrading to everyone. According to the author and the comments posted on this topic, Lambaugh is ignorant and openly racist. Being a minority myself, I couldn't agree more with the author that this discriminating term and racism is wrong and the money isn't worth such degradation (especially towards our president). Overall, the author's argument against racism is very affective in situations dealing with all the various citizens in the United States.

Lessons For Failing Schools

In a New York Times article,"Lessons for Failing Schools", the author states that the $100 billion education stimulus package gives Education Secretary Arne Duncan unprecedented leverage to energize the languishing school reform effort, (published on July 5, 2009). The author believes that Duncan should focus his efforts on the relatively small number of schools that produce so many of the nation’s dropouts. In this case, his audience may be teachers or adults with children who attend low-rated schools. The author states that Duncan can use his burgeoning discretionary budget to reward states that take the initiative in this area, but Congress could push the reform effort further and faster by granting the education department’s request for two changes in federal education law. The first would be to come up with new federal school improvement money and require the states to focus 40 percent of it on the lowest-performing middle and high schools. The second change would allow the secretary to directly finance charter-school operators that have already produced high-quality schools. I also agree with the author in which the secretary should target the small number of schools that produce most of the number of dropouts in the nation because the nation can no longer tolerate schools that have trapped generations of students at the margins of society and locked them out of the new economy.

Government Mistakenly Posts List of U.S. Nuclear Sites!

According to USA Today's article, the federal government accidentally posted a list of government and civilian nuclear facilities and their activities in the United States on the internet on May 6. The 266-page document was published as a transmission from President Obama to Congress, and according to the document, the list was required by law and will be provided to the International Atomic Energy Agency. The document includes both government and civilian nuclear facilities, all of which have various levels of security, including details and the locations of the nation's 103 commercial nuclear power reactors. But, Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists' Project on Government Secrecy, states that there are "zero" national security implications to the publication of this document. Even though researchers may believe that there is no threat associating with this document, anything posted on the internet about a significant situation such as this may cause a disastrous outcome in my opinion. Knowing that such an outrageous document was posted on the internet and could be accessed by terrorists made this a definite must-read article.