The Ring of Fire: Mike Papantonio- 'Heartland Institute Kicks Off Climate Change Denial-a-Palooza'

Source:The Ring of Fire- Mike Papantonio, talking about the Heartland Institute and climate change.

"The conservative Heartland Institute is holding their annual climate change summit, where they hope to convince those in attendance that climate change is just a liberal hoax. It should come as no surprise that Heartland was founded and is funded by some of the biggest polluters in America. Mike Papantonio talks about what's really driving Heartland's climate change denial with Brendan DeMelle, executive director and managing editor of:Des Moq." 

From The Ring of Fire

I don't believe anyone in their right mind believes that there's no such thing as climate change. Of course I'm not a mindreader but thats my feeling. All you have to look at the weather to see that, with longer summers and colder winters and with ice melting in areas with frigid weather. 

The question is at least from the United States point of view is, what should we do on our part about it to fix it. Should we pass cap and trade and force American business's to live under regulations and taxes that foreign business's don't live under, or should we do something that would make us more competitive in the energy industry both at home and globally, that would also benefit our economy. 

As a Liberal who believes in primate markets and capitalism, I lean towards making us more competitive, economically but that would also make us more competitive when it comes to energy policy as well as our foreign policy. A national energy policy for America, that moves us towards energy independence and finally off of foreign oil, would accomplish three things by doing several things. 

First, it would benefit our economy in multiple ways, because we would open up new energy industries which would create good jobs. 

It would get us off of foreign oil, because would be relying on domestic energy instead, which would create jobs. But it would also create more competition in the energy sector, because of just oil, gas and electricity which are the three main energy industries right now. 

With a comprehensive national energy policy, there would also be a solar industry, wind industry, natural gas would be bigger in America, nuclear would be bigger in America and so would clean coal. We will need to still drill for oil and gas in America for at least ten years after we create an energy policy. But at least we would be drilling for American oil and gas and no longer importing it. 

A comprehensive national energy policy would benefit our economy because of the good jobs it would create. It would benefit our foreign policy because countries that we are currently importing oil from. We would no longer have to do that, giving them lest leverage over us. And it would benefit our environmental policy because we would be finally using cleaner sources of energy. 

If we are going to have some climate Change policy, it should be a global treaty, so that everyone is operating under the same rules.

The Young Turks: Cenk Uygur- 'Why Does Cenk Criticize President Obama?'

Source:The Young Turks- Cenk Uygur, taking on President Barack Obama.

"MSNBC/The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur addresses the people who despise the fact that he's critical of President Barack Obama." 

From The Young Turks

President Obama said in his press conference on Wednesday afternoon that leaders should lead. My response to the President would've been that starts with you, buddy! Now perhaps I wouldn't of called him buddy, don't know that for a fact, perhaps I would've said: "That starts with you, Mr. President! We'll never know and there's no point in discussing it. 

But my point is the same leaders have to lead or nothing gets done, successful President's don't sit on the sidelines and let others work it out and then weigh in later to see what the people who actually did the work came up with. Leaders don't look to compromise right off the bat, like the President's sorry excuse for a budget back in January. 

What leaders do when they know they have to compromise in the end to get anything done. Which is what President Obama obviously has to do with a divided Congress is put on the table what they want to do: "This is my plan, if you don't like, come up with your own plan." Then the other side puts down a counteroffer and lays out what they want to do if they had all the power. And then both sides come together at the end of the day and work out a final agreement. 

This is what lawyers do and this is what skillful negotiators do and this is why successful President's are successful. This is what President Clinton, President Reagan, President Eisenhower, President Truman, President FDR did and why they were able to accomplish so much in their presidency's. 

You don't sit on the sidelines laying out goals with no plan to accomplish it. Which is what the President has been doing on the deficit reduction and other issues since he's been President. Health care reform would be another one. President's have to be President, leaders have to lead or nothing gets done. 

President's are the chief executives for a reason because the buck actually does stop with them, its not just an expression. And that means taking a stand once in a while and taking heat for it to do what's right for the country at the end. And then they get rewarded for their right decisions.