What was Boston Tea Party was all about? History books in high school and grade school will teach you this: "The Boston Tea Party was a protest against taxes from the crown".   Cowpie.

The Boston Tea Party, when you look at it historically accurately, is quite interesting:

The Boston tea Party was a protest against a TAX CUT for the East India Trading Company. We all remember learning something about this company. Basically, it was the biggest multinational company of the time (1773). What happened is this: American colonists were happily growing tea, selling it, and making a living. The East India Trading Company saw a market here, and petitioned the King to cut their taxes.

The King complied, and cut the taxes for the rich enough for the EITC to have a good enough margin that they could import the tea directly from China and sell it cheap enough to control the market. Well, the working man didn't like that very much, so they dressed up, got into one of those EITC ships, and dumped the tea.

Remember: The Boston Tea Party was a protest on tax cuts to the rich, and outsourcing to China.

Here is an article about Massachusetts bridges.  It outlines how 500+ are structurally deficient. 

Now, I am fully aware that this article is coming out only because of the Minnesota disaster.  THAT'S the problem.  Where is the media?  In my opinion, it is the media's duty to investigate things.  The way I read the first amendment, I read it as another check and balance - only the peoples check to the government. 

Why is the media sitting on its hands?  Look, its been two days, and this story comes out.  Someone obviously knew about it.  Why didn't they research it sooner?  Certainly, with all the Big Dig problems here in Boston, the media knew about it and chose not to cover it. What happened to the news?  Where can you go to watch some news and learn something? 

All I see is entertainment news on TV, sensationalizing everything they can.  Don't get me wrong, for a political junkie such as myself, I LOVE to see what's the idiots running this country are up to.  That being said, where can I go to learn something new thats not mainstream? 

Why aren't we holding media's feet to the fire on why they only report problems after they happen?

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/news/record.cfm?id=279887

Here is a great video of Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont really speaking the facts about our 'booming' economy.  He quizzes Jim Nussle, the Bush budget nominee.  Nussle isn't inherently bad as far as I know (but I am no Nussle expert), but there are really some big questions here.

Now, we have the White House, on an almost daily basis stating that the economy is booming.  That's cause for questioning.  If I've learned nothing from this administration, they have a frankly, brilliant tactic.  When there is a weakness in the administration, they do one of two things:

1. Blame the other side for the weakness that is a result of their policy.
2. Publicly state the exact obvious.

In this case, obviously, we can see the White House stating the opposite.

Watch this video, it's full of truth.

So, it's a new fad - putting your small child on a leash. 

My first reaction is to cringe in disgust.  However, after that initial feeling, I work it out mentally.

There are definately some good and bad things about this. 

The bad things, I think at least, are pretty obvious, sO i dont feel I need to go into them.  However, if any of you would like to go aq little more in depth about this, please feel free.

However, there are some good thigns about this.  The child can learn to walk proficiently pretty early on.  The child can explore on its own within perset boundaries.  The child can feel independent (this can be a good or bad thing).

Thoughts?

I wrote this a little whilte ago - like I say in the essay, I don't necissarily agree with all of it, but it definately all has some validity to it, and makes you think a bit....

Global warming is OUR problem.  The planet, while it spawned us, will really not care what happens to us.  

I heard George Carlin say once that the world would just shake us off like a bad case of the fleas when it was done with us. He might have been riffing off of a musician.  He also said that perhaps the earth wanted a nice layer of plastic in its composition.   

Funny, but who knows? 

Regarding the species becoming extinct: It IS a shame - who knows what we are REALLY losing?  However, I have a couple conflicting points of views as well coursing through my veins.  Species have been becoming extinct since species existed.  This is just evolution at work.  We are part of the natural order of things, so I don’t worry about it too much.  However, there is one thing that most species do that we don’t, and it is a simple principle: you don’t shit where you eat.  Inotherwords, when overpopulation occurs, generally the species goes into a decline, and a balance occurs.  The problem with humanity is that we somehow lost that balance ability.  Something like that.  Ask me tomorrow I might have a totally different view on this topic. 

There is one thing that I stand behind, though, and it is this:  Sadly, I learned about it from a stupid advertisement, but never the less: 

"In our every deliberation, we must consider the impact of our decisions on the next seven generations."  - From The Great Law of the Iroquois Confederacy. 

How many hundreds of generations lived on US soil without damaging the land? 

How did we lose this ability to coexist?  If we cant even coexist with the neutrality of the Earth - how in hell are we going to coexist with each other?