The other day I got a “voter opinion survey” from Rep. Eric Eisnaugle. The survey itself was about 10 or 15 questions covering a few broad categories — education, transportation, etc. What’s interesting about this is that it’s the first time I can remember an elected official directly seeking my opinions. It’s always the other way around, I want to voice an opinion I have to seek them out. I like the way this freshmen representative is going.

At the bottom of the survey it asked if I’d like to be contacted with the results to which I obviously said yes. I’d like to see what the rest of my community thinks about adding a sales tax to internet purchases (I sure hope not) and funding for education, but more importantly I’d like to see if this survey effects Rep. Eisnaugle’s voting at all.

Is that legit or what?

The full text of my tweet is:

@ricksanchezcnn These people in positions of power just think they can do whatever they please. Kind of sick actually.

and was in reply to two tweets about Ted Haggard and Portland’s mayor, both who had illicit.

So there you have it. I’ve now been published (can I say that?) on CNN. What have you done today?

They're going to need a new clock.

Evidently there isn’t any money left in the program designed to give people $40 gift cards to buy the things. You know, the program that began LAST JANUARY with a set amount set aside? There’s now a waiting list and Congress is considering putting off the transition date until June so they can get these people their free or reduced cost digital boxes.

Here’s the thing, if they didn’t request their gift card six months ago then oh well. Those are the breaks. If you don’t pay for cable/satelite/IPTV then go buy yourself a digital box, or don’t and read a book instead. The last thing the government needs to be doing right now is shelling out additional money to people who waited to the last minute. If that’s the case, I might as well go collect an unemployment check for the sixteen years of my life I didn’t work. I’m entitled to that too, right?

Give me a break. Obama has vowed to go through the federal budget line by line eliminating useless programs. Let’s hope he starts by refusing to add additional money to a program that people have been adequately warned about. You waited to long? Oh well. Get over it.

Update: Despite the Senate voting for and extension to the transition, the US House voted the bill down thus killing any hopes to prolong the thing. Thank. You. God!

The tax plan you are putting out is very interesting. Cutting taxes for people with income under $200,000 is certainly a good thing. However, how does this effect sub-chapter S corporations which file business taxes with their income taxes? If their business makes more than the $200,000 cut off, their taxes will increase. If their taxes increase it will be more difficult to employ people and continue running the business. I’m curious how this factors in.

-An Undecided Registered Independent from the State of Florida

Yeah, I laid it on pretty thick with the closing in the hopes that someone would actually read it.

Shortly after clicking send on the email form I received a canned response email, much like you would see from any corporation saying something similar to this:

Thank you for your interest into Barack Obama. Due to the very high volume of email we regret that we cannot reply to your message. We encourage you to read Barack Obama’s plan for our nation by visiting… blah blah blah.

Basically thanks but we don’t do email. Which I found very odd considering Obama being considered the more technologically advanced candidate. Either way I felt like my question would go unanswered. A few people suggested I contact the local campaign office but I figured they wouldn’t be able to tell me anything other than what was on their talking points. I basically forgot about it.

What did happen, which I wasn’t exactly happy with, was that I got automatically subscribed to Obama’s various email lists. I got an email from him thanking me for my support — which I thought was tacky considering I asked a question trying to make a decision and instead got added to a list. I also got an email from his wife encouraging me to get involved in some for of campaigning, again, tacky. On Twitter I called this a “courtesy fail.” Needless to say I unsubscribed pretty quickly.

With the idea of fairness I sent John McCain an email asking a question about something in his economic policy just to see what happened. Even stranger than the Obama response, I got nothing. Not a canned “thanks for your interest” email, not a “we don’t respond to email” email, nothing. Basically I figured despite being 2008, neither campaign had figured out how to directly interact with email questions. So I forgot about the whole thing.

Then just before noon on Friday, the day of the debate, I got a response to my Obama email — sort of. What I got was a five paragraph email response detailing a bit more of Obama’s tax plan with links to a few fact sheets hosted on the Obama website. The email was addressed Dear Friend and was signed Sincerely Barack Obama. Now chances are this was not written by Barack Obama, but the fact that I got a somewhat thought out response at all is somewhat impressive considering the first response basically said they don’t do responses.

Did the email answer my question. Not specifically, no. The fact sheets that were linked to talked more about specific cuts that would actually benefit sub-chapter S corporations, but did not address the issue of the $200,000 income tax cut off. It’s not a perfect answer but I guess it’s an answer.

So what does all this mean? I don’t really know. I still haven’t made up my mind. I’m not exactly keen on either candidate right now. There are things I like about both of them and things that I have issues with for both of them. What I do like, is that despite saying they don’t respond to email, someone actually took a few minutes to — at the very least — compile a few pre-written paragraphs and send it out. If I ever get a response from McCain’s people, I’ll be sure to update this post.

The other day I was reading through a thread on an Apple forum about Obama’s potential VP (by the time this posts the cat should already be out of the bag). The tread started with potential people and then quickly, as all things do on the internet, turned into a debate back and forth between the candidates. This time four years ago I would have been ready to jump in and fight for my horse. But not this year. This year is different.

I don’t know who I’m voting for yet. I’m not sure if I should know at this point. I mean, it’s August. We’ve still got time. Sure, it’s a big decision but for some reason I can’t get excited about it. I’m not sure if it’s the candidates or what, but something just seems off this year. Because of this, I’ve made a decision to wait until the debates before forming any kind of opinion.

In the thread someone asked if this was because I wanted to see one or the other flip flop, or get caught up on something. That’s not really it at all. For some reason it doesn’t seem right to have made up my mind this early. I’m not sure if I’ve been jaded by world events over the past four years, or maybe I’ve grown up a bit, I don’t know.

What's so funny?

Maybe it is the candidates. On one hand there is Obama who everyone likes but no one knows why, and on the other is McCain who no one likes and everyone has a different reason why. Maybe it’s that we seem to make it about everything other then what it should be about. It’s not about what someone actually believes anymore, it’s all about what the media is spinning out. It’s all kind of disheartening.

So, unlike four years ago, there probably won’t be any scathing political editorials this year — at least not for awhile.

Do you know who you’re voting for? Do you feel like you’re in the same boat as me? Let me know in the comments.

Foreign Governments
One of the largest factors that raise our oil prices are foreign governments — and particularly their instability. Some of the largest oil producing countries are beds of international turmoil. Nigeria’s oil rich region has been captured by rival warlords who want a share in the countries oil wealth. There is Venezuela who’s extreme leftist president isn’t too fond of America and need I even mention Iran? Their president has threatened stop the exportation of oil if they are sanctioned by the United Nations. And then there is China. While it is not exactly their government that is causing the price of oil to rise but their increased prosperity. In the last few years China has jumped out of nowhere to the second most oil demanding country in the world — behind the US.

Dwindling Supply
Partially because of China’s increased demand, as well as other countries refusal to cut back (including our own), oil supplies are all but gone. If you have ever taken an economics course then you know the principle of Supply and Demand. When there is high demand and little supply the price of a product goes up. Well there you go. There is very little oil and very high demand — almost to the point where there is more demand then supply. When we reach that point and there are massive shortages around the world, the price of oil will be set by whichever country is willing to pay the most for it.

Environmental Lobbyists
Fortunately for us, we’re not to that point yet. In fact, we have enough unrefined oil to sustain us. The problem here in America is that we can’t refine it quick enough. There are only ten oil refineries in the United States. Experts have said that to adequately supply refined oil (gas, home heating, etc) to the country we would need somewhere around five times that number. Why don’t we have more refineries then? Why was the last one built in 1976? Well environmental legislation — proposed and supported by the lobbyists — have put a stranglehold on the industry, making it almost impossible to open new refining plants. There are other laws that have passed which favor the environmental groups and thus raise the price of oil as well. One such is the new ethanol fuel additive law which has been enacted in a number of states. The problem is that, while ethanol is cleaner burning and doesn’t hurt ground water, it dissolves in water. So, unlike the current additive, it can’t be piped from its point of origin to the refineries. It has to be trucked or delivered by train. Since both of these transport methods are slow and rely on the price of gasoline, can you see the catch-22 it presents?

Big Oil
Now I don’t want you getting the idea that I’m anti-environment and pro big oil because that isn’t exactly the case. Big oil is as much to blame as the environmentalists. Big oil has refused to explore cleaner, cheaper methods of fuel production and at the same time are making profits the likes of which no company has ever seen. Billion dollar profits when gas prices are through the roof? Something doesn’t seem right. Senator Charles Schumer (D – NY) has raised the question that perhaps big oil is gouging the American public. While his proposal is more then likely an election year statement, it probably has some validity. Oil refining on the whole is at about 85% capacity right now. Big oil claims this is due to needed repairs stemming from last years hurricane season. Despite their record profits, I can guarantee that the price of those repairs is built into the price of a gallon of gas. It’s no wonder the former Exxon CEO recently walked out the door with a $150 million retirement package.

Politicians
Every US senator, congressmen, and president in the last thirty years is equality to blame. Laws could have been passed requiring big oil to start researching cleaner, cheaper, and more abundant fuel sources. Thirty years ago Brazil’s government passed such a law and by the end of next year they will be 100% oil independent. Our government chose not to pass such legislation. In fact, last year Congress had a chance to finally hold big oil accountable. The CEO’s of the five largest American oil companies were called into a hearing in the Senate. While the idea sounded good, the CEO’s were never sworn in and absolutely nothing was accomplished. It was really just a big political stunt.

Oil Traders
The price of oil is controlled largely by future traders. They have bid the price of oil from roughly $20 a barrel in 2002 to it’s current record price of $75 and change. Traders say that the increase in price is due to a number of factors — most of which we looked at above. While the traders are right, it isn’t that cut and dry. The traders are also to blame. Oil is traded based on speculation and the traders speculate that the world (particularly oil producing countries) is fixing to go to hell in a hand basket. Because of this speculation, the price of oil is bid up. Yesterday, for instance, where oil hit an all time high, the price was bid up higher then it probably should have been in an effort to cover any potential weekend changes in the geopolitical atmosphere. Oil isn’t traded over the weekend so the traders bid the price up, just in case. Make’s sense right?

Ok, let’s take a quick break to look at just who we have to blame for our high fuel costs so far. We’ve got instability of oil rich nations and insane foreign leaders who control the means of production. We’ve got an extreme lack of supply spurred by increased world demand and our own countries inability to refine what supply we do have. We’ve got environmentalists and politicians to blame for that. We’ve got big oil who seems to think change is a bad thing and is making record profits off their stranglehold of the American people. We’ve got oil traders who seem to bid up the price of oil when a fuel tanker catches a flat tire en route to a service station. Is that it? Did I cover everyone? Well, not quite. I’ve got to take that finger of blame and turn it around.

Us
That’s right, you and I are to blame as well. Despite the extreme prices at the pump and in our electric bills, are we doing anything to conserve? Nope. Do we give into the fear that the supply will soon vanish and fill up our tanks and gas cans “just in case?” Yep. The argument can be made that we can’t just stop using gas and that’s true, but we can cut back. We can keep lights off, group errands together, not give into ever idiot on TV who says that there will be disruptions so go fill up now. We can use websites like Gas Buddy to find the cheapest gas and tell big oil that we’re not going to just take what is given to us. We can write our politicians and tell them we’re not going to allow them just standing ideally by smiling at the cameras. We can do what we can to reduce our individual demand.

So who is to blame for our high oil and gas prices? Well, everyone really. The fact is that oil will continue to rise, possibly to $100 a barrel by the end of the summer which translates to somewhere around $5 a gallon at the pump. As scary as that might sound, the prices will continue to rise until something is done and unfortunately, that something has be lead by us. We each have to do what we can and hope that our government, big oil, and the traders follow in line.

Blogs have come a long way since the term was coined almost 7 years ago, when blogs were mostly an extension of one’s personal journal that the world was able to access. Today, blogs have moved to become more topical in nature–just look at the different categories for this years Bloggie Awards. There is a blog for people interested in celebrity gossip, cooking tips, and advertisements–there is even a blog about designing other blogs. But a vast number of blogs out in the some 26.8 million blogs on the internet have to do with news and politics. Technorati, a sort of clearing house for the blogosphere, lists five of the internet’s ten most popular blogs are political opinion in nature.

The political blog became mainstream in America during last year’s heated Presidential election. There were bloggers situated on both sides of the isle evaluating the other sides messages, stance on issues, and ratifying their own. Since then, the blogging world has moved from just being accepted to being embraced by traditional media outlets. NBC’s Dateline features a look at the blogosphere once a week, CNN’s The Situation Room has “internet reporters” who look at bloggers opinions daily, and Slate–an online news magazine owned by the Washington Post/Newsweek has a column called “The Daily Blog” that looks at just that–what the blogosphere is talking about.

Blogs are a way for people to freely deliver information and their opinions to the world–and for the world to respond to them. This open dialog between the reader and the author has never been seen before. Traditional outlets have “letters to the editor” but never has the dialog been conducted in a real time public forum. This free exchange does not come without it’s dangers–in this case the danger is slant.

The traditional media, whether it will admit it or not, contains a bias to either the left or the right. Each paper, magazine or network has it’s own slant either subtle or great. When it comes to the blogosphere, the slant is usually pretty large–and identifiable–thanks to being comprised of opinionated postings. While this is a danger, it is also a strength. Instead of trying to cover their slant under the disguise of fair journalism, blogs embrace it as their raison d’être. This is also, in a very round about way, holding the traditional media to a higher scrutiny. Because traditional outlets are now featuring blogs on their programs and in their pages, they are–for the most part–showcasing both sides of the isle–relating opinions from all vantage points.

The blog has redefined the op-ed piece and will continue to do so in the future. Traditional outlets, in looking at the blogosphere and featuring it’s contents, will in turn be holding themselves more accountable–pushing them toward a truly unbiased relating of the news. Who would have thought the blog could be so powerful?

The chances of nuclear war escalating out of this situation are slim, but the there is another consequence to the current Iran situation–oil. Apparently 50% of the worlds oil passes through Iranian controlled ports, which means, if they wanted to, they could throw a huge wrench into the world oil market. Even though the USA doesn’t receive a single drop of Iranian oil, thanks to various trade embargoes, our price of oil will skyrocket if Iran were to slow down supply. Remember Hurricane Katrina, and the mass panic and fear that oil was going to be interrupted sending gas prices as high as $5 and $6 a gallon in some places? Yeah, we’d be looking at that again, or even worse. So you may be thinking that China and Russia wouldn’t stand for a huge cut in oil production and would step into intervene–or maybe Saudi Arabia would so as not to loose money on oil sales. Fact of the matter is no one seems to know what would happen. Russia buys oil from Iran under the table so maybe nothing would change. Fact of the matter is there are three things that need to happen in the next few months.

First, America has to address our dependency on foreign oil. This means calling the five big oil executives back to congress to testify, this time under oath. They are making money hand over foot thanks to high gas prices and congress should force them to start cutting into their prices to alleviate the price at the pump, and force them to start reinvesting some profits into alternative fuel production–we’ve got enough corn fields to produce ethanol until the cows come home, or what about hydrogen? If we force big oil to pay for the research we’ll have these technologies perfected and running safely in a few years.

Next, we need to open up oil drilling in ANWR, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Yeah, it’s a wildlife refuge in Alaska that is the ancestral home of two Indian populations. One of the two wants to allow drilling. So that makes one Indian tribe and a boat load of Democrats who constantly kill this bill in the Senate. ANWR drilling would produce one million barrels of oil a day. Granted, it isn’t much but that is one million fewer barrels we have to rely on from the seemingly endless supply of hostel oil rich countries.

The final thing we need to do is enact a regime change in Iran. Though, this time it can’t be done militarily. Iran is simply too large of a country to pull off a successful ground campaign. It would require taking all of the troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan and calling up a boat load of others to pull it off successfully. This is not an option. We know it, Iran knows it, it just wont work. Even if it could, President Bush would never get congress to approve it. So you turn to the UN to place sanctions on Iran. Ok, even if Iran hadn’t recently moved all it’s money to untouchable Swiss accounts, we all know that UN sanctions are next to useless. Alright, so then how do we put pressure on Iran and remove Ahmadinejad from power? The answer lies in the successful fall of Communism fifteen years ago.

Communism fell throughout the world in just a few months because of educated students living in the Communist countries who wanted freedom from oppression. Supposedly there is a huge percentage of the Iranian population that desire the same freedoms though have yet to come forward and act upon it. In fact, we as a country have been waiting for the Iranian situation to solve itself in this way since the Clinton administration. Well, it is now more apparent then ever that the time for a social uprising and potential coup is now. With the inspiration from a few special forces units and CIA agents, the right people in Iran can be convinced that it’s time to act. The way to a safer Iran is through it’s own people. We learned this with the fall of Communism and frankly we are relearning it in Iraq. We just need to light a fire under the Iranian people and get them started.

While the histories books have yet to be written, no one is going to be able to think of 2005 without thinking of Hurricane Katrina. In terms of shear devastation, there hasn’t been a storm to hit America that is quite like Katrina. One of the fiercest storms in recorded history, Katrina killed thousands of people and left New Orleans under water for over a month. Rebuilding is going to take years and the population of the region will never be the same. Katrina also brought racial and economical issues back into the forefront of American politics and because of this the total effect of Hurricane Katrina will not be felt for years to come.

Terrorism was in the news again this year with the horrific train bombings in London. Coordinated attacks went off on three London subway trains and a bus within thirty minutes of each other. London, however, turned the tide and released video footage of the bombers which lead on a swift investigation leading with arrests of other terrorists living and potentially operating in London.

The Supreme Court saw huge changes this year with the resignation of Sandra Day O’Connor and the death of William Rehnquist. John Roberts, first named to replace O’Connor, was then nominated, confirmed, and sworn in as the 17th Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Alito has been nominated for O’Connor’s seat and confirmation hears have been set for early 2006.

Perhaps the biggest story of the last thirty years or so from a religious standpoint was the passing of Pope John Paul II and the Conclave that followed. After four elections, Joseph Ratzinger of Germany was elected the new Pope of the Catholic Church.

For a good portion of the year Nattalee Holloway dominated the news. First it was the story of her disappearance, then of the suspects, and eventually the ineptitude of the Aruban government. While all this coverage is just a little ridiculous, the tragedy of it all is that this girl was probably raped, killed, and dumped in the ocean and a few teenagers are going to essentially get away with the perfect crime.

In the legal world there was the Scott Peterson trial, the crazy ass “Runaway Bride” and of course, the lovable petifile Michael Jackson. Thats right folks, Jacko was acquitted of molesting that boy. There isn’t really much more to say about that case.

While I’m pretty much over writing this article as it became quite boring and I’m sure it’s quite boring to read, I’m going to wrap it up by saying that Iraq held three elections this year. Three. Incredible. Here is to 2006 and what the news will bring us in the coming 365 days. Perhaps I should start campaigning for next years Sexiest Geeks list.

Done.