Stop BP?ARCO From Burning Sea Turtles Alive

 

 

Burned Alive - Help Stop BP from Torching Endangered Sea Turtles

Endangered sea turtles are being burned alive as part of BP's careless oil spill cleanup efforts.

This is unacceptable. These rare, important turtles are becoming trapped in the oily surface of the Gulf and then torched by cleanup crews in "controlled burns" of corralled oil -- any wildlife caught inside the corral are literally burned alive.

And it's illegal: As protected species under the Endangered Species Act, anyone responsible for killing a Kemp's Ridley sea turtle -- the turtle most affected by the Gulf oil disaster -- is liable for criminal penalties including prison time and civil fines of up to $25,000 for each violation.

As reported in The New York Times, the oil cleanup crew's "so-called burn boxes are torching oil from the water's surface at the sacrifice of turtles, crabs, sea slugs and other sea life."

Take action below right now and send this to all your friends. Tell BP to stop torching endangered sea turtles. The turtles should not be burned alive in the process of cleaning up the oil spill that's already destroying their habitat. We can stop it and get the turtles out of harm’s way with your help.

Bail-out Funds for Oil Companies? Hell NO!

Dear Auntie Nanuuq,

Big Oil Bailout? Tell the Senate to Vote NO on the Murkowski resolution!

Can you believe it? The Senate may soon vote to exempt Big Oil from regulation when just the opposite is needed!

Big Oil’s friends in Congress are getting ready for a key vote that amounts to nothing less than a bailout for this dirty industry. We need your help telling the Senate to VOTE NO on Senator Murkowski’s Big Oil Bailout.

As oil continues to pour into the Gulf of Mexico and new images of oil-soaked animals hit our screens almost every hour, Senator Murkowski (R-AK) is poised to bring her Big Oil Bailout to a vote within days.  Her resolution would weaken the Clean Air Act and help keep America reliant on oil at a time when we should double-down on our pursuit of clean, renewable sources of energy. 

Don’t let the Senate gut the Clean Air Act in order to help Big Oil! Please email your Senators today.

Under a Supreme Court ruling, the Environmental Protection Agency was charged with regulating global warming pollutants under the Clean Air Act, but Sen. Murkowski’s legislation, (S.J. Res. 26) would stop the EPA in its tracks.  As glaciers disappear from Glacier National Park and polar bears face an uncertain future in a warming Arctic, as more violent storms march across our country leaving devastation in their paths, we are reminded again and again why America must act to address global warming.  The Clean Air is one very potent tool to reduce greenhouse gases. 

Don’t let the Senate gut the Clean Air Act – contact your Senators today!

Sincerely,

Kathy Kilmer
The Wilderness Society

Californians Vote Green.com (Or Do They)?

Isn't this a beautiful photograph?  Do not the words evoke a pro-environment group?  Does not this make you think that the "Green Party" has sent you a mailing?  Well, you better think again and read the Fine Print. Because I am here to tell you after I read the fine fine print I began to wonder what the hell these people are up to.

I am by no way or means a political dummy or ostrich...I GIVE A DAMN about what's going on politically, environmentally, medically, consumer wise,etc.  So, out of curiosity I wanted to know why a so called "Green" voters group would endorse those propositions paid for by PG&E & Mercury Insurance.

According to the disclaimer at the bottom of the page in fine print, I quote: "Appearance in this mailer does not necessarily imply endorsement of others appearing in this mailer, nor does it imply endorsement of,or opposition to, any issues set forth in this mailer.  Appearance is paid for and authorized by each candidate and ballot measure which is designated by an *"

I'm going to say right out: What a crock of crap!  If this organization was so concerned with being "Green" and pro-environment (because that Is that 'Green' means)...then they would not accept any type of payment from PG&E or Mercury Insurance!  Nor would they accept any type of payment or donation from dubious candidates.

When you accept money from bad intentioned corporations & people (Mercury Insurance & PG&E) then you are In Fact endorsing them.....You are aiding & abetting them by taking a pay-off/bribe.  There is no two ways about it....you have fallen into the greed way...and you are in no way absolving yourself of collusion by adding a written "disclaimer" on the bottom of your literature.  

Ten (10) out of 15 candidates paid to have their names placed in this mailer and all four (4) of the State & City measures (3 of which are anti-environment & consumer) appearing on this mailer were also put in by paid campaign funds.

When I went to the website URL listed on the mailer there was absolutely no information about the group itself posted/available.  What there was however was this: 
 
"If you are interested in purchasing placement, please send us a list of candidates and measures that you will be running in the June primary to rtaylor@californiansvotegreen.com. Click here to submit your slate candidacy information (You must have recieved your order confirmation number before submitting. If you need a confirmation number contact pauljoseph29@msn.com)"

Very interesting......makes you wonder don't it?

In all fairness, I emailed Paul and inquired about his intent and I pointed out his group's lack of integrity.....  We shall see.....

Voter BEWARE!!!!!

Another Car Insurance Scam!!! Mercury Insurance: Proposition 17 (California)

 

 

Proposition 17    

This initiative was placed on the ballot by Mercury Auto Insurance, which spent $2 million to pay signature gatherers and has spent over $5 million on the campaign in support of the proposal.

Prop 17 would undermine some of the protections in the landmark Prop 103, approved by voters in 1988 to reform the auto insurance industry. Specifically, Prop 17 would allow auto insurance companies to charge people more money if they have a lapse in coverage, even if that lapse is as short as a few hours. Current state law forbids this practice.

Arguments for: Prop 17 would produce cheaper auto insurance rates for most drivers, and increase competition among insurers.

Arguments against: This is nothing more than Mercury Insurance trying to wring more money out of already squeezed consumers. Mercury has already tried to do this and was slapped down by the courts, and in states where insurers can charge more for a lapse in coverage, many drivers wind up paying significantly more money for their auto insurance. This would punish people who have legitimate reasons for a lapse in coverage, including veterans.

More information:
Yes on Prop 17 website
No on Prop 17 website

Vote NO on Prop. 16 (California)

Proposition 16: is being sponsored by PG&E. 

PG&E: these are the same people who brought you Chromium 6 in your water and refused to take responsibility or clean it up unrit Ed Masury & Erin Brockovich went after these mamzers in court and forced them to make it right.

Prop 16: PG&E 2/3rds vote - Sponsored by one of California's largest electric utilities, this would require a 2/3rds vote instead of a majority vote for local governments to create public utility districts or to pool resources to buy renewable energy.

Vote "NO": Proposition 16

This initiative was placed on the ballot by a signature-gathering effort funded by Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), Northern California's privately-owned electric utility. It would require a 2/3rds vote (instead of a majority, as under current law) for a local government to create a municipal utility or to create what is known as "Community Choice Aggregation" (CCA).
CCA was a reform created during the electricity crisis nearly ten years ago that enables local governments to pool resources to buy power. Many local governments, including Marin County, use CCA to encourage the use of renewable power. PG&E opposes this, and has pledged to spend up to $30 million to pass this initiative.

Arguments for: This proposal (sponsored by PG&E) will require greater public discussion of government plans to enter the electricity market, and could save the public money. It protects the "taxpayers' right to vote" by ensuring that a supermajority of voters approve public power projects like public utilities and CCA.

Arguments against: This proposition is nothing more than PG&E's effort to protect its monopoly by misleading voters about the intent of the initiative. California already suffers from the problems created by the unfair 2/3rds rule for the state budget. If voters want to create public electric utilities or encourage the use of renewable power and pay cheaper rates than PG&E, they should be able to do so by a majority vote. This initiative would merely increase electricity costs for most families.

More information:
Yes on Prop 16 website
No on Prop 16 website

Boycott: Valero/Tessero Gasoline

Send Valero a message: Hands off California's climate change law Boycott Valero Gas Your message to Valero CEO Bill Klesse: I will be boycotting all Valero Energy owned and supplied gas stations until you drop your funding of the ballot initiative that will destroy California landmark clean energy and air pollution law, AB 32. Dear Friend, A few days ago, I sent Valero Energy CEO Bill Klesse an email asking him to stop attacking AB 32 — California's landmark Global Warming Solutions Act. I was surprised to get an actual — real-life — response from him: From: Klesse, Bill Date: Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:02 PM Subject: Re: Stop Attacking CA AB 32 To: Adam Quinn I assume you realize that we are discussing CO2. Many people do not realize this is a CO2 law. We are not willing to ruin our economy, our business, your life style and our country over AB-32. Sent from my iPhone Click here to send Valero CEO Bill Klesse a message that you will boycott Valero gas and maybe he'll personally respond to you, too. In 2006, California passed The Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32), making our state number one in the world in legislating real reductions in the greenhouse gases — including C02 — that cause global warming. Now Valero Energy — a Texas-based oil company — has already spent half a million dollars to fund a deceptive initiative that would destroy AB 32, California's landmark clean energy and air pollution law. Valero is directing its corporate funds to a campaign seeking to take our law off the books via the California initiative process. If Valero's money can generate enough paid signatures to get this initiative on the ballot, the company may succeed in rolling back AB 32 in November's election. Click here to send Valero CEO Bill Klesse a message. Today, CREDO Action and Courage Campaign members are fighting back by launching a boycott of Valero gas stations. Send a message to Valero CEO Bill Klesse telling him you won't buy Valero gas as long as he continues to fund the attack on California's environment. Bill Klesse needs to hear from you that we are serious. We'll deliver your message immediately to Bill Klesse and then later to a Valero station near you so Valero's station managers can also send a message to their bosses — attacking California's global warming law is bad for business. Valero and another Texas-based oil company, Tesero, are going to need to spend at least a million dollars to gather signatures for a November ballot initiative that would kill AB 32 and new clean energy development. Valero and Tesero operate gas stations under the following brands. Boycott all of these locations: Valero Beacon Diamond Shamrock Shamrock Corner Store Ultramar Tesoro Mirastar USA Petroleum Pledge to boycott all of these stations and send a message to Bill Klesse and Valero Energy. Valero's CEO needs to hear the message loud and clear: Hands off California's clean air! Sign the pledge and join the California boycott of Valero. Your pressure works. Adam Quinn, Campaign Manager CREDO Action from Working Assets Did you know CREDO has a Facebook page? Click here to check it out! Brought to you by Working Assets Funding Service, Inc. 101 Market Street, Suite 700 San Francisco, CA 94105