Thermodynamic crimes

Heating with electricity is as much a thermodynamic crime as turning a motor with combustion.

Homes and food should be heated by natural gas. Motors should be turned by electricity.

When gas burns (combustion) it's most natural and plentiful product is heat, therefore it is best suited for heating. Electricity is a much higher and more precious form of energy required by motors. Unfortunately, portable needs for energy have not developed the most natural conversion of chemical energy into electricity, electrochemistry using fuel cells.

The consequence of committing a thermodynamic crime is wasted energy, which comes at a price both physically and psychologically. Wasted resources harm the "bottom line" and disrespect the laws of nature.

Utopian commute

The ideal commuter solution to congested roadways would be free (the savings in road construction would more than pay for it) shuttle services, where respectful, safe drivers in nice vans shuttle residents from their front doorsteps to main transfer points (off the road for minimal/no disruption of traffic) along main road arteries where larger buses take them into the city (always remaining on main roadways, especially freeways (for a speedy and quick commute). These buses drop commuters off at main transfer points (minimizing the number of stops on the route for a quick commute) where similar vans shuttle commuters to the front entrances at the workplaces. All city transport services are concentrated on these services so that buses leave and arrive at main transfer points very frequently (at least every 30s to 1 minute), and vans arrive at commuters homes within minutes of the "ready call," where commuters signal their desire and preparation for pick-up. In this way, the main transfer points do not require large parking lots because the only method of transfer is by drop-off via the city-funded vans, or via drop-off by a spouse. People are paid to advertise the presence of the commuter shuttle service with door-to-door flyers to areas of viable commuter populations.

Al Qaida, Hezbollah, and Iran

Everyone knows that Al Qaida's mission is the forceful spread of Islam, and I think that this reason underscores the threat which Americans have successfully assaulted with much sacrifice both in Afghanistan and in Iraq. I think that their words are not hollow, but their brains are, so it has been easy to thwart their mission. Such religious devotion blinds them from common sense and forces them to attack in strategically foolish ways, especially when we manipulate them with our words. Right now, Al Qaida doesn't have much power at all, thanks to the damage that we have inflicted on them for four years now, despite world protests against it. Of all of the excuses used to justify our invasion of Iraq for political purposes, I believe that the fight against Al Qaida is the primary reason and perhaps the only reason which we really care about.

This same war against terrorism has justified America's support of the recent Israeli offensive against Hezbollah in Lebanon. They are not lunatics, they are murderers, thieves, and disillusioned, power-hungry zealots. But their power is quickly diminishing and their words are becoming quite hollow. But notice Iran in the coming years and her support of Hezbollah and other terrorist groups. Her words are not hollow, and we may likely suffer much in the near future if the world does not unite in the American war on Terror, namely France, Russia, and China.

Some people say (source protected): "Iran is fomenting trouble and the sooner it is brought under control the better....but we need to be careful and use non-violent methods first. Only if they fails do we need to use force. We can't be like them and use indiscriminate force..and bring tragic loss of human life."

In response to the concerns for the destruction of war, I recognize the tremendous sacrifice and harm inherent in armed conflict, but the refusal to meet one's enemies with force when self-preservation is of the essence risks much worse. Only two questions needs to be asked of Iran: 1) Does she desire peace with America and her allies (including Israel)? and 2) If she does not desire peace, then what threats to our security does she pose now and may she develop in the future? For your, the 1st question would naturally be modified to: 1) Does she desire peace with India and her allies? A third question is probably required for the sake of consistency: 3) Do all of one's allies desire peace and security for one's homeland? Those who do not must be re-classified as enemies.

Now, while it is much easier and wiser to make friends out of former enemies, this must never come at the expense of the peace and security of one's country, and the risk of betrayal must be always accurately considered. Furthermore, the condition of conversion to the religion of Islam, or any other religion for that matter, is an unacceptable violation of human freedom and a re-affirmation of nonpeaceful (forceful) intentions. Any country which desires to control another country as a condition for peace is not an ally at all (America included); I know that we have done our "fair share" of controlling other countries without the justifications of either peace or security.

FYI: It seems clear to me that the American people are preparing to wage war on Iran as we waged war with Iraq.

Personally, if I were President of America, I would immediately classify Iran as an enemy. As an enemy, I would extend the olive branch of peace and also, after a short period of consideration of our peace offering, exercise wisely chosen military opportunities to safeguard our peace and security. Until she accepted our offer of peace completely, I would simply cut off all trade and aid to Iran and all her allies (including those who trade with her), and exercise a balanced strategic and economic military campaign to minimize the threat.

Representation in government

Representatives represent the people as individuals, Senators represent the people as a state. It seems to me like the job of a representative is to represent, and the best qualifications are those of doing the best discovering, and advancing the will of the people, in order of their priorities.

The representative must know the views of all of one's constituents and must honor the freedoms and equalities upon which this country was founded. The representative is bound to solicit the views his constituency, and act only with the support of a full majority.

To that end, technology proves a very crucial tool in its ability to move and organize information. One should establish an electronic system for authenticating identity for the purposes of verifying constituents, for receiving and organizing viewpoints, and for modifying those views either on an individual level, or on an organizational level by majority vote of those who support the respective view.