Showing posts with label Solar Power's fatal flaw. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Solar Power's fatal flaw. Show all posts

Monday, January 9, 2012

The Obama's

What’s new Today

Our #1 is a review of a new book “The Obama’s.”  #2 talks about how the OWS is looking to divvy up the loot they took in.  #3 looks at a Naomi Wolfe article on how Bush was lining up a dictatorship and applies it to President Obama.  #4 asks the question is Wasserman-Schultz the dumbest person in congress.  #5 looks at bias in the media.  #6 is a story about how Obama wants to raise wages for government workers.  #7 introduces us to Ludmya “Mia” B. Love who may be running for congress.  #8 relates the problems with solar energy and why the market for solar seems to be collapsing. 







1.  Book:  The Obama’s



Hope is easier to embrace than reality.

That is one of the themes of Jodi Kantor's new book, "The Obamas," which tells the story of the first couple's arrival in the White House and their subsequent struggles to adapt to Washington and its ways while facing expectations that may have been equaled only in the early days of JFK’s American Camelot.

Kantor's account of the Obamas' first weeks in the capital is a reminder of a euphoria that seems very far away today, as the president continues to grapple with a tepid economy and the lock step Republican opposition to almost every facet of his agenda. The question at his inauguration was whether Barack Obama would oversee a historic, transformative administration that could overcome partisan politics; the question now is whether he will survive his re-election campaign.

In retrospect, some of Obama's early promises seem hopelessly optimistic if not downright naive (for starters, he pledged to achieve peace between Israel and the Palestinians by the end of his first term, as well as to close the Guantanamo Bay  detention camp within a year)…






This looks like it might be a good read.  The promise about hope between Israel and the Palestinians reminds me of an old joke (I’m updating it here).  This person finds a magic lamp and rubs it and a genie appears.  The genie asked what his wish was.  The man takes out a map of the world and says he’d like peace in the Middle East.  The genie said he can do magic, but even that is beyond what he can do.  So the man says, “Okay, I’d like Tim Tebow and the Broncos to win the Super Bowl this year.”  The genie looks at him and says, “Let me look at that map again.” 



2.  OWS dilemma

The cash is burning a hole in their pockets.

As the Occupy Wall Street movement loses steam, protesters are pitching new and creative ways to spend the $300,000 remaining in the kitty.

The group now raises just a few hundred bucks a day, down sharply from the tens of thousands that poured in daily at its height in November.

All told, it took in $706,855.91 in donations between Oct. 1 and Jan. 4. Much of what was already spent went to food, laundry, supplies and MetroCards.

Among the suggestions aired at recent OWS meetings on how to slice up the Occu-pie were:

1 Withdraw all the money in hundred-dollar bills, stuff the Benjamins in canvas bags and torch the cash in a bonfire on Wall Street. The incendiary proposal was dropped.

2 Split the loot among occupiers. “A lot of people aren’t thinking it’s such a crazy idea anymore,” one said. The twice-proposed measure was also withdrawn.

3 Buy a $150,000 piece of real estate for homeless protesters to live in. “At least 100 homeless people held down the center of our movement in Zuccotti Park by staying there and occupying the ground 24/7,” one homeless occupier wrote in a proposal, which also was withdrawn.

4 Spend $9,500 to break into a foreclosed home on Vermont Street in Brooklyn, fix it up and move a family back in. An OWS general assembly approved this outlay last month and it was done….


It will be interesting to see what they eventually do with the money.  Are they more honest and trustworthy than politicians? 







3.   Obama’s Fascism in America in 10 Steps

Writing back in 2007, Naomi Wolfe catalogued the steps to creating a dictatorship (which she sought to apply to George W. Bush). Interestingly enough, they apply far more to the man who replaced him.

Wolfe's steps include:

1. Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy

Isn't that precisely what Occupy Wall Street has done with the banks and businesses? OWS has ties to Obama's friends in ACORN, as well as to SEIU. Isn't that what was done with Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker and his attempts to save that state from bankruptcy? Isn't that what the EPA is doing with its endangerment finding -- claiming that carbon dioxide emitted by industry is going to cause catastrophic climate change? For that matter, isn't that precisely what was done by the Department of Homeland Security, whereby pro-life citizens, returning military, gun-owners, Ron Paul supporters, Christians, and just about everybody in "Red State America" falls under the category of domestic terrorist?

2. Create a gulag

FEMA is doing something that bears a disquieting resemblance to concentration camps. 

And Madam Wolf worried about Guantánamo Bay, yet Mr. Obama has not closed it.

3. Develop a thug caste

At a town hall meeting in St. Louis held by Democrat Congressman Russ Carnahan, members of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), representative of government employees, beat a black man who was there selling flag pins. A woman was beaten up by an Obama supporter in Minnesota. A man had his finger bitten off  in an assault by an Obama supporter at an anti-health care rally.

And let's not forget the entire Occupy movement of the 99-centers; they have been camps full of lawlessness, full of rapes and assaults. OWS was produced and organized by people close to the Obama administration.

4. Set up an internal surveillance system…


So what do you think?  Is Obama trying to create a dictatorship in America? 







4.   Wasserman-Schultz:  Perhaps the most stupid person in Congress



At issue was her criticism of GOP Presidential candidate, Mitt Romney. According to Ms Schultz, as CEO of Bain Capital, Romney was responsible for layoffs made by companies which received Bain investment dollars. Following that logic Wallace asked Schultz if the CEO of the United States, President Obama was responsible for the layoffs at Solyndra

You see says Dumb, Dumb Debbie ""The decisions that were made at Solyndra that ultimately led to their bankruptcy were those of people who worked at Solyndra." The CEO of the investment company, the United States of America bears no responsibility. But the layoffs made at companies Bain invested in, were not because of decisions made by the people who worked at those companies, those were the fault of the CEO of the investment company.

The video below is almost comical the way Schultz tries to get out from under her own words.






It is really funny to watch the video as little Debbie trips all over herself trying to explain why Romney as a venture capitalist was responsible for layoffs, but Obama as a venture capitalist in the green energy field isn’t responsible for any layoffs. 









5.  Media Bias, Stage Two

Scott wrote this morning about the absurdity of Republican debates being moderated by liberal activists like George Stephanopoulos and David Gregory, who, as Scott put it, are “on a mission to take down the candidates by making them appear crazy or by separating them from the base of the Republican Party.” But that is just stage one of the liberal press’s effort to control the presidential election cycle. Stage two comes when Democratic Party activists posing as journalists report on the proceedings.

From now until November, the leading offender likely will be the Associated Press. Today the AP described last night’s debate in November; its account began:

Mitt Romney brushed aside rivals’ criticism Saturday night in the opening round of a weekend debate doubleheader that left his Republican presidential campaign challengers squabbling among themselves far more than trying to knock the front-runner off stride.

Three days before the first in-the-nation New Hampshire primary, Romney largely ignored his fellow Republicans and turned instead on President Barack Obama. “His policies have made the recession deeper and his policies have made the recovery more tepid,” he said, despite a declining unemployment rate and the creation of 200,000 jobs last month.

The AP’s gratuitous editorializing is intended to suggest that Romney’s assertion that Obama’s policies have worsened the recession and weakened the recovery is self-evidently false. But that is absurd: the nation’s “declining unemployment rate” is all the way down to 8.5%, whereas it was 7.6% when Obama took office. Moreover, that comparison understates the deterioration in the nation’s employment since Obama took office, since hundreds of thousands of people have given up and left the labor force….


In actuality there are over 4 million Americans missing from the work force.  That is the number that using history would have joined the workforce in the last three years that are missing.  If you add them into the mix, the actual unemployment rate is near 11%. 



6.  Obama calls for a Raise for Government workers…



… The chief executive wants to give federal civil servants a half-percent pay raise. The absurdity of this proposal is clear in light of the excellent reporting of USA Today's Dennis Cauchon. In a series of stories in 2010 that drew emotional criticism from federal employee union leaders but no factual refutations, Cauchon used the government's own data to show that civil servants' compensation has far outstripped that of private-sector workers. "The compensation gap between federal and private workers has doubled in the past decade," Cauchon found. "Federal civil servants earned average pay and benefits of $123,049 in 2009, while private workers made $61,051 in total compensation, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The data are the latest available." If anything, Obama should freeze federal pay indefinitely so private-sector employees can catch up with the bureaucrats.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editorials/2012/01/obama-guts-military-gives-raises-bureaucrats/2074876#ixzz1ixZIVkRG



I thought civil servants had smaller pay but better benefits.  It appears they now are top dogs on everything. 





7.  Introducing Ludmya B. Love

If you haven’t heard of Ludmya “Mia” B. Love before, you will be hearing a lot more about her. Mia has the potential to be the next big thing in conservative politics. And you heard about her here first!

Mia is the American-born daughter of Haitian immigrants, mother of three children, served on the PTA, city council and now is Mayor of Sarotoga Springs, Utah. She is an avid runner and shooter, and I’m sure the readers will love this tidbit:

She has a concealed carry permit and often packs a gun. Her husband introduced her to shooting on their first date. His first gift to her was a rifle.

She’s also recently announced that she’s running for Congress in the newly created 4th District of Utah….

http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/01/mia-b-love-a-conservative-political-star-rises-in-utah/

An interesting story and a person who looks like a great candidate.  Of course to the left she is the ultimate heretic being a woman and black and a conservative.  Expect the left to pull out all the stops to stop her.  





8.  Solar Power’s demise

…But for generating continuous mains power, solar is a green toy. In clear sunny weather, the electricity generated from solar panels varies from zero at midnight to a modest maximum at midday, providing there is no dust on the panel. On a cloudy day, output varies from negligible to none. In all cases complete reliable backup generation is required.

Solar power is a high cost way of generating an intermittent and variable supply of electricity from a very dilute source while sterilising a large area of land.

The solar industry is only efficient at one thing - extracting unearned profits from tax payers and other electricity consumers.

As the growing global austerity starts to bite, all such frippery will evaporate.

The sagging market for solar panels is merely heralding that emerging reality.


There is a fossil fuel rush going on which the greens don’t want to acknowledge.  They thought they had killed FF with AGW, but that has fallen by the roadside.  They went on to say even if AGW isn’t a problem we will soon experience peak oil and we have to change anyway.  But the boom of fracking and finding more and more gas and oil that are within our reach offers the world a new golden age with cheap energy and worldwide prosperity. 

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

Headwinds

Democrats and Taxes

Obama’s into big stuff, says chief of staff Bill Daley on ABC’s This Week.
"I do firmly believe that ONE OF THE WET BLANKETS ON THIS ECONOMY AND ON COMPANIES, ON THE SYSTEM RIGHT NOW IS A QUESTION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT OUR POLITICAL SYSTEM, WHETHER THE LEADERS CAN GET TOGETHER, WHETHER THEY CAN SOLVE BIG PROBLEMS," Daley said.

So let’s define the “big, wet blanket problem” in which Obama and his Chicago friends now find themselves:
THEY ARE ADDICTED TO BIG TAXES, BIG SPENDING AND BIG GOVERNMENT, and none of it- NONE. OF. IT. - has a darn thing to do with what’s best for the public and the economy.

ALL OF IT- ALL. OF. IT. - HAS TO DO WITH FUNNELING MONEY INTO DEMOCRAT PARTY COFFERS.

And it's sitting like a wet blanket over our economy. And Daley's right. Democrat leaders can't solve it. They couldn't solve it when they ran the tax scam in Chicago and they can't solve it now…

http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/johnransom/2011/07/11/obummer_the_tax_scam_faileth/page/full/

A very simple explanation of what the deficit debate is all about.

Democrats Can't Keep Their Story Straight on

James Pethokoukis has done a great job over the weekend of documenting the Obama Administration's turnabout on the debt ceiling deal. AS A DEAL GOT CLOSER AND CLOSER TO FRUITION, THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, EITHER AS A FORM OF POLITICAL POSTURING, INCESSANT IDEOLOGY OR PANDERING TO THE LEFT-WING BASE, DECIDED TO PUSH MUCH LARGER TAX INCREASES THAN PREVIOUSLY THOUGHT.

In short, Obama sees a need for a permanently bigger government and a lot more tax revenue to fund it. Had Obama agreed with his own debt commission and Republicans, a big agreement was possible. Or he could have proposed real reforms to entitlements. But he declined and there wasn’t a mega-deal. Don’t blame Boehner for that.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/kevinglass/2011/07/10/democrats_cant_keep_their_story_straight_on_taxes

The democrats want a megadeal so that they don’t have to vote to raise the debt ceiling again before next year’s elections. The Republicans should use this fact as well to get the spending cuts they want.

Hispanic support for Obama plunges

President Barack Obama is hosting a White House meeting for Hispanic advocacy groups Monday, just a week after a Gallup poll of Hispanic VOTERS REVEALED POTENTIALLY LETHAL NEWS FOR HIS RE-ELECTION CHANCES.

The Gallup poll showed that OBAMA’S SUPPORT AMONG HISPANICS FELL ALMOST A THIRD IN THE LAST 18 MONTHS, DOWN FROM 73 PERCENT IN DECEMBER 2009 to 52 percent in June 2011. That’s very bad news for Democrats, because Obama’s re-election strategy depends on a Hispanic landslide in swing states such as Florida and Virginia.

But IT IS GOOD NEWS FOR REPUBLICANS, who are trying to boost their share of the overall Hispanic vote up to and beyond 40 percent.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/07/11/obama-huddles-with-hispanic-groups-to-woo-support-for-2012-race/#ixzz1RoDhpAdc

Obama’s coalition is falling apart. Young voters (especially those without jobs or those who are underemployed), Hispanics, and women support has eroded significantly in the past eighteen months.

The job market is defying history

A dismal June employment report shows that employers are adding nowhere near as many jobs as they normally do this long after a recession has ended.

UNEMPLOYMENT HAS CLIMBED FOR THREE STRAIGHT MONTHS AND IS NOW AT 9.2 PERCENT. THERE'S NO PRECEDENT, IN DATA GOING BACK TO 1948, for such a high rate two years into what economists say is a recovery.

The economy added just 18,000 jobs in June. That's a fraction of the 90,000 jobs economists had expected and a sliver of the 300,000 jobs needed each month to shrink unemployment significantly.
THE EXCRUCIATINGLY SLOW GROWTH IS CONFOUNDING ECONOMISTS, SPOOKING CONSUMERS AND DISMAYING JOB SEEKERS. Friday's report forced analysts to re-examine their assumption that the economy would strengthen in the second half of 2011.

They had expected improvement in June after a bleak jobs report for May. They figured that hiring in May had been artificially weakened by temporary factors — a run-up in gasoline prices to $4 a gallon and factory disruptions caused by Japan's earthquake and nuclear crisis.

But the June numbers were even worse than May's, even though gasoline prices are falling and factories revving up again.

http://news.yahoo.com/flat-jobs-data-signal-weakest-recovery-decades-211320802.html

AP needs to be talking with more conservative economists rather than liberals ones and they won’t find them quite so confounded. In fact Progressive solutions don’t work to bring an economy out of a recession. Progressivism is about dividing the pie, not making it bigger. But anyone who thinks Obama will be reelected isn’t paying attention.

Excommunicated Democrats

It is rare as a Fox News commentator that you have the benefit of feedback from high ranking elected officials. And it is particularly rare as a Fox News Democrat to get feedback from high ranking Democrats, who typically either ignore Fox or make it their business not to comment on the substance of its programming. But I did have such an opportunity this weekend when I ran across Chuck Schumer at a party, appropriately enough, in Southampton, New York recently.

Senator Schumer offered a comprehensive critique of Fox News Democrats and what he believes their responsibilities and obligations are.

THE NEW YORK SENATOR ARGUED WITH GREAT PASSION THAT DEMOCRATS ON FOX NEWS HAVE AN OBLIGATION, AND INDEED A RESPONSIBILITY, TO STICK TO THE PARTY LINE AS OUTLINED AND ARTICULATED BY HIMSELF AND HIS COLLEAGUES, otherwise, in his view, THEY NO LONGER SHOULD BE CALLED "DEMOCRATS" and should not identify themselves as members of the Party either.

Specifically, Senator Schumer said that since Fox News, in his opinion, has as one of its principle objectives, building support for the Republican Party, anyone who appears on the air as a Democrat, particularly in the political debates Fox News organizes, has an obligation (in his mind) to articulate Democratic talking points. IT WAS HIS CONSIDERED OPINION THAT DEMOCRATS WHO DO NOT DO THIS, WHO SPEAK THEIR MINDS, AS I TRY TO DO, WERE NOT ONLY NOT "DEMOCRATS" ANYMORE, PER SE BUT SHOULD ALSO NOT BE IDENTIFIED AS SUCH BY FOX NEWS CHANNEL.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/07/11/senator-schumer-offers-his-take-on-obligations-and-responsibilities-fox-news/#ixzz1Roh30cRG

As a history buff, this position seems to be more something you would find in Stalin’s USSR rather than the “big tent” Democratic Party.

The Church of the Holy Progressivism

…. MODERN PROGRESSIVISM, AS A CONSTRUCT, IS A CHURCH -- one whose practice is reminiscent of the Dark Ages and one that can truly be called an "opiate of the masses." It comes complete with sin-tax collectors who seek to extract more wealth as you more excessively engage in the sin of success. These same people, whom they call "legislators," also serve the function of alms collectors, bound to the highest calling of securing and distributing food stamps, healthcare services, and income. There are the inquisitors, called the media, who will put to the rack anyone who questions the church's intent or challenges its claims. And the figurehead and Grand Inquisitor, Barack Obama, works to maintain his flock's devotion to a greater "social justice," with sermons so moving that they cause his disciples to incoherently yell, cry, or even feel thrills running up their legs.

AND IF PROGRESSIVISM IS INDEED A CHURCH, I GUESS THAT WOULD MAKE PAUL RYAN A MODERN-DAY GALILEO….

…. The resulting furor in the PROGRESSIVE BACKLASH WAS UNMISTAKABLE. Unable to deny the severity of our debt, they immediately began an attack on the wealthy. Essentially, THEY PRESENTED OUR DEBT PROBLEM AS NOT A DEBT PROBLEM, BUT AN INCOME PROBLEM. The Huffington Post suggests that "when a family finds itself in difficult financial circumstances," it can either reduce spending or increase income. They suggest taxing the wealthy to achieve the latter….

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/07/conservative_heretics.html

Obama increased spending by $700 billion per year above what it was during the Bush years or actually the past 20 years. In the coming debate, the Democrats need to agree to $7 trillion in cuts before we even look at tax increases coupled with more cuts.

Progressivism: Here’s the real history

….American industrialization piled factories onto an agricultural society, accelerating urbanization. As it had in Europe, IT DISPLACED PEOPLE, WHICH PROVIDED FERTILE GROUND FOR POLITICIANS SELLING SOCIALISM IN VARIOUS FORMS AS A MEANS FOR RELIEVING THE ECONOMIC DISTRESS. In Europe, the socialists were immediate beneficiaries of the Industrial Revolution. In the United States, the Civil War displaced additional people, especially in the South, and fed political corruption. POLITICAL REFORMERS CLUSTERED AROUND THE IDEA THAT THE SOLUTION TO SUCH LARGE-SCALE PROBLEMS HAD TO BE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. Approaching the end of the 19th century, the came to call themselves Progressives and eclipsed Americas' acknowledged socialists. They accomplished their first national political successes with passage of the Interstate Commerce Act, the Sherman Antitrust Act, and the Forest Reserve Act, which began government control of commercial carriers, of corporations, and of natural resources, all before 1900.

THE FIRST PROGRESSIVE PRESIDENT WAS REPUBLICAN THEODORE ROOSEVELT; THE SECOND, WOODROW WILSON, A DEMOCRAT. Both effectively forwarded Federal government control of the U.S. economy. HERBERT HOOVER, CONTRARY TO POPULAR IMPRESSION, WAS A PROGRESSIVE AND AN ACTIVIST IN EXPANDING GOVERNMENT'S ROLE; FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT RAN AGAINST HIS SPENDING BUT MANY OF HIS DEPRESSION POLICIES WERE ROOTED IN HOOVER'S, resting in both cases in expansion of government in the economy. Though the legend of Hoover's laissez-faire approach toward the Great Depression still lingers, the truth is much more interesting. Neither president's policies succeeded in relieving the Depression; recovery was built on the growth following World War II….

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/07/our_retreat_from_prosperity.html

Progressivism to me is a throwback to the times of the divine right of kings. They were sanctified by God and answerable only to God. The Progressives haven’t abandoned elections---yet, but they don’t hold the electorate in high esteem.

Tribe’s Op-ed

He writes:

Several law professors and senators, and even Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, have suggested that section 4 of the 14th Amendment, known as the public debt clause, MIGHT PROVIDE A SILVER BULLET. This provision states that “the validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law ... shall not be questioned.” THEY ARGUE THAT THE PUBLIC DEBT CLAUSE IS SUFFICIENT TO NULLIFY THE CEILING — OR CAN BE USED TO PERMIT THE PRESIDENT TO BORROW MONEY WITHOUT REGARD TO THE CEILING.

Both approaches provide the false hope of a legal answer that obviates the need for a real solution.
That sounds right to me. Indeed, I found relatively little in Tribe’s op-ed with which to disagree. HE NOTES THAT AN INTERPRETATION UNDER WHICH ANY ACTION WHICH THREATENS DEFAULT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL WOULD SWEEP TOO BROADLY, and notes the implications for executive power of any argument that would allow unilateral borrowing.

,... the argument that the president may do whatever is necessary to avoid default has no logical stopping point. In theory, Congress could pay debts not only by borrowing more money, but also by exercising its powers to impose taxes, to coin money or to sell federal property. If the president could usurp the congressional power to borrow, what would stop him from taking over all these other powers, as well?

Tribe concludes quoting Justice John Marshall Harlan II, “the Constitution is not a panacea for every blot upon the public welfare,” and suggests the solution to the current impasse is not to be found in the constitution, but in the political process

http://volokh.com/2011/07/08/tribe-on-the-debt-ceiling/

It would seem to me the act’s wording, “the validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law ... shall not be questioned” ends the argument since the debt must be authorized by law. What we are talking about is new debt that obviously has not been authorized yet.

Solar Power’s fatal flaw

….From the study commissioned by the University of Juan Carlos and the Juan de Mariana Institute, since 2000 SPAIN SPENT €571,138 TO CREATE EACH "GREEN JOB", including subsidies of more than €1 million per wind industry job. Two thirds of jobs were in construction, fabrication and installation, one quarter in administrative positions, marketing and projects engineering, and JUST ONE OUT OF TEN JOBS HAS BEEN CREATED AT THE MORE PERMANENT LEVEL OF ACTUAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE RENEWABLE SOURCES OF ELECTRICITY. The programs creating each green job also resulted in THE DESTRUCTION OF 2.2 JOBS ELSEWHERE IN THE COUNTRY FOR EVERY "GREEN JOB" CREATED. In the end the price of electricity paid by the consumer in Spain will have to be increased 31% to be able to repay the historic debt generated by the deficit produced by the subsidies to renewable. [See Resources below.

Once the panels are constructed, THE COLD, HARD REALITY OF SOLAR ENERGY'S 33% EFFICIENCY SHINES AS HOT AS THE MIDDAY SUN. One can clearly see the massive government subsides required to keep solar plants operating while never achieving anywhere near breakeven return on investment. Environmentalists still proudly promote the green advantages of solar while glossing over the facts:

Solar projects include a natural gas generation system to supplement the grid when the sun doesn't shine.

Solar turbines require the same amount of water as a thousand households to run.

SOLAR ARRAYS HAVE A HUGE FOOTPRINT -- OVER FIVE SQUARE MILES OF HABITAT TO POWER 140,000 HOMES.

This same economy-of-scale farce holds true for small domestic solar panels. These installations require massive government subsidies and legislation, forcing the grid to buy electricity from solar providers -- which, in turn, increases the cost of electricity to every consumer….

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/07/the_real_cost_of_solar_energy.html

The technology just isn’t there yet. We should invest in research and development but not in actual requirements to use “green” energy.