"All Bills for the raising of Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives;"
Anyone know how the Senate can originate this morning's fiscal cliff bill? Seem like they did, and the newsies haven't said anything about Article 1 Section 7.
Tuesday, January 1, 2013
Monday, December 31, 2012
You Know You are Getting Old
When you need water pump pliers to get the cork out of the champagne bottle.
Sunday, December 30, 2012
Murder as a hate Crime?
That's what they are charging Erica Menendez with after she confessed to pushing a man to his death in front of a NYC subway train.
What's wrong with plain old first degree murder? That's been a crime since Moses brought the ten commandents down from Sinai. The punishment for murder under the law is harsh enough for any one's taste.
Why invent a new crime with a fancy name?
Welfare for lawyers anyone?
What's wrong with plain old first degree murder? That's been a crime since Moses brought the ten commandents down from Sinai. The punishment for murder under the law is harsh enough for any one's taste.
Why invent a new crime with a fancy name?
Welfare for lawyers anyone?
Over the cliff?
Who knows. Obama was on Meet the Press this morning talking about it. He spoke all the the usual platitudes but avoided the use of numbers. Or anything else of substance. He did say "We all agree on what to do." Which obviously isn't true 'cause they haven't done anything.
The newsies aren't giving any information. Like who's on what side, like what the sticking points are. Boehner must know that the Republicans and the House will look better if they pass anything. The last attempt was Plan B which failed to gain enough votes. The newsies haven't told us why it went down, who was for it and who was against it and why. Either the issue is too complicated for the average newsie to understand or nobody trusts newsies enough to talk to them.
All Obama talks about is the need for soak-the-rich tax hikes. And how it is all the Republican's fault for not passing them. He doesn't mention that going over the cliff will bring in more revenue, giving him more money to spend. He's gotta be in favor of that.
The newsies aren't giving any information. Like who's on what side, like what the sticking points are. Boehner must know that the Republicans and the House will look better if they pass anything. The last attempt was Plan B which failed to gain enough votes. The newsies haven't told us why it went down, who was for it and who was against it and why. Either the issue is too complicated for the average newsie to understand or nobody trusts newsies enough to talk to them.
All Obama talks about is the need for soak-the-rich tax hikes. And how it is all the Republican's fault for not passing them. He doesn't mention that going over the cliff will bring in more revenue, giving him more money to spend. He's gotta be in favor of that.
Cannon Mountain Ski Weather
We got another 2-3 inches of nice light powder yesterday and last night. It's below freezing, overcast, and calm.
Saturday, December 29, 2012
Retaliation against orphans
You would think the Russki's could find some other way of getting back at the Americans. In retaliation for an American law ostracizing Russian gangsters/security agents, (the Magnitski amendment) the Russians decided to forbid American adoption of Russian orphans.
For an orphan, I have to believe that adoption by Americans beats the hell out of living in a Russian orphan asylum. Even Russians have to know this.
I can understand the Russians desire to retaliate for the Magnitski amendment, but surely they could have found some way to do it that did not penalize their own most vulnerable citizens. A tariff, extra paperwork, canceling US copyrights, hiking prices on exports, there has gotta be some other thing they could do that would irritate the Americans without penalizing their own.
For an orphan, I have to believe that adoption by Americans beats the hell out of living in a Russian orphan asylum. Even Russians have to know this.
I can understand the Russians desire to retaliate for the Magnitski amendment, but surely they could have found some way to do it that did not penalize their own most vulnerable citizens. A tariff, extra paperwork, canceling US copyrights, hiking prices on exports, there has gotta be some other thing they could do that would irritate the Americans without penalizing their own.
Friday, December 28, 2012
Diane Rehm pushing wind and solar on NPR
She had a bunch of "alternate energy" enthusiasts on, pushing hard, claiming that reducing fossil fuel use would solve global warming and save the earth. Trouble is, wind doesn't give you any juice when the wind stops blowing. (It has been dead calm all day up here). Solar quits when the Sun goes down.
Up here we need juice all the time. Without juice the oil burner doesn't work and the pipes freeze. I want electricity to run the lights AFTER the Sun goes down. Electricity isn't optional. In winter we cannot just wait in the dark for the power to come on.
So, the utilities have to build real power plants, the kind that work all the time, enough of them to serve all their customers when the wind stops and the Sun goes down. And, the real cost of electricity is paying off the cost to build the plant in the first place. Fuel costs and payroll are neglible compared to paying off the plant. And, they have to pay off the plant whether it is running or not. So, my outrageous electric bill just gets more outrageous when ever PSNH gives money to wind or solar producers. Buying "alternate energy" does not reduce the need to make the mortgage payments on the real power plants. They have to pay the mortgage on time even if the plant isn't generating electricity.
In short, "alternate energy" just raises my electric bill. Even if "alternate energy" were as cheap as real energy, buying it raises my electric bill. And it ain't cheap. "Alternate energy" costs about ten times as much as real energy.
So why do we want to mess with "alternate energy" since it is just a cost enhancer? Is it the desire of the greenies to return to a Hiawatha standard of living? Is it a desire for the political power that comes from control of the electricity supply? Is it a belief that 380 parts per million of carbon dioxide has a noticeable effect compared to 300,000 parts per million of water vapor? Water vapor is as strong a green house gas as carbon dioxide, and there is a lot of it, and with most of the world covered with water, its gonna stay abundant. Is it failure to notice that the world hasn't warmed up at all in the last ten years?
Up here we need juice all the time. Without juice the oil burner doesn't work and the pipes freeze. I want electricity to run the lights AFTER the Sun goes down. Electricity isn't optional. In winter we cannot just wait in the dark for the power to come on.
So, the utilities have to build real power plants, the kind that work all the time, enough of them to serve all their customers when the wind stops and the Sun goes down. And, the real cost of electricity is paying off the cost to build the plant in the first place. Fuel costs and payroll are neglible compared to paying off the plant. And, they have to pay off the plant whether it is running or not. So, my outrageous electric bill just gets more outrageous when ever PSNH gives money to wind or solar producers. Buying "alternate energy" does not reduce the need to make the mortgage payments on the real power plants. They have to pay the mortgage on time even if the plant isn't generating electricity.
In short, "alternate energy" just raises my electric bill. Even if "alternate energy" were as cheap as real energy, buying it raises my electric bill. And it ain't cheap. "Alternate energy" costs about ten times as much as real energy.
So why do we want to mess with "alternate energy" since it is just a cost enhancer? Is it the desire of the greenies to return to a Hiawatha standard of living? Is it a desire for the political power that comes from control of the electricity supply? Is it a belief that 380 parts per million of carbon dioxide has a noticeable effect compared to 300,000 parts per million of water vapor? Water vapor is as strong a green house gas as carbon dioxide, and there is a lot of it, and with most of the world covered with water, its gonna stay abundant. Is it failure to notice that the world hasn't warmed up at all in the last ten years?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)