Letter to Obama

Once again I found something that needs to be read. Here it is.

A Letter To Senator Obama
October 30, 2008
The New York Times carried a story on Saturday, October 4, 2008, that proved you had a significantly closer relationship with Bill Ayers than what you previously admitted. While the issue of your relationship is of concern, the greater concern is that you lied to America about it.
The Chicago Sun reported on May 8, 2008, that FBI records showed that you had a significantly closer relationship with Tony Rezko than what you previously admitted. In the interview, you said that you only saw Mr. Rezko a couple of times a year. The FBI files showed that you saw him weekly. While the issue of your relationship is of concern, the greater concern is that you lied to America about it.
Your speech in Philadelphia on March 18, 2008, about "race" contradicted your statement to Anderson Cooper on March 14 when you said that you never heard Reverend Wright make his negative statements about white America. While your attendance at Trinity Church for 20 years is of concern, the greater concern is that you lied to America on March 14.In your 1st debate with John McCain, you said that you never said that you would meet with the leaders of Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, and North Korea without "preparations" at lower levels ... Joe Biden repeated your words in his debate with Sarah Palin ... while the video tape from your debate last February clearly shows that you answered "I would" to the question of meeting with those leaders within 12 months without "any" preconditions. While your judgement about meeting with enemies of the USA without preconditions is of concern, the greater concern is that you lied to America in the debate with McCain.
On July 14, 2008, you said that you always knew that the surge would work while the video tapes of you from more than a year ago show that you stated that the surge would not work. While your judgement about military strategy as a potential commander-in-chief is of concern, the greater concern is that you lied to America on July 14.
You now claim that your reason for voting against funding for the troops was because the bill did not include a time line for withdrawal, while the video tapes of you from more than a year ago show that you voted against additional funding because you wanted our troops to be removed immediately ... not in 16 months after the 2008 election as you now claim. While your judgement about removing our troops unilaterally in 2007 is of concern, the greater concern is that you lied to America about your previous position.
You claim to have a record of working with Republicans while the record shows that the only bill that you sponsored with a Republican was with Richard Lugar ... and it failed. The record shows that you vote 97% in concert with the Democrat party and that you have the most liberal voting record in the Senate. You joined Republicans only 13% of the time in your votes and those 13% were only after agreement from the Democrat party. While it is of concern that you fail to include conservatives in your actions and that you are such a liberal, the greater concern is that you distorted the truth.
In the primary debates of last February, 2008, you claimed to have talked with a "Captain" of a platoon in Afghanistan "the other day" when in fact you had a discussion in 2003 with a Lieutenant who had just been deployed to Afghanistan . You lied in that debate.
In your debates last spring, you claimed to have been a "professor of Constitutional law" when in fact you have never been a professor of Constitutional law. In this last debate, you were careful to say that you "taught a law class" and never mentioned being a "professor of Constitutional law." You lied last spring.
You and Joe Biden both claimed that John McCain voted against additional funding for our troops when the actual records show the opposite. You distorted the truth.
You and Joe Biden claim that John McCain voted against funding for alternate energy sources 20 times when the record shows that John McCain specifically voted against funding for bio-fuels, especially corn ... and he was right .... corn is too expensive at producing ethanol, and using corn to make ethanol increased the price of corn from $2 a bushel to $6 a bushel for food. You distorted the truth.
You and Joe Biden claim that John McCain voted like both of you for a tax increase on those making as little as $42,000 per year while the voting record clearly shows that John McCain did not vote as you and Joe Biden. You lied to America .
You and Joe Biden claim that John McCain voted with George W. Bush 90% of the time when you know that Democrats also vote 90% of the time with the President (including Joe Biden) because the vast majority of the votes are procedural. You are one of the few who has not voted 90% of the time with the president because you have been missing from the Senate since the day you got elected. While your absence from your job in the Senate is of concern, the greater concern is that you spin the facts.
You did not take an active role in the rescue plan. You claimed that the Senate did not need you while the real reason that you abstained was because of your close relationships with the executives of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Countrywide, and Acorn ... who all helped cause the financial problems of today ... and they all made major contributions to your campaign. While your relationship with these executives and your protection of them for your brief 3 years in the Senate (along with Barney Frank, Chuck Schumer, Maxine Waters, and Chris Dodd) is of concern, the greater concern is that you are being deceitful.
You forgot to mention that you personally represented Tony Rezko and Acorn. Tony Rezko, an Arab and close friend to you, was convicted of fraud in Chicago real estate transactions that bilked millions of tax dollars from the Illinois government for renovation projects that you sponsored as a state senator ... and Acorn has been convicted of voter fraud, real estate sub prime loan intimidation, and illegal campaign contributions. Tony Rezko has contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to your political campaigns. You personally used your political positions to steer money to both Tony Rezko and Acorn and you used Acorn to register thousands of phony voters for Democrats and you. While your relationships with Rezko and Acorn are of concern, the greater concern is that you omitted important facts about your relationships with them to America .

Go Read The Rest Of The Letter

It's Your Country

I visit a lot of sites. When I find something that says what needs to be said, I will link it here. Here comes a good one for you.

Your County. Your Call.

On November 4th it all really boils down a very simple thing: the Future of our country. And here is why.

When I started this blog about a month ago I wasn’t thrilled about Sen. Obama’s presidency, but it was hardly a grave concern. I didn’t like his track record, I didn’t like his lack of meaningful experience, I thought he had been flip-flopping too much on key issues, I was annoyed by open bias of mass media. Worst case, I thought, it’d be 4 years of a demagogue with strong left views. We can live through that. Countries swing from right to left and back — it’s a cycle. This is how democracies work. You can easily see this on my blog – just four weeks ago I wanted to keep it light and funny, pointing out things like the fact that the “change” VP pick had been a Senator for 35 years. But as I looked more and more into Sen. Obama’s past and his recent actions, I started to realize that we’ve been dealing with something entirely different — something that America has never seen, at least not on such scale.

It’s been almost like unclogging a sink — you open it, you take something out, then you take out more, and what starts coming out after that makes you wish you never opened that thing in the first place. Forget “change” VPs with decades of Senate history. How about close relationships with people involved in international terror? Or laser sharp focus on indoctrinating children? Or a laundry list of every modern-day tyrant openly expressing support? Or persistent suppression of free speech? Or going for twenty years (and bringing children) into a church that openly promotes hate of white people, just as openly supports Hamas and condemns our country on regular basis? Or campaigning for a radical with Islamic ties who threw a stable country into a bloody mess? Or close ties with people who led an organizaiton that unapologetically bombed the U.S. Capitol, the Pentagon and a police station and who were on the FBI Ten Most Wanted List? Or vote fraud of monstrous proportions? Or accepting a flow of donations from unidentified foreign sources? All of above — and more – is on Sen. Obama’s resume. It’s not in some classified files, it’s not locked in some FBI closet, it out in the open. I’m not talking about GOP sponsored books, I’m talking about media — the same media that’s been so curiously and unapologetically supporting him. Sen. Obama’s own actions and sentiments (especially those he made before running for President) speak louder than any Republican paid advertisement. A resume like this would’ve been a road block for someone running for a seat on a city council. Here we’re talking about the most powerful post in the world – and people choose to ignore all of this, lulled by the promise of change.

Facts are stubborn things. You can choose to ignore them, but you can’t make them go away. And all the facts point to the same simple conclusion: if elected, Sen. Obama and the people he represents would completely change the country. They WILL change it. In four year it won’t be the country we know. It will be something quite different. Call that state socialist or communist or obamunist, apply any label you want, but the change that’s coming is the most dangerous change our country has faced in its modern history. And all you need to see it coming is just read what’s out there and think.

Go Read The Rest

Have You Been Preparing to Vote?

I am always doing a lot of reading. I am all over the net reading news, blogs, candidate sites, Talk-Radio sites, you name it I am there.

Not everyone agrees with me or should. I collect information both good and bad, and attempt to form an opinion based on what I learn. I am not the type who will accept someones opinion without doing the research to back it up.

I found myself in agreement with Thomas Sowell again this week. You may want to give his latest article a read. The home run piece of the article was this:

Suicidal fanatics cannot be deterred. If they are willing to die and we are not, then we are at their mercy-- and they have no mercy. Moreover, once they get nuclear weapons, that is a situation which cannot be reversed, either in this generation or in generations to come.

I have been saying similar things for years. He says it so well. He exposes the flaw in talks and negotiation so clearly. Is this what we have to look forward to? Perhaps the changes that policy such as this would bring, is really what we are voting on. I know this kind of wrong headed thinking will destroy the nation I love. Millions will die because BO doesn't get it.

Are you willing to take that risk?

Other articles of interest:
Obama's prime-time ad skips over budget realities -AP
Obama says change needed as McCain derides TV ad -AP
Palin calls for break from Bush energy policy -AP
Hot-button social issues highlight state ballots -AP
What Does That Make Me?
Joe The Plumber's Audacity To Hope MUST READ
Distrust Of Media And Polls Make Election Impossible To Predict

A Fun Look at Current News

It would be Hilarious if it wasn't the Truth.

Fred has Something to Say

It is pretty clear.

Do Polls Lie?

I am not much of a poll person. Polls can be manipulated by how the questions are asked and who is actually called. I think everyone has heard the question, "So when did you stop beating your wife?". This is an example of framing a question with a biased assumption. In this case the assumption is you are a wife beater and it places the answerer in a severe disadvantage. Arguing the assumption makes you look even worse as being unrepentant to the listening audience at no time does it enter their mind that the questioner could be the problem.

Coming back to the polls, Obama is ahead in every poll. Is this real or imagined. Do you think the polling bodies chose Democratic areas to call and seek answers? Is this an attempt at bandwagon media trying to pull more people on to the bus? Everyone wants to be a winner or on the side of the winner.
Could this be simply the result of all the name calling and stereo typing forcing people to respond this way. Every time you turn around some one is being called a racist for standing against BO. It doesn't matter what level of legitimate criticism is brought to bare. Race is the ultimate trump card or club to beat back those who oppose "The One".
Do you think the content chant for "Change" has driven people to vote for BO? It is very clear that America needs some changes to fix some of what is wrong. Does simply saying "Change" all the time, draw in more votes? I don't see anything that BO offers as "Change", moving in a direction I want to go. In fact, most of his suggested changes are going the wrong way.

When all is said and done, when election day comes, will the people vote as the polls suggest? When each of us stands alone with our ballot, no one looking over our shoulder, and no one ready to pounce on us for our opinion, will we still vote for BO? Could it be that we are giving a clear message to the populace and they are listening but too afraid to confirm our position? Perhaps only the few of us who are strong enough on the inside are making the difference.

I know a number of people who stand against this wave. I will continue to stand against BO. If he does some how make it into office, I will double my efforts to write my elected leaders and swing public opinion around.

The end game is this: It is all about power and keeping ones self in the seat of power. If the electorate turns against those who can be voted out, they will lose power. The power leaches can't afford to be cast from their throne even if they have to go against their golden boy. It will take a mighty effort to remind them who is really in charge. I hope you will be at my side as we save this nation despite itself.

TO THE UNDECIDED VOTER - I dare you to read it all the way through and come back here and comment.

What Is He Thinking

The Headline:
Obama to name CO2 as pollutant

It will soon be against the law to breath. Humans take in Oxygen and exhale Carbon DiOxide. All mammals process oxygen to CO2 in the same way. The counter measure to this constant flow of CO2 is plants. Plants need CO2 just like we need oxygen.
Plants take in CO2 and release oxygen. Different plants have different processing demands for CO2. Choosing to plant and maintain crops removes vast sums of CO2 from the air.

I'm not going to go into the vast problems with the theory of Global Warming. I wont bother to point out the many articles that show the temperature is now falling. I wont bother to point out the many times in the fossil record that the planet has heated and cooled without mans intervention. I wont bother to point out that Mars has had similar temperature patterns to earth without mans intervention.

One day you may wake up with a government required CO2 meter hooked to your body and a tax bill for your out put.

Just another reason that Obama is not the right choice for America.

Great Stuff

Obama's Cabinet Lacks Change

Obama seems to be drawing all the old Clinton advisor's and then a list of old crusties off the hill.

Richard Lugar (R-Ind) Been in Washington DC since 1991
Chuck Hagel (R-Neb) Been in Washington DC since 1997
Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.) Been in Washington DC since 1978
Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) Been in Washington DC since 1993
John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) Been in Washington DC since 1984
Jack Reed (D-R.I.) Been in Washington DC since 1991

How is he going to be a change agent when his entire cabinet are firmly set in the ways of Washington and have little hope of change. The "Old Boy Network" is alive and well in the BO campaign.

Articles of Interest:
The Next Administration: Obama
Bringing Back The Kerry Spot, Diplomatic Edition

Maybe No One Will Notice

The entire media campaign for BO can be summed up by "Don't tell them". BO's faults, fobbles, and fuas paus are not reported and carefully covered up. If anyone does manage to report a sin of the master it is quickly down played or stacked against the greater sin of the adversary whether real or percieved. Thomas Sowell has done a great job of pointing out the many issues the general media doesn't want you to know.

Do Facts Matter?Recriminations.
By Thomas Sowell

Abraham Lincoln said, “You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you can’t fool all the people all the time.”
Unfortunately, the future of this country, as well as the fate of the Western world, depends on how many people can be fooled on Election Day, just a few weeks from now.
Right now, the polls indicate that a whole lot of the people are being fooled a whole lot of the time.
The current financial bailout crisis has propelled Barack Obama back into a substantial lead over John McCain — which is astonishing in view of which man and which party has had the most to do with bringing on this crisis.
It raises the question: Do facts matter? Or is Obama’s rhetoric and the media’s spin enough to make facts irrelevant?

Go Read The Rest of Sowell's Article

The Truth Spoken Well

I stumbled accross a blog that spoke the truth so clearly I wanted you to read it too. Some Things Just Need to be Said and Huntly Brown says them well.

Why I Can't Vote for Obama

Dear Friends, A few months ago I was asked for my perspective on Obama, I sent out an email with a few points. With the election just around the corner I decided to complete my perspective. Those of you on my e-list have seen some of this before but it's worth repeating...
First I must say whoever wins the election will have my prayer support. Obama needs to be commended for his accomplishments but I need to explain why I will not be voting for him.
Many of my friends process their identity through their blackness. I process my identity through Christ. Being a Christian (a Christ follower) means He leads I follow. I can't dictate the terms He does because He is the leader.
I can't vote black because I am black; I have to vote Christian because that's who I am. Christian first, black second. Neither should anyone from the other ethnic groups vote because of ethnicity. 200 years from now I won't be asked if I was black or white. I will be asked if I knew Jesus and accepted Him as Lord and Savior.

Go Read The Rest - It's worth it.

The Core Problem

Everyday I put my full self into everything I do. I don't hold back or wait for someone to come along and help me out. It doesn't matter if I am at home or at work, I put out a full effort to take on the challenges that face me. Procrastination and foot dragging would never come to the minds of those who see me in action. I am a get it done person without having to run down all those around me. I strive to pull everyone along with me as I face the daily challenges of life.
As I look around at those who I interact with, the overwhelming majority seem to want someone else to deal with the daily problems and challenges. They seem to want to do the minimum necessary to get by in life. The few go getters who meet life head on are usually picking up the slack.
I watched one gal slowly spread herself thinner and thinner until those around her were leaning and watching her do most of the work. She didn't seem to notice it was going on. I went over and pulled her from the crew forcing the others to go back to work. I explained to her what I saw and how she was being taken advantage of, and she hadn't even noticed.
This plays out multiple times around the world everyday. The self motivated driven individuals carry the rest of the work force. These hard working individuals need to be recognized and rewarded. As a leader I want to nourish and retain these people, while letting the others change directions and move on. The bulk of the staff needs to be pushed and coerced into productivity so they can make their keep.
Have you ever had someone tell you that they aren't paid enough to do that? While the employer is thinking, prove to me you can do it and I will pay you. The two never achieve any level of satisfaction because neither is willing to take a risk. The employee has the best position for risk but usually the least willing to take the step forward. The employee is in a position where they can be recognized and move up in stature and pay. They are already there doing some portion of the job and within their reach is a career move that will propel them forward.
The company is in the worst position for risk because they need to hire someone to do the job and they need some kind of assurance that the job will be done successfully by the hire. They are free to hire from within or choose a newcomer from the outside, neither prospect guarantees them success. If current employees step up and prove they can handle the job, the employer should recognize this effort with some kind of bonus first. The bonus should be given to the employee along with a conversation about what the job requirements are, and the expectations. This bonus should act as a retainer and incentive for the employee to make a decision as to taking this position and strive to meet the goals. If the employee agrees to the new position and the goals, wage adjustments should follow within thirty days of them being met. This is a demonstration of a person striving for success and being rewarded for their efforts.
Most companies have only 10-25% of their staff who are these type of individuals. The rest simply show up for a pay check and will strive to do the smallest amount of work possible to get it. They successfully lean on everyone else to survive.

The American Dream is available to all but only the achievers, the self-starters and the personally driven will ever achieve it. The rest will sit back and expect it to come to them. America has traditionally been a nation of individuals who work hard and enjoy the rewards for their efforts. Failure is always a possibility but persistence usually pays off over time, and those who strive to the highest degree deserve the greatest reward.
In the last 50 years, America has changed. Socialist practices have slowly creped into our society. Our various welfare programs that were once a good idea, designed to help the down trodden, have become holding places for the lazy. There is no incentive to strive and achieve and no end to the gravy-train even if it is deemed meager.
Karl Marx penned, "From each according to his ability to each according to his need." These words have flourished and now we see them taking over our nation. It no long matters how hard you work for it, if someone decides you have too much, they will take it and give it to those who have too little. The line of measure for too much and too little is at the whim of the politician in charge. The Utopian belief is that those who can, will and those who can't, will get a share anyway. Over and over this has been tried on society after society and the result is, those who can, will do a little. The incentive has been pulled from the equation and all will be reduced to simply getting by.

I heard this worn out and false Utopian philosophy once again come up at the last presidential debate. Those who are unwilling to put the full measure of themselves into their work are once again excited. They see "the Rich" (an arbitrary class based on false assumptions) giving over vast sums of money to solve their problems and make their dreams come true. History's lessons have proved it doesn't work time and time again but maybe this time they say.
BO said this,

"When you spread the wealth around it is good for everybody."

McCain challenged that notion in the debate by saying,

"You know, when Sen. Obama ended up his conversation with Joe the plumber – we need to spread the wealth around. In other words, we're going to take Joe's money, give it to Sen. Obama, and let him spread the wealth around.
I want Joe the plumber to spread that wealth around. You told him you wanted to spread the wealth around.
The whole premise behind Sen. Obama's plans are class warfare, let's spread the wealth around. I want small businesses – and by the way, the small businesses that we're talking about would receive an increase in their taxes right now.
Who – why would you want to increase anybodies taxes
right now? Why would you want to do that, anyone, anyone in America, when we have such a tough time, when these small business people, like Joe the plumber, are going to create jobs, unless you take that money from him and spread the wealth around.
I'm not going to...We're not going to do that in my
administration."

Do we really want government promoting more socialist programs? Do we really want someone deciding when we have too much? Do you really want your hard work rewarding those who barely try around you? Yes, there are some who may be able to afford paying more taxes but at what point do you become one according to the government?

Full video of Obama and Joe the Plumber
Full Transcript of Debate 10/15
Spreading the wealth around, is it really good for everyone

Is He Eligible

BO has not provided proof a citizenship even though it was requested by court once. A guy from Washington is standing up and challenging both BO and Secretary of State Sam Reed. He is pushing to have BO removed form the Washington State Ballot if he cannot prove that he is an eligible candidate.
Steven Marquis of Fall City, Wash., filed suit Oct. 9 in Washington State Superior Court, calling for Secretary of State Sam Reed to determine whether Obama is a citizen before Election Day. The Secretary has an obligation to the people of the state to verify that all items on the ballot are legally correct and accurate.

GO Steve. I applaud you.

Reference

How Wrong Does Biden Have To Be?

What is the deal? The media is supposed to help with pointing out mis-statements and out right lies. They are there to report and investigate the facts and lay them before their audience. Instead we find the news having a greater and greater bias with each passing day.
How many people remember the Dan Quayle mis-spelling? If a republican says something wrong it is front page news across America. If a democrat says something wrong it is buried if mentioned and only as a passing remark because the poor person was simply tired.
Obama had visited all "57" states when campaigning. Didn't get covered too extensively, did it. After all, BO was tired and had been going non stop. Perhaps in his exhaustion he only could remember the 57 Islamic states?

What about the VP debate? The media declared it a tie or a slight edge to Biden, but what really happened? Let's score some of the issues. Which one of the candidates new what the job was they were applying for?

Biden's answer to the question was long winded.

Vice President Cheney has been the most dangerous vice president we've had probably in American history. The idea he doesn't realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that's the Executive Branch. He works in the Executive Branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that.
And the primary role of the vice president of the United States of America is to support the president of the United States of America, give that president his or her best judgment when
sought, and as vice president, to preside over the Senate, only in a time when in fact there's a tie vote. The Constitution is explicit.
The only authority the vice president has from the legislative standpoint is the vote, only when there is a tie vote. He has no authority relative to the Congress. The idea he's part of the Legislative Branch is a bizarre notion invented by Cheney to
aggrandize the power of a unitary executive, and look where it has gotten us. It has been very dangerous.

Palin's answer was a bit shorter.

Of course, we know what a vice president does. And that's not only to preside over the Senate and [I] will take that position very seriously also. I'm thankful the Constitution would allow a bit more authority given to the vice president if that vice president so chooses to exert it in working with the Senate and making sure that we are supportive of the president's policies and making sure too that our president understands what our strengths are.

Wouldn't you like to know who got it right? (The Constitution)

The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

The issue about Cheney presiding over the senate is only significant by way of the fact that he actually did the full duty of his job, where other vice presidents only showed up once in a while. I guess Biden was taken offense to someone doing the full job they were elected to do.

I find this to be a huge mistake but it has gone almost completely un-noticed, or at least unreported. Let us look at some of the other mistakes.

Under an Obama Administration the middle class will "pay no more than they did under Ronald Reagan"? No, the tax rates will be similar to the higher rates under Clinton.

Did "we spend more money in three weeks on combat in Iraq than we spent on the entirety of the last seven years that we have been in Afghanistan building that country"? No, one year’s worth of spending in Iraq equaled five in Afghanistan.

Do “Iraqis have an $80 billion surplus”? No. If oil prices had remained high, it might have reached $50 billion by the end of this year.

Amusing point as evidence that Biden is just one of the people he pointed to, inviting anyone to have a beer with him at "Katie's Restaurant" in Wilmington, Del. Unfortunately, people will have a hard time taking him up on his offer, since the restaurant hasn't had that name for probably 15 years. He obviously has stayed in touch with his constituents.


The falsehoods/lies/wrong answers kept coming all night long. The amazing part was how well he can deliver these words. He was straight faced and unchallenged by the media. The Obama/Biden campaign thinks they got away scott free with this.

Help me get the word out and change the publics perspective. Perhaps even change the election.

Geothermal is Under Used

World Geothermal Power Generation Nearing Eruption
Jonathan G. Dorn
With fossil fuel prices escalating and countries searching for ways to reduce oil dependence and greenhouse gas emissions, capturing the earth’s heat for power generation is garnering new attention. First begun in Larderello, Italy, in 1904, electricity generation using geothermal energy is now taking place in 24 countries, 5 of which use it to produce 15 percent or more of their total electricity. In the first half of 2008, total world installed geothermal power capacity passed 10,000 megawatts and now produces enough electricity to meet the needs of 60 million people, roughly the population of the United Kingdom. In 2010, capacity could increase to 13,500 megawatts across 46 countries—equivalent to 27 coal-fired power plants. Originating from the earth’s core and from the decay of naturally occurring isotopes such as those of uranium, thorium, and potassium, the heat energy in the uppermost six miles of the planet’s crust is vast—50,000 times greater than the energy content of all oil and natural gas resources. Chile, Peru, Mexico, the United States, Canada, Russia, China, Japan, the Philippines, Indonesia, and other countries along the Ring of Fire (an area of high volcanic activity encircling the basin of the Pacific Ocean) are rich in geothermal energy. Another geothermal hot spot is the Great Rift Valley of Africa, which includes such countries as Kenya and Ethiopia. Worldwide, 39 countries with a cumulative population of over 750 million people have geothermal resources sufficient to meet all their electricity needs. (See data.) Typically, power generation using the earth’s heat required underground pockets of high-temperature water or steam to drive a steam turbine. Now, new technologies that use liquids with low boiling points in closed-loop heat exchange systems allow electricity to be generated at much lower temperatures. This breakthrough is making geothermal power generation viable in countries such as Germany that are not known for their geothermal resources and is one reason why the number of countries using the earth’s heat to generate electricity could almost double by 2010. One advantage of geothermal power plants, beyond the benefit of producing electricity from a low-carbon, indigenous energy source with no fuel costs, is that they provide baseload power 24 hours a day. Storage or backup-power is not required.

You should read the rest.

Data Tables of Interest

With all the potential we have here in the US we supply only 0.4% of our needs with Geothermal. We have tons capacity and vast needs for energy. We don't have to base our entire energy plan on oil. Alternatives do exist and we know how to use them. We just need to put it in practice.

Switching To Save Energy

I don't know how many of you have tried to do a minor renovation and needed or wanted a light switch to be somewhere else. It usually involves cutting more holes and moving wiring to the designated place. The additional wiring and installation runs up the cost as well as the damage it may leave behind.
What if you can put that switch where you want it with no wires? There are some great remote switches especially when it comes to ceiling fans, which are quite popular. The draw back is they need batteries and you aren't interested in filling the land fill with more dead batteries.
Well there is good news for everyone with the invention of the Self-Powered Light Switch. It allows the simple act of flipping the switch to generate all the power it needs to either turn off or on the light. No more dead batteries when you really needed light.
This would be fantastic for multiple applications. Historic homes, new construction and old as well as for safety. Historic homes can have the most minimal renewal footprint because they wont have to channel out walls for switch wires. They can literally peal and stick to existing walls.
New construction could save miles of copper wire by no longer running all those lengths for switches. This is environmentally friendly for the earth and my wallet.

The current cost of these may be high but new technology will eventually be price neutral.
Cost

More Info
Intelligent Uses

Artificial Trees

The plant is the ultimate solar energy production facility on the planet. It uses its structure to capture sun light and reflective light to produce energy. Most of our planet is covered by these energy making marvels and it's about time we started noticing.

Artificial Trees to Produce Alternative Energy

A big problem with producing alternative energy is that it takes up lots of land, resources and money to produce little alternative energy. Vast acreage is needed if an alternative energy production plant wants to compete with conventional energy producing plant, let us say to produce, hundreds of megawatts of energy. This is a big hurdle in the way of constructing large-scale solar power plants. The production of solar energy is only feasible at places where the real estate is not costly, or the rooftops of buildings and houses can be used to lay down solar power generation equipment.
Man-made solar energy production technologies need direct sunlight to give optimal performance and this raises a need for lots of obstruction-free space. Solar energy plants don’t work properly if the surface has obstructions and shades. Fortunately this problem is restricted to man-made solar power generation facilities; the natural ways of producing solar energy are not shackled by such limitations. Take for instance, plants.
Although plants don’t convert sunlight into electricity they do use light from the sun to convert water and air into cellulose. This is a complicated process.
A typical tree is a prime example of a mechanism that optimally utilizes the solar energy. Even though not all leaves are directly exposed to the sun they all use the sunshine. How does it happen? It is simple as well as complex. The leaves of a tree are situated in such a manner that almost every leave one way or another gets its share of sunshine. The branches and the leaves grow in a strategic manner to create enough space between them. Leaves are translucent, that is, the sunshine can filter through them and they also reflect sunshine to other leaves.
Go Read The Rest

We need to recognize and utilize every form of alternative energy. This could be a major player in our future energy needs.

Playing Ball

Nothing like a little fun for Jerry.

What Are They Doing with All That Oil Money?

Have you heard of Hydropolis? You have got to see this to believe it.

It is set to be completed in 2009. It was originally staged for 2006 but since this hasn't been done before it has had a few set backs.

Here are some other articles:

Hydropolis-underwater hotel

Hydropolis Undersea Resort

Fun with Water

I thought these were great. Hope this lightens your day.

You can find many more here.

Can Japan Help?

Japan went through a major economic crash in the 90s. Can we learn anything from their suffering?

Studying Japan's Dark Decade to See How U.S. Might Fare

The sky over Tokyo seemed to fall in September of 1990, when the Nikkei stock index dove almost 20 percent in one month. Real estate prices would plummet and the financial sector would crack, trapping Japan in a "lost decade" of economic growth. Is the United States now set for its own?
That prospect may not be as scary as it sounds.
It is too early to tell just how sharp a U.S. recession might be, but fears of a long malaise are conjuring images of Depression-era soup lines. If Japan is any guide, however, such fears may be out of proportion.
Japan in the 1990s saw billions of dollars worth of wealth disappear. A generation of "parasite singles" grew up, living with their parents well into their 30s. The suicide rate spiked, and university graduates spent years in part-time jobs. Japanese entrepreneurs had no or limited access to capital, stymieing innovation. Yet the standard of living for the average Japanese did not dramatically change -- the pain of the crisis unfolded over many years and the government refrained from dire pronouncements.
Unemployment would peak at only 5.5 percent, an enviable rate for much of the world in good times. Deflation -- or price declines as gloomy consumers and skeptical businesses put off purchasing -- sickened the economy. Yet leading experts now agree its impact was not as severe as originally thought.
Japan saw repeated years of low or negative growth, but the final tally was something short of a decade-long recession -- with the 10 years leading up to 2000 averaging out at almost 1 percent growth. Companies like Toyota would prosper in adverse times, forced to sharpen their competitive edge. Emerging in the 2000s as the leader in hybrid cars, Toyota found itself on stronger footing than its U.S. counterparts.

Read the rest here.

The US is a lot bigger economy and some would place us as the key support to all the other markets in the world. Does this make it different and can a huge bailout turn it around?
The wealth cycle is: Precious Metals, Stocks & Bonds, Property than back to Precious Metals. The bailout is an attempt to jump over the precious metal cycle straight into the stocks and bonds cycle. The key to the system is confidence and security. These are emotional engines that drive the financial markets. What steps will the government take to boost confidence because throwing money at it doesn't heal the pain and restore the emotional ties to wealth?

Sloths Move Faster

Here we are watching our economy tank. The government voted us a bailout plan a week ago. One week later, nothing has been accomplished. The number of issues that still need to be worked out are staggering. I just listened to a Fox Special on the economy and the only positive thing I heard was no decisions have been made on how to implement this plan. I still haven't figured out how they can call it a plan, when they don't know what they are doing.
They still need to put together a team, set up an office, set up a priority list of attack and then develop a plan of attack. Let's see, we are talking about the federal government, is three months to a year a reasonable allowance of time for this activity? We are talking government....... Will there be anything left to save?
By the time this government bailout hits the street, the market will have purged and started to correct itself. Will the new cash infusing program that comes from this start to over exaggerate the market and set us up for another major fall?

If you believe the bailout was the right thing or not, the speed of government action may ultimately make matters worse. Perhaps more appropriately, the lack of speed of government action will allow matters to get worse and then how will it keep the markets from getting over confident and cause a rebound? This problem is only getting more complicated and complex as anything the government gets involved in does.

Get ready for a rough ride, because no one knows how this is going to play out.

Videos That Need to be Seen

Nobody talks about this


Gone is the 1st Amendment


You got to work really hard in the media....to tear down the opponent.


This is the stuff that should make every American question where truth and this election come together. No one seems to really know who BO is and what he stands for. The evidence so far say he isn't with Americans.

I like BO for his name far better then Barrack Hussein Obama. The stench of this campaign and the lies we are constantly being fed make BO the perfect monogram.

The Cause Has Been Determined

Don't let them make it any worse.

Thanks Heavyhanded for finding this.

Collecting the Evidence

You may want to spread this around. We need to identify the problem and the problem makers.

What Just Happened?

Analysts: Bailout Won't Cure Economic Stress
Friday, October 3, 2008 3:30 PM

NEW YORK — Now that the government has decided it will spend $700 billion to get the economy started again, don't expect immediate results.
It's a little bit like those ads for protein drinks that show skinny milquetoasts turning into Schwarzeneggers in 60 days — you want it to be true, but you know in your heart it will take months or years of sweating in the gym to pack on that kind of muscle.
The latest readings on the U.S. economy show just how far we have to go. Home prices and auto sales are plummeting, manufacturing activity has tumbled and the consumer is feeling increasingly strapped.
The economy seems nearly dead, and things could get worse before they improve — even with Washington's help.
Much attention has been paid recently to the wrangling over the taxpayer-funded emergency rescue package. As it should. That's enough money to give every man, woman and child in the U.S. about $2,325 each.
Lawmakers say the bill is the best hope to save the financial system and revive the economy. It would allow the government to buy bad mortgages and other devalued assets held by troubled financial institutions, thereby inducing them to lend again to businesses and consumers instead of hoarding their cash.
The package, which was approved by the Senate late Wednesday and the House on Friday, would also include tax breaks for companies and the middle class.
History tells us not to expect miracles overnight. After the last big U.S. bailout — the formation of the Resolution Trust Corp. in 1989 to stop the U.S. savings and loan crisis — it took a year for the stock market to hit bottom, two years for the economy and three years for the housing market, according to Merrill Lynch.
And when Japan put a bailout plan in place in the late 1990s, its stock market took another five years to recuperate. By some measures, its economy still hasn't had a sustainable recovery, according to Merrill's chief North American economist, David Rosenberg. ........Read More

We just gave away all our hard earned money. We just took a major step toward socializing. It worked so well for the communists. Look at all the successful communist nations on the planet.

The government created this problem with bad decisions back in the late 90's. It forced banks to make questionable (Read as "mostly bad") loans to less then qualified borrowers. This was a bad plan that had bad results in its future and the future has now arrived. Choosing to make it worse with an even greater blunder is not my idea of helping.
I can't believe the number of people who are blaming this on capitalism and free enterprise. This had nothing to do with either. If someone puts a gun to your head and tells you to do something and you have no means of fighting back, you do it. There wasn't any free choice or open market activities that gave us this fiasco.

We need to send a clear message to congress that this was the wrong decision. Start by writing and calling the ones who screwed this up. The next step is to remove as many from office as possible who chose to abuse the trust we lent them. This isn't about the letter "D" or "R" this is about making choices that will make America strong.

Try this idea that we failed to use. We have some amazingly bright people in this county and they are not in Washington DC. They could have gathered up the top economists and business professors in America and created a real plan for saving America first. Once again we find our elected officials throwing money at the problem rather then using the talents of Americans to save us.

May God Protect Us From Our Own Stupidity.

How Did We Get Here?

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending

STEVEN A. HOLMES
Published: September 30, 1999

In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.
The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New York metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.
Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.
In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates -- anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.
''Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''
Demographic information on these borrowers is sketchy. But at least one study indicates that 18 percent of the loans in the subprime market went to black borrowers, compared to 5 per cent of loans in the conventional loan market.
In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.
''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.''
Under Fannie Mae's pilot program, consumers who qualify can secure a mortgage with an interest rate one percentage point above that of a conventional, 30-year fixed rate mortgage of less than $240,000 -- a rate that currently averages about 7.76 per cent. If the borrower makes his or her monthly payments on time for two years, the one percentage point premium is dropped.
Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.
Fannie Mae officials stress that the new mortgages will be extended to all potential borrowers who can qualify for a mortgage. But they add that the move is intended in part to increase the number of minority and low income home owners who tend to have worse credit ratings than non-Hispanic whites.
Home ownership has, in fact, exploded among minorities during the economic boom of the 1990's. The number of mortgages extended to Hispanic applicants jumped by 87.2 per cent from 1993 to 1998, according to Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies. During that same period the number of African Americans who got mortgages to buy a home increased by 71.9 per cent and the number of Asian Americans by 46.3 per cent.
In contrast, the number of non-Hispanic whites who received loans for homes increased by 31.2 per cent. Despite these gains, home ownership rates for minorities continue to lag behind non-Hispanic whites, in part because blacks and Hispanics in particular tend to have on average worse credit ratings.
In July, the Department of Housing and Urban Development proposed that by the year 2001, 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low and moderate-income borrowers. Last year, 44 percent of the loans Fannie Mae purchased were from these groups. The change in policy also comes at the same time that HUD is investigating allegations of racial discrimination in the automated underwriting systems used by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to determine the credit-worthiness of credit applicants.

Here we are just as the origianl writer reported.