alpipkin.com

Wow! Good thing Congress is raising the debt limit from $12.374 trillion to $14.3 trillion … wait, uh oh!

WASHINGTON — The US debt is on track to hit a congressionally proposed debt ceiling of 14.3 trillion dollars by the end of February, the Treasury said Wednesday, a day ahead of a key vote to raise it to that level.

“Based on current projections, Treasury expects to reach the debt ceiling as early as the end of February. However, the government’s cash flows are volatile, making it difficult to forecast a precise date,” the Treasury said in a statement.

The current limit on the public debt of the United States is 12.374 trillion dollars.

The US debt exceeded 12.349 trillion dollars on Monday, according to Treasury data.

The US House of Representatives will vote Thursday on whether to raise the US debt limit to a historic 14.3 trillion dollars, allowing the United States to borrow another 1.9 trillion dollars.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said representatives would take up the measure a week after the Senate approved the higher debt ceiling in a 60-39 vote.

In December, both houses agreed to increase the debt limit by an interim amount of 290 billion dollars to ensure the US government would continue to function.

The Senate also last week passed an amendment to legislation raising the debt ceiling that requires new budget items to be paid for, dubbed “pay-as-you-go.”

The measure is intended to prevent the federal government from spending money it does not have and to control the massive US budget deficit.

The House has adopted a similar measure.

Obama’s proposed 2011 Federal Budget includes revenue from “health care savings” of $156 billion and $650 billion from “cap and trade” income. Obama is not going to be able to put either of these programs in place this year … or any other year. Both are DOA.

So if Congress adopts his budget, the deficit will not be the reported $1.6 trillion … it will be more than $2.4 trillion!

I just hope the Republicans in the Senate hold their now 41 votes together and force the Democrats to go back and develop a budget that actually CUTS spending, rather than the unsustainable spending spree Obama has taken up.

This is just to funny!!!

… and yes … that really is Pat Boone.

I ran across something new today that is probably going to revolutionize the way we do many things in the future … liquid spray-on glass!

(PhysOrg.com) — Spray-on liquid glass is transparent, non-toxic, and can protect virtually any surface against almost any damage from hazards such as water, UV radiation, dirt, heat, and bacterial infections. The coating is also flexible and breathable, which makes it suitable for use on an enormous array of products.

The liquid glass spray (technically termed “SiO₂ ultra-thin layering”) consists of almost pure silicon dioxide (silica, the normal compound in glass) extracted from quartz sand. Water or ethanol is added, depending on the type of surface to be coated. There are no additives, and the nano-scale glass coating bonds to the surface because of the quantum forces involved. According to the manufacturers, liquid glass has a long-lasting antibacterial effect because microbes landing on the surface cannot divide or replicate easily.

Liquid glass was invented in Turkey and the patent is held by Nanopool, a family-owned German company. Research on the product was carried out at the Saarbrücken Institute for New Materials. Nanopool is already in negotiations in the UK with a number of companies and with the National Health Service, with a view to its widespread adoption.

The liquid glass spray produces a water-resistant coating only around 100 nanometers (15-30 molecules) thick. On this nanoscale the glass is highly flexible and breathable. The coating is environmentally harmless and non-toxic, and easy to clean using only water or a simple wipe with a damp cloth. It repels bacteria, water and dirt, and resists heat, UV light and even acids. UK project manager with Nanopool, Neil McClelland, said soon almost every product you purchase will be coated with liquid glass.

Follow the link above to read the entire article. Fascinating stuff.

This morning the White House delivered its 2011 Federal Budget, announcing proposed spending of $3.83 TRILLION! That budget projects a deficit of $1.56T. Just last week the White House announced that next year’s deficit would be $1.35T. How did the deficit grow by $210 Billion in one week?

Another point … the President’s proposed “spending freeze,” scheduled to start in a year, projects such a freeze would save $250B over the next 10 years. $250B in savings out of what … an average of $4T per year for 10 years … $40T … is what percent? 0.0625%, less than 1/10 of 1 percent!!! Further, did $210B of that $250B just get wiped out?

The “freeze” is nothing more that political slight-of-hand. I ran across the video below that describes in very simple terms what Obama proposed and what the ‘effect’ will be.

Swami Obama amazes his audiences with his mastery of the art of prestidigitation!

Chalk another one up for the government in California. I just ran across this little missive this morning on the Orange Country Register:

Astonishingly, tone-deaf state Senate Democrats in Sacramento last week revived a $200-billion, government-run, universal health care scheme to outlaw private insurance and subsidize coverage for millions of Californians.

The bill doesn’t yet specify how government would pay for this magical cure. But Senate Bill 810 is modeled after previous legislative efforts that would have imposed payroll taxes of up to 16 percent. The bill literally was resurrected from the Senate’s “dead file” of unsuccessful prior legislation, and shows how Capitol Democrats are utterly oblivious to growing public opposition to such intrusive, costly mandates.

Amazing!!!!! And to think we pay these bozos to “represent” us! Didn’t I just recently write about how California was going to go bankrupt if we didn’t start making some common-sense choices?

California reported a 12.4% unemployment rate for December 2009, matching the previous month’s rate and maintaining its place as the state with the 5th highest unemployment in the US. The housing bubble hit the state hard, though certainly not as hard as it hit Nevada and Arizona, yet home prices continue to be among the highest in the US (a story for another post).

Northrup-Grumman announced it would relocate the company’s corporate offices to Washington DC area, ostensibly to be closer to its main client, the US Government. Toyota will close their NUMMI auto manufacturing plant in Fremont in March (the last auto manufacturing plant in the state!) and move production to its plants in Texas and elsewhere because of high labor costs and high energy costs. Nissan Motor Co. completed moving its headquarters, and 1,300 jobs, to Tennessee in 2008. Interstate Bakeries Corp (Wonder, Roman Meal, Hostess Cakes, Drakes) left in 2009, also taking 1,300 jobs with them. At a time when Hollywood is celebrating its 100th birthday, the number of production days for feature films in L.A. is at a record low.

There are a number of reasons these and other businesses are closing their doors or leaving the state, but the reasons all stem from one common source; California state government.

• State taxes, among the highest in the US
• State labor regulations, among the most stringent and costly in the US
• State environmental regulations, the most restrictive in the US

While all of the above issues are bad and getting worse, that last item is the one that will drive the state to bankruptcy. In 2006 the state government passed AB32, California’s very own version of “stop anthropogenic global warming” legislation. Scheduled to go into effect in 2012, this one law will be the last straw for many California businesses.

The state is putting rules in place for owners of diesel-powered vehicles manufactured prior to 1996, and expected to operate more that 100 hours per year in the state, that will require them to replace the engines in their vehicles. Replacement estimates are between $60,000 to $90,000 per vehicle. Further, the old engine will have no value as they cannot be used in the state after the law is put in place. Many trucking firms and construction equipment firms are closing their doors because such expenses are beyond their ability to finance given the current economy.

Cement manufacturers will be driven from the state as the major byproduct of making cement is CO2. The only option these firms have short of relocating is called carbon sequestration; capturing the CO2 and injecting it into geologic formations for permanent storage … here in California, most likely abandoned oil wells. Just capturing CO2 is a very expensive process, not to mention there are few abandoned oil fields located near the majority of the cement plants in Southern California (located primarily in the desert, east of the coastal mountains). Sequestration is a very expensive proposition even in optimal conditions. Having to install a hundred plus miles of piping puts such an alternative outside of any economic reach.

What all of this means to the state’s electric energy industry is that the capacity problems the state had beginning prior to 2000 (resulting in the energy black-outs across the state) are going to be going away. So you might say “thank goodness” right? Sorry … new problem being created right now, courtesy of AB32.

All three of the state’s investor-owned utilities, as are some of the larger municipal utilities such as LADWP, implementing very large “renewable” energy programs (read photovoltaic (PV) solar power). For instance, Southern California Edison (SCE) has California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) authorization to build and own 250 megawatts (MW) of utility-owned solar photovoltaic capacity and to execute contracts up to 250 MW for generation from similar facilities owned and maintained by Independent Power Producers (IPP) through a competitive solicitation process. Not just 500 MW of new generating capacity, while the total load on the state’s generation capacity is shrinking, 500 MW of the most expensive generating technology.

Determining the cost for solar power by searching the web will give you answers ranging from $0.035/kWh to over $0.40/kWh; more than a magnitude difference. However, many sources pin the cost down to a value between $0.30 to $0.38/kWh. This compared to about $0.04/kWh for coal fired plants and $0.06/kWh for natural gas fired generation. More importantly, the fossil-fulled plants generate power even when the sun doesn’t shine, and very often are used as backup for PV.

Looked at from another perspective, the cost to build a natural gas fired generating plant ranges between $1,000 to $1,400 per kilowatt. Efficiency will range around 85%.

A PV array will cost between $6,000 to $8,000 per kilowatt, depending primarily on construction issues. The efficiency of the array will vary greatly but never exceed about 30%, but can be lower depending on:

• the location (in the northern hemisphere, the further north, the lower the efficiency),
• the average air temperature at the location (the higher the temperature, (the lower the efficiency),
• whether the array is tilted at the optimum angle for the location,
• maintenance of the panels  (are the panels routinely cleaned in locations where there is little rainfall).

What all this means is that electric rates in California are going to rise yet again, even though the state already has some of the highest rates in the US. I wrote here about developing PV or wind generating resources as an alternative to fossil or nuclear fueled plants. I also encourage you to to read a blog called NoFreeWind that has several great posts supporting these same conclusions; current PV and wind technology  cannot be used as an alternative to thermal generating technology powered by fossil or nuclear fuel. Nevertheless, companies already stressed financially may be pushed to either move out of the state or close as a result of all this “free” energy.

All this to affect less than 0.05% of the world’s CO2 emissions (and I say effect because it will not eliminate CO2 emissions) in the backdrop of the Climategate revelations and new evidence that the “science” behind Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) may not be as “settled” as has been reported so breathlessly by the main stream media over the last 20 years.

Meg Whitman, former CEO of eBay and current Republican candidate for governor of California, wrote an article Friday calling for a re-look at AB32.  AB32 has a trigger to postpone implementation of specific regulations when there is “a threat of significant economic harm.” I haven’t studied the bill enough to understand the implications of this trigger, but I’d lay odds that pulling this trigger would not provide the relief needed, in any economy. Further, I disagree with Whitman on moving forward with “clean”energy options for reasons stated above.

Destroying the state’s economy in the name of AGW, at a time when many renowned climate scientists are rightfully questioning the veracity of the AGW “science” is the equivalent of allowing the terrorists that planned and carried out the 9/11 attacks to have access to protection under our constitution … oh, wait … well, equivalent to the government taking over the auto companies … wait … oh, never mind! Find your own analogy!

A few groups have began to organize for the purpose of stopping or suspending AB32. The apparent leader among them, Citizens to Suspend AB 32, is an education and initiative project chaired by California Assemblyman Dan Logue.

Regardless of how, this train wreck needs to be stopped and soon if we want to avoid turning California into Michigan with a beach!

As it is being referred to, the Scott Heard ‘Round the World!

Scott Brown, Republican candidate for the US Senate from Massachusetts has pulled off the upset of the last five or six decades and beat Martha Coakley today to take the former Senator Ted Kennedy’s long-held seat. As I write, the vote count stands at 52.6% to 46.5%, which is great because with that kind of spread, the Democrats have no opportunity to cheat as they did in Minnesota last year in the Coleman/Frankin Senate race. (I also have to add another out-n-out stealing of the 2004 Gubernatorial race in Washington State between Repub Dino Ross and ultimate victor, Dem Christine Gregoire.)

As I stated in a somewhat backhanded way in my last post, this is a message the Democrats in DC ignore at their own peril!

As with most every other political junkie in the US, I’ve followed the Scott Brown phenomenon underway in Massachusetts with fascination and (dare I say it?) hope! He has achieved something no one thought possible … even 30 days ago. Yet there is one phrase I hear and read with increasing frequency; even if Scott brown loses today, he will have sent a the Democrats a chilling message regarding Obamacare.

I heard a similar refrain last November regarding the special Congressional race in the 23rd district of New York when the local Republican party bosses ran a very liberal candidate, Dede Scozzafava. A rival candidate, Doug Hoffman, ran on the Conservative Party ticket and in the last couple of weeks came from single digit territory to a double digit lead over Scozzafava, causing her to drop out of the race just days before the election. The Democrat candidate, Bill Owens went on to win the race by about five points (Scozzafava picked up about 10% of the total vote even after dropping out).

So … did the Democratic party in Washington change their agenda in response to having just dodged a bullet? Absolutely not! They deemed Owens’ win as confirmation that their agenda was safe. Well the same thing will happen if Martha Coakley, the Dem candidate running against Scott Brown, wins today.

A win is just that, and a loss is a loss. It can’t be spun any other way. And regardless of the message a close win would provide for the conservatives and Republicans, the Democrats will feel that their agenda was vindicated.

For those of us on the right, the only win would be for Scott Brown to become the next US Senator representing Massachusetts. Messages only count if the recipient is listening to you.

Like most Americans I’ve followed the events of the terrorist attack on Christmas day with growing concern. By the way, it wasn’t an attempted attack … it failed to down the aircraft, but it was an attack and ostensibly successful if measured by the additional denigration the TSA will subject the average US air traveler to.

The initial response of government officials such as Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Incompetanio, Deputy National Security Adviser John Brennan, and even Obama’s being MIA for three days did not inspire confidence. Incompetanio’s statement on the Dec 27th Sunday talk shows, “… the system worked …” was nothing more than an attempt to cover the administration’s back side. The following Sunday, Brennan’s’ round on the Sunday shows was not much more than a CYA tour. He didn’t address the problem … the administration blew it on connecting several glaring dots!

I know! What has been missing since 9/11 and is really needed is a department under the direct control of the National Security Adviser, called … uhmm … I don’t know …. maybe the DODC … sure, that’s it, the Department of Dot Connectors. That’s the ticket … another bureaucracy will solve the problem!

Instead, we are soon to be faced with the threat of full body scanners in order to board an airplane. The interesting thing about the current plan is that the TSA, in a pique of modesty, says that the face as well as the “genital” area will be digitally blurred. Gee, that’s encouraging; TSA will be unable to see any details in the exact area where the explosive material was “carried” by the panty bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.

Even if the TSA doesn’t blur everyone’s crotch, the images are not an xray and can’t detect a stick of dynamite stuffed up Mohammad’s rear-end (as opposed to being wrapped in his turban), which is how an attempt was made recently on Saudi Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, the assistant interior minister who has been spearheading the country’s war on terror. The Prince escaped with minor injuries.

The video below briefly covers the attack as well as interviews and profiles of former residents of Club Git-mo who President Bush released to Saudi Arabia for rehabilitation in their “arts for jihadists” program. There is even a shot of one of Abdula’s better paintings!

One of the new imaging machines would not detect a device carried internally, so what will the TSA’s response be when someone attempts to light a fuse protruding from his behind? It can’t be to install xray machines next. For frequent fliers, that would result in flying becoming the most dangerous form of travel, rather than the safest!

However, Muslims will not stand for entering a machine that projects an image of them basically nude. What would the TSA do about that? Exempt anyone who professes to be Islamic?

The only way to make flying safer is to stop looking for things and start looking for people. Every other country in the world that is serious about air safety and terrorism trains their security agents on how to interview passengers prior to boarding. I’ve been interviewed on many occasions when returning from European airports. They only ask three or four relatively innocuous questions, but they are trained to recognize when people are being untruthful or evasive.

The Israelis have become masters of this approach. Did you know that to board an El AL airlines flight … you aren’t required to remove your shoes? How could that be? Well for your information, El AL is widely acknowledged as the world’s most secure airline, after foiling many attempted hijackings and terror attacks through its security protocols

Such tactics are referred to by our liberal friends as PROFILING! However, it is Terror profiling … not criminal … not racial … TERROR profiling. And using such obviously right-wing, anti-civil rights methods is not going to happen anytime soon in this country, because as I said here, the current administration nor most of the bureaucracies in Washington are serious about the war we are in with Radical Islamism. Most even refuse to us that name.

Sad!

Update: Ran across this very funny parody on airport security this evening. Be sure and check it out. Rings so true!!!!

Hundreds of committed individuals gathered in Oglala, South Dakota to protest global warming. As seen in the press photo, these are individuals with a serious stake in the argument. Their spokesperson said “we hope to maintain this vigil for as many months as it takes to stop the warming, even though we know it is inevitable the warming will come.”

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Ran across the video below and thought it would be a great way to kick off the New Year right. While I never believed Obama represented anything I wanted from a president, many (in fact the majority) did. The past year has shown how dangerous Obama has been to our liberties and freedom, and the video does an excellent job of describing the sentiments of many, including mine.

Please, get involved. For your sake … for your children’s sake … for your grandchildren’s sake … for your Country’s sake!!!

The Chinese have had a greeting for … maybe centuries: May you live in interesting times. I think I can safely say we have done that for the past couple of years. Let’s just hope that at the end of 2010 we can say it was a great year … one that puts us back on the path of personal liberty and indivudual freedom.

Happy New Year to you all.

Obama signed an executive order Dec 17 that went completely unnoticed in the main stream media:

For Immediate Release December 17, 2009
Executive Order — Amending Executive Order 12425

EXECUTIVE ORDER
- – - – - – -
AMENDING EXECUTIVE ORDER 12425 DESIGNATING INTERPOL
AS A PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION ENTITLED TO
ENJOY CERTAIN PRIVILEGES, EXEMPTIONS, AND IMMUNITIES

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act (22 U.S.C. 288), and in order to extend the appropriate privileges, exemptions, and immunities to the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), it is hereby ordered that Executive Order 12425 of June 16, 1983, as amended, is further amended by deleting from the first sentence the words “except those provided by Section 2©, Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, and Section 6 of that Act” and the semicolon that immediately precedes them.

BARACK OBAMA THE WHITE HOUSE,
December 16, 2009.

Seems innocuous enough … so why would the MSM bother, right? Well, this little stroke of the pen has given INTREPOL, the international criminal police organization, the same immunity from searches,  seizures and diplomatic immunity as foreign embassies have. Why would Obama do such a thing? His order effectively gives Interpol more freedom to operate within our borders than any US agency has.

Steve Schippert and Clyde Middleton over at ThreatsWatch reported on this over a week ago. Their investigation uncovers some very troubling facts.

After initial review and discussions between the writers of this analysis, the context was spelled out plainly.

Through EO 12425, President Reagan extended to INTERPOL recognition as an “International Organization.” In short, the privileges and immunities afforded foreign diplomats was extended to INTERPOL. Two sets of important privileges and immunities were withheld: Section 2© and the remaining sections cited (all of which deal with differing taxes).

And then comes December 17, 2009, and President Obama. The exemptions in EO 12425 were removed.

Section 2c of the United States International Organizations Immunities Act is the crucial piece.

Property and assets of international organizations, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall be immune from search, unless such immunity be expressly waived, and from confiscation. The archives of international organizations shall be inviolable. (Emphasis added.)

Inviolable archives means INTERPOL records are beyond US citizens’ Freedom of Information Act requests and from American legal or investigative discovery (“unless such immunity be expressly waived.”)

Property and assets being immune from search and confiscation means precisely that. Wherever they may be in the United States. This could conceivably include human assets – Americans arrested on our soil by INTERPOL officers.

President GW Bush refused to join the United Nations treaty that would give the International Criminal Court (ICC) authority to prosecute US citizens without due process, in violation of the US Constitution. Since then, several US citizens have been threatened with prosecution for “war crimes,” including former VP Dick Cheney.

Would amending Executive Order 12425 allow INTERPOL the ability to grab a US citizen and take them to France or the Hague? This is very scary stuff!

Follow this link to read Schippert and Middleton’s conclusions.

UPDATE: Bush didn’t refuse to join … in 2002 he “unsigned” the Rome Statute, the UN treaty establishing the ICC, that President Bill Clinton signed in 2000 and Congress subsequently refused to ratify. An aside … Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated last August the she thought it was “a great regret” that the US was not a part of the ICC.

I have often argued with my liberal associates (it seems I no longer have liberal friends … the last decided he could no longer be my friend because I wouldn’t vote for Al Gore in 2000) that if the government had to take something from one person in order give it to someone else, that which is “given” couldn’t be a “right.” Stealing from Peter to pay Paul cannot result in a “right” for Paul.

Well, I just encountered a video that does the best job of defining what a right is I’ve yet to hear. Judge Andrew Napolitano, sitting in for Glenn Beck last Friday, lays it out rights succinctly:

Healthcare is not a right!!

This is the $64000 question (or in today’s world, $64 Trillion). Is passage of Obamacare inevitable?

Some say yes and some say no, it’s not inevitable. Time will certainly tell, but I’d say chances are better that 90%. However, we can’t live our lives on … dare I say it? … HOPE! To hope that this foray into socialism won’t happen isn’t a plan. You can be certain the Democrats aren’t ‘hoping’ they will have the votes so it will pass.

The Dems have approached this legislation very strategically. I think they were taken aback in August by the ferociousness of grassroots opposition from the ‘tea parties.’ However, by November, they decided to ignore their constituents’ protests an just push forward. This point was made abundantly clear this morning when Sen. Jim DeMint (R – SC) read the provision Sen Harry Reid (D – NV) slipped into the bill prohibiting repeal of certain provisions of Obamacare by future Senate:

there’s one provision that I found particularly troubling and it’s under section C, titled “Limitations on changes to this subsection.”

and I quote — “it shall not be in order in the senate or the house of representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection.”

My first thought upon hearing of this was “how can any Congress write a law prohibiting future Congress’ of repealing said law?” DeMint goes on to call this a “rule change;”

This is not legislation. It’s not law. This is a rule change. It’s a pretty big deal. We will be passing a new law and at the same time creating a senate rule that makes it out of order to amend or even repeal the law.

I’m not even sure that it’s constitutional, but if it is, it most certainly is a senate rule. I don’t see why the majority party wouldn’t put this in every bill. If you like your law, you most certainly would want it to have force for future senates.

I mean, we want to bind future congresses. This goes to the fundamental purpose of senate rules: to prevent a tyrannical majority from trampling the rights of the minority or of future co congresses.

I still say “how can any Congress write into any bill a provision that prohibits future lawmakers from changing or repealing that law?” Even amendments to the Constitution can be repealed, e.g. the 21st Amendment repealed the 18th Amendment which introduced Prohibition.

Back to my main point; The Dems have been very strategic in their approach but it doesn’t appear the Republican are being strategic in either their opposition to the legislation nor in plans to challenge Obamacare in court once signed into law. Lastly, the Reps need let the Dems know that a major effort will be undertaken to repeal this monstrosity beginning Jan 3, 2011. Maybe the GOP doesn’t want to telegraph their moves, but their past actions couldn’t be termed ’strategic’ by any stretch of the imagination.

I guess we can HOPE!

UPDATE: I was too quick on the draw about work being done on the legal side.