Saturday, August 29, 2015

Birthright citizenship

Is said to have come from a Supreme Court "dicta", and not from any case that was heard and decided.

Just goes to show you what gets established as fact isn't fact at all.

You f'd up, you trusted them

Lies You Will Hear As The Economic Collapse Progresses

Chavismo runs aground in Venezuela

A little ditty on Instapundit looks awfully familiar.  The end game stateside is going to have an awful familiar ring to it too.

Instead of oil, we are going to get the "quantitative easing" version of Chavismo.

Nobody on Wall Street believes it, but it is coming.

What would it take to install a windmill?

Moneywise, about 3k bucks would do it.  Maybe that would produce an average of a kwh per day.  Yikes.

This post will have to be short because I'm going to take my van in for servicing.


Maybe I should have called it a wind turbine instead.  People might misunderstand my intention.

The links I am referencing are these:

air turbine  $1145, actually a little cheaper at amazon ( $895) ( but it isn't same model, really no cheaper)

pole kit  $286

tower kit $266

total comes to less than what I said, but I am padding the numbers a bit as a precaution.  Lower end is 1700 bucks.  Make that about $1500 bucks ( updated!!!)

Since these are installed on boats, I figured I could install it on a van.  Woo-hoo!

This one will go into the power and electricity subseries posts of the off-the-grid series of posts.

Prev   Next

Rise and Shine, 8/29/15

Not going to work today.  What the heck?  If I don't feel like working, I don't have to.  Did enough yesterday.  Can always make up for it later.  lol

Haven't done a "rise and shine" for awhile.  It's a bit more spunky than an "obligatory".  What the heck?

Now that I have all this time, don't know what to say here.  What the heck?

That bit yesterday about people doing dumb things.  Yesterday, this chick was trying to force her way through a line of cars in order to enter a parking lot.  She was blocking the lane of traffic she was in, and this annoyed me because it was also slowing down traffic in my lane, which was backed up for a block.

It was dumb because all she had to do was go about a 100 yards to the next intersection, turn left, and enter that same parking lot from a different location.  But no, she had to enter right there, like it was only there, and nowhere else on this Earth where she could enter that parking lot.

People were doing that continually.  She did that, and then somebody else turned in behind, and then that person started doing the same damned thing.  No wonder I got mad.  Just pure stupidity, no other word for it.

That entire episode reminded me of the way liberals act.  They barge in and take over whatever institution and demand that it be done their way, or there would be hell to pay.  So, you get homosexual activism, feminist activism, and so forth.  The homosexuals have done that to the Boy Scouts now, and to the institution of marriage.  Everybody just gives in to them.

It is like that with that chick yesterday.  The homosexuals could have set up their own arrangements for their own benefit, and did not have to deprive others of the use of whatever institution.  Do you see what I  mean?  There was no need for what the homosexuals were doing.  They could still "marry" each other if they wanted to.  But no, they had to ruin it for everybody else because they felt their "rights" were being violated.  That chick was inconveniencing everybody else when she could have done it a different way.  It wasn't necessary for her to enter that parking lot from the location she was trying to enter it.  But evidently, she's a special, special little snowflake and everything has to be just so and nothing else will do.

I didn't give in to that chick.  She tried to force her way into my lane and I wouldn't let her.  Most people probably think I was being a jerk.  But I wasn't inconveniencing anybody, not even this chick.  She honks her horn and makes a face at me.  So, I yell back "go around!"

Somebody else let her in after I passed her up.  Yep.  I'm the bad guy even though I wasn't the one inconveniencing everybody.  That's liberalism for you in a nutshell.  You have to say no to them and be willing to be the bad guy because being the nice guy only gets you a big headache.

Friday, August 28, 2015

Home again, 8/28/15 ( corrected )

Assorted thoughts on a busy day...

It was indeed a busy day and a busy week, relatively speaking.  It will be the first good check in a couple months or more.

I listened in briefly to the Limbaugh show today.  Trump appears to have won Rush over.  What does that mean?  I have not the foggiest.  It doesn't mean anything to me.  Trump could be all hype, but maybe that's all it takes in this country.  It got Hussein elected.

Maybe the Trumpster really means it.  Even so, he would need to be able to do it, but just because he is rich doesn't mean he can do the Presidency thing well too.  Skills don't necessarily translate into unrelated areas.  If you are good at business, you may be good at politics too, but not necessarily governing.

I may not go out west after all.  It is just too limited an objective.  Better to stay near home and even work a bit to make up for the lost time.

Traffic got my goat today.  It shouldn't, but people do too many dumb things.  I was in a hurry and my patience wore a bit thin and I started hollering at people a bit.  Not like me to do that, but not out of the question either.

At least I'm home, safe and sound.  Living on to see another day.


Sometimes a little proofreading helps.  Corrected a couple of glaring mistakes.

Quick thought before I go, 8/28/15

Everyone is shocked by Trump's success so far.  They shouldn't be.  The reason Trump can succeed is that there's no accountability in the GOP.  None.

Are you really shocked that Boehner and McConnell do the things they do?  Why are you surprised if you are one of those who are?  The GOP had its chance to dump those guys a long time ago, and REFUSED.  Why be surprised now?  Why be shocked?  Why should anyone be surprised that they are acting the way they are acting?  If you don't hold them accountable, then why should you be surprised that there's no accountability for Trump either?

Trump's not a real conservative?  Show me the real ones, then.  There aren't any, or there are few of them, and the voices are pretty weak.

Not even Limbaugh is as conservative as you think.  I've detected some squishing on his part.  There are all squishes.  Big time.

A ‘Staggering Betrayal’ Simmering in the Senate Over Vote on Iran Deal - The New York Sun

A ‘Staggering Betrayal’ Simmering in the Senate Over Vote on Iran Deal - The New York Sun

A “staggering betrayal” is how one pro-Israel activist in Washington describes any use by the Democrats of a filibuster to prevent the Iran deal from getting a full vote next month in the Senate.


Really weird that the Dems would filibuster their own bill, and that the White House would approve.

Former Fed Official’s Sage Comments: Investors ‘hooked on the heroin of quantitative easing’

No shit, Sherlock.

At least somebody out there agrees with me.

Obligatory, 8/28/15

Something I read yesterday reminded me of an idea I had to make a portable wind installation on my van.

The idea is to use a telescoping pole to mount it.  When I want to leave the property, I can bring it down, and store the turbine so that it won't be stolen when I gone.  In other words, I can take it with me wherever I go.

If I could pull off that, it would be pretty neat.  Wind is attractive because it can potentially add a lot to my self-generating capacity.  With enough energy, you can do just about anything.

Thursday, August 27, 2015

Quick thought before I go ( 8/27/15): Masters of Deceit

How does Obama get to be POTUS when he does so many wrong things?

Answer:  As a candidate, Obama pretended to be a whole lot of things that he wasn't.  He is a master of deceit.  This goes for all Democrats.  Their success depends upon fooling everyone about who they are and what they want.  If they were honest about these things, they'd lose big time and they know it.  The deceit is necessary for their survival.

So many things that the Democrats want just won't work.  It seems almost by design that they don't work.  Then again, it isn't designed to work, failure is the intention.  Supposedly, a thing gets done to achieve a certain goal, but that goal isn't reached.  Example:  "Affordable Care Act".  It was supposed to make health care cheaper by "bending the cost curve".  Has it achieved that?  My impression is that it has not.  Basically, what it did do was to create another entitlement that is hard to get rid of.

The same appears to be true with "climate change".  The idea is to create a new program that supposedly "does something" about climate change.  But an analysis of the programs in place in Europe doesn't show any such thing.  Carbon emissions aren't affected by trading carbon credits.  The climate won't be changed by carbon emissions if they don't go up, and that is if you believe that carbon emissions will make any difference anyway.  The scheme they want to implement won't work.  Surprise, surprise.  It never does.

You can go down the list with Democrat initiatives.  All are designed not to work.  That's so they can agitate for new programs to replace the ones that don't work.  Example:  "immigration reform".  That got "reformed" nearly 20 years ago and now it needs to be fixed again.  Evidently, it wasn't fixed the first time.  I get the feeling that it wasn't supposed to get fixed the first time, or for that matter, any time.

With the Democrats, if they ever did fix what they keep breaking, they'd be out of a job.  So, the deceit that they will fix something that they never intend to fix, is necessary for their continued existence.

What happens if their deceit doesn't work anymore?  What would happen if the truth finally started to matter?

Obligatory, 8/27/15

I strive to put out a least one post per day.  For five years, I have done this.  I've missed a few days during this time, but for the most part, I've managed to put up something every day.

These are one of those days in which I am a little bit weary of it all, to put it plainly.  I'd really like to just kick back and relax and forget it all.

There have always been days like this, even when I was a kid.  Back then, I'd play hooky.  Oh, yeah.  I didn't go to school every day.  That's the kind of thing that could get you into trouble, you know?  How many things have I done over the years that could have gotten me into trouble but didn't because the laws weren't enforced strictly?

This is a rather lenient society after all.

I've been thinking about another trip out west.  It is nearly Labor day, so the opportunity is close at hand.  Yet the expense is significant, and I've burned through a lot of money because of this project.

Here's what I'd like to check on.

It is a rather embarrassing looking affair.  Imagine putting one of these on top of a van.  That's the idea I had recently.  What a messy thing that would be.  Well, if I were to do something like that, I'd better get a whole lot better at it than this.

A trip out west would determine if this embarrassing looking thing managed to survive for almost five months.  If it did, it might work on top of a van, but it had better not look like this, for heavens sake.

It would be longer and shorter.  I figure about 3 to 3 and a half feet tall ( as opposed to six ).  It would be maybe 11 feet long.  Worked though some estimates last night.  Trying to imagine how it would look.  Could it be fashioned into a type of aerodynamic shape?  I'm worried that it may not want to cooperate.

Well, I put up something.  So now it is time to kick back and relax a little before I go off to earn some money to pay for all this stuff.

Wednesday, August 26, 2015

A solution to the illegal alien problem

Every one of them that gets caught gets sterilized.  Snip, snip!  No more "anchor babies"!

If they already have kids, the kids go into orphanages.  Don't get to keep their kids unless they go home.

Here's why you can't say that.  Like I been sayin'--- the truth doesn't matter anymore.

Obligatory, 8/26/15

The big picture situation, as it appears to me, could be on the verge of becoming chaotic.

On the national level, you've got the elections coming up, and Trump has disturbed the Establishment wing of the GOP.  Democrats have their own problems with Hillary v. Sanders.  Will the people running the show allow these two guys to become the standard bearers of each of the respective parties?  Or will they deny the nomination to them both, and have more conventional candidates?  If so, what will these guys do?  Will Trump run as an independent, and Sanders too?  You could have a 4 way race as a possibility.

Then you've got the possibility of the market melting down like it did in 2008.

There's the Iran deal in the mix.  Plus a trade deal coming down the pike eventually.  The trade deal isn't popular, but the powers-that-be want to ram it down our throats.

The Establishment is said to be surprised at the alienation.  Spare me.  There should be no surprise.  These guys have been pushing stuff on us and ignoring us for so long that they should expect a push back.

It's all adding up to a volatile mix that could explode into a real mess.  The winner of the presidency could be a minority president with a vote count in the thirty percent range.

Tuesday, August 25, 2015

Another idea I thought I'd share

Yeah, what a sensitive word "share".  We are all into this sensitivity stuff these days.

What the heck, you can't beat them, oh wait... don't say that, for heavens' sake.

Anyway, the Big Idea is to put a quonset hut on top of the van.  What???!!!??  Yeah, it would entail using a rack gizmo, and attaching the wood to the rack, and then the cattle panel to the wood.  It would be longer and shorter than the quonset hut I built out West so as to reduce its profile just a bit.  I figure at 4 feet or shorter, it won't be too tall.

This idea would replace putting a camper shell on top.  This option would be cheaper, I think.

As with the original "coffin" idea, I want to really insulate it well so that it won't need so much power to climate control it.  It would be primarily for sleeping.  I can envision putting some personal effects up there, too.

This one can go into the construction subseries in the off-the-grid post series.


The roof will consist of concrete cloth.  Perhaps the sides, too.  It will be "framed", which is to give it strength.  If it is to be on the highway, it has to be strong enough to resist a lot of wind.  Now, to attach it to the wood, will need to first attach the wood to the rack.  I think some u-bolts through the wood and around the rack will do it.  The wood can be 8" tall, instead of 4".  Why?  Want some clearance from the roof.  Want to have the wood provide some of the support for what's on top of it, namely me.  However, the van's roof will supply some of the support for the quonset sleeper.

It may need 4 horizontal bars across the top of the van's roof.  The front and back are extensions to the main body area where the sleeper is.  The idea here is to stretch it out so that it will be less tall and more aerodynamic.  Each end will be reinforced with framing that it can resist the wind resistance out on the road.

The cloth will be cut to size so that it will fit around the rounded edges.  Perhaps some chicken wire can go into the open spaces for additional support.  You can also cut the chicken wire to size like the cloth, because it is not so thick.  Wire can be threaded through the wood to complete the fastening of the concrete cloth walls to the structure.

Prev  Next

Home again, 8/25/15

Only 4 more months to Christmas!

Maybe by that time, everybody will be broke!

After spending most of the day in triple digits in the black, the markets headed south again before the close.  This is the kind of thing you get with a bear market.  Are we there yet? ( in a whiny child voice )  Nope, junior, we aren't there yet.  Maybe another thousand points and we were be in official bear territory.  Bwah, hah, hah!

Well, I shouldn't laugh my evil laugh.  Before it is all said and done, we could all be said and done.

There's people out there calling for more quantitative easing.  It only proves one thing...  The economy is hooked on easy money and debt.  There's no wealth creation going on here, but the opposite.  You don't get something for nothing, but tell that to a liberal who believes in Keynesian theory.

Negative interest rates?  Nope, it won't hold up for long.  People will stop putting their money in banks and the banks will fail.  It's the thirties all over again.  People putting their money in mattresses.

More debt?  Gotta pay it back, don't you know?  If you try to default, you become like Greece.  They'll own you.

You gotta do what John Houseman of the old Smith Barney commercials said:  You have to make money the old fashioned way, you have to earn it!  Try telling that to a liberal these days.  Try telling anything to a liberal these days.  They know everything.

Winston Churchill and World War II

There may be a popular misconception that is being perpetrated upon the public.  Churchill may be getting blamed for World War II!  But Churchill wasn't prime minister when the Nazis attacked Poland.  He wasn't prime minister when the British made good on the pledge to the Poles that they would intervene if the Nazis attacked.  The war was months old before Churchill got into office.  So, how is Churchill to blame?

Neville Chamberlain negotiated the Munich agreement that Hitler disregarded.  He had no choice but to support the Poles, or to resign.  His resignation finally came when things started going very badly in the spring of 1940, long after Poland had already fallen.

I suspect that this is propaganda that helps Obama in his appeasement of the Iranians.  Also, why he returned Churchill's bust to England because he would have preferred a Nazi victory in that war, just as he would prefer an American defeat on the world stage today.

I'm also of the opinion that the push for a Islamic Caliphate is coming from this belief that the West is weak and the Munich Agreement proves it.  Hitler was almost successful in conquering all of Europe as a consequence of this weakness, so they believe they can succeed where Hitler failed.

In other words, they are following in Hitler's footsteps.  The Islamists admire Hitler.  Obama is reprising Munich in hopes of an ultimate American defeat in an upcoming war.

U.N. Shows How Fake Iran Deal Is – Dick Morris TV: Lunch Alert!

U.N. Shows How Fake Iran Deal Is – Dick Morris TV: Lunch Alert!

Morris hits the hammer square on the nail.  He could have done better, though.  Obama signed the law which says that all documents have to be turned over.  In order for this deal to be in compliance with that law, the secret side deals have to be turned over.

The spin is that the side deals cannot be turned over because of confidentiality between the IAEA and Iran.  That's a load of bull, as the Powerline article has already pointed out.  The US has plenty of pull on the IAEA and can insist upon its release.  If anything, the pressure is in the opposite direction in order to hide the fact that the US has totally caved in on the issue of inspections.

The deal is a sham.  But not enough people are hitting the panic button here so that the pressure will be on to stop this deal from becoming law.  Morris says "write your congressman".  It's gonna take more than that, but before more than that is gonna take a whole lot of people to become aware of the betrayal here.

Monday, August 24, 2015

Still like this idea, but I am missing something

Check over the math for the electron thruster idea

Speed of light equals 299,792,458  m / s

ISP equals effective velocity/  9.80665 m/s2  equals 30570323 ( rounded )

Thrust equals m dot times effective velocity

1 mole of electrons masses 1/1836 th one mole of protons

Atomic weight of hydrogen equals 1.00794, yielding 5.49e-4 grams sec, or 5.4899e-7 kg sec

If c is  299,792,458  m / s, and assuming m dot of   5.4899e-7 kg, then we obtain  164.58 kg m/ s squared

This calc looks correct, but the other calc for Isp may be wrong.  Double check rocket equation
want to be able to determine how much mass is needed and how long the thrust will take in order to accelerate a mass of 100k pounds to 2 km/sec

Okay, I've check rocket equation, and it says what it did before.  It will take about 300 grams to do the trick.  So, what accounts for the discrepancy?

Not using correct equations.  Just guessing at what it should be.  Moral to story?  Sometimes, you just don't know what you're doing, so it's best just to admit it.  Okay, I'm not a rocket scientist.


I've been fooling around with those equations linked to in the above paragraph, and plugging some numbers into the calculator.  In order to get the 30 million ISP number, the amount of electrons needed would only be
1/1000th of a mole of hydrogen.   The mass is 1/1836 of a gram divided by a thousand equals 5.45 e-7 grams electrons per second.  That should yield an ISP of close to 30 million, but that could be only a fantasy anyway.  Can't determine the true ISP cuz I ain't that smart.

Anyhow, with an ISP of a 30 million, then it should only use about 300 grams of electrons for the delta v of 2.1 km/sec.  It would have to obtain the electrons from hydrogen, which would require about 600 kg of hydrogen to go along for the ride.

The true number may be greater than a million, which is the number I've heard about for fusion engines.  They expel particles out at a fraction of the speed of light.  It is the velocity that makes all the difference.


I'm back to thinking that the real ISP is closer to 30 thousand than to 30 million.  This isn't a practical idea.


Maybe one more update, and I will leave this alone.  In order to make this idea work, you have to bring along the hydrogen for the source of electrons.  But that is why it won't work.  That is because it implies extra mass, and that extra mass makes it a problem.  You can get 30 million ISP if you use electrons exclusively, and leave the hydrogen home.  But to do that, you will have to confine the electrons and be able to retrieve them when you want them.  There isn't any way to do that for the length of time required.  If there was, they could make the Polywell Fusion device work.  The answer to the puzzle then, is that you cannot confine enough electrons to make this work.  It isn't feasible.

Markets gone berserk

It looks incredible to me when I checked in this morning.  Down 700 points, but it was worse at the open.  Then it seemed to battle back before fading into the home stretch.

The market is down over 2k points, but I'm nowhere near breakeven in my position.  I know why, too.  The way this thing works is that it mimics the percentage move each day.  But, if the stock goes down 20 %, it has to rise more than that to get even.  Example:  Stock falls 20% from 100 to 80.  In order to get back to 100, it needs to rise 20 points out of 80, not 100.  It has to rise 25% in order to make it to breakeven.

I knew all that, but for some strange reason, I've been overlooking it.

Alternative to Iran deal

Consider that the deal won't stop Iran from getting the bomb.  Even their supporters aren't claiming that this will stop Iran from eventually getting the bomb.  There's one way to ensure that Iran never gets the bomb, and that is war.

The left rules that out like it is an option that can never be considered.  Yet, they like to say that if Iran cheats on the deal, then military force can be used.  The truth of the matter is that the left has ruled out military force altogether.  No matter what Iran does, the political left in America won't allow the use of force.  So, what good is this deal if it cannot be enforced and doesn't stop Iran from obtaining the bomb eventually anyway?

The fact of the matter is that Iran can't stop us from disarming them.  Only we can stop ourselves.  So, what is so bad about stopping Iran from getting the bomb?  Isn't that better than letting a terrorist state have the bomb and what that could mean?

Iran has made its intentions known.  If they get the bomb, they most likely will use it.  The reliance upon deterrence only works with a rational opponent.  The Iranians aren't rational.  If they are rational, and are facing a very real American threat, they'd be more willing to negotiate.  Then and only then can we have a hope of getting a deal that MIGHT work.  On the other hand, the Iranians know that as long as the left holds power in the United States, they are free to pursue their objectives to get the bomb and to USE IT.  They want this deal because they want to continue even after the leftist president is gone and a more hawkish American president is in power.

Why give this gift to Iran?  What good is that to us?


An additional thought:  Do you believe that Obama would use force if Iran flagrantly violates the deal if implemented?

You can be sure of one thing:  Obama would pretend to be hawkish and the Iranians would pretend to be intimidated if the Iranians believed that this would keep a truly hawkish presidential candidate from winning the White House.

Frankly, I do not believe that Obama would ever use force against them no matter what they did.  If I am wrong, then he would only do limited things, he never commit ground troops to Iran.  Even if he did commit troops, he would make sure that they would fail.

Bottom line:  I don't trust Obama nor do I believe any of his promises because he lies.  Why would he push the agreement through under the circumstances that now exist if he could be trusted?

Sunday, August 23, 2015

Milestones for the blog

300k pageviews and 9500 posts.

That's after nearly 5 years of full time blogging.

For what it's worth, which apparently is not much, it's been great.  Thanks for help making a dent in the wall of silence.  Even if it is only a very small dent.

More reasons to believe the Iranian deal is bad

There is some strange belief amongst liberals that if you are nice to somebody, they will be nice to you.  That might work in a civil society, where most people are reasonable and kind, but in a mean world, as this world can be sometimes, it just might get your head chopped off.

So, Obama is nice to the Russians, and ends the Bush era work on missile defense in Europe.  What did he get from the Russians?  Not very much, it seems.  In order to get such a prize concession, Obama should have asked for a halt in Russian help to the Iranians.  Obama could have had a bargaining chip there, but he gave it away and got nothing in return.

The result is that the Iranians could keep right on working on their bomb making plans.  Sure, they can continue working on centrifuges without Russian help, but having a reactor around makes things a whole lot easier.  Why make it easier for Iran?

He didn't help with the revolt against the Iranian regime.  He could have had a bargaining chip there, too.  For help with the revolt, he could have demanded that they stand down on their nuclear research.  If they didn't comply, Obama could have helped the Green Revolution --- a lot.  So, the Iranians had no real incentive to negotiate, and it looks like they didn't really.  Basically, they got everything they wanted for little in return.

With his policy in Iraq, Obama lost yet another bargaining chip with the Iranians.  Instead of a bargaining chip, he handed Iraq to Iran on a silver platter.  He was sure nice to the Iranians, but the Iranians haven't changed their attitude one bit.  It's still "death to America" in Tehran.

Now, he is being nice again.  He wrapped their nuclear bomb research with a nice ribbon around it, and what does he have to do in order to get Congress to accept it?  He has to lie about it.

Meanwhile, while Obama is being so nice to the Iranians, we will soon have to face a terrorist regime with nukes.  That could get your head chopped off.  That would definitely not be very nice.

Something implied, but not stated

The Powerline article cited in this post implies that Obama is lying about the Iranian agreement.  The article doesn't state that explicitly, but you can come to that conclusion if you think about what you are reading.

The secret side agreement mentioned in the AP story is going to be claimed as inaccessible because of promises of confidentiality to the Iranians, but the secret is that it is this administration that holds the keys to the release of the documents that they promised to obtain.  Here's how:

Amano’s defense of the Parchin side deal comes amid speculation that the IAEA is being subject to overwhelming pressure by the Americans and the Iranians. On the American side, the leverage is straightforward: Amano is up for reelection next year, and he perennially relies on Western nations to provide him with slim majorities [r].
Amano's job depends upon pleasing the Americans and their allies, not Iran.   Iran's displeasure at the disclosure isn't really the deciding issue.  Since it is the West that caved in to the Iranians, it is the West that has something to hide.

In other words, Obama pressured Amano to alter the usual procedures for verification in order to get a deal, and then wants to blame the Iranians for keeping that fact a secret.  This makes it politically acceptable to the Americans, but only if the gambit works.  If the truth comes out, even Obama's most ardent supporters are going to have a hard time justifying this deal.