If You Like Your Nuclear Program, You Can Keep Your Nuclear Program…

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Give Peace A Chance“Now is not the time for us to impose new sanctions, now is the time for us to … give diplomacy a chance, give peace a chance.” – Barack Obama

“And by peace he means let Iran have nuclear weapons…” (Weasel Zippers)

Well, we knew Barack Obama was a Leninist, but it appears we had the wrong Lenin. What’s next, a Bed-In with the Mooch taking Yoko’s place while Barry fiddles with his granny glasses and channels the shade of Tim Leary? Hardly. Obama’s antipathy for radical Islam has always been less than skin deep, and his idea of peace seems to be buying the mullahs enough time to go comfortably nuclear. If recycling inanities from the Sixties helps the cause, then Obama will gladly break out the bongs, turn on the black lights, and dole out the hash brownies.

Barack Obama’s inexplicable and increasingly dangerous tilt toward Iran is getting harder to hide. Whether his administration is consciously shifting policy or simply making ad hoc, unrelated (even incoherent) decisions is unclear. But the cumulative effect is indisputable — a declining America in the Middle East inevitably means a stronger Iran, portending grave risks for Washington and its appalled friends and allies. (TribLive)

The Freaky BrothersYou’d have to be as stoned as a Furry Freak Brother or a Persian philandress to believe that Obama’s Geneva agreement will suffer a better fate than a fat chicken in Colonel Sander’s kitchen. Not even the squishiest of Congressional Democrats believes that, judging, at least, by the numbers of them desirous of reimposing sanctions on the regime.  Rouhani and the gloating Iranians certainly don’t think so:

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

“Do you know what the Geneva agreement means? It means the surrender of the big powers before the great Iranian nation.” – Hassan Rouhani, President of Iran

“No facility will be closed; enrichment will continue, and qualitative and nuclear research will be expanded.  All research into a new generation of centrifuges will continue.” – Abbas Araqchi, Chief Iranian Negotiator

“Had the enemy been able to confront us militarily, it would have already taken action. Given their weakness in the military dimension, they have opted for the political arena and we will certainly succeed in this area too.” — Iranian Army Commander Major General Ataollah Salehi

Salehi’s probably right, considering the left wing Islamophile America has twice thoughtlessly installed as Commander-In-Chief. 

Looks Good Until You Try ItRelated articles

PTG

Original Post:  Be Sure You Are Right, Then Go Ahead

Share

(D) Is For “Domestic Enemy”

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Obamacare glitch

Unfortunately, in presidential elections there are no do-overs and no rewinds; no repeats, reruns, reissues, or recalls; no Lemon Law that covers the inhabitant of the Oval Office.  In America, barring the unlikely and the unforeseen, you’re stuck with your mistake for four years, and if you don’t learn from it, eight.

Barack Obama’s first term in office produced ample reasons why there should have been no second.  But this is 21st Century America, where the degradation of the electorate is nearly complete, where up is down and right is wrong and woe betide the lonely dissident who dares to tell you different.

 The implementation of the Democrats’ disastrous Affordable Care Act should convince anyone retaining even a modicum of common sense (or their health insurance) why the modern Jackass cannot be entrusted with power nationally. He can’t be trusted locally either, but at least damage inflicted there is usually containable.

And even as Obama and the Democrats turn the American healthcare system into a smoking ruin, they’re planning the same thing for our national defense.  The latest brilliant scheme?  Training Libyans — a substantial number of whom were last seen murdering our ambassador in Benghazi — in flight ops and nuclear wherewithal, classes to be conducted right here in the United States (See DHS Plan: Let Libyans Train Here for ‘Flight Operations,’ ‘Nuclear-Related Fields’).   So when the next fleet of 747s smacks into a conveniently located American skyscraper or the next bomb in Boston goes dirty, and the “Obama Didn’t Know” chorus begins anew, just remember that the scarlet “D” in “Democrat” stands for “Domestic Enemy.”

PTG

Original Post:  Be Sure You’re Right, The Go Ahead

Share

As “Big E” Retired, New Carrier to take Name “Enterprise”

Share

The Navy recently deactivated CVN 65, the Enterprise.  However, they have announced that CVN 80 will carry the name on.  The Army Time has more…

On the day the Navy officially took the aircraft carrier Enterprise out of service after 51 years in the fleet, the service announced that the name Enterprise won’t be absent long from the fleet.

The third Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier, CVN-80, will become the ninth ship in the Navy’s history to be named Enterprise, Navy Ray Mabus announced Dec. 1 in a pre-recorded video message that was played at the inactivation ceremony.

As the article goes on to state, the ship cannot be formally decommissioned until her nuclear fuel is removed, and her reactors deactivated permanently.  Then, sadly, the great ship will be dismantled.

Share

Green Energy Is Burning Up Your Green $$$

Share

Obama’s insane energy policy is burning a hole through the American’s family budget. At the same time, our government is burning through our tax dollars while putting our future generations deeper and deeper in debt.

How are Americans reacting to this insanity? That I can tell, there is almost no reaction from Main Street America. The reason, I think, is obvious.  The average American is being battered about like a ball in a pin ball machine by the multitude of negative impacts their government’s policies are having on them. It is almost impossible for anyone to focus on one bad policy long enough before another one smacks them from behind. We bloggers, on the other hand,  are able to sift through numerous issues each day and decide to write about one of them. In that fashion, I decided that today I would write about the absurdity of Obama’s “Green” energy policies.

What The Obama Administration Won’t Tell You About Solar Power is the title of a recent article at The Daley Gator, via Big Peace,  which begs for attention that it is not likely to get. So, I will do my humble best to help raise awareness on this important issue. Here are some of the highlights:

On Friday, Secretary of the Interior Salazar praised a new solar project in California, expected to be the largest in the world, as a major milestone in fulfilling President Obama’s promise to expand renewable energy.[i] The first phase of the project, to be completed in 2013, is being supported by a U.S. Department of Energy $2.1 billion loan guarantee. The 1,000-megawatt Blythe Solar Power Project in Riverside County, California claims to be able to power between 300,000 and 750,000 homes and create 1,000 temporary jobs and about 200 permanent jobs. The truth is that solar power alone will dependably serve very few homes because it is too unreliable but will cost up to 5 times as much as the cheapest form of electrical generation. Consumers, businesses, and the taxpayer will suffer.

Of course, Secretary Salazar does not tell the public that this solar plant will provide only a small fraction of the power that a 1,000 megawatt fossil fuel or nuclear plant would provide. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), a new solar thermal plant has an average capacity factor of only 18 percent, which compares to a new natural gas combined cycle plant at 87 percent, a new coal-fired plant at 85 percent and a new nuclear plant at 90 percent.

Think about for a second or two, my friends. A capacity factor of only 18 frigging percent. This is twenty-first century progress?

And, the capital cost compared to conventional generating plants of the same size:

Not only is the annual production less but the cost of the solar plant is much higher. According to the EIA’s analysis of the cost of new generating plants which begin producing power in 2016, the projected capital cost of a solar thermal power plant excluding finance charges is $4,692 per kilowatt compared to $2,844 per kilowatt for a dual-unit coal-fired plant and $978 per kilowatt for a natural-gas combined cycle plant. [iv] So, the cost for a 1,000 megawatt solar plant would be $4.7 billion dollars, a coal-fired plant would be $2.8 billion, and a natural gas combined cycle plant would be just under $1 billion.

What about the relative production costs?

* solar thermal, 31.2 cents per kilowatt hour,
* coal, 9.5 cents per kilowatt hour,
* natural gas combined cycle, 6.2 cents per kilowatt hour, and
* nuclear, 11.4 cents per kilowatt hour.

When I look at these numbers my blood starts to boil. Our government (well maybe it’s not our government but Obama’s government) is promoting and subsidising solar energy at a cost of 31.2 cents per kilowatt-hour while impeding development of our humongous gas reserves, which could be used to produce energy at not 6.2 cent per kilowatt-hour but something even less. If private industry had the freedom to develop our gas reserves, the unit cost of that gas would be significantly less than it is today.

So, the lucky citizens of California will be paying through the nose for their electrical energy. (That ought to really help the sales of the Chevy Volt.) But don’t worry. I’m sure it wong belong when everyone will have the chance to watch their Green$$$ being burnt up by a Obama Green Energy Plant near you.

Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

Original Post: Conservatives on Fire

Share