DD Wiz wrote on Mar 2, 2008 8:19 PM: The published letter from Cheyne Whitney asks how rooftop solar is cleaner and safer than solar from Imperial Valley. Hello! You don't need 150 miles of transmission lines that require devastation of sensitive habitat and cause fires every time the wind blows! Oh, and the real point, the energy companies don't get to keep centralized control. The writer continues: "the economic feasibility of rooftop solar to power our entire county remains in question." And the ANSWER to the question is that 1.3 BILLION DOLLARS for this BOONDOGGLE could outright pay for solarizing 40,000 rooftops with systems the size of mine, and if you just added HUGE additional incentives such as $10,000 or $15,000 in addition to current incentives, you could attract those who are borderline ready and just need that extra push, and that would cover 80,000 to 100,000 homes the size of mine (and even more if you just look at an average-sized residence).
No, Cheyne, there is no question. It is far cheaper to just pay for local generation.
In fact, Cheyne's final point is a counterproductive non-sequitr, referencing the 3 million in Florida who lost power recently. The problem was centralized, long-distance transmission. The solution is local, on-site generation! But this, of course, terrifies the energy monopolists.
Shifting gears, gee, I really wanted to reply to the published letter from perennial whiner Junious Montgomery, but there was not even a single snippet of substance to actual respond to, just empty name-calling! Oh well, I guess that's what they're down to.

sdraoul wrote on Mar 2, 2008 10:49 PM:DD, knock off the baloney! Solar power can be implemented by anyone who wants to it is volunatry. And, quit driving your car anywhere, you're polluting MY air. You and your FILTHY FOSSIL FUELS that won't run out for a 1000 years (that includes coal which can be scrubbed).

As for Leon Smith, another DD type sociological lemming. I thought you went to law school. If you did, you would know there are not 20 million illegals in the country because there is absolutely no proof that such numbers exist except in the fantasies of Mexican haters. Show one official estimate from a legitimate source that hints at more than 12-15 million, show me just one.

And, if you went to law school, you would know the difference between an administrative violation, which violations of immigration law are, and U.S. Criminal codes which require prison sentences of 366 days or more.

Ron wrote on Mar 3, 2008 6:17 AM:Obviously, not a Wiz @8:19 PM is tripping over his own facts.
Not a wiz states: "And the ANSWER to the question is that 1.3 BILLION DOLLARS for this BOONDOGGLE could outright pay for solarizing 40,000 rooftops with systems the size of mine, and if you just added HUGE additional incentives such as $10,000 or $15,000 in addition to current incentives, you could attract those who are borderline ready and just need that extra push, and that would cover 80,000 to 100,000 homes the size of mine..."
So even if you took all the homes not a wiz claims could be covered, at 140,000 homes maximum, he is still short of the needs of the growing County. The Sunrise Power Link will provide power to 650,000 homes. Under the Not a wiz plan, that leaves 510,000 homes without, and with our County growing, as it is, we need that power just to maintain, if not grow. Does he think businesses will want to stay if simple electricity is in question, or the price of power is going to be a hardship? I don't think so. Further, he cites 1.3 billion, of SDG&E's money, which is private money. Is he suggesting the Government provide this $32,500 for each of the 40,000 homes? The price of Power Link to 650,000 would be only $2,000 per. If the costs were spread even wider, a lot less.
Of the 1,118,410 housing units in San Diego County, his idea would only cover
3.6% of the population. To match the power capability of the Sunrise Powerlink, you would have to install solar panels on 855,000 residential homes at a cost to ratepayers of approximately $20 billion. So what we are talking about here is, a small group of fanatics who want to control what the rest of us do, and charge us more for it. I'm telling ya, you really need to check the wizzer's "facts", cause their not always what they seem to be.-

Ron wrote on Mar 3, 2008 6:49 AM:I love the new front page feature that shows how many people read the most popular stories. I see yesterday's big story got 1,216 views, and since I missed it I can go read it now. Knowing more than 1,000 looked at it shows just how important it is.-

Nick wrote on Mar 3, 2008 7:30 AM:"SD RAoul" keeps using that great low figure of 12-15 Million Illegals. How was that figure? Oh, I don't know, 2,3,4 years ago? I guess he assumes we we don't have any sneaking accross the border anymore.......LMAO.
1 is too many "RAoul", that is the point you just can't seem to get!-

Chuck wrote on Mar 3, 2008 8:23 AM:Liberals scream about what Bush is spending in Iraq, but have so blocked Bush from developing our oil resources that they cheer the $104 per barrel we are sending to Arabia, Russia, Chavez, Nigeria, Mexico and Indonesia-

sdraoul wrote on Mar 3, 2008 8:23 AM:Nick is unaware that 800,000 illegals were arrested and deported by the BP last year, 33 percent less than the year before. Moreover, we know from studies by the Public Policy Institute of California over a period of years that 500,000 to 700,000 return to Mexico every year.

Thus, the 12-15 million figure that is a compilation of Census Bureau and ICE estimates are more accurate than the 20,000,000 two Bears Stearns Company analysts concocted after studying Jersey City. And, let us not forget that the charming Jim Gilchrist, Orange County's Minuteman Founder, claims there are 40-million (in his book) 40-million illegals because he claims all people of Mexican origin in the U.S. are illegally here despite 75 percent being natural born American citizens, like me.-

The method used by Gilchrist, Bear Stearns MBAs, Nick and people who write letters to the NC Times is that if most illegals around here are Mexican, then most Americans of Mexican origin must also be illegal.

Patriot wrote on Mar 3, 2008 8:31 AM:sdraoul's 10:49 PM post and a similar one the day before makes reference to crossing the border without permission as an "administrative violation". That infraction sounds fairly minor and there wouldn't be such a ruckus if that was all that was going on. It's all that other stuff that follows: the so-called "undocumented" using fake ID and stolen social security numbers to gain employment for which they are not authorized. Driving unlicensed and uninsured. Driving up poverty rates and costs of public services. Driving down wages for the lowest paid workers. Whether there are 20 million people or ONLY 12 million is irrelevant. If 11 of the 12 million were French speaking Canadians, sdraoul might very well argue that we give them all a free pass. I fear though that if anyone objected, they would unfairly earn the label "Canadian hater" or "phobe" or some other disparaging term.

Now what? wrote on Mar 3, 2008 8:31 AM:So odd to see Ahmadinejad visiting Iraq's leaders with so much fanfare, isn't it? Signing treaties, apparently quite the allies. Meanwhile, the 18 US political benchmarks set for Iraq are holding at exactly 1 accomplished, 17 to go. Maybe you like the idea of a 1-3 hundred thousand American military/paramilitary in Iraq for decades, keeping the violence down, so that Iraq can build a strong alliance with Iran. Ahmadinejab and Maliki must be quite amused at the outcome of Bush's little adventure-for-no-reason. The hated Saddam was ousted by us for them. A Shiite was elected by the purple thumbs. Iran and Iraq are a mutual admiration society. And our troops are bogged down for decades. McCain says: stay the course.

Chuck wrote on Mar 3, 2008 8:45 AM:The news is reporting that the U.S. has launched airstrikes in Somalia targeting terror suspects and that
two terrorist suicide bombings kill at least 23, wound dozens in Baghdad. And what will you hear from the liberals on this board all day? That the USA are murderers and that we deserve the suicide bombings, because they are the great uniters

0412 wrote on Mar 3, 2008 8:49 AM:Chuck wrote on Mar 3, 2008 8:23 AM ROF. I think that your brain might be short circuited as your memory banks seem to be in disorder. You have said the same thing previously numerous times. Everyone should scream at the cost of the Iraqi war in death and treasure. It will be our great great grand children who will be paying for this war. Bush has deferred it to them. The Republicans rubber stamp majority was in power for six of the last eight years. They could have easily approved oil drilling off the coasts or within the territory of the USA including Chuck's back yard. So, I do hope that you will update your pat answers for the sake of levity on this blog.

OBSERVATION wrote on Mar 3, 2008 8:52 AM:Now what? wrote on Mar 3, 2008 8:31 AM: McCain and fellow conservative ilk are like a military contingent assaulting a fortified position They keep assaulting the position and assaulting the position until they are all dead.

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 3, 2008 9:02 AM:The post from "Ron" (6:17am) again diverts from the real issue about the proposed Sunrise Powerlink BOONDOGGLE that Cheyne Whitney was gushing over in the published letter I responded to in my 8:19pm post. The lights are on in San Diego right now. The comparison of the costs for a 50% increase in production that do not reflect the real costs of environmental habitat destruction and fires with the one-time costs for subsidizing installation of LOCALLY-GENERATED on-site power sources that are most active when most needed (summer sunshine air-conditioning season) is apples-to-bananas, but that is all "Ron" has right now so it seems like he's going to stick with that.
When all the true costs are covered in relation to addressing what it is we actually need, yes, it is more feasible to install solar locally, helping those who want to do it voluntarily with a little extra help to compensate them for the public good they are contributing to the community and to help create the volume that, in the long run will drive down production costs, than to string 150 miles of transmission lines at the cost of destroying sensitive habitat and setting off massive fire devastation when the wind blows one of these down, which you KNOW will happen (especially when there are FIVE better routes suggested in the EIR, even if you have to end up taking this BOONDOGGLE). By the way, the 1.3 BILLION does not include the cost of reimbursing fire insurance companies for losses caused by this insane act of negligence.

ROL LOL wrote on Mar 3, 2008 9:03 AM:Marine responds, right or wrong Well we treated this morning to the resume of Fidel (Jay) Jiron. He must think that it is quite impressive rising to a senior NCO in the USMC at the company grade level. I for one say, SO WHAT??? Neither signing your name as U. S. Marines (Retired) nor our USMC history qualifies your opinion for any additional attention or merit.

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 3, 2008 9:04 AM: The post from "sdraoul" (10:49pm) states that "Solar power can be implemented by anyone who wants to it is volunatry." That is not an accurate statement. Many would love to go solar, but the cost remains prohibitive because the government continues to subsidize electricity produced by non-renewable FINITE FILTHY FOSSIL FUELS by allowing monopolistic advantages to private investors who could not compete without protective enabling legislation that destroys real competition and not only allows a competitive subsidy but frees them from the true costs of the environmental consequences of their devastating methods of producing and transmitting electricity. Solar and other nonrenewables can be produced in a manner that is cost-competitive IF it is also consumed on the same economies of scale as non-renewable sources and IF the costs of those FINITE FILTHY FOSSIL FUEL sources are required to include the consequential devastation to sensitive environments, the increased fire risks when transmission lines are blown down, etc.
"sdraoul" chides me for polluting HIS air. Without actually knowing what he drives or how many miles, I'd like to ask him what kind of car he primarily drives, what kind of mileage he gets and how many miles he puts on it (OK, mileage times how many trips to/from Del Mar Heights to Congressman Issa's Vista office...". I'll compare that with the kind of car I drive (Toyota Prius Hybrid) and my mileage if he will agree that the one who creates the most net pollution of the others' air will agree to reduce it to the lower level between the two of us.
And then I will go one step further -- I will acknowledge that I am an environmental sinner who is trying to repent and reform. It is true that for too many years my carbon footprint was far too big, but I am actively trying to correct that. Now that the solar is in place, the next step is that I am actively seeking alternatives for my pollution-spewing, FINITE FILTHY FOSSIL FUEL guzzling PRIUS, to either to convert it to or replace it with a PLUG-IN hybrid whose backup energy source will only kick in for trips over 40-60-more miles (depending on options) and can be made to run on fuels that are NOT imported from dictators and terrorists. I am considering various options now, and hope that this year's big change will be to an electric car.
The biggest hurdle for me and others making the big plunge toward complete independence from non-renewable FINITE FILTHY FOSSIL FUELS purchased from dependence on terrorists and dictators is COST. Polluters are subsidized by not being held responsible for the real costs of air pollution, climate change and foreign policy costs from wars to get oil from middle-eastern dictators who won't kow-tow to the demands of oil company administrations. California had a mandate in place several years ago to require a steadily-increasing percentage of cars sold in California to be non-fossil-fuel powered and, while that was in place, we had excellent options being developed such as the Toyota RAV-4 EV and the very popular Chevy EV, temporarily to be subsidized by polluters until the economies of scale in production would catch up to the Pollutionmobiles. This was very successful, until scrapped by pressure from corporate lobbyists for Big Oil and Big Auto, as well documented in the movie "Who Killed the Electric Car." We need to restore the mandate to hold polluters (both users and pushers) responsible for the real costs of what they (WE) do and to ease the transition to cleaner transportation technologies.
I am also thinking of establishing a "Twelve-Step" group for recovering polluters.
I also want to help demonstrate that one can clean up their environmental act and continue to live comfortably. While I have gotten comfortable with fluorescent compact bulbs, it actually no longer matters WHAT kind of lights you use, or how much you leave 'em on, if you are producing more electricity from sunshine than what you use :-)

esteban wrote on Mar 3, 2008 9:06 AM:Chuck, that's because liberals secretly want the USA to be destroyed. I'd rather have Ahmadinejad as pres than some of these loony libs.

Once Again wrote on Mar 3, 2008 9:10 AM:Why does Chuck jump for joy whenever the US Troops are killed by a roadside bomb as Chuck's hero Bush delays the proper equipment? Because as we already know, any success for the terrorists is a success for Chuck.

0412 wrote on Mar 3, 2008 9:10 AM:Chuck wrote on Mar 3, 2008 8:45 AM The same ole anit liberal allegation again from Chuck . LOL. Me and my five liberals denounce any terrorist attack on any anybody, anywhere at any time regardless of race, creed, gender or geo political location. Those on this blog who are in your opinion detractors have not identified themselves as liberals- have they? LMAO. Now fellow bloggers, get ready. Chuck has really nothing new to say again, again and again. But, he does not care. There will be plenty more pat statements and pat answers from Chuck today.

esteban wrote on Mar 3, 2008 9:26 AM:Censored again...God forbid I express my opinion on Pulse's anti American rants. He's NCT's golden boy.

Chuck wrote on Mar 3, 2008 9:41 AM:When Hillary or Hussein get annointed as the liberal nominee, they will immediately start talking about job growth. Then McCain will remind the of the hundreds of thousand of jobs lost because liberals blocked oil exploration. Then McCain will remind them that both have promised to attack the auto industry, the insurance industry, the mortgage industry, the drug industry, the trucking industry, the medical industry, the oil industry, the shipping industry, the computer industry, etc. Apparently, the only industry they won'y attack is Hollywood, the pervert industry and the porn industry, illegal alien industry and naturally-- the public school teachers union industry

Chuck wrote on Mar 3, 2008 9:43 AM:>>There will be plenty more pat statements and pat answers from Chuck today.>> That is for certain

Question for raoul wrote on Mar 3, 2008 9:53 AM:I find your posts about immigration interesting and, I must say, admirably consistent. Let me ask you: if you could write the policy, what would your immigration policy look like? Would you disband the Border Patrol altogether and declare the border open? Or do you think the current compromise is best, where we have "laws" and some "enforcement" but overall allow many in. Do you feel that the life that the "illegals" have is good enough? Or would you rather see them not burdened by the imminent threat of being caught and deported? Thanks in advance.

Chuck wrote on Mar 3, 2008 10:01 AM:The news is reporting that the U.S. is pressuring lenders to find alternatives to foreclosure. Good for them. The first solution is for the lenders to ask those people who signed on the botom line for a mortgage to keep their end of the bargain. But, if someone is $150K upside down on their home and their payment is about to rise $500/mo due to an ARM, that will never happen. The only thing that can possibly be done is to allow borrowers who have a small equity or are only $10K-$30K upside down to do a no cost 5.5% 30yr refinance, despite being upside down. But Countrywide will turn that down because they have too many of those sweet $15K prepayment penalties on the subprime mortgages that were sold as FNMA, GNMA or CMO funds to the financial industry

esteban wrote on Mar 3, 2008 10:10 AM:Pulse...take a look at all the other armies in the world. We are the kindest and most honorable army in the WORLD! Maybe except for the French...because they don't fight, they give up.

GREEN JOBS wrote on Mar 3, 2008 10:13 AM:-
Chuck complains about the cost of gas at $104 a barrel being paid to enemy nations.
Yeah, Oilmen in the White House and record oil profits and our enemies are prospering.
Chuck also complains about lost jobs because of oil. Oil dependency is a job killer, all right.
Hillary and Obama are both campaigning on GREEN JOBS - private sector jobs installing solar, wind and geothermal energy. I think our auto industry will also recover if we start making cars that don't run on dictator power and need service every time you drive to the store and back.

SOLON ... wrote on Mar 3, 2008 10:14 AM:… Chuck’s intended racial slur yesterday (Mar 2, 2008 11:27 AM) against the noble name HUSSEIN must be checked. Hussein Is a Semitic name, meaning "good" or "handsome." Furthermore, the name Barack is a Semitic word meaning "to bless" as a verb or "blessing" as a noun. In its Hebrew form, BARAK, is found all through the Bible.
I want to say something about Barack Hussein Obama's name. It is a name to be proud of. It is an American name. It is a blessed name. It is a heroic name, as heroic and American in its own way as the name of General Omar Nelson Bradley or the name of Benjamin Franklin. And denigrating that name is a form of racial and religious bigotry of the most vile and debased sort. It is a prejudice against names deriving from Semitic languages!
Barack and Hussein are Semitic words. Americans have been named with Semitic names since the founding of the Republic. Fourteen of our 43 presidents have had Semitic names.
Let us take Benjamin Franklin. His first name is from the Hebrew ’Bin , the son of the Right (hand), or son of strength, The "Bin" means "son of," just as in modern colloquial Arabic. Bin Yamin Franklin is not a dishonorable name because of its Semitic root. By the way, there are lots of Muslims named Bin Yamin. Ben Franklins’s name is as noble as it gets.
Which brings me to Omar Bradley. Omar is an alternative spelling of Umar. Umar ibn al-Khattab was the second caliph of Sunni Islam. General Bradley was named for the poet Omar Khayyam, who bore the caliph's name.
What about Congressman Darrell Issa of California? ("`Isa" means Jesus in Arabic). Former cabinet secretary Donna Shalala? (Shalala means "waterfall" in Arabic).

Barack Hussein Obama is very proud of the name given him by his father. When he becomes president his name will become honored and respected as the ‘good and blessed’ one.
Submitted 1:15am Re-submitted 10:14am

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 3, 2008 10:22 AM: The post from "Question for raoul" (9:53m) raises good questions for "sdraoul." Additional questions that I would like to see in "sdraoul's" proposed policy:
1. Do you agree that there are problems with the current immigration situation?
2. What solutions to these problems would your proposal include in terms of responding to "symptoms" (reactive)?
3. What solutions to these problems would your proposal include in terms of addressing the CAUSES of the problems in the first place (proactive) -- both here and in Mexico?
I do find "sdraoul" to be mostly factually knowledgeable on this issue, but his responses tend to focus on negatively finding fault with others' statements. While there is a place for that when they are wrong, ultimately I think people want to see solutions.
This is hardly my "signature" issue, but at least I have offered actual solutions, focusing on proactively addressing the causes of the problem, and I would also be interested in "sdraoul's" views on this important subject.

I wonder wrote on Mar 3, 2008 10:25 AM:What would it be like if a liberal really did win the White House? Granted, it'd be bad news for all the bureaucrats in the drug and insurance companies. And it might mean a major shrinking of the military and the whole military-industrial complex. So, yes, many jobs would be lost. On the other hand, it could be a huge boon for other industries and services. For example, what if a lot of the money that goes for military research was poured into medical research? What if industries and services aimed to alleviate suffering got the loopholes and government support that the military now does? How would it be if, in cities that could accommodate them, industries (private industries) devoted to developing greener public transportation and energy could feel this was a time of unprecedented growth? How about taking the enormous military budget and refunneling lots of it to a hugely expanded Peace Corps? Get the picture? I don't see that overall, jobs would need to be lost at all. What if promoting and sustaining health, mental health, a thriving population, and peace had the same priorities that all things military had now?

Patriot wrote on Mar 3, 2008 10:28 AM:I agree in principle with most of DD Wiz's commentary in his 9:04 AM post. I just don't want to have to plug in my car to the grid that is generating electricity from finite fossil fuels. I want economy of scale in solar panel production so I can afford to install some panels in my sunny back yard and thumb my nose at those foreign dictators and terrorists.

Whaddaya call it? wrote on Mar 3, 2008 10:41 AM:I'm concerned about Chuck. He has real venom for this thing he calls "liberals". They believe in all sorts of things that real liberals (like me) find absurd or even repellant. They have enormous power that real liberals (like me) only can dream of. They are, worst of all, the cause of all the terrible things in the US and maybe the world. But they are a fantasy, an imaginary enemy of some sort. And Chuck won't bend on this, either. Thousands of efforts to correct his views, to bring them more in line with reality, have been made on these pages but his accusations and statements never vary even one iota. Seriously, is this a kind of paranoid disorder? Are these delusions of persecution? Chuck should seek help, maybe from the medical/insurance/pharmaceutical industry that he loves so much.

SOLON ... wrote on Mar 3, 2008 10:46 AM:… Chuck continues his futile effort to vilify Senator Obama (9:41 AM), but is ignorant that the name ‘Hussein’ is a Semitic based name which translate to ‘HANDSOME’ or ‘GOOD’. This is a blessed and appropriate name for the senator. It is a name to be proud of. It is an American name. It is a blessed name. It is a heroic name, as heroic and American in its own way as the name of General Omar Nelson Bradley. (Omar is also a Semitic name).
Thank you, Chuck, for keeping the name HUSSEIN before us.

Chris to esteban wrote on Mar 3, 2008 11:04 AM:Maybe if you could address the issues that Chris Pulse addresses instead of spouting your crude, sarcastice venom filled hate you responses wouldn't be censored. But the problem is that you have nothing else to offer but that which was mentioned above.

SOLON ... wrote on Mar 3, 2008 11:04 AM:… More Semitic and Arabic names of great Americans: For the edification of Chuck, who thinks one can vilify a person by their blessed Aramaic and Semitic derived names.
Both names, John and Adams, are Semitic names. His first name is from the Hebrew Yochanan, or gift of God, which became Johan and then John. (In German and in medieval English, "y" is represented by "j" but was originally pronounced "y".) Adams is from the biblical Adam, which also just means "human being." In Arabic, one way of saying "human being" is "Bani Adam," the children of men.
Thomas Jefferson's first name is from the Aramaic Tuma, meaning "twin." Aramaic is a Semitic language spoken by Jesus, which is related to Hebrew and Arabic. In Arabic twin is tau'am, so you can see the similarity.
James Madison, James Monroe and James Polk all had a Semitic first name, derived from the Hebrew Ya'aqov or Jacob, which is Ya`qub in Arabic. It became Iacobus in Latin, then was corrupted to Iacomus, and from there became James in English.
Zachary Taylor's first name is from the Hebrew Zachariah, which means "the Lord has remembered."
Abraham Lincoln, of course is, named for the patriarch Abraham, from the Semitic word for father, Ab, and the word for "multitude," raham,. Abu, "father of," is a common element in Arab names today.
So, Chuck, Barack Hussein Obama fits right in this list of presidents with Semitic names. In fact, we haven't had one for a while. We are due for another one.
Thanks to Prof. Juan Cole for research on this subject.

Chuck wrote on Mar 3, 2008 11:04 AM:>>(Omar is also a Semitic name).
Thank you, Chuck, for keeping the name HUSSEIN before us.>> There's a big difference between Gen. Bradley and Hussein Obama. After commanding a Corps in the Africa and Sicily campaigns for Patton, General Bradley commanded the entire First Army Group from Normandy to Berlin. The only thing Obama commands is his pack of swooning women who faint at his stump speeches. Can anyone on the planet name a single accomplishment of Hussein Obama. But, I have to admit, he's very good at buying votes with other peoples money in his entitlement free-for-all

Chuck wrote on Mar 3, 2008 11:12 AM: >>Chuck’s intended racial slur yesterday (Mar 2, 2008 11:27 AM) against the noble name HUSSEIN must be checked>>> Why should it be checked? As I recall your type attacked Romney for being a Mormon.--- an intentional slur. Just because your type doesnt want Husseins entire past history, actions, and voting records to be public, doesnt mean you should have your way. And, the whole world can see what's coming: When McCain asks him about certain people he associated with and did business with, Hussein and the media will immediately answer with "McCain in a racist, and a slur artist", as they will be desperate to keep the truth about Hussein from the voters

0412 wrote on Mar 3, 2008 11:16 AM:Conservative Strategy: Chuck is infamous on this blog for using certain vocabulary words in regards to liberals. Some of them are spew, filthy, ilk and type. I just finished a very brief perusal of the internet. I found a minimum of 60 web sites with editorials and blogs using the exact same vocabulary in rants against liberals and liberalism. Now, we can assume that Chuck is very dedicated to the irritation of the liberals and liberal leaning independents right here on the NCT blog. I believe that Chuck is just one the thousands of right fascist conservative bloggers who are employing an organized assault on liberalism in order to have their national and world view prevail. Chuck is just a foot soldier in the ranks. He probably takes his lead form Limbaugh, Hanity and Cunningham. He is just a mouth piece for hatred. Make no mistake the Conservative right does hate Liberalism. If the American people and the Constitution suffer because of it, that is just too darned bad.

Chris wrote on Mar 3, 2008 11:17 AM:Esteban says that we are the kindest most honorable army in the world. What rot. Of course all the sheep in other countries think the same about their own armies but then they are not on the recieving end of all the kindness of their armys and as far as honor is concerned there is not enough honor in our whole military to fill a thimble.

Patriot wrote on Mar 3, 2008 11:22 AM:As for the 10:46 AM post, I'm no fan of Obama's politics, but for anyone to highlight his middle name or confuse his last name with Osama in some attempt to associate the man with a middle eastern dictator or terrorist is shameful.

SOLON ... wrote on Mar 3, 2008 11:22 AM:… Grammatical error for Chuck (9:41 AM): You have a noun-verb disagreement. When you use a singular noun you should use a singular verb. In your specific error you should have said QUOTE: When Hillary or Hussein gets [not get]. Further, if they are both elected (as a president and vice president team) and you change the word from OR to the word AND, use of the plural verb GETS would be appropriate. Either way, OBAMA, a Semitic name for the good one, will enter the White House.

0412 wrote on Mar 3, 2008 11:24 AM:Chuck wrote on Mar 3, 2008 11:04 AM Typica Conservative deflection. Your use of the middle name of Senator Obama is to put in the mind of the people that he might be a Muslim and so by being a Muslim is in league with the terrorists. That is the issue. It is the same tactic being applied by your buddies Limbaugh, Hanity and Cunningham. Obama has bought anyone's vote. The money that he has raised so far comes from millions of swooning women. When I grow up, I want to be just like him.

0412 wrote on Mar 3, 2008 11:30 AM:Chuck wrote on Mar 3, 2008 9:41 AM Chuck what liberal party? I am not aware of a liberal political party. Clinton and Obama are running for the nomination of the Democratic Party which does contain liberals. It is not controlled by liberals
as the Republican party is controlled by the Conservative right. Just more of the Conservative right slime machine.

SOLON ... wrote on Mar 3, 2008 11:30 AM:… Chuck stoops to non-sequiturs in his silly distinction between the Semitic name of HUSSEIN and OMAR (11:04 AM). Does Chuck know the difference between his name and that of Charles the Great? Just as silly. Just as silly as saying that everybody with the name of JOE bears the same stigma as JOE Stalin. Grow up, Chuckie.

Ron wrote on Mar 3, 2008 11:39 AM:It does seem to me that the real apples-to-bananas comparison was done by not a Wiz@9:02 AM, again! Wiz wants to make the 2007 wildfires an issue when considering the Sunrise Power Link. Ok, fair thought. It's the one time, in my memory, when "A" Power Line caused a fire like this. But, more than that, I think this is a fig leaf by not a wiz, as he knows, or he should know, that most California Wildfires are natural to this terrain, thus part of the eco-system. And they are further propogated by terrible Forestry activities, and encroachment into the outer regions.
The Cedar Fire was a human-caused wildfire which burned out 280,278 acres and some 2,820 buildings. The recent wildfire covered more acreage, at 500,000, but fewer structures. But, that is neither here nor there, it's in fact, irrevelant. Wildfires are, and will be part of the eco-system here, and to name the one time a power line just happened to cause this one, is truly an apple to banana comparison. If a falling power line were the "norm", then I'd agree with you, but they are not. Estimated damage by the last wild according to the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies (NAMIC) in their February 21, 2008 report of the 2007 wildfire costs, estimated $2.5 billion in losses. And continuing their analysis, it reveals that in the past 10 years of California wildfire history close to 1,350 structures have burned on average EACH YEAR, with an estimated annual insured loss of some $490 million—nearly twice the long-term average. Moreover, while on average, less than 10 percent of the burnt areas in the United States are in California, around 70 percent of the total insured losses are from properties in Southern California. "The Fire" issue as stated by not a wiz, is a red herring.
Let me repeat what NAMIC said: "...less than 10 percent of the burnt areas in the United States are in California, around 70 percent of the total insured losses are from properties in Southern California.
Fires, natural and un-natural are taken into consideration when these power lines go in, it's a part of the Enviromental Cert process.
So, what it boils down to is not a wiz's hatred of capitalist enterprise, and he values desert plant life more than humans. You've gone over the edge wiz. Maybe if the investor hand cranked the generators, you'd be more appreciative, cause they've produced it "from the sweat of their brow's?"
Is that what this is really about?
Still wondering... if I owned more than one house, in order to keep my personal footprint down "for the Children", do I have to have solar on ALL my houses?

The name CHUCK . wrote on Mar 3, 2008 11:43 AM:. There is a BIG difference between Chuck the blogger and Charles the Great, more properly called Charlemagne. Chuck the blogger cannot by any stretch of the imagination be labeled “The Great”. Charlemagne, king of the Franks, came to rule over most of Europe. Several Holy Roman Emperors bore his name, as well as kings of England, France, Spain, Portugal and even Sweden. How in the world did Chuck the blogger come by such a noble name as this Frenchman? Is his ancestry FRENCH? I do see French traits in Chuck.

What’s in a name? .. wrote on Mar 3, 2008 11:54 AM:Well, how interesting. The Arabic word ABU means “father of”. Therefore, an alternate name for the Herbert Walker Bush, father of Bush the lesser, would be ABU BABY BUSH.

0412 wrote on Mar 3, 2008 11:58 AM:Chuck wrote on Mar 3, 2008 11:12 AM: Our "type" did not raise the question of Romney's Mormon religion. He was not a candidate for the Democratic Party. He was running for the Republican nomination. It was REPUBLICANS who questioned it. Your attack on Obama's name is an attempt to associate him with Muslim terrorists. It is a form of hate speech which is repugnant or Republican or repugnant Republican. LOL.

esteban wrote on Mar 3, 2008 12:09 PM:To 0412...God you are naive. The libs OWN the Democratic party.-

ORACLE = wrote on Mar 3, 2008 12:13 PM: = Well the dollar continues its downward slide. It now takes only 103 Yen to buy a cheap dollar; soon it will take only 100. Today oil hit a new high of $104 bbl, before settling down to $102. Gold and silver hit new highs against the dollar, gold gaining over $10 today. Darn! Wish I had gotten that gold filling two years ago instead of amalgam. And silver, finally soared above $20 oz. Do they put silver in amalgam?
All the major markets were in negative territory all day, and the DOW today has already dropped over 100 pts.
A comment from Warren Buffet, the Oracle of Omaha: By any reasonable measure, the economy is already in recession. GW Bush says we are not headed for recession. Who will win this argument, the Oracle of Omaha, or Dubya, the Oracle of Crawford? At least Senator McCain admits he doesn?t understand economics. That makes me feel good about the Republicans.-

OBSERVATION wrote on Mar 3, 2008 12:18 PM:Thomas Jefferson quote: "When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."-

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 3, 2008 12:19 PM: The post from "Chris to esteban" (11:04am) notes accurately that "esteban," like so many other conservatives, can only call names and rant and scream and throw tantrums but never actually responds at the level of substance or substantive issues.
Note to "Chris" -- while I always admire the optimism of a hopeful liberal, expecting too much from "esteban" or "Chuck" or some of the others is beyond even the imagination of the most creative liberal.
I do enjoy the bold, honest, plain-spoken letters from liberals such as Chris Pulse, Eric Parish, successful manufacturing entrepreneur Joe Martin, Rocky Velgos, J. Howard Crews, Joe Crews and Douglas Crews and many others and rarely comment on them because they are so articulate and complete they need no further additions from me.
-

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 3, 2008 12:20 PM: The post from "Patriot" (10:28am) raises a valid concern, that those not using renewable or alternative energies are still plugging into non-renewable FINITE FILTHY FOSSIL FUELS purchased from dependence on terrorists and dictators, however he should note that by simple efficiencies they are still using a lot less of it.
And as to solar, people like me who are buying NOW are helping to fuel the demand for increased production and create the economies of scale so that everyone else can eventually get on board. Also, some people can still buy partial solar, which does not zero out their electric bill, but at least reduces it to shave off the highest tiered rating, or they have it connected to targeted specific uses such as heating a swimming pool (or charging a car) and I have even seen conversions to put on the tops of plug-in converted cars to be charging while you park your car in the sun :-)
It's coming, just not fast enough.-

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 3, 2008 12:21 PM: The posts from "SOLON..." (10:14am, 10:46am, 11:04am and 11:30am) and "Chuck" (11:12am) and "Patriot" (11:22am) regarding Barack Obama's middle name of "Hussein," what is the big deal?
I've always thought that King Hussein of Jordan was one of the greatest and wisest Middle Eastern leaders ever.
And the way his last name sounds similar to "Osama" is a constant reminder that Dubya promised to catch him "Dead or Alive" but when the poop hit the windmill, he diverted resources from Afghanistan and let the real Osama escape from Tora Bora.
I have always been very appreciative of "Chuck's" constant reminders of some of our greatest Middle Eastern allies and I love the way he keeps rubbing Bush's nose in the fact that the real Osama truly has bin Forgotten.
-

Whatever it is... wrote on Mar 3, 2008 12:31 PM:While the children make fun of names, I'd like to reiterate that when I read Obama's speech from October, 2002, where he strongly supports the war against the Taliban and al Qaeda, and strongly condemns the coming invasion against impotent, army-less, WMD-less, contained Saddam, Obama nailed it while all the others, with all their experience and advisors, from Cheney to Hillary, from Ron to esteban, got it dead, 100% wrong. France got it right. Germany and Russia got it right. Spain got it wrong and their leader was kicked out of office next election. Same with Italy. Same with Britain. Bush and McCain got it, and still get it, dead wrong. So did Hillary. Time to vote for the one who got it right for a change.-

Floyd The Scientist wrote on Mar 3, 2008 12:55 PM:DD Wiz rails about the so-called damage caused by Sunrise Powerlink if it is installed (mostly because he doesn't like the way it looks) but doesn't consider the damage caused if it is NOT installed: brownouts, blackouts, worsened medical problems because home equipment won't turn on, death because there's no air conditioning to counter the heat, and economic dislocation because businesses shut down without power. Our health and safety vastly outweighs DD Wiz's offended sensibilities.

Jefferson and guns wrote on Mar 3, 2008 12:56 PM:What would Jefferson say about the fact that when the government becomes tyrannical, if they've been smart about it, most of the people (armed at that) are shills for that very tyrant? Imagine if all the slaves had been armed...I see one heckuva lot of dead slaves, though many would've taken a few white people down with them. When a minority is used as a scapegoat, as is usually the case with tyrants, the armed majority are aiders and abetters of the tyranny. Did this occur to Jefferson?

Marky Marx to Chris wrote on Mar 3, 2008 1:05 PM:Doode, I’ve told you before, many times before, you’re letters and blogs are the greatest. Why do you bother responding to these right wing fanatics, Chuck, esteban, Nick, Mike America, etc. There just jealous doode. They wish they were as courageous and mature when they were thirteen as you are. Just remember, sticks and stone can break your bones, but words will never hurt you…….right on. Power to the peeps!

Patriot wrote on Mar 3, 2008 1:07 PM:The article about hydrogen fuel cells in Japan under AP technology was interesting: http://www.northcountytimes.com/articles/2008/03/03/ap/hitech/d8v6652g1.txt. Once again, the Japanese are making big investments in the future and their biggest corporations are on board. Are there any U.S. companies involved in this sort of development with the level of capital investment to make something of it?

esteban wrote on Mar 3, 2008 1:09 PM:to Whatever it is...you thought there were WMD's in Iraq just like the rest of us did. Don't act like you were this all knowing being that knew something we didn't. ...

Ron wrote on Mar 3, 2008 1:23 PM:I don't know what all the fuss is about using Barack's middle name. So it's a Muslim name, so what? But, what is more interesting, is who has been putting the name out there. That's right folks, it has been the Democrats! Former Nebraska Sen. Bob Kerrey has apologized to Barack Obama for any unintentional insult he committed by raising the Democratic presidential candidate's Muslim heritage while endorsing rival candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton. This was, of course, after the "rumor" had hit the internet, and several media outlets, so they let the cat out of the bag, then apolgised. Riiight....
And also interesting, is Sen. Hillary Clinton accepted the resignation of her New Hampshire campaign co-chair Bill Shaheen, a day after he suggested that Barack Obama's candor about his past drug use would open the door to Republican attacks. So, he's concerned about Republicans attacks, but he's the one who put out the dirt?
LOL Do you see how this works? After they have leveled the charge in the media, then they apologise, and hope some "right-wing" outlet/person picks it up, and they can use it against them, for re-stating it. Talk about dirty tricks... man these guy's are full of em.
Come to think of it. If you remember the "Willie Horton" campaign against Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis, that was first used by Pope Al Gore during the primary, and then picked up by the Republicans in the general election. You really have to look for the MO here folks. When the Democrats accuse people of dirty tricks, you first gotta look at the one's making the charge. Cause more than likely, that's exactly where it started.
As to his name, thanks for the update on the "meaning", I think I'll stick to what I already know. Barack "Hussein" Obamaman = Empty Suit.

OBSRERVATION wrote on Mar 3, 2008 2:11 PM:Andrew Jackson

It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their own selfish purposes.-

Chuck wrote on Mar 3, 2008 2:26 PM:>>>Chuck, who thinks one can vilify a person by their blessed Aramaic and Semitic derived names>>> Give me a break. I read about how blessed this filth is everyday. They invoke the name of Allah, and them blow up an orphanage. I understand why that is blessed to a liberal, it just isnt blessed to normal people.-

Ms M wrote on Mar 3, 2008 2:33 PM:esteban wrote on Mar 3, 2008 1:09 PM:to Whatever it is...you thought there were WMD's in Iraq just like the rest of us did. Sorry Esteban Some of us did not believe there were WMD's and that Iraq was an immediate threat to our country. Speak for yourself. Also, the vote to go to war was not 100% in favor of invading Iraq.-

Oh, Ron wrote on Mar 3, 2008 2:36 PM:No one denies that Hillary is among those who have played the game with Barack's middle name. But are you claiming that Republicans haven't? Good grief. Who's using the name in that derogatory, infantile way on this blog space? It's not the Hillary supporters, it's the conservatives like you and Chuck. Both Hillary and the right wingers share in this. Are you, like, bragging that because Hillary's people did it, that you are off the hook for doing it too? That's an argument you use a lot, and it never makes sense. A Democrat does something bad, so when a Republican does it, it's not bad. Huh!?-

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 3, 2008 3:18 PM:The post from "Patriot" (1:07pm) makes an important point about the use of hydrogen fuel cells as well as losing out to foreign competitors in the green economy.
I admit that I have often overlooked hydrogen fuel cells as an important resource in going green, and also note that those who resist show their hatred of American entrepreneurial competitiveness by continuing to tie us to the outdated dinosaur technologies of the FINITE FILTHY FOSSIL FUEL past.
Nice post, "Patriot."-

Ron wrote on Mar 3, 2008 3:33 PM:The point is, and you really need to go check the time line on this.. Oh, Ron @2:36 PM. Is that "The Clinton's" did this first." They were the one's who put out the rumors, and everyone else pick it up from there. That's the MO.
But, of course, you'll make every kind of excuse for it. No surprise there.
Also, did you hear that Obamaman is not for Homosexual Marriage, according to "HIS" faith? Wow!!!
That is not going to go over very well.
First he quotes Ronald Reagan, then he says no gay marriage. And they are still fainting at the rally's!!!!-

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 3, 2008 3:38 PM:The post from "Ron" (11:39am) yet again responds the only way conservatives know how when they can't address the substance of an issue: change the subject and, if that isn't enough, try to make it personal.
"Ron" goes off on a tangent unrelated to my point, which he has every right to do as long as he doesn't harbor any illusions that he addressed the issue.
He goes through a litany of all the fires around the country that were not caused by downed transmission lines.
Hello, "Ron"! I was not talking about them. I was talking about the ones here, in San Diego, where we had multiple fires that were caused by DOWNED POWER LINES.
Maybe you don't remember. I do. I got evacuated and lost several days of work and worry if I was going to have a house to come back to.
There were several power outages because TRANSMISSION LINES WERE DOWN. Local, on-site generation would have prevented both the fires and the power outages.
"Ron" says that I value "desert plant life more than humans." What he does not understand is that there is a balance of nature and it is not a matter of choosing between mutually exclusive options, but that what is good for plants and animals is also best for us.
Failing that line, "Ron" tries to make it personal: "Still wondering... if I owned more than one house, in order to keep my personal footprint down "for the Children", do I have to have solar on ALL my houses?"
What does this have to do with anythng?
Of course, the more you can add solar or eliminate non-renewable FINITE FILTHY FOSSIL FUELS purchased from dictators and terrorists, the better that is.
For all of us, that means going one step at a time.
For all of us confessed environmental sinners trying to recover from our ecological debauchery, we are moving as quickly as practical to go as green as possible. While I certainly don't hold myself out as any kind of an example, I'm quickly playing catch up for all my past excesses. Having completed the solar on the main residence, I am looking for the best strategy for going FOSSIL FUEL FREE on the car and yes, also the rental property so we can attract quality tenants who don't want an electric bill. Because our rental properties are in cooler coastal Oceanside, using less A/C, and are smaller, we can do even more for even less but, alas, in the meantime we still wallow in our shortcomings, though admitting the problem is at least the first step.

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 3, 2008 3:51 PM:The post from "Ron" (1:23pm) makes a serious factual error, however for once I do not think he is just "making it up" because this is a widespread "urban legend."
He repeats the common fallacy that Al Gore invented the "Willie Horton" ad against Michael Dukakis. Let's see -- he doesn't want to give Gore credit for his rightful role in making the Internet a reality, but does want to pass along a widespread MYTH about Al Gore "inventing" Willie Horton.
In a primary debate that included Dukakis, Gore made a general question about the furlough policy in Massachussets, where Dukakis had been governor, and which was the only state whose furlough program included prisoners who had sentences of life without parole. He did not mention Willie Horton by name or cite any specific instance.
In May 1988, AFTER Gore had locked up the nomination, the conservative Reader's Diget ran an article about the Massachussets program, introducing the specific case of Willie Horton and noting that Democratic nominee Dukakis had been the governor. Bush communications guru Lee Atwater picked it up and blew it up (and way out of proportion to any role by Dukakis in the specific case), which he later admitted (on his deathbed) that he had moral regrets about.
But Al Gore never cited the specific instance nor did he mention the name of Willie Horton.

Oh, Ron wrote on Mar 3, 2008 4:05 PM:You make it sound like every smear campaign in recent history was started on the left and then merely engaged by the right. Where do you see me making excuses for it? You might note that I called it wrong whoever did it. If anyone, you are excusing Republicans as long as they did it second. Here's an assignment, since you love to dig: can you find any smear tactics used against Democratic candidates that were started on the right? Let us know which ones they were. We'll be ready for a long, long post. BTW, is your comment about Obama on gay marriage some kind of revelation that he is not what we might consider perfect? Hey, now that's news, isn't it? But as we always say, liberals have no problem at all criticizing leaders and candidates regardless of their party. You're dueling with your imaginary, straw foe again, Ron. LOL Meanwhile, unlike you and McCain and Clinton, Obama got Iraq right.

0412 wrote on Mar 3, 2008 4:06 PM:Chuck wrote on Mar 3, 2008 2:26 PM Obama names has nothing to do with terrorism. But just like a robotic foot soldier of the Conservative right, you press forward eschewing the same mantra. What happened to the conservative copy righted words of ilk, your type, filthy liberal of which you are so fond?

Ms M wrote on Mar 3, 2008 4:22 PM:Ron wrote on Mar 3, 2008 3:33 PM: Also, did you hear that Obamaman is not for Homosexual Marriage, according to "HIS" faith? Wow!!!
That is not going to go over very well. Sorry Ron but it will go over well with this lib that is FOR "Homosexual Marriage"! I don't walk lock step with any party. I am for equal rights for ALL people. If Obama's religion practices a man and a woman for marriage so be it. There is never going to be a president who is 100% like me because he has to be the president of our country - all it's people - a very diverse one at that!

deviled eggs wrote on Mar 3, 2008 4:48 PM:Does anyone know what happened to our beloved Alf?

Nick wrote on Mar 3, 2008 6:00 PM:To Mark Marx: Your killing me, now I'm a "right-winged fantaic"....LOL. You know what that makes you and your heroes "Eric" & "Chris" then? Yep, left-wing fanatics. You guys are definately not your typical middle-of-the-road Lib's. Nope, you guys are wayyyyyy out there.

Nick wrote on Mar 3, 2008 6:04 PM:"The Whiz" enjoys the letters of Eric Parish and Chris Pulse. That says volumes about you "Whizzer"!

Chuck wrote on Mar 3, 2008 6:28 PM:>>>It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their own selfish purposes>>> Thats right, Hussein and HerViciousness are promising it all for free if you'll just cast that ballot for them

Cluck wrote on Mar 3, 2008 7:02 PM:LOL!!!! I just love pulling the strings of these conservatives. I amuse myself to no end getting them to respond the way they do. They are such silly little niave puppets and it is so much fun making them dance!! LOL!!! It's so much fun having fun with these conservatives. Watching them wiggle makes me giggle. Gosh, whadda they gonna do next? HAHAHAHA!!! LOL!!!

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 3, 2008 7:32 PM:The post from "esteban" (1:09pm) jumps to conclusions, assuming that everyone else is as gullible in suckering for the Bush administration's lies about WMD as the conservatives, when he says, "you thought there were WMD's in Iraq just like the rest of us did. Don't act like you were this all knowing being that knew something we didn't."
Hello! Most of the world knew there were no wMD's! Don't you remember (or weren't you paying attention) when the Bush Administration's own weapons inspector Scott Ritter said there no WMD, and all the conservatives like Limbaugh and Hannity ridiculed him? Then U.N. weapons inspectors Hans Blix and Mohammed El Baradei said the same thing, and more trash talk from conservatives. Our long time allies the Germans and French, who supported us after 9/11 and in the first Gulf War, were not fooled. Twenty-three U.S. Sentaors and an even higher percentage in the House, were not fooled. Heck, I even had it up on my website BEFORE THE WAR, and I'm just an illiterate 3rd-grade dropout!
So sorry you missed the scoop, but a lot of people who just get their news from Fox Noise and right-wing ranters missed out. You weren't alone.

Focal Point wrote on Mar 3, 2008 7:37 PM:deviled eggs wrote on Mar 3, 2008 4:48 PM Alf is probably on a photo shoot.

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 3, 2008 7:43 PM:The post from "Floyd The Scientist" (12:55pm) making a statement about damage from brownouts and blackouts that misses the real issue about what I was talking about regarding the proposed Sunrise Powerlink BOONDOGGLE.
The brownouts and blackouts were caused by DOWNED POWER LINES -- LONG-DISTANCE TRANSMISSION LINES -- the same ones that caused the fires in the first place!
Now, "Floyd" thinks the solution is to make even MORE transmission lines to blow over and cause FIRES along with even worse brownouts and blackouts?
Local, on-site generation would prevent both the fires and the brownouts/blacouts.
He talks about "no air conditioning" but does not understand that A/C can be powered by solar which is most effective exactly when A/C is most in demand!
Flat Earth "Floyd" further ridicules "Our health and safety"
while overlooking the simple FACT that our precious health and safety is exactly what is imperiled by both the environmental degradation of Sunrise Powerlink and also the fires that these dangerous BOONDOGGLES cause every time the wind blows.

My suspicions proven true wrote on Mar 3, 2008 8:34 PM:...by the name CHUCK...that our friend Chuck is a Frenchman. Or, Chuck, do you prefer French-American?

Floyd The Scientist wrote on Mar 3, 2008 8:50 PM:Alas, DD Wiz appears unaware that brownouts are generally caused when demand exceeds supply, not just because of downed power lines. Blackouts are caused when the utility sheds excess load by turning off selected areas known as rotating outage blocks. Both can occur when the existing transmission lines are at capacity, not because they have been damaged. As for local on-site generation, we should be reopening the Silvergate Power Plant near downtown San Diego, refurbishing the South Bay Power Plant in Chula Vista, and adding San Onofre Unit Four with an adjacent water desalination plant to meet existing and future needs -- but for now, Sunrise Powerlink is on the table for discussion and should be built.

Floyd The Scientist wrote on Mar 3, 2008 9:04 PM:If the main power grid goes down and your solar system is connected to it, your solar system will also go down. It's a built-in circuit required by safety regulations so the repair crews don't get hurt. (I discovered that while investigating solar for my home). That means solar is worthless as an alternative for powering the air conditioning in the heat of the day! We need a stable supply of energy so that the hobbyists can implement solar panels if they so desire, and the Sunrise Powerlink will help achieve that goal.

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 3, 2008 10:18 PM: The posts from "Floyd The Scientist" (8:50 and 9:04pm) cite some correct facts, but then go off on tangents that are irrelevant to the point I was making and, in context, actually reinforce what I said.
"Floyd" is correct that "brownouts are generally caused when demand exceeds supply, not just because of downed power lines." That is why we need to make sure the power lines do not go down in the first place! Instead of transporting across hundreds of miles of wind-swept terrain, local on-site solar generation prevents the exposure that causes the lines to go down cutting off supply. And solar is the best source of supply, because the peak output coincides with the peak demand!
"Floyd" is also correct that solar electricity connected to the grid will also automatically shut down when the gird goes down. This is why we need to make sure that the grid does not go down, and that is not by having our supply at the mercy of hundreds of miles of transmission lines that will be blown down, interrupting that supply and causing fires, so that we get hit by two devastating events at the same time!
"Floyd" continues: "solar is worthless as an alternative for powering the air conditioning in the heat of the day! We need a stable supply of energy." This is a complete non-sequitur! Because solar is most efficient the same time that demand for A/C is at its peak (long sunlit hours of summer heat), and is not at the mercy of transmission lines going down, it IS the most reliable!
The Flat Earth anti-science naysayers may dismiss solar as the realm of "hobbyists," but they forget that automobiles, computers and wireless communications (heck, and even wired for that matter) were also once the domain of "hobbyists" and are now the foundations of a thriving economy!