MOO! - ChicoEsquela's Blog - Bakersfield.com

Are you Eloi or Morlock?

Thu, 11 Sep 2008 07:57:28 PDT

While not completely descriptive (I would envision 3 classes with today's working conservative American between the two described), this old Sci-Fi tome provides some insight into the world of today IMO. Think of the eloi as the glitterati of today (celebs, actors, Libs, socialists living off transfer payments, etc.) and the Morlocks as everyone else (if there can only be two classes) --:

Eloi and Morlocks

If you have not read H. G. Well's "The Time Machine" I highly recommend it as a science fiction masterpiece. The hero builds a machine that transports him hundreds of thousands of years into the future where he meets two different species of human beings, the eloi and the morlocks. The movie is as terrible as the book is excellent.

The eloi evolved from the ruling class. They live in beautiful gardens and ruins amid fragrant flowers and tasty fruits. Their days are filled with fun. They have no understanding of the things that are provided for them and feel no need to understand. They are pretty but useless.

The morlocks evolved from the working class. They live underground with the machines where it is dark and dangerous. They make things and provide them to the eloi whom they treat as food animals. They are ugly but productive.

Allowing that the darkness and the cannibalism are plot devices I see this as a brilliant piece of extrapolation. As I look around I see two cultures with different values. Eloi and the morlocks walk among us today; you just have to look for them.

Eloi live in the television world where appearance is everything. Their work is either interpersonal or artistic and rarely about making money. They believe in all types of magic. They don't understand what morlocks do. They regard machines, numbers, money, and weapons as evil and would like them to disappear so we could live like the happy chimpanzees. Eloi create our culture.

Morlocks live in the concrete world where appearance is less important than productivity. Their work is with machines or numbers and is usually about making money. They rarely believe in magic. They don't understand how eloi survive without producing anything of substance. They regard machines, numbers, money, and weapons as sources of power and enjoyment that make us different from the unhappy chimpanzees. Morlocks create our material well being.

Which are you????

65 MPG Ford -- We Won't See It Here? Know Why?

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 16:43:38 PDT

One of the biggest reasons -- it runs on diesel. Too expensive to make it "acceptable" here....... more

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_37/b4099060491065.htm?chan=rss_topStories_ssi_5

Too bad we are trying to be too green...........

Gustavo -- Is God telling us to ignore the Republican Convention?

Sat, 30 Aug 2008 19:24:13 PDT

Hmmmmmmmmmm................. I wonder................

For all the "non-believers" out there

Do you think God may be telling us something?

I mean Dobson and others wondered out loud if it would rain during the Barry Coronation.............

I wonder if God is telling us something?

I mean already Bobby Jindahl won't show.

Could it be a woman will show us the way?

Fri, 29 Aug 2008 06:33:46 PDT

Could it be the rock star Barrack and his old political hack are "Palin" in comparison to the real party of "change" ???

Vets for Freedom Ad -- One of the best I've seen.......

Tue, 26 Aug 2008 12:09:49 PDT

I hope as many people as possible watch this:

http://www.vetsforfreedom.org/

Who will McCain choose?

Tue, 26 Aug 2008 07:40:28 PDT

He could do much worse than Sarah

I know the faithful want Romney, but I think he may just pick a woman.

Carly Fiorina has too much baggage from HP even though she might give him a shot in CA............... This lady is not only easy on the orbs, she makes a lot of energy sense as well.

But, if his credo is to "go safe" then Romney or Pawlenty might be chosen. But I could just see Pluggs Bidenpence debating with this gal, bragging about his trophy wife with her "problematic" Doctorate...........

I just watched the Obama-McCain Saddleback Forum and.........

Sat, 16 Aug 2008 19:21:41 PDT

......... when Obama was done I turned to my wife and said "poor Johnny boy, he's gonna completely flop in comparison to that.......Obama is just that good......." My wife just said "bless his heart [McCain's]"

(this is what she says when talking about someones' hooch she is trying to sell that is way over priced and in really sad shape BTW).........s

I thought McCain made a big mistake in agreeing to do this type "forum"

I could not have been more wrong..........

The Obamasiuhhhh........... 10 reasons not to vote for him......

Mon, 28 Jul 2008 10:05:26 PDT

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoTvpE6dFZw

Obama's foreign policy is dangerously naive -- While politicians with favorable views of W have been elected in Germany, Italy, France, and elsewhere... Obama is giving cause to make our allies even more nervous. The Washington Post reported that "European officials are increasingly concerned that Obama's campaign pledge to begin direct talks with Iran on its nuclear program without preconditions could potentially rupture U.S. relations with key European allies." Obama would give credibility/reward to ther world's chief sponsor of terrorism. Such a meeting would undermine Iranian dissidents... and lower the prestige of the office of POTUS.

Obama's Iraq policy will put a huge source of oil in the hands of terrorists -- Barack says he will remove two combat brigades every month, and have all our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months... regardless of what military leaders on the ground in Iraq argue. When Bush announced the Surge strategy in 2007, Obama opposed it saying, "The President's strategy will not work." Beyond these miscalculations and poor judgments, Obama has been INCONSISTENT on Iraq... saying one thing to Democrat leaders in D.C. and another to the press.

Obama's policy toward Israel is inconsistent and confused -- Last month, Obama told an audience at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided. the next day, he backtracked, stating "Obviously, it is going to be up to the parties to negotiate and range of these issues... and Jerusalem will be part of the negotiations." These quick switches of policy stem from inexperience (at best) and general tone-deafness on the meaning of words and policy(at worst) in the Mideast. Given Obama's long-standing ties to Palestinian activities in the U.S., one has good cause to wonder.

Obama's short-term flip-flops on NAFTA and other issues are dangerous -- Obama's Mideast policy may have been the quickest turnaround, but it is not the only one. During the primary, the campaign sent out fliers explaining Obama's opposition to NAFTA... but in the last month, Obama has backtracked on NAFTA saying, "We need to figure out how we can make this work for all people." As a primary candidate, he supported public financing of presidential campaigns. In February 2008, he said he would aggressively pursue spending limits. Then last month, Obama threw public financing under the bus.

Obama's judgment about personal and professional affiliations is dangerous -- In March 2008, Obama was defending Jeremiah Wright... then after several clips of sermons by his longtime mentor surfaced on the Internet, Obama finally denounced Wright in public. Once Jeremiah Wright became a political liability, Obama dumped him. What about Bill Ayers?? Ayers participated in the bombings of NYC Police Headquarters in 1970, the Capitol building in 1971, the Pentagon in 1972. Make no mistake: Obama and Ayers relationship goes back to the grassroots in Chicago.

Obama would use the failed 1990s strategy against terrorism as opposed to the post-9/11 strategy -- Obama supported the Supreme Court decision to grant habeas corpus rights to terrorists, including Osama bin Laden. In an interview last month, Obama said "In the first attack against the World Trade Center, we were able to arrest those responsible, put them on trial..." Ask the legal officials during the 1990s how cowed terrorists were by our continued indictments. Witness the attack on the USS Cole or September 11... and even more specifically, why there have been no successful attacks against American civilian interests abroad since 2004.

Obama's economic policies are dangerous to the American economy -- In a recent Wall Street Journal article, Kimberly Strassel reported "Obama is hawking a tax policy that would take the nation back to the effective marginal tax rates of the Carter days. He wants to further tax income, payroll, capital gains, dividends, and death. His philosophy is pure redistribution." In effect, Obama's tax plans will mean the death of small businesses across the United States... and small businesses have created the most new jobs in recent decades. Unemployment will skyrocket!!

Obama opposes any kind of drilling to reduce oil and gas prices -- Obama is not just against offshore drilling. He is against any drilling. Period. His solution to our energy crisis is additional tax burdens on oil company profits... taxes we can only imagine will be passed on to the consumer, thus causing an even more expensive trip to the gas station. As the New York Slimes recently detailed, ethanol subsidies are a major plank in Obama's view of energy independence and national security. Really!!?? Ethanol subsidies??!! Some of these subsidies will end up in the hands of the same oil companies he says should be subjected to a windfall profits tax.

Obama is LEFT of Hillary Clinton and NARAL on the issue of life -- As an Illinois Senator, Obama voted against the Induced Infant Liability Act, a law that would have protected babies if they survived an attempted abortion and were delivered alive. When a similar bill was proposed in the U.S. Senate, it passed unanimously.

Obama is actually the MOST Liberal member of the U.S. Senate -- In 2007, Obama's composite Liberal score of 95.5 was the highest in the Senate. Rounding out the top five most Liberal Senators last year were Whitehouse (D-RI), Biden (D-Del), Sander (D-Ver), and Menendez (D-NJ). Who would such a Liberal Leftist appoint to the Supreme Court??

It really IS as simple as THIS...............

Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:29:06 PDT

http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/columnists/HughHewitt/2008/07/11/its_the_oil,_stupid

Swimming & Drooling............ You Gotta LOVE This Dog!

Wed, 16 Jul 2008 07:17:31 PDT

Officer Rikki's bio

Breed: Bloodhound

DOB: 10/05/05 Birthplace: Quebec, Canada

Her partner and handler is Senior Officer Andrea Pflugh. Rikki is the first Bloodhound for the Bakersfield Police Department. Her specialty is tracking/trailing. Rikki will be trained to follow the individual scent of a human. Rikki will be utilized to find missing children, Alzheimer's patients and even bad guys as long as she has an item from that person to smell and get their scent. Rikki is very loving and good natured. Her favorite past times are swimming and drooling.

Obama Will Revive Redistributionism.................

Fri, 11 Jul 2008 07:43:35 PDT

Reviving Redistributionism

New data from the IRS will be out in a few weeks on who pays how much in taxes. My contacts at the Treasury Department tell me that for the first time in decades, and perhaps ever, the richest 1% of tax filers will have paid more than 40% of the income tax burden. The top 50% will account for 97% of all federal income taxes, while the bottom 50% will have paid just 3%.

Source and rest of article:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121555916730437401.html?mod=opinion_journal_political_diary

Did Anyone see the Asteroid reported on KCAL9?

Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:45:19 PDT

You never know.........

http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/usaf/2020/app-r.htm

Obama and Dems Lying About Oil Leases.............

Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:17:19 PDT

WSJ: Obama, Democrats Lying About "Nonproducing" Oil Leases

—Ace

Caught between public anger over $4.00+ per gallon gas and their anti-oil base which cannot countenance additional drilling of any kind, Democrats have trotted out an extremely stupid talking point -- make oil companies drill where they currently hold leases before allowing any additional exploration. If they can sell this stupidity, they can claim they are in fact for additional oil production -- they're the ones trying to pressure the oil companies to stop "stockpiling" oil-rich lands -- while holding the line on additional wells, thus appeasing their base.

No Republican would be permitted such a convenient absurdity; the MSM would demolish it. But the rules are always different for Democrats, and the media is determined to help sell this lie.

Except for a few conservative-titling outfits, such as the WSJ.
Oil companies take leases not because they know there's oil on the land (or under the sea), but because they think there might be oil and need the lease in order to explore that possibility and to secure the legal right to pump it if they do find it. It's simply ridiculous to assume, as the Democrats' talking points do, that each and every lease actually contains a huge amount of recoverable oil, and the oil companies are simply refusing to drill there. Instead, the claim goes, the oil companies are clamoring for the right to grab up additional leases... which then, of course, they will also leave untouched.

Why are oil companies securing leases for oil they know is there but have no intention of drilling? If their goal is to not drill, why bother with the expense of a lease at all? They're all in on it together, in this conspiracy theory, so they can all just agree to not drill at all. They hardly need to pay the government money for the right not to drill.

This is all so ridiculous that the entirety of the MSM should have called this dishonest spin for what it is. But they didn't, of course, and so the WSJ is left to explain the obvious:

To deflect the GOP effort to relax the offshore-drilling ban – and thus boost supply while demand will remain strong – Democrats also say that most of the current leases are "nonproducing." The idea comes from a "special report" prepared by the Democratic staff of the House Resources Committee, chaired by Mr. Rahall. "If we extrapolate from today's production rates on federal lands and waters," the authors write, the oil companies could "nearly double total U.S. oil production" (their emphasis). In other words, these whiz kids assume that every acre of every lease holds the same amount of oil and gas.

In other words, they're assuming that that the currently-nonproducing leases can produce the same amount of oil as the producing ones. And yet the productive wells were not chosen at random, were they? They were explored because they were the most likely to have oil, and then they were drilled because the exploration proved they had oil.

This is like assuming that because your wife agreed to marry you when you asked her to, you can randomly walk down the street proposing to strangers and enjoy the same 100% success rate.

Yet the existence of a lease does not guarantee that the geology holds recoverable resources. Brian Kennedy of the Institute for Energy Research quips that, using the same extrapolation, the 9.4 billion acres of the currently nonproducing moon should yield 654 million barrels of oil per day. Nonetheless, the House still went through with a gesture called the "use it or lose it" bill, which passed on Thursday 223-195. It would be pointless even if it had a chance of becoming law. Oil companies acquire leases in the expectation that some of them contain sufficient oil and gas to cover the total costs. Yet it takes years to move through federal permitting, exploration and development. The U.S. Minerals Management Service notes that only one of three wells results in a discovery of oil that can be recovered economically. In deeper water, it's one of five. All this involves huge risks, capital investment – and time.

It also involves guessing at where one's resources are best used. If ExxonMobile has, say, thirty leases, and the money and equipment and manpower to only explore on, say, five areas at a time, they're obviously going to go after the most likely sites first, and the least likely areas will remain "nonproducing" in the interim.

But even the most likely sites are in fact highly unlikely to produce recoverable oil. It's a numbers game. Oil can be found -- but they need to be able to look in a lot of places.

... Yet companies are not allowed to explore where the biggest prospects for oil and gas may exist – especially on the Outer Continental Shelf. Seven of the top 20 U.S. oil fields are now located in analogous deepwater areas (greater than 1,000 feet) in the Gulf of Mexico. In 2006, Chevron discovered what is likely to be the largest American oil find since Prudhoe, drilled in 7,000 feet of water and more than 20,000 feet under the sea floor. The Wilcox formation may have an upper end of 15 billion barrels of recoverable oil and should begin producing by 2014 – perhaps ushering in a new ultradeepwater frontier.

But by all means let's try to force companies to drill where they have little hope of finding oil.

Via Hot Air, which also makes this point:

Demanding drilling first on all extant leases is an absurd position to take when they don’t have any indication of accessible oil from the preliminary studies. It amounts to drilling dry holes at a cost of tens of millions of dollars each just to demonstrate the futility. Who do you think will pay that cost? Hint: it won’t be Barack Obama or Congress, but the people who drive up to the pumps every day.

Source: The Wall Street Journal

"Dr." Mark Martinez -- Some Questions -- Feel Free to Use Surrogate Chica to Answer.......

Sat, 28 Jun 2008 16:19:34 PDT

I just got done dong a short run to Richgrove........ Listened to your radio "show" on 1230 AM...........

I have a few questions for you, again feel free to utilize surrogate Chica to answer (I know I scare you as I have your number) these very basic questions I had listening to your "show"-----

1) A caller called in and said he made less than $50,000 per year gross. You said you were in the same situation. I will, of course check this, but is that really the case? Or were you just Lying (poetic license you might rejoinder as a defense) ....... Just WHAT is the real truth?

2) You admitted that you have a diesel truck and pay the relevant high prices thereto. Why do you have such a vehicle in these times of conservation being the ultimo facet of our solution to the energy problems? It sounded like you have a full size diesel pick up which is not needed in your line of "work".....

3) You had someone supposedly representing Chevron on there you kept referring to as "Uduak from Chevron" purported to be a real and true spokesman for Chevron Oil. The man kept touting Obama and his energy policies and directing people to his website -- punctuated by his mis-statements on the details of the oil and gas business........ Was this man chosen to be a real spokesman for Chevron or someone you brought on to just tout Obama under that guise? (I had to wonder when he made statements that are easily provably false re the O&G business by any competent geologist-geophysicist-petroleum engineer)......

What have you to say to these questions Mr. "Dr." Martinez?

(or will we be treated to more from the lipid loquacious Easter candy again?)

I was just wondering.................

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 07:38:08 PDT

Surely those people whose lives are affected need a lot of physical labor
type help plus food, furniture, clothing, etc. I don't care what your
heritage is, when you are need, people should help.

Just wondering...

Where are all of the Hollywood celebrities holding telethons asking for help
in restoring Iowa and helping the folks affected by the floods?

Where is all the media asking the tough questions about why the federal
government hasn't solved the problem? Asking where the FEMA trucks (and
trailers) are?

Why isn't the Federal Government relocating Iowa people to free hotels in
Chicago?

When will Spike Lee say that the Federal Government blew up the levees that
failed in Des Moines?

Where are Sean Penn and the Dixie Chicks?

Where are all the looters stealing high-end tennis shoes and big screen
television sets?

When will we hear Governor Chet Culver say that he wants to rebuild a
"vanilla" Iowa, because that's the way God wants it?

Where is the hysterical 24/7 media coverage complete with reports of
cannibalism?

Where are the people declaring that George Bush hates white, rural people?

How come in 2 weeks, you will never hear about the Iowa flooding ever again?

Gun Owners -- Pay Attention!

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 07:20:20 PDT

US court overturns DC handgun ban

DC residents have been barred from keeping handguns for 32 years

A ban on handguns in Washington DC has been ruled unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court.

The US capital, which has some of the toughest gun control laws in the US, had challenged a lower court ruling striking down the ban.

It is the first such case considered by the court in decades and is expected to have effects on gun laws across the US.

Debate over the exact meaning of the constitutional right to keep and bear arms has raged for years.

If you care at all about Big Money in Politics............

Thu, 19 Jun 2008 10:13:18 PDT

..... this should interest you.

Of course it will go down along partisan lines (just as the blog entries at bottom of article) but what do YOU think?

http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/democratic-party/20496/obama-will-opt-out-of-public-campaign-financing-for-election/

Now that the proverbial "shoe is on the other foot" as far as who has the REAL money, we are witnessing a "C" change in Dem remonstrations on public financing of campaigns, but just watch the Dems emphasize:

1) He never REALLY promised

2) Public financing legislation is meaningless (now that the prodigious fund raising Obama machine is in play)

Pat Buchanan on Obama and Race

Wed, 18 Jun 2008 07:28:43 PDT

Its worth a look.............. (for all)

http://www.buchanan.org/blog/?p=969

Bugs That Poop Crude Oil!

Mon, 16 Jun 2008 10:19:16 PDT

From The Times

June 14, 2008

Scientists find bugs that eat waste and excrete petrol

Silicon Valley is experimenting with bacteria that have been genetically altered to provide 'renewable petroleum'

Some diesel fuel produced by genetically modified bugs

He means bugs. To be more precise: the genetic alteration of bugs – very, very small ones – so that when they feed on agricultural waste such as woodchips or wheat straw, they do something extraordinary. They excrete crude oil.

Unbelievably, this is not science fiction. Mr Pal holds up a small beaker of bug excretion that could, theoretically, be poured into the tank of the giant Lexus SUV next to us. Not that Mr Pal is willing to risk it just yet. He gives it a month before the first vehicle is filled up on what he calls “renewable petroleum”. After that, he grins, “it’s a brave new world”.

Mr Pal is a senior director of LS9, one of several companies in or near Silicon Valley that have spurned traditional high-tech activities such as software and networking and embarked instead on an extraordinary race to make $140-a-barrel oil (£70) from Saudi Arabia obsolete. “All of us here – everyone in this company and in this industry, are aware of the urgency,” Mr Pal says.

What is most remarkable about what they are doing is that instead of trying to reengineer the global economy – as is required, for example, for the use of hydrogen fuel – they are trying to make a product that is interchangeable with oil. The company claims that this “Oil 2.0” will not only be renewable but also carbon negative – meaning that the carbon it emits will be less than that sucked from the atmosphere by the raw materials from which it is made.

LS9 has already convinced one oil industry veteran of its plan: Bob Walsh, 50, who now serves as the firm’s president after a 26-year career at Shell, most recently running European supply operations in London. “How many times in your life do you get the opportunity to grow a multi-billion-dollar company?” he asks. It is a bold statement from a man who works in a glorified cubicle in a San Francisco industrial estate for a company that describes itself as being “prerevenue”.

Inside LS9’s cluttered laboratory – funded by $20 million of start-up capital from investors including Vinod Khosla, the Indian-American entrepreneur who co-founded Sun Micro-systems – Mr Pal explains that LS9’s bugs are single-cell organisms, each a fraction of a billionth the size of an ant. They start out as industrial yeast or nonpathogenic strains of E. coli, but LS9 modifies them by custom-de-signing their DNA. “Five to seven years ago, that process would have taken months and cost hundreds of thousands of dollars,” he says. “Now it can take weeks and cost maybe $20,000.”

Because crude oil (which can be refined into other products, such as petroleum or jet fuel) is only a few molecular stages removed from the fatty acids normally excreted by yeast or E. coli during fermentation, it does not take much fiddling to get the desired result.

For fermentation to take place you need raw material, or feedstock, as it is known in the biofuels industry. Anything will do as long as it can be broken down into sugars, with the byproduct ideally burnt to produce electricity to run the plant.

The company is not interested in using corn as feedstock, given the much-publicised problems created by using food crops for fuel, such as the tortilla inflation that recently caused food riots in Mexico City. Instead, different types of agricultural waste will be used according to whatever makes sense for the local climate and economy: wheat straw in California, for example, or woodchips in the South.

Using genetically modified bugs for fermentation is essentially the same as using natural bacteria to produce ethanol, although the energy-intensive final process of distillation is virtually eliminated because the bugs excrete a substance that is almost pump-ready.

The closest that LS9 has come to mass production is a 1,000-litre fermenting machine, which looks like a large stainless-steel jar, next to a wardrobe-sized computer connected by a tangle of cables and tubes. It has not yet been plugged in. The machine produces the equivalent of one barrel a week and takes up 40 sq ft of floor space.

However, to substitute America’s weekly oil consumption of 143 million barrels, you would need a facility that covered about 205 square miles, an area roughly the size of Chicago.

That is the main problem: although LS9 can produce its bug fuel in laboratory beakers, it has no idea whether it will be able produce the same results on a nationwide or even global scale.

“Our plan is to have a demonstration-scale plant operational by 2010 and, in parallel, we’ll be working on the design and construction of a commercial-scale facility to open in 2011,” says Mr Pal, adding that if LS9 used Brazilian sugar cane as its feedstock, its fuel would probably cost about $50 a barrel.

Are Americans ready to be putting genetically modified bug excretion in their cars? “It’s not the same as with food,” Mr Pal says. “We’re putting these bacteria in a very isolated container: their entire universe is in that tank. When we’re done with them, they’re destroyed.”

Besides, he says, there is greater good being served. “I have two children, and climate change is something that they are going to face. The energy crisis is something that they are going to face. We have a collective responsibility to do this.”

Power points

— Google has set up an initiative to develop electricity from cheap renewable energy sources

— Craig Venter, who mapped the human genome, has created a company to create hydrogen and ethanol from genetically engineered bugs

— The US Energy and Agriculture Departments said in 2005 that there was land available to produce enough biomass (nonedible plant parts) to replace 30 per cent of current liquid transport fuels

Words of Wisdom

Thu, 12 Jun 2008 12:01:46 PDT

“Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less.”

The Bear on Jun 12 2008 | Filed under: Energy Policy
Update on ‘Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less.’

Our “Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less” campaign continues to gain momentum. Yesterday, American Solutions delivered the first round of signatures - 350,000 - to the U.S. Senate urging them to take immediate action to lower gas prices by drilling for oil domestically.

We delivered the signatures to the offices of Senators Alexander, Clinton, Durbin, Ensign, Kyl, McCain, McConnell, Obama, Reid and Schumer urging them to offer real solutions to our energy challenges, beginning with using more of our domestic energy resources.

But this is only the beginning. It’s our goal to have 3 million signatures by both parties’ national conventions this fall. Help us reach our goal by forwarding this email to 10 friends and encouraging them to sign the petition.

GO HERE and Sign the Petition Now! Join the 453,842 people who have signed the petition.