Richard's main page
If you're seeing this blog in a frame click here to see it without the frame
If you're seeing this blog in a frame click here to see it without the frame
BOSTON – Striving for an epic upset in liberal Massachusetts, Republican Scott Brown pushed ahead of Democrat Martha Coakley on Tuesday in a U.S. Senate election that became a referendum on President Barack Obama's health care overhaul and his first year.
A loss — or even a narrow victory — by the once-favored Coakley for the seat that the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy held for nearly half a century in this Democratic stronghold could signal big political problems for the president's party this fall when House, Senate and gubernatorial candidates are on the ballot nationwide.
More immediately at stake was a critical 60th vote for Democrats to save their health care legislation and the rest of Obama's agenda. A 41st Republican in the 100-member Senate could allow the GOP to block the president's priorities with filibusters.
With 60 percent of precincts reported, Brown held a steady lead over Coakley.
Let's hope the lead continues!If you're seeing this blog in a frame click here to see it without the frame
If you're seeing this blog in a frame click here to see it without the frame
If you're seeing this blog in a frame click here to see it without the frame
By Joke of the Day
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
No cause for celebration.
The Supreme Court has ruled that there cannot be a nativity scene in the U.S. Capitol this Christmas season.This isn't for any religious reason. They simply have not been able to find Three Wise Men in Washington, D.C.
A search for a virgin continues.
There will be no problem, however, finding enough asses to fill the stable.
If you're seeing this blog in a frame click here to see it without the frame
If you're seeing this blog in a frame click here to see it without the frame
© 2009 The Patriot Update. Feel free to circulate this article, but please link / give credit to The Patriot Update.
After observing Obama on the campaign trail and during his first six months in office, we have concluded that our President lives and governs according to his own set of “Ten Commandments.” They’re certainly NOT the Ten Commandments you learned in Sunday School. In fact, many are the direct opposite!
I. Thou shalt have no God in America, except for me. For we are no longer a Christian nation and, after all, I am the chosen One. (And like God, I do not have a birth certificate.) SOURCE
II. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, unless it is my face carved on Mt. Rushmore. SOURCE
III. Thou shalt not utter my middle name in vain (or in public). Only I can say Barack Hussein Obama. SOURCE
IV. Remember tax day, April 15th, to keep it holy. SOURCE
V. Honour thy father and thy mother until they are too old and sick to care for. They will cost our public-funded health-care system too much money. SOURCE
VI. Thou shalt not kill, unless you have an unwanted, unborn baby. For it would be an abomination to punish your daughter with a baby. SOURCE
VII. Thou shalt not commit adultery if you are conservative or a Republican. Liberals and Democrats are hereby forgiven for all of their infidelity and immorality, but the careers of conservatives will be forever destroyed. SOURCE
VIII. Thou shalt not steal, until you've been elected to public office. Only then is it acceptable to take money from hard-working, successful citizens and give it to those who do not work, illegal immigrants, or those who do not have the motivation to better their own lives. SOURCE
IX. Thou shalt not discriminate against thy neighbor unless they are conservative, Caucasian, or Christian. SOURCE
X. Thou shalt not covet because it is simply unnecessary. I will place such a heavy tax burden on those that have achieved the American Dream that, by the end of my term as President, nobody will have any wealth or material goods left for you to covet. SOURCE
If you're seeing this blog in a frame click here to see it without the frame
If you're seeing this blog in a frame click here to see it without the frame
If Pentagon whiz kid researchers at DARPA have anything to do with it, handheld fusion reactors could be more than just the stuff of science fiction. Controlling a fusion reaction, the same energy source that powers the sun, is a longtime dream of ambitious scientists. Fusion holds the key to nearly limitless energy.
Someone at DARPA must think a handheld fusion device is possible, because DARPA indicates that its Chip-Scale High Energy Atomic Beams could lead to "handheld power sources." Only problem is, the project doesn't appear in the 2010 budget, but that doesn't necessarily mean the researchers have given up on the idea.
There's little info about this mind-blowing project, but it certainly changes our assumptions about nuclear fusion. We were thinking you'd need a gigantic facility, lots of high-powered lasers, and zillions of dollars to control a fusion reaction. To hold this sort of thing in your hand? The fact that scientists are even talking about this possibility, and pursuing it with multimillion-dollar budgets, is astonishing.
More evidence that if you let science go it can create miracles!If you're seeing this blog in a frame click here to see it without the frame
| Who would have thought that the benefits of generating electricity from huge nuclear power plants... | |
| no greenhouse gases to contribute to climate change | |
| …could ever be provided in a small, compact, energy module that can be transported by truck, rail or ship to remote locations wherever reliable electricity and heat for communities and industry is needed? | |
Small -1.5 meters across, approx size of a residential “hot tub”
Produces 70 MWt or 25 MWe, enough to power 20,000 average American homes or the equivalent
Buried underground out of sight and harm’s way
Transportable by train, ship, truck
Sealed module, never opened on site
Enough power for 5+ years
After 5 years, removed & refueled at original factory
Uniquely safe, self-moderating using a natural chemical reaction discovered 50 years ago
No mechanical parts in the core to malfunction
Water not used as coolant; cannot go “supercritical” or get too hot
No greenhouse gases or global warming emissions
Think: Large Battery!
...can be found here: http://www.hyperionpowergeneration.com/about.htmlIf you're seeing this blog in a frame click here to see it without the frame
If you're seeing this blog in a frame click here to see it without the frame
If you're seeing this blog in a frame click here to see it without the frame
The latest Larry Elder column is here: http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/elder052109.php3
A particularly interesting excerpt follows
Our first neo-Marxist president?
By Larry Elder
| | |
|
| |
...
In the early 1900s, a businessman, Carl Fisher, owned the Prest-O-Lite headlight company. He organized an association to finance coast-to-coast paved roads so that motorists could drive both day and night, ideally using his headlights. The association soon disbanded, when Congress passed the Federal Road Aid Act of 1916. What would have happened had government not built an interstate highway system? A consortium of truckers/gas stations/hotels/motels/roadside restaurants would likely have built one with their own money in order to make more money. They would have charged tolls for maintenance. Motorists actually using the roads would bear their costs.
Private business built the first leg of the New York subway system. And it made money — at least before local government used taxpayer money to build competing systems and undercut the fare charged by the private operator. Tax dollars hid the true cost, allowing the city-owned service to charge less. Ultimately, the private operators sold out to the city.
Did Eisenhower have the constitutional authority to build the interstate highway system? Yes, but not to improve economic development — and he knew it. In fact, the official name of the interstate highways is the Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways. Ike argued that the country needed paved highways to move missiles around to protect the country. From a military standpoint, the argument was dubious. Missiles could be launched from fixed positions, as technology continually increased range, speed, accuracy and power.
...
This is a highly recommended article!
You can also visit Elder's site at: http://www.larryelder.com/home.html
If you're seeing this blog in a frame click here to see it without the frame
If you're seeing this blog in a frame click here to see it without the frame
If you're seeing this blog in a frame click here to see it without the frame

If you're seeing this blog in a frame click here to see it without the frame







If you're seeing this blog in a frame click here to see it without the frame