Scalia's Dead: Oh boy (part II)

So the Republicans have come out to state Obama should NOT nominate a replacement.  This was stated by McConnell and the various candidates for president.

However, the White House has come out to state Obama will be nominating a candidate as soon as the Senate is back in session.  The White House has also stated it expects the Senate to do its constitutional duty.

This is going to get scary.  However, I think the Republicans are going to get screwed by doing this.  They are going to be labeled as obstructionist (true) and failing to do their jobs (also true).  Both of these will NOT go over well with independent voters, the ones they need for the presidential election.  The longer the Senate delays, the worse it will get and the worse it will be for the Repub chances for November.  

However, its going to be a fecal storm in the mean time.

If Scalia meant to flip us all off, he did a good job.  Or prevent the Trump from winning for that matter.

Well played, Justice Scalia.  Well played.

How to Turn a Holiday Tradition Into an "International Incident"

President Barack Obama's pardoning of a turkey named "Abe" this Thanksgiving has led some Chinese to gloat at the Japanese prime minister's expense.

As part of a peculiar annual tradition at the White House, Obama on Wednesday granted amnesty from the dinner table to two turkeys named "Honest" and "Abe" — from the nickname for President Abraham Lincoln. But a translation glitch in Chinese media replaced the character for single-syllable "Abe" with the surname of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe (pronounced "Ah-bay").

Several commenters in Chinese social media focused on comparing the prime minister to an animal.

Many Chinese harbor animosity toward Japan because of its brutal occupation of much of China during World War II, and they specifically scorn Abe because of his visits to a war shrine that is seen as a symbol of Japan's past militarism.

link.

Ukraine War Update: плакала так трудно лягушачий смеялись

As Russian President Vladimir Putin's forces took over Ukraine's Crimean peninsula in early 2014, the interim Ukrainian government was debating whether or not to fight back against the "little green men" Russia had deployed. But the message from the Barack Obama administration was clear: avoid military confrontation with Moscow.

link.

You fscking idiots.  How could you possibly misunderstand the culture as to do this?!

Ukraine: Drama for the People!

In that, the country has definitely delivered for the Ukrainian people!

First off, at least as far as our Risk Map, it seems the opposition is losing ground again.  Poltava appears to be back in the hands of the PoR.  The edge of Euromaidan's strength seems to be the Dnieper River.  That makes it more an West vs East game, which is a loser, in a way, for Euromaidan.  They need the East to buy in.

Secondly, the amnesty law passed by Ukraine's Rada states it only applies to those that leave the buildings in the next 15 days.  If they do not,

Third, Kravchuk, like the ghost of meltdowns past, warns Ukraine is on the cusp of Civil War.

As though echoing that sentiment, the opposition leaders have stated Yanukovich must step down, snap Presidential elections called and the Constitution returned to the 2004 version (how many are there?!).  There are threats the opposition will 'attack.'  Whatever that may mean.

There have been some odd rumblings with respect to the ukrainian army.  One I saw claimed any officer which had a problem with restoring order ought to resign.  Not a good sign that.

However!  There are reports of folks resigning from the government. 

Europe is starting to weigh in and rumors have it that banker problems in the West might have helped turn down the heat in Kyiv.

On the other hand, Medvedev and Putin are starting to growl: a delay in the next tranche of the bailout and the gas price cut are on hold until the next government of Ukraine is sworn in.  Is Putin throwing Yanukovich under the bus?

OTGH, I think Obama's mention of Ukraine in the State of the Union address produced the SQUEE heard 'round the world.

It's Official: Return to the Moon Tossed

President Barack Obama's proposed budget gives NASA a $6 billion 5-year boost but aborts early attempts to return to the moon and turns over space transportation to commercial companies.

The space agency's budget would grow to $19 billion in 2011 under the proposed budget released on Monday, with an emphasis on science and less spent on space exploration.

It "adds $6 billion to NASA's budget over five years and draws upon American ingenuity to enable us to embark on an ambitious 21st Century program of human space exploration," the budget proposal reads.

But the plan ends the Constellation program "which was planning to use an approach similar to the Apollo program to return astronauts back to the Moon 50 years after that program's triumphs."

The budget notes that an independent panel found the moon program was years behind schedule.

"Instead, we are launching a bold new effort that invests in American ingenuity for developing more capable and innovative technologies for future space exploration," it reads.

The new budget, which is subject to change by Congress, also extends operations at the International Space Station past its planned retirement date of 2016, suggesting such potential additions as inflatable space habitats.

I'm saddened, but, honestly, this was expected. Space goals never survive past administrations it seems. I have to wonder what the follow-on to the Orion capsule is going to be. A Dragon derived one? There are some bits of hope in here. One being that the budget is growing.

However, I believe, strongly, that NASA needs to have some of its missions trimmed. The earth observing mission ought to be handed over to NOAA. I have to wonder if we ought not to scrap NASA as is and reform the thing. Spin NACA back out. The aeronautics and astronautics has been a troubled marriage at best. Then make a department of space or some such.

Looks like it'll be a while before we get any more additions to the A's on the map. Damnit. I was promised moon colonies when I was a kid! We may just do it with or without, Mr President. Hopefully, we'll be announcing something big this week or next for Team Phoenicia. We'll see. The investing class is a fickle bunch.

Obama Opposes a Carbon Tariff

President Barack Obama on Sunday called a House-passed climate change bill "an extraordinary first step," but spoke out against a provision that would impose trade penalties on countries that fail to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

"At a time when the economy worldwide is still deep in recession and we've seen a significant drop in global trade, I think we have to be very careful about sending any protectionist signals," Obama said in an Oval Office interview reported by The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post.

"I think there may be other ways of doing it than with a tariff approach," Obama said.

The Democratic-controlled House on Friday passed the climate change bill that would require large U.S. companies, including utilities and manufacturers to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases associated with global warming by 17 percent by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050, from 2005 levels.

No, no, no, and,umm, no.

This climate bill, in fact any climate bill, while necessary will end up costing US business a nontrivial amount. All you have to do is compare the energy consumption and the type of energy consumption and you will see where it'll hurt in detail. My wife did a pretty good paper on this a while back. Two years ago? I think? The only way to balance this out - because, y'know, the Chinese and others, but especially the Chinese, are not going to do a single thing about their carbon emissions - is to impose a 'carbon tariff.'

That Obama opposes it is disheartening. Sure, let's raise the costs for US businesses, but not others.

*sighs*

FWIW, I whole heartedly support a climate bill. I prefer the carbon tax rather than cap and trade, but...eh. Either way carbon emission reductions need to be done. And soon. No matter what, we are getting a climate change. Now its just a question of how drastic. We have the power to curtail and mitigate the looming desicated polar bear, but only if the whole world does this. China and India have to be on board too...or else we are fscked. Tech development is a good way: our newest green revolution, but that will take time. Time we may do not have.

Climate Engineering Is Now On The Table

The president's new science adviser said Wednesday that global warming is so dire, the Obama administration is discussing radical technologies to cool Earth's air. John Holdren told The Associated Press in his first interview since being confirmed last month that the idea of geoengineering the climate is being discussed.

One such extreme option includes shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun's rays. Holdren said such an experimental measure would only be used as a last resort.

"It's got to be looked at," he said. "We don't have the luxury of taking any approach off the table."

Holdren outlined several "tipping points" involving global warming that could be fast approaching. Once such milestones are reached, such as complete loss of summer sea ice in the Arctic, it increases chances of "really intolerable consequences," he said.

Twice in a half-hour interview, Holdren compared global warming to being "in a car with bad brakes driving toward a cliff in the fog."

At first, Holdren characterized the potential need to technologically tinker with the climate as just his personal view. However, he went on to say he has raised it in administration discussions.

This was predicted almost 8 years ago by a climate scientist from here then. Even if we went cold turkey CO2wise, we'd still have the resultant climate since it'd take thousands of years for the CO2 to be sequestered naturally. If this is taken seriously, then we may end up with climate a couple degrees higher.It will take a lot of work to flush that much CO2 out. if we don't move fast enough, it'll end up being 5C more. Betcha.

Obama's NASA Budget One of Policy Continuity

The fiscal 2010 NASA budget outline to be released by the Obama Administration Feb. 26 adds almost $700 million to the out-year figure proposed in the fiscal 2009 budget request submitted by former President Bush, and sticks with the goal of returning humans to the moon by 2020.

The $18.7 billion that Obama will request for NASA - up from $18.026 billion for fiscal 2010 in the last Bush budget request - does not include the $1 billion NASA will receive in the $787 billion stimulus package that President Barack Obama signed Feb. 16.

Aviation Week has learned that in addition to the human-lunar return, Obama wants to continue robotic exploration with probes to Mars and other Solar System destinations, as well as a space telescope to probe deeper into the universe.

I have to say I a little surprised, but pleased. One of NASA's great banes has been that every 8 years its priorities get reset. It's nice to know that Obama seems to want to continue with the Moon quest. Assuming Obama makes it through 2016, we'll be largely there. Assuming that a Repug or an antispace Demo doesn't come in then, we ought to be 'there.'

My 'wish' would be some enhancements for the unmanned program: money to cover the MSL overruns, money to speed up, a tad, the Jupiter-Europa Orbiter and ditto for the Titan Saturn System Mission as well as more money and direction for the Mars program. I would also want a rigorous and well thought out exploration of the minor bodies in the solar system as well. and...and...well.

:D


Now, let me say that we really need to be careful about international collaborations. They very frequently drive up costs and can have dubious benefits (ISS, frex).

This Is A *REALLY* Bad Idea

It has been reported in several places that the Obama administration is considering transfering LANL and LLNL from the Department of Energy to the Department of Defense.

...

I cannot explain how bad of an idea this is.

The Bush administration's stupidity wrt the management changes (UC to contractors) was bad enough. It axed hundreds of researcher jobs at LANL and LLNL. Now if the Labs are transfered to the Pentagon, the science there is simply dead. The purpose of the labs would simply be weapons production and research only. Los Alamos would devolve into a nuke production/research facility and really, at that point, why have LLNL and LANL...

...

I cannot even express how depressed this makes me.

Guess Obama really is putting science back in its proper place.

Oh and Chu! How could you?!

Note: This is posted on my time. No opinions here are LBNL's or NERSC's. However, as Chu knows from many an all hands, keeping an LBLer from calling people on the carpet is nigh on impossible.

Obama Wants to Ban Space Based Weapons

President Barack Obama's pledge to seek a worldwide ban on weapons in space marks a dramatic shift in U.S. policy while posing the tricky issue of defining whether a satellite can be a weapon.

Moments after Obama's inauguration last week, the White House website was updated to include policy statements on a range of issues, including a pledge to restore U.S. leadership on space issues and seek a worldwide ban on weapons that interfere with military and commercial satellites.

*sighs*

SCHWEEEET! Congratz, Dr Chu!

Life's been a mess here due tot he fact that Lyuda's PT has been in the fscking shop for the last week. The shop, the dealer really, has blown multiple turbochargers. I'm about to go rain down hell upon them in person, but while I have been so preoccupied with my personal problems, they slipped a fast one past me.

President-Elect Obama has selected my boss' boss' boss, Steve Chu, to be the Secretary of Energy. Because the Director's Page is likely to be updated with a replacement in the not too distant future, here's a small grab of his bio there:

Chu’s own research has resulted in numerous awards, including the 1997 Nobel Prize in Physics, shared with Claude Cohen-Tannoudji and William D. Phillips, for developing methods to cool and trap atoms with laser light. He did the work that led to the prize while at AT&T Bell Laboratories, from 1978-87; in 1987 he joined Stanford University as a professor in the Physics and Applied Physics Departments and was a highly decorated scientist, teacher, and administrator there until he accepted the directorship of Berkeley Lab.

Chu has published more than 220 scientific papers and is a fellow or member of the world’s leading scientific academies. He serves on numerous boards including the Hewlett Foundation, the University of Rochester, and the Executive Committee of the National Academies’ Board on Physics and Astronomy. He has been an advisor to the directors of the National Institutes of Health and the National Nuclear Security Agency.

His undergraduate degrees in physics and mathematics were from the University of Rochester and his Ph.D from UC Berkeley. He has been awarded ten honorary degrees and has held numerous visiting lectureships at universities including Harvard, Cambridge, Oxford, and the Collège de France.

Chu was born in Saint Louis, Missouri on February 2, 1948. He is married to Jean Chu, who was trained as a physicist at Oxford University and was formerly Stanford’s Dean of Admissions and the university president’s chief of staff. He has two grown sons, Geoffrey and Michael.

Oh, if the scuttlebutt is true, his siblings consider him a slacker, relatively speaking, since even though he has a PhD and a Nobel and run a lab and now is going to be a dept head of a nontrivial part of the government, he only has a single PhD. IDK if there's truth to that or not, but still an amusing rumor.

For the rest of you, he's huge into renewable energy, expect that for a major agenda item, and also synthetic biology, so look for that to be added more to the DOE's platform. Oh and he's not been a fan at all to what has been done to LANL and LLNL for management contracts. There's a slight ray of hope there, but only a slight one.

On a personal note, I've met him a few times. A very nice guy and very bright. PHD-itis is not something that has afflicted him.

Congratz, Dr Chu!

Sooo...

Why isn't Obama just smacking McCain around like a little...ahem?

I mean, the economy is going bonkers. We have a war that we are still in that he has promised to draw to a close. We have another war that we are slipping up in and...we have the single most unpopular President in decades, if not ever, in office. Not to mention he's far more articulate than McCain is on the stump.

Why does it seem that the whole election is really a toss up?

With the pronunciations of a landslide prior, I'm wondering: what the heck is up?

Double Stinker

Both Obama and McCain voted for telecom immunity & warrantless wire tapping bill. I cannot believe that Obama did that. McCain, I can believe since he's sucking up to Shrubbish to win over the Concons, but Congress and the Senate are by and large in Democratic hands.

phaw.

Small update: Obama originally said he'd filibuster anything like this. Then he didn't. No flipflop there.

AvWeek: The Candidates on Aerospace

Special report looks at presidential candidates' agendas, immediate priorities, and implications for A&D

This week's Aviation Week & Space Technology zeros in on Senators John McCain and Barack Obama and where they stand on aviation, aerospace and defense issues. As the lead article by Editor-in-Chief Anthony L. Velocci Jr. states, "For many aerospace and aviation interests, McCain is a known but feared quantity, while Obama is a blank slate."

AW&ST's discussions with political advisers and reviews of public records provide the backdrop for a thorough analysis of the aviation, aerospace and defense industry under the next president. The report examines key industry challenges the next U.S. president will face, including America's role in future space exploration, defense modernization, and a crumbling civil aviation infrastructure; these issues will be exacerbated by a huge national debt and a war on two fronts.

Aviation Week did pretty much a whole issue dedicated to the question. I don't have it, but its worth noting for those that want to run to the library. As far as space exploration goes, McCain states he wants to stay the course. As far as Obama is concerned, he wants to ax the manned portions of what's planned. Alas. As far as aerospace cotnracting is concerned, AvWeek says it best as far as McCain is concerned: feared, but known. Obama on the other hand is a complete unknown. I suspect that he'll come through with an ax though to pay for his other programs.

Prez Run: A Touch of Energy (Policy)

There's something to like - and hate - from both Presidential candidates' energy proposed energy policies. Neither one makes me particularly happy, really, and both seem to be playing to their constituents. Big surprise that! Let's touch on some specifics. Unfortunately, McCain, other than his recent press releases, seems to be rather vague, so forgive me if I screw this a tad.

On the plus side, but candidates are talking about energy independence. This is something loooong overdue and really should have been considered by some other administration as far back as the 1970s after the OPEC embargo induced price shock. Kudos for them both for at least making the right mouth motions and air exhalations. At least they both say they want to do this.

Obama puts out some good proposals. One of them is the renewable energy requirements: 25% of electricity being renewable by 2025 and the embracing of biofuels, especially the cellosic ethanol. McCain's made mouth motions too about this, but not to the same degree and not as concretely.

McCain does something a little braver in one respect. He claims to have embraced nuclear power in a big way. He wants to increase the number of nuclear reactors by 45 by 2030 from the 100 something now. Obama pans this one. Oh, he doesn't outright reject it, but he does rather poo-poo the idea. Nuclear power just isn't a seller among the Democratic base generally.

Both of them, much to my gut wrenching sickness, state they want 'clean coal.' While I recognize that coal is a vital, current member of our energy mixture, I don't think it really belongs to our future whatsoever. Clean coal requires so much research its ridiculous. You know that carbon sequestration demo coal power plant that DOE was developing? The one that most of the world was excitedly waiting to see if it would solve the CO2 emission issue on a per plant basis? Well, it was cancelled. Why? The costs were spiraling out of control. It's necessary budget doubled without much work getting done to well over a billion dollars and nearing two. This one strikes me a near impossibility to reach and I cannot like any proposal for this. *shrugs*

However, I have to express my skepticism about anything proposed for after any administration's tenure. At best, Obama will have been out of office for nine years (a full administration cycle and a bit) by then and who knows whether or not his successor will continue said policy. This criticism is for McCain, too, btw, with his prognostications about 2030, 14 years, nearly two (!) administration cycles.

blast. Out of time. Meeting coming up and I have a fully booked day after that.

What to do with the Carbon Tax/C&P Dinero?

A debate has started up as what to do with the money we'll get from the carbon tax or cap and trade plans. Both McCain and Obama are planning on a cap and trade scheme. Obama's will have an immediate auction while McCain's will have an allocation initially without auction and then phase in an auction over time. Both have issues - big price jumps and initial lobbyist uber influence, respectively - but I am not going to discuss that in this post. For now, this post is dealing with what I'll call carbon money.

There's a tussle online over what to do with the dinero. It's going to be a LOT of money. The permits could be worth $7 trillion by 2050. If you ponder that, even if you spread that over 40 years, that's something like $175 billion dollars per year. That's a nontrivial chunk of change there. What are we going to do with it?

Before we tackle that, you have to keep some things in mind. First, this is not a long term, guaranteed revenue stream. The whole point is that this is to make up for the 'market failure' of failing to get rid of carbon dioxide emitting industries. Or in the very least get the resources to offset or mitigate the damages from those industries that emit but are irreplaceable. This does mean the revenue stream, even if the auctioned price each year rises should and is intended to fall: we don't want the industries to keep emitting!

Therefore, anything that we want to spend this money on must be short term funding items. The most popular idea is to fund the development of technology to replace the fossil fuels with renewables and other alternate technologies. that's the thrust of the Lieberman bill that McCain backs. Another suggestion might be to set up an insurance fund that would cover the problems that may stem from the large scale implementation of nuclear power plants. Environmental clean up is another suggestion I've come across. Space projects could be yet another. Education reform yet another. There are plenty of suggestions and at an average of $187 billion there's a nontrivial amount of money to be had. There's one suggestion that I came across, I am not so sure is a good idea.

Robert Reich suggested, here and above, to give it all back, to send out dividend checks to the people each year.

I am less than enthused with this option. Each American would get about $625. My family would get about $1,875. While I'd appreciate that amount (!), I have to say that I think someone needs to sit down and do the math associated with moving the money around in the economy like this. I may have time for this but I doubt it.

It also seems to be terrible short sighted. Rather than investing in something, it's merely a redistribution of wealth. Perhaps an unwise method for one at that.

Small Update: Climate Feedback has more.

Poltiical Cartoon for the Geek in You

Dean to Super Delegates: Pick NOW

An increasingly firm Howard Dean told CNN again Thursday that he needs superdelegates to say who they’re for – and “I need them to say who they’re for starting now.”

“We cannot give up two or three months of active campaigning and healing time,” the Democratic National Committee Chairman told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. “We’ve got to know who our nominee is.”

hmmm.

Richardson to Endorse Obama

(that picture has a funky angle on it or something)

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, the nation's only Hispanic governor, is endorsing Sen. Barack Obama for president, calling him a "once-in-a-lifetime leader" who can unite the nation and restore America's international leadership.

Richardson, who dropped out of the Democratic race in January, is to appear with Obama on Friday at a campaign event in Portland, Ore., The Associated Press has learned.

The governor's endorsement comes as Obama leads among delegates selected at primaries and caucuses but with national public opinion polling showing Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton pulling ahead of him amid controversy over statements by his former pastor.

Richardson has been relentlessly wooed by Obama and Clinton for his endorsement. As a Democratic superdelegate, the governor plays a part in the tight race for nominating votes and could bring other superdelegates to Obama's side. He also has been mentioned as a potential running mate for either candidate.

I am not a fan or Richardson whatsoever despite his credentials and what he has done for me personally. A lot of this is personal. It has to do with what he helped orchestrate against a friend's family. He has been fingered as the major source of information to the media (aka leaks) that time and again made as much pro-gov spin as possible (biasing the media). This could be seen as something I am just ticked about and its my problem.

Let's stop and look at him now. Richardson has been tagged as a lame duck governor and he's just biding his time until he's tapped for something in Washington in the presumed next administration. Do you remember his boasting about making health care available in New Mexico to one and all? it's dead. Really dead. As soon as he stopped campaigning for President, he stopped pushing for it. New Mexico as a whole is a very poor state. The majority of NMicans would have really benefited from this. If Richardson was really serious about this issue, rather than merely grandstanding for the party primaries, he'd be still pushing for this in the NM legislature. He's not.

Draw your own conclusions.

Anyways, Richardson has endorsed Obama. From what I can read of the Democratic Party tea leaves, this is something that will carry some positive weight within the party. This is something of a slap to the Clintons since Richardson has been so close with them.

It's notable that Richardson only done this after it looks like Obama's going to get the nomination.

Obama's Letter to Puerto Rico

"Puerto Rico's status must be based on the principle of self-determination," he wrote. "As President I will work closely with the Puerto Rican government, its civil society and with Congress to create a genuinely transparent process for self-determination that will be true to the best traditions of democracy. As President I will actively engage Congress and the Puerto Rican people in promoting this deliberative, open and unbiased process, that may include a constitutional convention, or a plebiscite, and my Administration will adhere to a policy of strict neutrality on Puerto Rican status matters. My Administration will recognize all valid options to resolve the question of Puerto Rico's status, including commonwealth, statehood, and independence."

That settles Obama's position wrt Puerto Rico.

I don't support commonwealth status. I believe that the only constitutionally viable, morally acceptable is is either we need to incorporate them as a state or set them free as a separate nation. Because Congress has granted Puerto Ricans American citizenship, this ahs its own problems as well though.