The only that surprises me about this is the fact that they had to write a story about it. I could never logically get my arms around how this was supposed to save us energy, anyway.

For example, households may draw less electricity for lights at night, but will use more power in the early in the day as they wake to darker and chillier mornings.

Yeah, it only really works if we can wake up in the daylight. Way to go Congress.

Early Daylight Savings fails in power savings


In my e-mail inbox

A letter from my dear Senator:

January 13, 2006

Dear John:

Over the past several months, a healthy debate has occurred in our country
about drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). I
appreciated knowing your views on this important issue.

As you know, after a great deal of thought, I voted against drilling in
the ANWR. I thought the risks outweighed the potential benefits. The
United States will never be petroleum independent-we simply do not have
the oil. Department of Energy (DOE) figures show that we are currently 56
percent dependent on foreign oil. The DOE estimates that the ANWR would
reach full production by the year 2020, and even then, it would only
decrease our dependence on foreign oil by about 2%.

We desperately need a comprehensive energy policy, and the Administration
should get a lot of credit for putting a comprehensive package together.
The energy bill that the Senate passed this Congress addressed important
issues, such as electricity reform, nuclear and hydroelectric plant
regulations, energy efficiency standards for buildings and appliances, new
gasoline content standards and many others. These, in particular, are
more important to the energy needs of Ohioans than drilling in Alaska.

While I oppose drilling in the ANWR, I do not believe drilling should be
restricted on all federal land. The federal government is the caretaker
of millions of acres, which undoubtedly contain oil and gas reservoirs,
and I support the President’s efforts to identify potential energy sources
on our federal lands. In less fragile ecosystems, oil and gas exploration
can coexist with the natural environment. I believe that it is our duty
to find these sources and then carefully assess the costs versus the
benefits in each case.

Again, thank you for sharing your concerns. If you have any further
questions or comments please feel free to contact me.

Very respectfully yours,

United States Senator

Evo update

The BBC is so enamored with the new Bolivian president. Every time he visits a new country, it is on their website. Apparently, in order to travel from Bolivia you first need to win the presidency. Mainly I think they do so to write sentences like:

“Mr Morales won the December election on pledges to increase social spending and turn away from free-market policies.”

Posted at 09:36 pm by Johnny B

Posted by BP @ 01/11/2006 07:31 PM PST
Yeah…free market…baahh! That never works. Here’s my favorite quote:

“Mr Morales has vowed not to forget the people who put him in power, and has said he will take a pay cut of 50% when he takes office which he says will help pay the salaries of new teachers.”


Posted by John Cook @ 01/12/2006 09:38 PM PST
One thinks you must be a tad bit alarmed at what appears to be a left wing revolution in South America. Bolivia’s leader is only one you mention. Do not forget Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and now Chile. While our President acts the world’s A number one terroist fighter, his own back yard is rapidly heading left.

Posted by BP @ 01/13/2006 04:16 PM PST
One could make a good argument for the return of the old Monroe Doctrine. One doesn’t need to cross the world to fight despotism…that’s for certain.

Unfortunately, there are plenty of representatives in our own legislature who are fans of “increas[ing] social spending and turn[ing] away from free-market policies.” Our own president is responsible for one of the largest increases in social spending in the last 40 years. In and of itself it all sounds so innocent…but as mr cook stated, it SHOULD be a little unsettling.

Posted by John Broussard @ 01/13/2006 09:36 PM PST
“What appears to be” is a good qualifier here. Take da Silva (of Brazil). This guy ran as a hard-liner lefty threatening not to repay foreign debts, etc. He was a union leader who rose to political power. I can’t recall specifics off the top of my head, but I heard on NPR how da Silva changed his tune about nationalizing the banks etc. once elected, and in fact passed some market-based reforms. I paraphrase, but I remember him saying that poor Brazilians need jobs. So his campaign rhetoric didn’t match his real world policies. Da Silva is more like Dominique Villepin than Castro. As for Chile, they’ve been right wing for a long time…I doubt this socialist single mom is going to make a lot of lefty reforms there. Lastly, however much I disagree with their politics, these people were elected, and left wing does not always equate to terrorism. However, Chavez has concentrated his power too much over the last few years, and I feel there will be many more “landslides” he will win. For some reason, I don’t see that happening with Evo.