NATIONAL: Get Out and Vote on Tues. Nov. 6, 2012!

ELECTION TUESDAY 11/6/2012: Everybody - please IGNORE the advertisements, and instead, do some research and make intelligent choices. We were raised by our parents to believe that if you do NOT vote, then you shouldn’t complain when OTHER PEOPLE make the decisions for you. We taught our children the same thing. It is a responsibility of our citizenship to get out there and vote. Thanks!

****************************************

ORIGINAL ARTICLE: It shouldn't be called "Political Advertising", but instead "Political Propaganda". Now THAT'S Truth in Advertising!

I was just reading an article in Time Magazine (August 20, 2012, page 4 "A dark take on the 2012 election"). In it, the Huffington Post was lamenting the $2,000,000,000 (that's right - $2 Billion) that  would be spent on the 2012 Presidential Election, once all is said and done. Readers writing to the Times "Inbox" complained about how the campaigns were definitely "not informative". In the long history of America, as far as I can tell, Political Campaigns have NEVER been intended to be informative - they are intended to GET VOTES, with a fair amount of character assassination thrown in.

Wow - where to begin? Who amongst us decides who to vote for based on the "Political Propaganda"? Are we that ill-informed that such Propaganda is our best source of information on where the candidates stand on issues, and indeed, even understanding the issues? Even with the vast resources of the internet at our fingertips?

SUGGESTION: Ignore the political Propaganda, and instead do some research and find out BOTH:

1) what the candidates put out as policy proposals, and

2) what they have ACTUALLY DONE (and not just said),

with a HEAVY EMPHASIS on 2).

Educate thyself, and don't fall for the political advertising that is really "Political Propaganda". Should the Citizens of the United States do that, all the "Political Propaganda" spending in the world won't change our minds on the issues in front of us. The Yo-Yo's at the Huffington Post should be goading their readers into educating themselves on political issues, rather than their resorting to the absurd hand-wringing.

On the same page of the Time Magazine, the readers write in about how saddened they are by the many jobs that could have been created with that $2,000,000,000 that is instead being spent by Obama and Romney. Right. Because government TARP spending of an unknown amount ($800,000,000,000? That's $800 Billion. $3,000,000,000,000? That's $3 Trillion) created so many new jobs?

Note: after doing a little research, its impossible for a non-insider like me to add up how much the federal government spent on the bailouts, but this New York Times link gives us a fair idea.

What the Time magazine readers don't really understand is that SPENDING ON ADVERTISING (think Google or Facebook, whose primary revenue source is advertising, as two rather large examples) does indeed create jobs. Bet Google and Facebook employ a few folks. Ask ANYONE IN ADVERTISING how many jobs $2,000,000,000 in spending on Ads (TV, Print, Radio, Cable, Internet, etc.) creates. I would be willing to bet that it creates more jobs per $$$ spent than the bailout did.

Use your brains, people! Don't be Zombie Propaganda Puppets!

NATIONAL: Moonwalker Armstrong Passes into the Stars

UPDATE 11/1/2012: I recently finished reading Armstrong's ONLY authorized biography, written in 2005 by James R. Hansen entitled "First Man: the Life of Neil A. Armstrong" (some details: Simon & Schuster, NY, NY, 2005, Illustrated with diagrams & photos, 7x10 inches, 769 pages).  Overall, I'm happy to have read the book, but it was just an above average effort. Much of the book I found to be boring because, frankly, Armstrong was a fairly boring person (if you can believe that) who led an amazing life of accomplishment. He was so focused throughout his entire life on his engineering and piloting, and on his personal privacy, that among the Apollo astronauts, he was probably the only real one with a snoozer of a personality. I'm not saying that to be unkind, because he epitomizes the definition of a great American. He was humble, focused, and not out for his slice of fame, though it was  right at his fingertips throughout his entire adult life.

The highlights of the book are the same as the highlights of his career accomplishments: numerous X-15 experimental aircraft flights out of Edwards Air Force Base, 78 successful fighter combat missions in the Korean War, and of course, being the first man to set foot on the moon. Shortly after his successful Moon walk, he worked for NASA for another year or so, then hid out as an engineering professor at his alma mater, Purdue University for about 10 years. After that, he became a spokesperson for Chrysler Corporation (nobody seems to remember that!), and lived a quiet lifestyle out of the public eye.

I'm sure there are better book reviews of "First Man" out there than mine, but I think you will most enjoy the Apollo years, which of course gets the most pages of attention - as it should. Given the importance of Armstrong's achievements,  I recommend this book, though not highly. Should you only want to read one "Moon Book", I much prefer "A Man on the Moon" by Chaiken. I also recommend the 12-part HBO TV miniseries narrated by Tom Hanks that was based on Chaiken's book: From the Earth to the Moon.

UPDATE 8/27/2012: Read this article on Armstrong. I am inspired to add comments on the man that was Neil Armstrong. His family, over the weekend, came out with statements about the life of the first man that walked on the moon. As noted below, Armstrong considered himself to be "just a nerdy engineer" who was just "doing his job". His family's statement said this:

"Neil was a reluctant American hero who always believed he was just doing his job. Honor his example of service, accomplishment and modesty, and the next time you walk outside on a clear night and see the moon smiling down at you, think of Neil Armstrong and give him a wink."

Armstrong epitomized the calm, assured tone that astronauts prized. Mr. Armstrong wrote his authorized biography in 2005. From Wikipedia:

"Armstrong's authorized biography, First Man: The Life of Neil A. Armstrong, was published in 2005. For many years, Armstrong turned down biography offers from authors such as Stephen Ambrose and James A. Michener, but agreed to work with James R. Hansen after reading one of Hansen's other biographies." 

I just ordered a used copy of the book at Amazon for $9 including shipping - I look forward to reading it, and adding it to my Apollo / Gemini / Moon Book collection.

ORIGINAL ARTICLE: Well-known, soft-spoken American astronaut Neil Armstrong passed away on Saturday 8/25/2012 at the age of 82. I am a HUGE Apollo and Gemini program follower, having read and watched dozens of books and programs on this amazing era in American accomplishment, and am saddened to be reading in the paper this moring about his passing. Armstrong represented what a determined, hard-working America can accomplish.

Armstrong was a smart and strong man, with many accomplishments beyond being the first human to set foot on the surface of the moon. After receiving fame for his Apollo 11 moon accomplishments, he retreated to quietly and humbly teach and work on his Ohio farm. Before his Apollo fame, he earned an aeronautical engineering bachelor's and master's degree, and flew 78 combat missions for the U. S. Navy in the Korean War in 1949.

His moonwalk on July 20, 1969 capped America's victory in the Cold War Space Race that began on October 4, 1957, with the launch of the Soviet Union's Sputnik 1 Satellite. The end of the Race marked the meeting of Kennedy's audacious deadline set in May 1961 to have an American walk on the moon before the end of the decade (1970) was out - a goal that was met 5 months early with Armstrong's "Giant Leap for Mankind". Another astronaut of Apollo fame, John Glen, spoke of Armstrong's steely nerve when landing the Eagle on the surface of the moon, using all but 15 seconds of fuel when going for a safe landing on the moon. Armstrong calmly transmitted this message that caused the world to rejoice: "Houston, Tranquility Base Here. The Eagle Has Landed".

Armstrong stayed out of the spotlight of celebrity and glamour that followed the Apollo Program Astronauts, but came out in 2010 with concerns that our federal government was shifting attention away from a return to the moon and towards private companies developing spaceships. Apollo inspired a generation of young Americans, yet it seems that our energy and imagination is no longer stirred by the passions of programs like going to the moon. That is a sad testimony to where our country is headed, with massive debt, unending liabilities and no ability to ever fund an Apollo-like program again.

On that day in 1969, America showed the 600 million world-wide viewers that the American spirit can accomplish amazing things - things that seemed impossible a few years before. Fortunately, the Mars Curiosity Rover is inspiring similar, though less intense, feelings among Americans about what we can accomplish when we put our minds to it. We need to put our eager, enthusiastic, bright Americans to work on programs like Apollo. Tom Hanks said it best with his Letter to Congress in 1995. We'll see what happens next.

My favorite Apollo reading is the book "A Man on the Moon" by Andrew Chaikin that was later turned into a 12-part HBO Special "From the Earth to the Moon" narrated by Tom Hanks. I urge you to honor Neil Armstrong and the accomplishments of that generation, and look it up, and read the books or watch the series. 

Another Apollo favorite of mine is the 1995 movie "Apollo 13" starring Tom Hanks and Kevin Bacon. Apollo 13 takes us on a wild ride of a moon mission when the lunar landing was aborted after an oxygen tank exploded, crippling the service module. The daring of our American engineers and control center staff turned our saddest tragedy into our greatest moment. Despite great hardship caused by limited power, loss of cabin heat, shortage of potable water, and the critical need to jury-rig the carbon dioxide removal system, the crew returned safely to Earth on April 17.

When I worked at TRW in the 1980's, we still had aeronautical engineers working there that were called in to work when things went so wrong on Apollo 13. They told the stories of checking their software and hardware developed for the Apollo Program, and coordinating rescue saving knowledge to Flight Control. I was honored to have known and worked with these people for the short time that I did.

American legend Neil Armstrong - thank-you for your strength and resolve, and being part of an incredible team that accomplished incredible things, and made us proud to be Americans.

NATIONAL: The Extreme Folly of Corn Ethanol

I've been wanting to write on this subject for a LONG time! Ethanol is such a losing proposition in so many different ways that I don't know where to start...

This is all I have time for now, but there will be more to come. Thanks for reading.

BASIC ETHANOL STATISTICS: I'm just going to collect and throw out some basic ethanol statistics that I can refine over time.

• The US uses 40% of its national corn crop to create ethanol.
• The EPA mandates that 13,800,000,000 (that's right: 13.8 Billion) gallons of ethanol be mixed int our gasoline supply in 2013.
• Ethanol production is HEAVILY subsidized by taxpayers, and will have to be for decades (or perhaps forever) because it just does not pencil out as a fuel additive that makes economic sense on its own.

CONTRIBUTES TO WORLD HUNGER: For a variety of reasons (worldwide drought among them), hunger epidemics are sweeping the world today - primarily in Africa, the Middle East and South America including Mexico and Central America. This 3rd world hunger is made worse by the run up in the price of corn, a world food staple, by the US conversion of this food source to a gasoline additive. President Obama has stated that he believes that the US, as the wealthiest nation on the planet, has an obligation to fight world hunger. Unfortunately, the drive to convert food to gasoline (in the form of ethanol) has made that fight that much more difficult.

INCREASES FOOD STAPLE PRICES IN MEXICO: Mexico is perhaps the hardest hit by this corn-to-ethanol policy in the United States. With corn tortillas making up the bulk of diet calories to the Mexican poor, ethanol policies in the US are believed to have driven the price of corn tortillas up by a factor of 3 in Mexico. Where is the compassion for our poor, hungry neighbors to the south? When it comes to the supposed "solution" of ethanol to the problem of global warming, the policy is basically "to h*ll with the poor"- or so it would seem from where I am standing.

INCREASE GLOBAL WARMING: Scientific American magazine says in their 2009 study that "Ethanol will NOT reduce Green House Gasses". Ethanol made from corn produces about 50% more green house gasses than fossil fuels, as is stated in  this study.

ETHANOL TRANSPORT ISSUES: Unlike fossil fuel-based gasoline, ethanol cannot be transported by pipeline, and must instead be hauled our highways in trucks. That is because, unlike fossil fuel-based gasoline, ethanol absorbs water that accumulates in pipelines and is dissolved in the ehtanol. fossil fuel-based gasoline, on the other hand, does NOT mix with water (think "oil and water don't mix", or that boat fuel filters remove water by letting it settle to the bottom of the fuel filter (because water is heaver than fossil fuel-based gasoline). Also, ethanol causes pipeline corrosion issues that fossil-fuel based gasoline does not - read about it here.  

I found an article at The Economist that says it best:

Corn-based ethanol is quite simply the largest scam ever perpetrated on U.S. society. It yields AT BEST a break-even in energy, an energy-returned-on-energy-invested of zero. It also creates more emissions than it eliminates for two salient reasons seldom mentioned.
The first is that adding ethanol to gasoline yields a more volatile mixture than the base RBOB. That has required the establishment of separate manufacturing lines to produce chemicals which re-lower volatility to its original level. Secondly, ethanol is hygroscopic and then corrosive. It cannot be transported via pipeline, the most economically and environmentally efficient means of transportation. Hence, ethanol is trucked around the country by soot-emitting 18-wheelers. An entirely new distribution infrastructure has been created to mix it with commodity gasoline (RBOB) at the local wholesale level. In addition, it uses enormous volumes of water, estimated at 82 gallons per gallon of ethanol by the Argonne National Laboratory http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/energy-futurist/the-energy-water-nexus-2. That's about one trillion gallons per year!
The corn-based ethanol rules in this country have benefited no one outside of its own value chain. There's no word for it other than egregious.

PHOTOS: Just for Fun!

A few photos from a recent backpacking trip that I liked. Click to enlarge:

NATIONAL: Buy New Ford Vehicles (not Chrysler or GM)

I will not buy NEW Chrysler or GM ("Government Motors") vehicle products, because unlike Ford, they got government bailouts in their government-sponsored illegal bankruptcies.

Early in Obama's term, around 2009, Chrysler and GM went through government-assisted bankruptcies. There were 2 problems with this:
1) Secured creditors got illegally stiffed to the tune of BILLIONS of dollars, and
2) Democrat-supported constituencies (primarily unions) got paid off at the expense of those legally entitled to bankruptcy funds.

If the government let GM and Chrysler go through a legal (non-government sponsored) bankruptcy, private investors would have competed for the assets of the car companies, and started anew - this is how bankruptcy is supposed to work, or so I am told. No, I am NOT a bankruptcy expert, so please correct me if you are (and I need correcting).

Now I read this morning that the state of Indiana was hosed by our federal government to the tune of $42.5 million, when their secured credit was denied by the Obama administration, and instead went to UNsecured creditors at the United Auto Workers union.

NATIONAL: Obama Campaign Desperation - Liar! Liar! Liar!

Obama got his clock cleaned by Romney in the first debate on October 3, 2012, plunging his campaign into an abyss of desperation. Obama directed his officials and attack dogs, including the media, to bombard the Romney camp with the "Liar" label. Obama robots are attaching the word "Liar" and "Romney" everywhere they can. But its not working.

Calling someone a liar is a serious charge, which is designed to be a loaded word suggesting bad faith or total, cynical falsity. The Romney camp has ample opportunity to do the same with Obama, but has chosen not to do so [UPDATE 10/18/2012: it would now appear that Romney's pundits and supporters are now using the "Liar Card" in the situation with our dead Ambassador to Libya - is turnabout fair play?]. For instance, every time he talks, Obama says he wants to increase taxes on the "Millionaires and Billionaires", yet his tax increase proposal starts with individuals making $200,000 a year; should the Romney team be similarly calling Obama a liar? The statement clearly is a lie. What? You mean Romney's camp isn't using the Obama "liar" tactic? Why not? Um, maybe because Romney comes from a political generation that knows how to play rough, but knows the limits of going too low at the presidential level. Obama plays by "Chicago Politics" rules, and its unfortunate for the American public to be exposed to these playground level tactics.

Traditionally, in politics, there are all kinds of ways to suggest that an opponent is not telling the truth, such as this weeks Obama TV ad asking "How Can We Trust Mitt Romney?" No objection to that approach. To have top officials from the Obama campaign yelling "Romney is a liar" at every opportunity screams of desperation and a "get elected at any cost" mentaility. Sad.

A source none other than the liberal Huffington Post picked up on this Liar tactic quickly after the debate. Just try googling "Romney" and "Liar" and see how many hits you get from the upper echelons of the Obama Campaign and Obama Staff.

For a take on the conservative angle, you can read Bill Bennett defending Romney in the first debate as NOT being a liar.

PHOTO: Just for Fun!

Photo of Andrew and Tim from a recent camping trip (photo by Cat :-)

Can't be serious all the time, can we? CLICK TO ENLARGE