Crazy guess here, politics.

And timing. The Energy Reliability Council of Texas on Thursday issued their impact assessment response to the EPA's Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, imposed in July, compliance demanded by January 2012.

ERCOT manages and operates the entire Texas power grid. If you haven't noticed, Texas and a good part of the central US has been gripped in the worst heat wave and drought since 1980. Six times this summer ERCOT has imposed "Level 2" restrictions as the power demand threatened to exceed the capabilities of the grid to supply, and large consumers who have established agreements with ERCOT were shut down to conserve power on those 108 degree days.

Level 3 is rolling blackouts.

By the way, the EPA also grabbed control from the State of Texas on new plant construction, so there isn't any.

ERCOT's assessment looked at three scenarios... I'll summarize them.

"Texas power producers will cut production from 2 to 8%. Period."

So here's what that means. Government imposed rolling blackouts.

Six times this summer demand rose within the threshold of reserve capacity. Reserve capacity is 1750Mw (or was, on August 4). That's less than 2% of total generation capacity.

I suspect the unpopularity of government imposed blackouts was a bridge too far for Obama. But it won't be if he survives the 2012 election. It'll be a feature, not a problem.

Also, why this is a big deal.

Because his policies, his directives to the EPA, hurt his re-election chances. They kill jobs. They piss people off with higher prices for energy and NO F*&IN access to energy.

Obama wants you to sweat and pay 4 times what you do now, for the privilege of sweating in the dark.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 09:20 AM | Comments (98)
Post contains 298 words, total size 2 kb.

It's baaaack. If you missed that barnburner in Waco last night, last year's Rose Bowl champ and 15th ranked TCU lost a close one to Baylor in a high scorin crazy thing, 50-48. It was one of those where the last team that had their hands on the ball when the clock ran out was gonna win it. Remarkably, only one turnover by each team last night, the last one a late 4th quarter interception by Baylor that held the win. Good stuff.

But there's more!

Biggest tickets today probably (19) Georgia at home against (5) Boise State, tonight at 8 eastern. And (3) Oregon vs. (4) LSU, same time (dammit).

The heat is breaking in Texas and I'm looking forward to less that $300 water bills. So I got that goin for me, which is nice.

Have a great Labor Day weekend you goofballs.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at 06:50 AM | Comments (277)
Post contains 151 words, total size 1 kb.

Nouriel Roubini, a/k/a "Dr. Doom," went on Bloomberg TV to make his latest predictions about the world's economy:

WeÂ’ve reached a stall speed in the economy, not just in the U.S., but in the euro zone and the UK. We see probably a 60 percent probability of recession next year, and, unfortunately, weÂ’re running out of policy tools.....and sovereigns cannot bail out their own distressed banks because they are distressed themselves.

(Emphasis mine.) At the Ambrosetti Forum in Italy, Roubini said in an interview with CNBC that the situation is worse that 2008, that this time there is fiscal austerity and that banks "are being cautious."

Business Insider says Roubini has been predicting a double dip recession for four years, however, and adds:

Remember, this is the traditional summer doldrums, and markets are still reeling from the unprecedented downgrade of the U.S. debt by S&P, black swans flocking in Europe certainly has only added to the market turmoil and volatility. So it is logical to see some mixed and somewhat pessimistic data coming out of this current environment, but they are not indicative enough to extrapolate out a recession.

They go on to remind us that 2012 is an election year and that "the Fed, the Obama Administration, and the Democratic Party will pull out all the stops to stave off a downright recession." But I wonder if the Fed belongs on that list.

Follow me on Twitter.

Posted by: rdbrewer at 05:57 AM | Comments (118)
Post contains 248 words, total size 2 kb.

Aerial surveillance FTW!

When David Hudson, Steven Lynn, and another friend decided to go flying on Friday, they never would have bargained for the day they would have. After returning from Memphis, Lynn asked Hudson, who was flying the aircraft, if they could fly over his house. Hudson set a course for Lynn's home and when they arrived they couldn't believe their eyes.

"When I took him over his house, there were a couple of guys loading up a bunch of stuff," said Hudson, "I was like, someone is stealing stuff down there."

Video below the fold

UPDATE: If the video doesn't appear on your computer for some reason, it's available in the link to the story. more...

Posted by: andy at 03:59 AM | Comments (92)
Post contains 131 words, total size 1 kb.

I met up with Candace Kita at the AoSHQ oceanfront beach mansion on old Cape Cod recently. In between iced hurricane cocktails, I asked her what new projects she was working on. "Well I am currently shooting several guest appearances for network television shows that will be broadcast this fall. I can't go into specifics right now but I will give AoSHQ readers exclusive photos and info as soon as they are ready to air." "I am currently promoting a cool new modeling card product called "Bench Warmer Bubble Gum Trading Cards". You know, trading cards like the baseball cards you used to collect when you were a kid complete with a piece of bubble gum only these cards feature pictures of sexy models".

Posted by: Open Blogger at 05:24 PM | Comments (769)
Post contains 276 words, total size 2 kb.

The most brutal layoffs yet.

The unfinalized plans are to cut over 10,000 and up to 30,000 employees in the next few years.

The reason for them is simple.

The massive cuts are partly to make up for what are expected to be huge lawsuit-related losses over the firm's and Countrywide's role in the mortgage crisis. Bank of America bought Countrywide, the country's largest mortgage lender, in 2008.

Posted by: Ace at 01:56 PM | Comments (324)
Post contains 86 words, total size 1 kb.

Perry's previous debate hits are discussed at NRO.

Perry shouldn't do this:

In 2002, for instance, Perry faced businessman Tony Sanchez in the general election. At the start of their debate, the governor played it safe: He mostly ignored SanchezÂ’s swipes and listed his accomplishments with a pleasant, steady smile.

When a panelist queried Sanchez about a bank of his that was under investigation, Sanchez asserted, “There were two federal judges and three federal agencies who said management and directors weren’t involved [in the wrongdoing]. . . . So I feel very good.”

“Mr. Sanchez, you shouldn’t feel good,” a solemn Perry replied, shaking his head. “You shouldn’t feel good when the federal authorities tell you that there is drug money that came into your bank in cash in suitcases. And then you sent the money to Panama at the request of those drug dealers. . . . You failed the test of leadership.”

Later, Perry lightened up. After Sanchez criticized Perry’s environmental policies, the governor noted, “What Mr. Sanchez didn’t tell you is that he recently told a Corpus Christi newspaper that he would copy Europe and allow Texans only two ice cubes per drink.” As chuckles rippled through the audience, Perry held up two fingers — and half-heartedly suppressed a grin — to illustrate his point. “That’s his conservation plan.” He then shot a glance at his opponent and quipped, “Mr. Sanchez, you’ve been spending too much time in Europe.”

...

Further into the program, Perry questioned Hutchison about her support for the Troubled Asset Relief Program. As she explained the intricacies of her decision process — just as he had planned — Perry played to the crowd, staring off into the distance with raised eyebrows as if to ask, “Is she done yet?”

It's one thing for him to do that in Texas, where people tended to know him. In that situation he can show a little personality, and a little arrogance.

In a debut on a national stage, with millions of people tuning in to see who he is, that's exactly the wrong thing to do. The first goal should to be to let people you're a serious guy, on top of things, smart, in command, not easily rattled.

The joking must wait. Particularly because the last president who had been a governor in Texas loved to tease and had a lot of confidence and charm. Perry's goal is to convince people he's actually not George W. Bush, and he can do that by restraining the personality and just projecting a smooth fluency with policy and principle.

I think he understands that, though. In this interview with Mark Levin, he just explains himself (including his support of the Texas Dream Act, which is not the federal one) and winds up actually getting a blessing from Levin -- not an endorsement, Levin stresses, but Levin calls him one of the several candidates he could support enthusiastically.

If Perry gets cute, jokesy, or swagger-y in the debate, he'll halt his momentum and lose some of it. If he stays on policy, he wins.

I think as a general matter that people have to shore up their weaknesses, not play to their strengths. Strengths are a comfort zone, and people like to stay in comfort zones; but strengths show themselves naturally, without having to emphasize them.

It's weaknesses that people are looking at. Address the weaknesses and the strengths will take care of themselves.

Clarification: I'm talking about the September 7 Republican debate at the Reagan Library, which is Perry's national debut.

Whether he can go after Obama hard, to his face, depends on how much credibility and authority he's amassed at that point (assuming he's the nominee). That's a different question.

Basically my thought on that is by the time the public is that much on your side that you can trash-talk your challenger, you've already pretty much won.

Further Clarification: I see where people are missing my point-- I didn't write it clearly.

I don't want Perry roughing up the other candidates with swagger and jokes. Of course, attack Obama -- but Perry's main goal in attacking Obama is to do so in a way that suggests that Perry knows what he's talking about and Obama doesn't.

Posted by: Ace at 12:48 PM | Comments (303)
Post contains 728 words, total size 5 kb.

Interesting points at Instapundit, with a concluding quote from F.A. Hayek.

Posted by: Ace at 12:34 PM | Comments (70)
Post contains 25 words, total size 1 kb.

This is "lowering expectations," of course. Having raised them so high, Obama now finds himself in the uncomfortable position of having demanded a dramatic national stage... and having not much at all to say.

So how does he get out of this jam? Well, he's claiming the Great Big Speech he made such a jackass fuss over is just one of a series of Great Big Speeches. And so he can console disappointed listeners with the claim, "But all my best stuff is coming later."

Right. Save the really good stuff for an impromptu meet and greet at a Harris Teeter in Virginia. A nationally televised speech before a joint session of Congress is naturally where you'd want to to just talk about your weaker ideas.

Aides say Thursday's speech will be part of a bigger plan the White House will roll out throughout the fall with the president hitting the road for speeches and town hall appearances. Aides have already confirmed that Obama will be traveling to California, Colorado, and Washington state for one three-day swing later this month that will include economic events as well as some fundraising.

Again, seems like there's only one job he's really fussed about "saving."

Hey, maybe this guy is simply unqualified.

Posted by: Ace at 11:13 AM | Comments (473)
Post contains 239 words, total size 2 kb.

Okay, it's just one trick, done again and again, but its a neat trick.

Via the Conservatory, which also spotlights a Nobel Prize winning economist laying the country's economic problems at the feet of Obama's hyperactive interventions.

The misdiagnosis of widespread market failure led congressional leaders, after the 2008 election, to propose radical changes in financial institutions and, more generally, much wider regulation and government control of companies and consumer behavior. They proposed higher taxes on upper-income families and businesses, and extensive controls over executive pay, as they bashed “billionaire” businessmen with private planes and expensive lifestyles. These political leaders wanted to reformulate antitrust policies away from efficiency, slow the movement by the U.S. toward freer trade, add many additional regulations in the medical-care sector, levy big taxes on energy emissions, and cut opportunities to drill for oil and other fossil fuels.

Congress did manage to pass badly designed laws concerning financial markets, consumer protection and medical care. Although regulatory discretion failed leading up to the crisis, Congress nevertheless added to the number and diversity of federal regulations as well as to the discretion of regulators. These laws and the continuing calls for additional regulations and taxes have broadened the uncertainty about the economic environment facing businesses and consumers. This uncertainty decreased the incentives to invest in long-lived producer and consumer goods. Particularly discouraged was the creation of small businesses, which are a major source of new hires.

Posted by: Ace at 10:28 AM | Comments (130)
Post contains 248 words, total size 2 kb.