Truth and Consequences - Tesla-Powered VW Vanagon Battery Install. High voltage solar inverter.

Honesty is the best policy. There seems to be some confusion about this. It's not the best policy so Jesus will love you. He already does. It's the best policy. Period.

My father infuriated me during my adolescence as he had all these little maxims that he seemed to live by. Unexplained and unthought through, or so I thought using what bit of intellect I was able to sport at age 15. In the intervening 46 years I have learned the hard way that most of those are serious timesaving shortcuts on issues that were worked out several hundreds or thousands of years ago. I can spend an endless amount of time arguing with them and attempting to disprove them. Oddly it always comes out the same.

I was ENORMOUSLY encouraged by the results of the November 8 election. And on so many fronts.

At age 61 I thought that I could no longer really be surprised at anything. I was delightfully wrong on this.

First was the stark, barren, unashamed, unapologetic, brashly open lengths that alt-left players will go to in order to achieve power. They have no bounds. They will say or do ANYTHING, including pay people to disrupt and incite violence, fabricate wholesale mythologies with FULL knowledge of their falsehood and a cynical smirk that you CAN fool some of the people some of the time. IT is deeply cynical and deeply evil.

Two of the surprises were of course Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. Both were given zero chance of even making the scoreboard at the outset. Bernie Sanders did amazingly well against all odds and probably would have won the Democratic primary had it not been for some deeply cynical, actually evil, and certainly illegal activities by Hillerary Clinton supporters and the Democratic National Committee. And of course Donald Trump actually won the election.

I had a position for several months that the dream ticket would be Trump/Sanders 2016. Bernie wouldn't play so it didn't happen.

I agreed with only ONE of Bernie Sanders almost comical policies and positions - a kind of Ron Paul isolationist position AGAINST American military adventurism. Oddly he and Trump were in violent agreement on this and actually shared an almost identical view on globalism and the decline of American working class manufacturing jobs.

Ironically, the Ron Paul isolationist view was the ONLY policy I can think of off the top of my head that I agreed with from either or both candidates. So what am I on about?

Both men did a very good job of TELLING THE TRUTH.

Now we can argue endlessly about whether or not either one of them knows what the "truth" even is. Or what IS is for that matter. I'm not referring to their accuracy or wise leadership. I'm referring to the fact that anytime either was asked a direct question, they gave a direct and honest answer that they BELIEVED to be the truth. This was without regard to the quality of the question, the credibility of the questioner, or the impact it would have on the American electorate.

Bernie Sanders is an unapologetic socialist with economic and social views that almost represent and encyclopedic compilation of every human organizational meme in history that has in fact demonstrably failed at least repeatedly. I find it strains credulity that anyone can even seriously HOLD any such views. But I have to say I believe he DOES hold them because he is very forthright, even crotchety, in presenting them as his honest beliefs.

Similarly Trump. I don't really agree with ANY of his policies save the views on military adventurism. But I believe HE believes they are best and he articulated them quite honestly. This was more starkly evident as the press/alt-left ROUTINELY and very dishonestly characterized almost everything he said as racist, mysogynistic, homophobic, Islamaphobic, etc. etc. As I was privileged to hear what he DID say, I was on a daily basis impressed not with him, but how deeply and evilly dishonest the press and alt-left were in their characterizations.

And I found it rare to encounter anyone particularly enthusiastic about trade tariffs, immigration, building walls, or conversely in the case of Sanders, free education, free medical care, confiscating all the money, or passing it out to the homeless at random. In short, it was not their policies and views that were popular, it was their HONESTY. Assuming both were heroically flawed and totally incompetent to be POTUS, they were HONEST about it and I think the American people homed right in on that viscerally and emotionally.

In contrast were the 16 other Republican contenders on the one side, and of course Hillerary the Clintonite on the other. It was readily and visibly apparent with ALL of them that every question and every answer was carefully gaged, measured, crafted, and delivered to appease whoever the questioner was, whatever the question, and anyone else who might be listening and of course that it be "politically correct."

This was true of the BEST of them. And of the worst. But in the case of Hillerary, it actually was a little playlet with an answer, a qualifier at the end of the answer to provide plausibly deniability, a raised eyebrow to indicate or "dog whistle" that I know this is a freaking lie, and a little smirk indicating further that "I know YOU know it is a freaking lie, but of course there's not a thing you can do about it." And even if you can PROVE its a lie my people won't believe you...

It is my belief that at least half the electorate weren't fooled, and were sickened by the politico speak. And so both Trump and Sanders were quite popular and drew tens of thousands of enthusiastic supporters to rallies all across the country, while Marco Rubio and Hillerary Clinton were hard pressed to find a VENUE that would allow their 135 loyal followers at their event to LOOK like a bunch of people even given the evilly deceitful accommodating tight lens shots provided by the adoring media.

On election day, as we all know now, it mattered. And for all you "popular vote" groupies, who barely even know what that is or why it's a problem, Overall Trump won approximately 2,600 counties to Clinton’s 500, or about 84% of the geographic United States. However, Clinton won 88 of of the 100 largest counties (including Washington D.C.). Without these 100 largest counties she would have lost by 11.5 million votes. Yes, there are a LOT of votes in downtown NYC, downtown San Francisco, and downtown Los Angeles. Not all of us think they represent America. More accurately, statistically they represent more of America's criminals and criminal activity than any place else in the country.

So I believe there was a visceral and positive reaction to honesty, and an actual and palpable revulsion in response to dishonesty. In all its forms.

And apparently they can't be bought either. Hillerary spent

$497,808,791

$247,541,449.

$189,453,103

$59,389,531.

Hillerary never really laid out any sort of vision for America with ONE exception. She did mention several times solar power on every roof and millions of jobs that would spawn. I'm all about that? Trump on energy? He's going to bring back coal mining jobs by going to something called CLEAN coal. He was quite honest about it. He believes it. That's kind of a problem actually.

So Trump didn't win on policy. And he didn't win on money. The only thing that mattered to Americans this cycle was honesty. In all the post-loss analysis done by Democrats, we can rest easy that they will be losers for the next 20 years because they will not read and will not follow the easy formula I am going to provide here for them to win.

It's nice to be nice.

Honesty is the best policy.

And you can argue those without end, but Dad was right along and I should have listened more carefully.

And so I am all bouncy not over who won or what policies are going to be implemented, but because my fellow citizens exhibited a strong discernment and wisdom based on this. They saw through the lies and the shameless shenannigans, and made their choice. I would love for two or three more elections to hammer this home. If your honesty and ethical behavior are not up to par, your money and your policies don't really matter. You aren't going to be elected.

All that by way of introduction. The REAL game changer for me was in Florida over AMENDMENT 1. This was a ballot initiative on the topic of Solar energy that is fascinating on so many points and so many ways I can scarce describe it. First, it WON and at the same time LOST at the ballot box - BOTH ON THE SAME DAY this past November 8th. The vote count was 4,560,682 in FAVOR of the Amendment and 4,418,788 opposed. So it won with a scant 50.79% of the ballot. It also LOST. This was because to amend the Florida constitution it has to get a supermajority of 60% of the electorate.

Titled

Rights of Electricity Consumers Regarding Solar Energy Choice

Doesn't that sound good? A constitutional amendment guaranteeing the right to put solar on your roof? Actually it's the last mumbled part about not having to subsidize costs of backup power and electric grid access that would allow Utility companies to simply charge Solar power advocates such exhorbitant rates for "grid access" as to effectively KILL SOLAR IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOREVER.

This was so misleading that it spawned a Florida Supreme Court case ruling on whether or not it was misleading. The court allowed the obviously dubious wording to stand in a 5-4 split decision.

The backers of the bill were of course the Utility companies. As of November 16, 2016, the support campaign group for Amendment 1, Consumers for Smart Solar, had raised

$26,368,925.00

$25,473,805.24

According to the Florida campaign finance report activity, the group leading the opposition campaign for Amendment 1, Floridians for Solar Choice had raised a total of about $2.4 million in contributions and had spent

$1,631,971.17

So $25.5 million against $1.6 million did render a 50.79% win, but it lost. A 10:1 ratio of expenditures and advertising on an absolutely and deliberately confusing ballot initiative FAILED to be enacted. And along the way there was a leaked audio tape. We like leaks and WikiLeaks as that is where we get truth, since it is unavailable from the people we pay to run our affairs.

On October 18, 2016, an audio tape containing a speech delivered by Sal Nuzzo, vice president of the Florida-based policy think tank called the James Madison Institute (JMI), at the October 2 State Energy/Environment Leadership Summit was leaked. Nuzzo discussed how the Amendment 1 support group, Consumers for Smart Solar, asked JMI to help prepare for the amendment campaign and indicated that the measure was designed to appeal to pro-solar voters while it's purpose was to “completely negate anything they (pro-solar interests) would try to do either legislatively or constitutionally down the road.” He referred to the group’s move of qualifying Amendment 1 for the ballot as a “savvy maneuver,” saying that the group could use “political jiu-jitsu” to harness the popularity of solar in their favor.

Nuzzo said that Amendment 1 proponents approached JMI when Floridians for Solar Choice, which opposed Amendment 1, started an initiative petition drive to put an amendment on the ballot designed to make solar production a right, prevent fees on solar producers, and boost the financial incentive for third-party solar energy providers. Nuzzo stated, “So Consumers for Smart Solar came to JMI and said you guys are the adults in the room, you’re the ones that have access to the research, to the scholars, to the SPN, to a lot of the national organizations, we need some help because not only are they [Floridans for Solar Choice] going to get the 700,000 signatures to get it on the ballot, it’s actually polling in the 70 percent range.” Nuzzo said Consumers for Smart Energy proposed their competing initiative, which was on the ballot as Amendment 1, and Nuzzo then described the initiative as an intelligent strategy to combine pro-solar language with consumer protections that could be used to block the efforts of solar advocates to provide incentives for solar expansion. https://soundcloud.com/cmd-sourcewatch/an-incredibly-savvy-maneuver

So again, absolutely dirty tricks, lies, and subversion coupled with a 10:1 money advantage DIDN'T WORK.  With 9 million votes cast, it is clear that 90% of the electorate didn't actually have a dog in this fight.  But they saw through the deception and did the right thing anyway.

Why is this important?   You can convince an honest man to change his position based on additional information and cogently presented reasoning.  You can't convince a crook of anything.  Those who stoop to such tactics as PAYING people to go demonstrate and attempt to incite violence at an opponents rally, who lie in response to every question and at every opportunity, and whose associates routinely KILL THEMSELVES, often with three to five shots to the temple, will stop at nothing to achieve their ends.  They believe they know what's best for us, and there is no particular boundaries limiting how they get the power to enable that - for the good of everyone of course.  As FBI Director James Comey famously noted, "I would have liked to prosecute Hillery Clinton, but I was afraid I might commit suicide later if I did."  Ok.  In all honesty, he never said that...

But at this very moment there is a recount going on in Wisconsin of a vote everyone agrees will never be overturned.  The strategy is to have a recount and do it slowly, so that the deadline for the electoral college certification is missed and so those electoral college votes won't be counted.  It is pathetic, will change nothing, but amply illustrates the LENGTHS these people will go to subvert the system.   How do they think this will ever get anyone elected?  The hubris and condescension are insulting.

By contrast Donald Trump thinks waterboarding and torture are ok if it keeps America safe.  I do NOT think the ends justifies the means.  But in their first conversation, General Mattis dismissed the concept saying the information gained was of no value, and you would do better with a cup of coffee and a pack of cigarettes.  Trumps response?   Didn't know that.  Ok. No torture then.  He believed he was hearing from an honest man that WOULD know, and accepted his answer and changed his point of view on the topic in twelve smooth seconds. This point of view came from a knowledgeable source, made sense as presented, and actually changed Trump's view on the spot.  All of this in a few minutes.

In this episode we note that Tesla has completed their merger with Solar City and describe a fascinating project on the island of Tau in American Samoa to bring totally silent clean photovoltaic power to the island - replacing diesel generators that consumed a half million gallons of diesel fuel brought in by ship. This month, India completed what is now the largest photovoltaic array in the world at 648 Megawatts. Fiat is leasing their 500e electric car for $49 per month with nothing down. And EVTV has completed their 13.4 kW solar upgrade with controllers and inverters and CHAdeMO fast chargers to allow you to totally power your electric car with sunlight. European automakers have announced plans for 350kw charging network across Europe effective almost immediately. I rather FAILED to mention in this video Musk's application to the FCC for permission to launch a 4425 satellite low earth orbit Gigabit Internet network that will bring high speed Internet to every corner of the earth.

So what's not to like? President Obama did none of that. President Trump is unlikely to do much of it either. But here's what I WOULD like to convince Trump of.

Honesty IS the best policy. And sunlight is the best disinfectant. And secrets really are not good for anyone, and particularly not good for Hillerary Clinton. If you are doing something you don't want your mother knowing about, you probably shouldn't be doing it. While Edward Snowden actually did us a great service in calling our attention to what the government was doing to our privacy, they are all welcome to read my e-mails if they have the time. But what Julian Assange did in publishing e-mails of those in government is heroic. We do have a need to know. And we do have a RIGHT to know, what our public servants are doing while in our employ. We may have some right and expectation to privacy for ourselves. But THEY DO NOT. If you accept ANY position in government, you have an OBLIGATION to transparency. You have NO right to privacy.

I am not going to spend much time trying to persuade Donald Trump to install solar on his Trump Tower. But what I will try to persuade him to do:

1. Immediately pardon Juian Assange and Edward Snowden and end this illegal and inhumane overseas captivity of these two AMERICAN HEROS.

2. Grant Julian Assange citizenship and a U.S. passport to go wherever he wants worldwide.

3. Make a personal contribution of $1 million dollars to the Wikileaks Foundation. I gave them $1000 myself. You have to be 1000x my net worth.

While critical of the press, WikiLeaks was the ONLY press we had that told us the truth in the past two years. If you want to drain the swamp, how about letting a little sunlight in. You can attack the BEHAVIOR of the press while at the same time strongly defending the right to a FREE AND OPEN PRESS with this singular gesture. WikiLeaks actually gave a textbook demonstration of where our own press falls short.

I would advocate giving him a cabinet position, but I don't think he would accept and he can do us all a great deal more service outside government than in. The concept that he is somehow backed by the Russians is absurd. He has outed more Russian misbehaviour than he has our own.

The guy has been held a virtual captive for four years, apart from his three children, entirely based on a vengeful U.S. government vendetta to extradite and prosecute him not for espionage, but for publishing leaked information coming from inside the U.S. government. And all of Hilleraries e-mails, foundation bribery schemes, and DNC shennanigans were likewise entirely based on INTERNAL leaks, not on the easy devil in the corner Russians. Indeed none of it was ever "hacked". It was simply handed over by employees within those organizations who failed to buy into the belief system that anything goes as long as we get our way.