Re: X-10 friendly switchmode PS

["Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx>]

"Dave Houston" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote

> "Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >Work with me here, Dave, I am trying to give you a least a little sliver
of
> >hope that your kids and grandkids won't be living in an underground vault
> >buying clean air at prices higher than today's natural gas prices!
<smile>
>
> Unfortunately, I think the next court up the ladder is the one that ruled
in
> favor of flattening West Virginia. I think the grandkids need to start
> bottling air for later use.

Power plants pollute everyone's air.  WV mountains only affect West
Virginians - mostly.  Ever see "Spaceballs?"  They had canned Perrier air.
Maybe it was one of those things meant to be funny that will eventually
become tragically prescient.

I'm not sure how the power plant regulations are going to shake out but one
thing's on our side and that's the growing consensus among scientists that
we're in trouble that may be so deep there will be no getting out of it if
something's not done soon.

> >I'm hopeful that even judges don't want to die of environmental diseases
and
> >might show some sanity regardless of who appointed them.  Supreme Court
> >justices have had a notorious way of turning on those who appointed them.
>
> Aside from Black and Breyer I can't recall any surprises. ;)

Blackmun, appointed by Nixon, IIRC, was a staunch conservative, yet he wrote
the majority opinion in Roe v. Wade. He eventually turned so liberal he
opposed the death penalty.   Black, of course, was a KKK'er before he became
one of the most liberal champion of civil rights the Supremes have ever
seen.  O'Connor and Souter are thought to have changed their views once they
reached the SCOTUS but since they were not sitting federal judges before
their appointments, it's hard to tell what they felt about constitutional
issues before they reached the bench.

Now, let's see if we can bring this back to switchmode PS's!  <g> Probably
not, although the Supremes did reach out and grab a very interesting patent
case whose outcome could have some pretty serious consequences for a lot of
techno-businesses.  For whatever it's worth, I saw Clarence Thomas on CNN a
while back along with Justice Kennedy and it was obvious that Thomas was a
lot more computer literate than his counterpart.  That gives me hope that at
least one judge can understand the technological issues presented by the EPA
case.  I guess we'll just have to wait and see whether SCOTUS is as
business-oriented as POTUS and the Congre$$

--
Bobby G.