RadioActive Chief

Chief’s Preface: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it” – George Santayana

A view from the land of Oz, “down under”:

Sun Could Set Suddenly on Superpower as Debt Bites

Question:

We have been raised to think of the historical process as an essentially cyclical one. We naturally tend to assume that in our own time, too, history will move cyclically, and slowly.

Yet what if history is not cyclical and slow-moving but arhythmic, at times almost stationary, but also capable of accelerating suddenly, like a sports car? What if collapse does not arrive over a number of centuries but comes suddenly, like a thief in the night?

Concept:

Great powers and empires are complex systems, which means their construction more resembles a termite hill than an Egyptian pyramid. They operate somewhere between order and disorder, on “the edge of chaos”, in the phrase of the computer scientist Christopher Langton.

Such systems can appear to operate quite stably for some time; they seem to be in equilibrium but are, in fact, constantly adapting.

But there comes a moment when complex systems “go critical”. A very small trigger can set off a phase transition from a benign equilibrium to a crisis. Complex systems share certain characteristics. A small input to such a system can produce huge, often unanticipated changes, what scientists call the amplifier effect.

Application:

Empires exhibit many of the characteristics of other complex adaptive systems, including the tendency to move from stability to instability quite suddenly. But this fact is rarely recognised because of our addiction to cyclical theories of history.
What are the implications for the US today? The most obvious point is that imperial falls are associated with fiscal crises: sharp imbalances between revenues and expenditures, and the mounting cost of servicing a mountain of public debt.

Think of Spain in the 17th century: already by 1543 nearly two-thirds of ordinary revenue was going on interest on the juros, the loans by which the Habsburg monarchy financed itself.

Or think of France in the 18th century: between 1751 and 1788, the eve of Revolution, interest and amortisation payments rose from just over a quarter of tax revenue to 62 per cent.

Finally, consider Britain in the 20th century. Its real problems came after 1945, when a substantial proportion of its now immense debt burden was in foreign hands. Of the pound stg. 21 billion national debt at the end of the war, about pound stg. 3.4bn was owed to foreign creditors, equivalent to about a third of gross domestic product.

Go to the linked article for the gory details on our current circumstances that lead to a harrowing conclusion:

For now, the world still expects the US to muddle through, eventually confronting its problems when, as Churchill famously said, all the alternatives have been exhausted. With the sovereign debt crisis in Europe combining with growing fears of a deflationary double-dip recession, bond yields are at historic lows….

We should be so blessed!

Australia’s post-war foreign policy has been, in essence, to be a committed ally of the US.

But what if the sudden waning of American power that I fear brings to an abrupt end the era of US hegemony in the Asia-Pacific region? Are we ready for such a dramatic change in the global balance of power?

Judging by what I have heard here since I arrived last Friday, the answer is no. Australians are simply not thinking about such things.

A favourite phrase of this great country is “No dramas”. But dramas lie ahead as the nasty fiscal arithmetic of imperial decline drives yet another great power over the edge of chaos.

Hopefully more of us will start to remember a few inconvenient historical facts in time to make a difference.

Boom Turns to Bust

South Dakota is one of the states that is weathering the unemployment storm quite well, thank you!

How the mighty have fallen.

Nevada, California, and Florida have the nation’s weakest economies, according to a midyear review of state employment trends by Portfolio.com and bizjournals. That’s a stunning reversal from half a decade ago. Nevada and Florida finished first and second, respectively, in 2005’s midyear review. California was a respectable 11th.

But this year’s study puts Nevada in 51st place, dead last among the 50 states and the District of Columbia. California (50th) and Florida (49th) are barely a step ahead.

On the other hand…

Surprises can also be found at the top of the new midyear standings. Tiny North Dakota enjoys the nation’s strongest economy at the moment, and Alaska holds second place, according to the Portfolio.com/bizjournals rankings….

But the severity of the economic recession has been tempered in states with affordable housing, especially those in the heartland that stretches from the Gulf of Mexico to the Canadian border. Six of the top 10 states are located within that broad belt, including North Dakota (first place), Texas (third), South Dakota (fourth), Nebraska (sixth), Louisiana (seventh), and Utah (10th)

Not too shabby.

Oakland allows industrial-scale marijuana farms

Oakland’s City Council late Tuesday adopted regulations permitting industrial-scale marijuana farms, a plan that some small farmers argued would squeeze them out of the industry they helped to build.

It looks like the only argument in Oakland is whether or not the corporate dopers will crowd out the small-time family dopers. (I know that sounds weird, but there it is!)

I REALLY don’t get this one! (And no, I am not arguing here one way or the other about Bob Newland’s Favorite Issue. That’s a whole other discussion.)

As far as I know the Federal drug laws are still on the books, and are still (sort of?) being enforced…at least the DEA hasn’t been abolished yet, as far as I know.

SO…Arizona is sued by DoJ for having the unforgivable nerve to presume to pass a law on immigration that mirrors the Federal laws, and is slapped down for doing so. They are acting IN SUPPORT of the Federal legislation.

Meanwhile, Oakland, and other locations, are actively promoting the direct VIOLATION of Federal laws withing their jurisdiction, with no Federal action in response?

Can you say N-U-L-L-I-F-I-C-A-T-I-O-N? Wasn’t there a rather sharpish discussion on that topic from the 1830′s until 1865 when the issue was supposed to have been disposed of? If not, perhaps the spirit of J.C. Calhoun and the other proto-Confederates of his day is truly alive and well and lurking under a hempen shroud.

Obama lawsuit invites fortified state militia
Constitution leaves room for Arizona to secure border

OK. The Feds are challenging Arizona’s mild attempt to reinstate some semblance of enforcement to laws put in place, but subsequently not enforced by them. This of course is on the grounds that the states cannot act to enforce Federal law. This proposition raises some points of interest.

Does this mean that states (and localities) then must also not enforce any state or local laws against illegal drug trafficking, possession, or use, all of which are against Federal law also? Also, what then about localities and states that have licensed and tolerate businesses whose entire existence is in violation of Federal laws–specifically the so-called “medical marijuana” trade? According to common law wouldn’t this de-facto administrative annulment of Federal law establish a precedent for similar de-facto state and/or local administrative annulment of other Federal laws?

If this is the case then there is no basis for the Federal suit opposing Arizona’s willingness to take on part of the neglected task of the Feds to enforce their own laws. If it is NOT the case, then the Federal government is directly violating the equal protection of the Constitution by arbitrarily choosing to selectively enforce SOME of its laws while simultaneously ignoring others! (Just wondering, you know?)

Meanwhile, to get back to the point of the above cited and linked op-ed is that even if Arizona is NOT upheld by the court system, it is far from helpless in the face of the ongoing Mexican invasion…Arizona still has some options, ones that are fully allowable under some rather specific terms of the Constitution:

(Uff da!  Here’s that pesky 2nd Amendment rearing it’s head again!)

…Arizona can form and expand its own state militia. Such forces were common when our nation was founded, and the Second Amendment recognizes that a “well-regulated Militia” is “necessary to the security of a free State.”  In short, Arizona and other states can raise and arm their own military forces. But, for what purpose can such forces legally act?

(Ooops! Not JUST the 2nd Amendment at work.)

The Constitution is informative here. In Article IV, Section 4, the federal government is required to “protect each [state] against Invasion; and [on request of the state government] against domestic Violence.” As St. George Tucker noted, this provision guards against “the possibility of an undue partiality in the federal government,” for example a “sectional” president who might, for political reasons, decline to protect states in a certain region. Today the federal government, at the direction of the president, has declined to carry out its duty under Article IV. Leaving aside its other possible consequences, this intentional failure to protect Arizona raises the question of what action the state is now entitled to take under the Constitution.
[emphasis added]

Yes, what indeed CAN Arizona (and by extension any other state) do in this case?

This brings us to Article I, Section 10, Clause 3, which provides that “No State shall, without the Consent of Congress … engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

Did you catch that? States MAY go to war under some circumstances WITHOUT “the Consent of Congress”!

“So, the militias organized and armed by a state may go to war when the state has been invaded or is in imminent danger. This is clear under Article I, and plainly justified when the federal government has deliberately failed to protect against invasion as required by Article IV. As Joseph Story explains in his treatise on the Constitution, the prohibition against states engaging in war is “wisely” limited by “exceptions sufficient for the safety of the states, and NOT justly open to the objection of being dangerous to the Union.”

So, the concluding summary from the piece:

At the time of our nation’s founding, the states surrendered certain limited powers to the federal government. Logically, foremost among the enumerated powers delegated to the new central authority were those relating to foreign affairs, including the war powers. But the states were prudent; they had a logical concern that if the federal government should fail in its duty to protect them from “invasion” or “imminent danger,” perhaps for reasons of political “partiality,” then the states should have a robust right to defend themselves, including by armed force. And so they do.

Hmmmm. Federal government “fails in its duty to protect”…for reasons of political “partiality”…? Sounds sort of familiar, somehow.

…send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee.
- John Donne

Finance Overhaul Casts Long Shadow on the Plains

So…you think that the recently passed financial reform bill is going to righteously stick it to those high-rollin’ Wall Street finance dudes? Not likely.

The impact may hit a lot closer to home than you might have thought:

Farmer Jim Kreutz uses derivatives to soften the blow should the price of feed corn drop before harvest. His brother-in-law, feedlot owner Jon Reeson, turns to them to hedge the price of his steer. The local farmers’ co-op uses derivatives to finance fixed-price diesel for truckers who carry cattle to slaughter. And the packing plant employs derivatives to stabilize costs from natural gas to foreign currencies.

Far from Wall Street, President Barack Obama’s financial regulatory overhaul, which may pass Congress as early as Thursday, will leave tracks across the wide-open landscape of American industry.

Designed to fix problems that helped cause the financial crisis, the bill will touch storefront check cashiers, city governments, small manufacturers, home buyers and credit bureaus, attesting to the sweeping nature of the legislation, the broadest revamp of finance rules since the 1930s.

Historically, the more that government gets involved in the market, the worse things get. (Remember, most of the the alleged negative effects of the free market are really the product of business and/or regulatory arrangements that have hindered the free market’s operation.)

I get a bad feeling about this one.

Three items relating to this piece of total Obamamaniacal insanity:

NASA Chief: Next Frontier Better Relations With Muslim World

NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said in a recent interview that his “foremost” mission as the head of America’s space exploration agency is to improve relations with the Muslim world.

Though international diplomacy would seem well outside NASA’s orbit, Bolden said in an interview with Al Jazeera that strengthening those ties was among the top tasks President Obama assigned him. He said better interaction with the Muslim world would ultimately advance space travel.

I could have thought that the foremost mission of the chief administrator of NASA was to…(maybe?) administer what little is left of our space program?

Silly me! But at least My opinion shared in good company:

Former NASA Director Says Muslim Outreach Push ‘Deeply Flawed’

The former head of NASA on Tuesday described as “deeply flawed” the idea that the space exploration agency’s priority should be outreach to Muslim countries, after current Administrator Charles Bolden made that assertion in an interview last month.

“NASA … represents the best of America. Its purpose is not to inspire Muslims or any other cultural entity,” Michael Griffin, who served as NASA administrator during the latter half of the Bush administration, told FoxNews.com.

At least somebody is stills sane!

Griffin said Tuesday that collaboration with other countries, including Muslim nations, is welcome and should be encouraged — but that it would be a mistake to prioritize that over NASA’s “fundamental mission” of space exploration.

“If by doing great things, people are inspired, well then that’s wonderful,” Griffin said. “If you get it in the wrong order … it becomes an empty shell.”

Griffin added: “That is exactly what is in danger of happening.”

He also said that while welcome, Muslim-nation cooperation is not vital for U.S. advancements in space exploration. “There is no technology they have that we need,” Griffin said.

Dang! Does this mean that we won’t be able to use camels on Mars after all?

The former administrator stressed that any criticism should be directed at Obama, not Bolden, since NASA merely carries out policy.

That last bit hits the nail on the head. This rot begins at the top!

Allah’s final frontier
NASA races to reach the crescent moon
This editorial comment from the D.C. Times makes a decidedly non-PC but true observation:

The Muslim world has nothing to offer the United States as a space-faring nation. If anything, America should be discouraging Middle East space programs. Iran has the most advanced space initiative in the region and claimed to have launched a satellite in February. It’s a short step from putting satellites in space to being able to do the same with warheads. Given that Iran is on the verge of nuclear-weapons capability, the upbeat message from NASA seems ill-advised

It doesn’t take rocket science to figure this out…but hey, nobody except B.O. and his KoolAid crew could mistake Bolden for having any real understanding of non-pharmaceutical experience of space.

In addition, there is an explanation why Islam may be in need of some technological strokes:

Islam’s meager contribution to human technological advancement is no accident. In his new book “The Closing of the Muslim Mind,” former Voice of America director Robert Reilly describes the brief flourishing of intellectualism in Muslim Spain 1,000 years ago before it was brutally suppressed by religious extremists. They imposed a continuing Islamic orthodoxy that is hostile to rational thought and to the scientific method. According to this view, the only knowledge required for human existence is contained in the Koran and the life and sayings of Muhammad. Pursuing any knowledge beyond that is at best a waste of time, at worst a capital offense. Classical books of knowledge were burned, the few Muslim philosophers and scientists were banished and the stage was set for centuries of scientific decline. The small number of discoveries credited to that part of the world since the Middle Ages came principally from conquered peoples.

Where is JFK now that we REALLY need him!

Firstly, this item from that noted mouthpiece of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy (VRWC)…the New York Times?

A Market Forecast That Says ‘Take Cover’

WITH the stock market lurching again, plenty of investors are nervous, and some are downright bearish. Then there’s Robert Prechter, the market forecaster and social theorist, who is in another league entirely.

Mr. Prechter is convinced that we have entered a market decline of staggering proportions — perhaps the biggest of the last 300 years.

In a series of phone conversations and e-mail exchanges last week, he said that no other forecaster was likely to accept his reasoning, which is based on his version of the Elliott Wave theory — a technical approach to market analysis that he embraces with evangelical fervor.

Originating in the writings of Ralph Nelson Elliott, an obscure accountant who found repetitive patterns, or “fractals,” in the stock market of the 1930s and ’40s, the theory suggests that an epic downswing is under way, Mr. Prechter said. But he argued that even skeptical investors should take his advice seriously.

“I’m saying: ‘Winter is coming. Buy a coat,’ ” he said. “Other people are advising people to stay naked. If I’m wrong, you’re not hurt. If they’re wrong, you’re dead. It’s pretty benign advice to opt for safety for a while.”

This article is really worth the read, and some thought. Even when they present an opponent to Prechter’s view…well…he sort of agrees too:

Over the next several years Mr. Acampora expects an “old normal market,” characterized by relatively short-lived swings that will provide many opportunities for smart investors — one that resembles the markets of the 1960s and 70s. “I’ve lived through it,” he said.

Like Mr. Prechter, he is a past president of the Market Technicians Association, the leading organization of technical market analysts, and he said that his colleague has done “some very good work.” But Mr. Acampora doesn’t agree with Mr. Prechter’s long-term theories, either intellectually or emotionally.

Hmmmm. Doesn’t agree with him EMOTIONALLY? WTF does THAT have to do with it?

The “mathematics don’t work,” Mr. Acampora said, because such a big decline would imply that individual stocks would need to trade at unrealistically low levels.

The logic here is very interesting. First, “The mathematics don’t work…” Why not? “BECAUSE such a big decline would imply that individual stocks would need to trade at unrealistically low levels.” (Like GM and GE, etc. trading for a few dollars a share in ’33?) Since when does the production of a mathematical result serve as the criteria to determine whether the mathematics “works”? He’s essentially stating that the math doesn’t work out because it gives an answer that he doesn’t like. This attitude is further amplified by the following statement:

Furthermore, he said, “I don’t want to agree with him, because if he’s right, we’ve basically got to go to the mountains with a gun and some soup cans, because it’s all over.”

Then he concludes:

“Still, on a “near-term” basis, he said, “We’re probably saying the same thing.”

Oops! Remember…THAT’s presented as an opposing view to Prechter!

At least the view from across the pond in the UK is better…right? Well, not exactly…it sounds more like the favorite observation of the robot character Marvin from Doug Adams’ Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy: “It’s all so depressing.”

With the US trapped in depression, this really is starting to feel like 1932

The US workforce shrank by 652,000 in June, one of the sharpest contractions ever. The rate of hourly earnings fell 0.1pc. Wages are flirting with deflation.

“The economy is still in the gravitational pull of the Great Recession,” said Robert Reich, former US labour secretary. “All the booster rockets for getting us “Home sales are down. Retail sales are down. Factory orders in May suffered their biggest tumble since March of last year. So what are we doing about it? Less than nothing,” he said.

Read on for more of the gory details. Maybe the robot has it right after all.

Obama and Supreme Court may be on collision course

The president’s agenda on healthcare and financial regulations sets the stage for a clash with the Supreme Court’s conservative majority.

There’s a lot more text in the article that amplifies the point…in the Chief’s humble opinion, the Constitution is functioning as designed – to slow down and limit the scope of what the government can and should be doing.

Perhaps B.O. will get the point that there is more to Constitutional governance than Executive Orders, rubber-stamp Congressional actions, and the proliferation of “Czars”.

Nah. Probably not.

Phew! Travel done & recovery/decompression mode largely done after having 4 weeks on the road since May 19th!

I KNEW it was time to stop when I woke up one night and thought “This is the most comfortable place we’ve stayed yet – but why can’t I remember checking in?” A moment later I realized I was at home!

’nuff said!

Blogging still slow…5th week on the road, with a few short interludes back home. At least the end of the road trips is near, and life will return to what (at times laughably!) passes for normal.

Furious President Obama summons Gen. Stanley McChrystal to D.C.

The top commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, has been summoned to the White House to explain biting and unflattering remarks he made to a freelance writer about President Barack Obama and others in the Obama administration.

The face-to-face comes as pundits are already calling for McChrystal to resign for insubordination.

McChrystal has been instructed to fly from Kabul to Washington today to attend Obama’s regular monthly security team meeting tomorrow at the White House.

An administration official says McChrystal was asked to attend in person rather than by secure video teleconference, “where he will have to explain to the Pentagon and the commander in chief his quotes about his colleagues in the piece.”

Ooops! Anyone else recall the final resolution of the differences between another general “Mac” and his CinC – Truman in that case.

The similarity hasn’t escaped notice among the Brits, one of whom is predicting an early and similar demise for McChristal:
I confidently predict Obama will sack General Stanley McChrystal for his Rolling Stone outburst

Oh dear, I fear General Stanley McChrystal will be making a one-day trip to Washington after U.S. President Barack Obama summoned him to Washington to explain his less than flattering remarks about the Obama administration that are due to appear in this week’s edition of Rolling Stone magazine.

Gen McChrystal has already apologised for the remarks, but that has not saved him from Mr Obama’s rage. There are many misguided souls in this world who still believe that the American president who is fundamentally a nice guy, who doesn’t get involved in petty political in-fighting.

Well, they are about to have a rude awakening. You don’t get to be elected President of the United States simply for a being a nice guy. You need to be a ruthless, political opportunist, and Mr Obama has these qualities in abundance.

Adding some additional context highlights the current situation…or not?

The Obama administration gave serious consideration to dismissing McChrystal last autumn after his outspoken comments at London’s International Institute for Strategic Studies, in which he openly called on the Obama White House to back his surge strategy for Afghanistan.

Mr Obama thought better of sacking him then, but the hapless American general has now given Mr Obama all the ammunition he needs to fire him. Which is why I rate the chances of Gen McChrystal surviving his latest showdown with Mr Obama as zero.

Either way, we won;t have long to wait to see if there is blood accompanying the broken glass in the Pentagon.

$7-a-gallon gas?
The folly of O’s oil-spill ‘fix’

President Obama has a solution to the Gulf oil spill: $7-a-gallon gas.

That’s a Harvard University study’s estimate of the per-gallon price of the president’s global-warming agenda. And Obama made clear this week that this agenda is a part of his plan for addressing the Gulf mess.

So what does global-warming legislation have to do with the oil spill?

Good question, because such measures wouldn’t do a thing to clean up the oil or fix the problems that led to the leak.

The answer can be found in Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel’s now-famous words, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste — and what I mean by that is it’s an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.”

Prima facie, B.O. and his ilk are nearly totally lacking in situational awareness with regards to the greater part of the votors. The prevailing White House philosophy seems to be “How can we fool them again?”

Experts: U.S. has no long-term political strategy for Afghanistan

The Obama administration is focused on meeting its July 2011 deadline to begin withdrawing U.S. troops from Afghanistan, but it has no political strategy to help stabilize the country, current and former U.S. officials and other experts are warning.

The failure to articulate what a post-American Afghanistan should look like and devise a political path for achieving it is a major obstacle to success for the U.S. military-led counter-insurgency campaign that’s underway, these officials and experts said.

The result is “strategic confusion,” said Ronald E. Neumann, who served as the U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan from 2005-07.

B.O. isn’t even making it up as he goes along.

This is surely worthy of SOME sort of comment…but what?

One has to wonder if this was the result of peer-reviewed research. If so, I’m not sure I want to visualize the procedure involved.

Lost? Manhood overboard, everybody

It’s just a solitary foot bone, but it suggests that people were navigating the world’s oceans tens of thousands of years earlier than had been thought. And, according to some experts, they did so – truly – by the seat of their pants.

The bone, found on the island of Luzon in the Philippines, suggests that humans got there at least 67,000 years ago, crossing open sea long before we have any direct evidence that people knew how to build boats or sail them. And even older stone tools have been discovered on other Pacific islands, which – like Luzon – were surrounded by water even when sea levels were some 360 feet lower, at the peak of the last ice age.

But how on earth did prehistoric people find what are often just specks in the world’s biggest ocean? Some years ago I came across a man who thought he knew. Samoan meteorologist Penehuro Lefale told an international conference that they did it because they had balls.

Helmsmen, he said, would hang over the side of their rafts and trail their scrotums in the water, using the most sensitive parts of their bodies to pick up changes in water temperature.

“If the water was becoming colder, their testicles would shrink and they knew they were moving away from land,” he went on. “If the water was warmer, they knew land was near.”

We’ve long been told that letting it all hang out makes us feel more pacific, but I never envisaged anything like this.

Hmmmm. Does this explain the presence of what appears to be bovine testicular organs observed on the back of some cattle trucks? An enhancement to the use of GPS perhaps? Something to think about? Nah.

After repeated attempts by various spokesmouths of the Donkey Party to brand the rascally Republicans and TeaPartiers as being anti-immigrant racists, they have recently discovered that maybe the opposition has a point after all:

Dems’ tough new immigration pitch

…top Democratic officials have concluded there’s only one way they can hope to pass a comprehensive immigration bill:

Talk more like Republicans.

They’re seizing on the work of top Democratic Party operatives who, after a legislative defeat in 2007, launched a multiyear polling project to craft an enforcement-first, law-and-order, limited-compassion pitch that now defines the party’s approach to the issue.

Excuse my skepticism. Just because they learn to talk the talk, means little or nothing based on their record of reluctance to walk the walk. IT behooves one and all to wait and see whether this is yet one morer instance of traditional liberal/progressive symbolism over substance.

Have been missing in action due to an unfortunate automotive incident in Massachusetts: having the car struck by someone who thoughtfully left 120ft. of skid marks in a 30 MPH zone before impacting the Chief’s vehicle, Oh, did I mention, the Chief’s insurance company of choice is notable by it’s absence from that state due to its…er, unique…regulatory environment.

It took a while to take care of the situation…and, barring just sitting around a motel for 10 MORE days, it was finally needful to trade in one damaged vehicle (in the repair shop) for an undamaged one to bring back home.

All’s well that ends well…and though the entire experience was what could be called suboptimal, at least contusion of the left shoulder and arm by the seat belt was preferable to the alternative if the seatbelt had not been in use at the time! Even though the Chief resents the nanny-state REQUIRING seatbelts, they ARE the way to go…the physics doesn’t lie!

Anyway…made it back just in time for the election results:

Sen John Thune re-elected already! The first conclusive victory of the November 2010 election cycle for the GOP? What a concept!

The Chief a bit surprised by the apparent results in the Congressional race…having been on the road for 3 weeks…apparently Christi impressed more voters than Chris. No surprise in Daugaard’s strong showing.

Although in each case noted, the Chief had other first choices, both are good candidates, and avoid the RINO syndrome, and besides, Christi can go for broke against Princess Stephanie without worrying about being tagged for “beating up on the girl”! (Did I really say anything that anti-P.C.???? Oh well.)

A step to artificial life: Manmade DNA powers cell
Well…not exactly, as noted by Ken Blanchard posting over at SD Politics.

Ms. Neergaard is lucky that bad science writing isn’t a crime; otherwise she would be in shackles by now. The word “enduring” in the first sentence is puerile puffery. The much worse sin against scientific literacy is that DNA doesn’t “power” living cells, nor does it “take over and drive” them. DNA is the fundamental repository of information for most of its operations and for the essential business of reproduction. DNA is a very powerful map, but the cell itself does the driving.

These distortions have clearly been encouraged by Venter, who is both a scientist and an entrepreneur. This is how he sells his science:

“This is the first self-replicating species we’ve had on the planet whose parent is a computer,” Venter told reporters.

Well, not yet. Venter’s team built the genome of one kind of bacteria from scratch, using fragments of DNA. In doing so, I gather they were plagiarizing the Lord’s work by precisely copying the DNA of the cattle germ. Then they transplanted the artificial genome into a different kind of cell (a goat germ). The new cell was able to function and I gather it has reproduced. But the parent of the new cell is clearly the recipient cell, not the computer.

Go read the rest of KB’s post…it’s well worth it.

By the way, the Chief heartily concurs with KB on this…and you can put 4 quarters with that and get a can of pop!

Health Care Law
63% Favor Repeal of National Health Care Plan

Support for Obamacare continues to slip:

Support for repeal of the new national health care plan has jumped to its highest level ever. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 63% of U.S. voters now favor repeal of the plan passed by congressional Democrats and signed into law by President Obama in March.

Prior to today, weekly polling had shown support for repeal ranging from 54% to 58%. Currently, just 32% oppose repeal.

The new findings include 46% who Strongly Favor repeal of the health care bill and 25% who Strongly Oppose it.

While opposition to the bill has remained as consistent since its passage as it was beforehand, this marks the first time that support for repeal has climbed into the 60s. It will be interesting to see whether this marks a brief bounce or indicates a trend of growing opposition.

What happened to all those assertions from ObamaPelosiReid that once the bill passed and people knew what was in it that it would magically become popular? Oooops!

Received the following from an e-mail correspondent:

LET ME SEE IF I GOT THIS RIGHT.
IF YOU CROSS THE NORTH KOREAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET 12 YEARS HARD LABOR.
IF YOU CROSS THE IRANIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU ARE DETAINED INDEFINITELY.
IF YOU CROSS THE AFGHAN BORDER ILLEGALLY, YOU GET SHOT.
IF YOU CROSS THE SAUDI ARABIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE JAILED.
IF YOU CROSS THE CHINESE BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU MOST LIKELY NEVER BE HEARD FROM AGAIN.
IF YOU CROSS THE VENEZUELAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE BRANDED A SPY AND YOUR FATE WILL BE SEALED.
IF YOU CROSS THE CUBAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE THROWN INTO POLITICAL PRISON TO ROT.
IF YOU CROSS THE MEXICAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE JAILED AND DEPORTED WITHIN 24 HOURS.
IF YOU CROSS THE U.S. BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET
a.. A JOB,
b.. A DRIVERS LICENSE,
c.. SOCIAL SECURITY CARD,
d.. WELFARE,
e.. FOOD STAMPS,
f.. CREDIT CARDS,
g.. SUBSIDIZED RENT OR A LOAN TO BUY A HOUSE,
h.. FREE EDUCATION,
i.. FREE HEALTH CARE,
j.. A LOBBYIST IN WASHINGTON
k.. BILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS PRINTED IN YOUR LANGUAGE
l.. THE RIGHT TO CARRY YOUR COUNTRY’S FLAG WHILE YOU PROTEST THAT YOU DON’T GET ENOUGH RESPECT IN THIS COUNTRY
m.. AND, IN MANY INSTANCES, YOU CAN VOTE
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I HAD A FIRM GRASP ON THE SITUATION

Last week the Chief had the experience of crossing the Canadian border at Niagara Falls. Not quite as bad as TSA at the airports, but they searched ALL US cars entering, and in questioning seemed to be extremely concerned by the possible ownership (back home in the States) of any firearms. It’ll be a LONG time before I try to spend any money up there again…we had been thinking of going up to Winnipeg again this fall…but no longer.

Can you say H-U-B-R-I-S? Hubris means extreme haughtiness or arrogance. Hubris often indicates being out of touch with reality and overestimating one’s own competence or capabilities, especially for people in positions of power.

When I first saw this, I had trouble believing it was serious…Gates et al have to be totally convinced of their status as übermenschen, if not demigods, who are uniquely qualified and endowed to assume on their own authority, the power to  play dominance games with the planet that we all live on. Not even the most arrogant polluting industrial managers (say, of the ChiCom steel industry for example) don’t openly and proudly proclaim a stated goal to consciously and deliberately change the climate of the Earth!

Bill Gates pays for ‘artificial’ clouds to beat greenhouse gases

The first trials of controversial sunshielding technology are being planned after the United Nations failed to secure agreement on cutting greenhouse gases.

Bill Gates, the Microsoft billionaire, is funding research into machines to suck up ten tonnes of seawater every second and spray it upwards. This would seed vast banks of white clouds to reflect the Sun’s rays away from Earth.

The British and American scientists involved do not intend to wait for international rules on technology that deliberately alters the climate.

The arrogance here is breathtaking…especially considering the actual state of the art of much of what passes itself off as “climate science”, but has been proven by the Climategate and other similar revelations to be based on conspiratorial coordination of faked, distorted, and fatally limited data.

Silver Lining, a research body in San Francisco, has received $300,000 (£204,000) from Mr Gates. It will develop machines to convert seawater into microscopic particles capable of being blown up to the cloud level of 1,000 metres. This would whiten clouds by increasing the number of nuclei.

Uh…rain and clouds mostly result from evaporation. The salt mostly stays dissolved in the sea. With Gate’s plan, NOW we can be the lucky recipient of precipitation in the form of salt water…won’t THAT do wonders for maintaining the soil!

Stephen Salter, Emeritus Professor of Engineering Design at the University of Edinburgh, said that there was no need to wait for regulations because the trials would not add chemicals to the atmosphere.

…uh…having taught Chemistry for over a quarter-century, I can assure the learned professor that water (H2O) and salt (NaCl) are in fact chemicals, and that water in it’s vapor phase is a MUCH more powerful greenhouse gas than is carbon dioxide.

But Sir David King, former chief scientific adviser to the Government, said that experiments with potential consequences beyond national borders needed international regulations. He told The Times: “I do not see any geoengineering solution which does not have unintended consequences or is not far too expensive.”

At least HE has retained some situational awareness concerning unintended consequences!

Let’s hope that this particular form of megalomaniacal insanity is squelched before it afflicts us all.

At times, when mentally cursing yet another BSOD (Blue Screen Of Death) from a Windows crash, it was easy to attribute diabolical intent to Bill Gates. Now it looks like he’s in need of crashing the climate like it was a cheap PC.

Men of iron and steel

The release of “Iron Man 2” this weekend kicks off the summer blockbuster season. It’s an interesting cultural moment for conservatives. The movie version of Iron Man is one of the most unambiguously libertarian figures in popular culture, a billionaire industrialist playboy who spends much of the new movie telling the government to get bent when it tries to claim his amazing suit of high-tech armor. He’s patriotic, loves the military, and views the bad actors of the world from a Reaganite position of moral confidence. In the original movie, he did what Hollywood has been painfully reluctant to do, ever since September 11: he flew over to the Middle East and took out the trash. This Atlas doesn’t shrug… he busts out repulsor beams and micro-missiles.

H/T for the above from People’s Cube, where SuperKomissar Maxim presented the following graphic offering:

Here’s everybody’s favorite big government showing some of its true colors again.

Raw milk battle reveals FDA abandonment of basic human right to choose your food

The Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund (FTCLDF), an organization whose mission includes “defending the rights and broadening the freedoms of family farms and protecting consumer access to raw milk and nutrient dense foods”, recently filed a lawsuit against the FDA for its ban on interstate sales of raw milk. The suit alleges that such a restriction is a direct violation of the United States Constitution. Nevertheless, the suit led to a surprisingly cold response from the FDA about its views on food freedom (and freedoms in general).

In a dismissal notice issued to the Iowa District Court where the suit was filed, the FDA officially made public its views on health and food freedom.

Some of the statements in the FDA’s filing are absolutely amazing. Can you say “food NAZI”?

The FDA essentially believes that nobody has the right to choose what to eat or drink. You are only “allowed” to eat or drink what the FDA gives you permission to. There is no inherent right or God-given right to consume any foods from nature without the FDA’s consent.

This is no exaggeration. It’s exactly what the FDA said in its own words.

Don’t take MY word for it, or even the words from the posting about this. Consider the following statements taken from the FDA’s court filing:

“There is no ‘deeply rooted’ historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds.” [p. 26]“Plaintiffs’ assertion of a ‘fundamental right to their own bodily and physical health, which includes what foods they do and do not choose to consume for themselves and their families’ is similarly unavailing because plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to obtain any food they wish.” [p.26]

There’s a lot more in the document, which primarily addresses the raw milk issue, but these statements alone clearly reveal how the FDA views the concept of health freedom. Essentially, the FDA does not believe in health freedom at all. It believes that it is the only entity granted the authority to decide for you what you are able to eat and drink.

The State, in other words, may override your food decisions and deny you free access to the foods and beverages you wish to consume. And the State may do this for completely unscientific reasons — even just political reasons — all at their whim…

This has all emerged from the debate over whether raw milk sales should be legal. But the commonsense answer seems obvious: Of course raw milk should be legal! Since when did the government have any right to criminalize a farmer milking his cow and selling the raw, unpasteurized milk to his neighbor at a mutually-agreeable price?

NOTE:  The principles apply whether or not one chooses to partake of raw milk, any particular food product.

But why is the FDA hell-bent on stopping raw milk from being sold in the first place? Think about it: What is it about this particular whole food that has regulators working overtime to make sure you don’t drink it?

Follow the money…(surprise, surprise, surprise!)

The real reason why the FDA opposes raw milk is because Big Dairy opposes raw milk. Just like Big Pharma, Big Dairy has worked very hard behind the scenes to steer FDA policy in its favor. And according to some recent reports, Big Dairy is one of the primary forces trying to eliminate raw milk because it threatens the commercial milk business.

What’s next? Will all farmer’s markets be outlawed because the veggies haven’t all been irradiated or pasteurized?

As usual, it’s all about the money, and as you follow the money trail all the way up to the federal level, you find the same thing happening everywhere: At the FDA, USDA, FTC and so on. U.S. government regulators have become monopoly market enforcers for Big Business, and they won’t let anything get in their way… not even personal health freedoms or just basic access to food.

There is a lot more detailed argument in the posting; you get the picture…but wait! As a finale the FDA outdoes itself again:
On page 27 of the dismissal, the FDA also states that Americans do not have a fundamental right to enter into private contractual agreements with one another, either.
HUH?

Buying clubs, cooperatives and community supported agriculture programs (CSAs) all rely on private contractual agreements in order to operate. People contract with each other to obtain clean, healthy food from the sources of their choice without government intrusion. But now the FDA is saying that people don’t actually have this right. To enter into such a private contract to purchase food, milk or even water is a violation of federal law, the FDA now claims.

You are just a subject of the King, you see, and you have no rights. You must eat and drink what you are told. You must behave in a way that is allowed by your King. You have no rights, no protections and no freedoms….
The “substantive due process” clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, however, assures people of this right when it states that no person shall “be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law.” And being able to make personal food choices without having to obtain permission from Big Brother is definitely included under this clause.

But the FDA — aw, heck, all of Washington for that matter — doesn’t honor the U.S. Constitution in any way, shape or form. The document is little more than a tattered piece of American history according to the Nazi nut jobs running federal agencies today. They are no more likely to respect the Constitution as they are to leap from their desk job chairs and magically transform into flying elephants.

The hits just keeps on coming! (Or are the letters of the second word in the previous sentence in the wrong order? Whatever!)

Remember the Blitzkrieg before it’s too late

First, a basic history review:

Seventy years ago today, on May 10, 1940, the German armed forces launched the deep-penetration attack through southern Belgium to the English Channel that split the French and British armies in two – a form of warfare known to the world as Blitzkrieg or “lightning war.” Three weeks later, the campaign ended with the German subjugation of France, Belgium and the Netherlands and Britain’s ignominious withdrawal from the European continent.

To contemporary Western military observers accustomed to the grinding attrition battles of World War I, Germany’s incredibly successful Blitzkrieg seemed magical. But there was no magic. For any great victory to occur, the winning side must get most things right while the losing side gets most things wrong.

How did this happen?

The Germans got most things right. They integrated new technology into new organizations – radio communications, tanks, armored infantry and air power – under vastly superior battlefield commanders, commanders who led Germany’s superbly educated, physically fit and trained soldiers from the front, not the rear. But it’s what the British and French got wrong that should command America’s attention.

First the Brits:

In the 1920s, Britain’s top generals focused the British army on organizing, training and equipping its troops to police the declining British Empire. British military leaders decided the only enemy Britain would fight for at least 10 years would be a colonial enemy, a hostile tribesman or insurgent. The long-term results of this thinking were nearly fatal to Britain.

As far as the frogs were concerned:

In France, where defense spending rose to account for one-third of all government expenditures by 1939, there was no shortage of modern equipment, only a shortage of competent senior leadership in the general-officer ranks. “Methodical battle,” a concept of war-fighting emphasizing set-piece battles and the application of preplanned firepower over maneuver, was enshrined as the French national vision of future war. Its strategic effect was devastating.

(France fell is six weeks.)
Now for the really scary bit; what are WE doing lately?

Today, stars will only fall on American Army and Marine officers who religiously embrace counterinsurgency inside the Islamic world as the future. The notion that the generals have “discovered” a military solution to Islam’s societal misery in the form of counterinsurgency is untrue, but no one in the White House, the Senate or the House, let alone the media, is willing to challenge it.

Sad but true!

But armies are what they do, and, for the moment, the U.S. Army and Marine Corps are light constabulary forces designed to police Muslim Arabs and Afghans with AK-47 rifles, rocket-propelled grenades and mines. This conversion to light forces designed to operate from fixed bases while depending heavily on timely and accurate air strikes for effectiveness and survival has left American ground forces in a weakened, vulnerable state.

For the United States, the critical military lesson of May 10, 1940, means avoiding Britain’s mistake of optimizing its forces to fight weak insurgents, especially when Muslim rebellions against unwanted American military occupations are easily avoided. It also means understanding that future conflicts will involve wars among nations and alliances of nations waged by powerful armed forces for regional power and influence; fights for energy, water, food, mineral resources and the wealth they create. Otherwise, the generals’ current obsession with counterinsurgency will leave the American armed forces as unprepared for a real war in 10 years as the British and French forces were for their confrontation with Germany in 1940.

Of course, it is claimed that now there is no likelihood of anyone being able to fight a “real war” against us, right?

(Move along folks, nothing to see here.  Ignore that 800 lb. gorilla that lives just to the north of the South China Sea; or what his buddy in the USSR Russian Federation is up to with continuing to develop shiny new high-performance aircraft, subs, nuclear weapons, missiles, and tanks.  No concerns at all, right?)

Weird Water in Space is Electrically Charged

A new ‘phase’ of water that is electrically charged has been discovered in space for the first time.

The weird space water vapor was discovered in an interstellar dust cloud by the European Space Agency’s Herschel space observatory.

Unlike the three more familiar phases of water – namely solid ice, liquid water and gaseous steam – this newfound ‘phase’ doesn’t occur naturally on Earth.

In the birth clouds surrounding young stars, ultraviolet light is pumping through the gas, and this irradiation can knock an electron out of the water molecule, leaving it with [positive] electrical charge.

After teaching H.S. sciences for 27 years, finding something new that is so fundamentally basic is just too cool!

Remember, the economy is on the way to recovery.  B.O. says so!

Stock market time bomb?

Even the world’s most savvy stock-market giants (e.g., Warren E. Buffett) have warned over the past decade that derivatives are the fiscal equivalent of a weapon of mass destruction (WMD) – potentially lethal. And the consequences of such an explosion would make the recent global financial and economic crisis seem like penny ante. But generously lubricated lobbyists for the unrestricted, unsupervised derivatives markets tell congressional committees and government regulators to butt out.

While banks all over the world were imploding and some $50 trillion vanished in global stock markets, the derivatives market grew by an estimated 65 percent, according the Bank for International Settlements. BIS convenes the world’s 57 most powerful central bankers in Basel, Switzerland, for periodic secret meetings. Occasionally, they issue a cry of alarm. This time, derivatives had soared from $414.8 trillion at the end of 2006 to $683.7 trillion in mid-2008 – 18 months’ time.

The derivatives market is now estimated at $700 trillion (notional, or face, value, not market value). The world’s gross domestic product in 2009: $69.8 trillion; America’s, $14.2 trillion. The total market cap of all major global stock markets? A mere $30 trillion. And the total amount of dollar bills in circulation, most of them abroad: $830 billion (not trillion).

One of the Middle East’s most powerful bankers conceded recently that even after listening to experts explain the drill, he still does not understand derivatives and therefore doesn’t trust them and won’t have anything to do with them. And when that weapon of mass destruction explodes, he explained, “Our bank’s customers, from all over the world, will be saved from the disaster.”

Keep those numbers in mind as you consider this:

Today’s massive new derivatives bubble is driving the domestic and global economies, far outstripping the subprime-credit meltdown.

Hopefully not belatedly, Congress is considering legislation to curb the use of derivatives and other methods that artificially boost returns. But 13 members of Congress or their wives used derivatives to magnify their daily moves.

“We have met the enemy and he is us!”

And one measure proposed by Sen. Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas Democrat, would bar banks from trading in derivatives. This, in turn, would push almost $300 trillion beyond the reach of regulators. Derivatives would become still more opaque. Some say abolish derivatives trading in the U.S. and push it offshore.

Possible results?

The now-bloody Greek tragedy over its debt crisis is echoing through the Federal Reserve and the halls of Congress. Greece’s public debt exceeds 100 percent of its economy versus 90 percent (at $13 trillion) for the United States. If you add unfunded U.S. liabilities for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, the long-term shortfall is $62 trillion, or about $200,000 for each American. At least that’s the estimate of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation. And Peter Peterson himself says he’s now in the business of promoting awareness about public borrowing.

With probable trader error plunging the Dow Jones into a 1,000-point tailspin and back up in 16 minutes, economic and financial prognostication made astrology look respectable. Could Greece be a harbinger of ugly things to come for the rest of the world? Prominent investor Marc Faber, hedge fund manager Jim Chanos and Harvard’s Kenneth Rogoff told Bloomberg China’s economy will slow and possibly “crash” within a year as the nation’s property bubble is set to burst.

Meanwhile the economic recovery continues apace, with the unemployment rate moving back to 9.9%, or 17.1% if ALL of it is counted.

This sort of progress can easily result in recovering the experience of the 1930.

Maybe that’s what B.O. means.  Isn’t Obamunism marvelous?

Gibbs Evades Question About Obama’s Use Of “Teabagger”

Video clip of the following at the above link to Real Clear Politics.

REPORTER: Are you able to get an answer on Fred’s question about the teabagger quote, if the President is aware that people are offended? GIBBS: Again, I have not seen the book. I can’t imagine I’m going to ask the President that, but I will — I will entertain it. I will check. [ABC News reports President Obama used the derogatory term in a new book.]

Don’t hold your breath waiting for an answer. C.A.H. could give Gibbs lessons on being forthcoming.

President Obama: GOP Opposition to Stimulus ‘Helped to Create the Tea-Baggers’

Three days after he decried the lack of civility in American politics, President Obama is quoted in a new book about his presidency referring to the Tea Party movement using a derogatory term with sexual connotations.

In Jonathan Alter’s “The Promise: President Obama, Year One,” President Obama is quoted in an November 30, 2009, interview saying that the unanimous vote of House Republicans vote against the stimulus bills “set the tenor for the whole year … That helped to create the tea-baggers and empowered that whole wing of the Republican Party to where it now controls the agenda for the Republicans.”

Tea Party activists loathe the term “tea baggers,” which has emerged in liberal media outlets and elsewhere as a method of mocking the activists and their concerns.

On Saturday, the president delivered a commencement address at the University of Michigan where he said one way “to keep our democracy healthy is to maintain a basic level of civility in our public debate … But we can’t expect to solve our problems if all we do is tear each other down.”

So much for any pretense of consistency…but what’s the backstory on this? Read on:

“President ‘Tea Bagger’ Owes Grandma an Apology

Just so we understand the ground rules here: 1) calling a Progressive Democrat a Socialist is bad; 2) Calling “Tea Party” protesters “Tea Baggers” is A-OKAY.

We seem to remember when the Left went apoplectic over imaginary suggestions that they were unpatriotic for being “against the war” during the Bush administration. We seem to recall President Obama very recently complaining about being called a Socialist (why do Democrats find Socialist to be such a dirty word? What is it about being a Socialist that they should universally shrink away from the title?).

You couldn’t ask for a more textbook definition of hypocrisy.

It is perversely amusing, though, watching Media Matters defend President “Tea-Bagger” for referring to average Americans, whose only crime is to reject Socialism, with a sexually offensive slur.

For a reminder, here are some shots of some U.S. citizens, who, in the Media Matters universe, should be referred to by the President of the United States as people who take testicles into their mouths.

So, how does this get to Lake Herman? Oh yes…via our own C.A.H. who has apparently figured that if it’s good enough for B.O. it’s good enough for him:

Teabaggers Rejoice: No Bailout for Flooded SD Homes

I won’t even address the content of this snarky and illogical post itself…that’s another whole discussion.

The descriptive terminology of the header strives for and achieves a new low, even from Madville.

Hey, Cory, do you have any daughters? Or a grandmother? Would you like them to be referred to by elected officials, or allegedly serious bloggers, as people who put testicles into their mouths? Do you really think it’s appropriate for ANY elected official or anyone who pretends to be a serious commentator on events to refer to anyone that way?

Maybe so. Too bad.

Sniper kills Qaeda-from 1½ mi. away

A British sniper set a world sharpshooting record by taking out two Taliban soldiers in Afghanistan from more than a mile and a half away — a distance so great, experts say the terrorists wouldn’t have even heard the shots.

Craig Harrison killed the two insurgents from an astounding distance of 8,120 feet — or 1.54 miles — in Helmand Province last November firing an Accuracy International L11583 long-range rifle.

“The first round hit a machine-gunner in the stomach and killed him outright,” said Harrison, a corporal of horse in the British Army’s Household Cavalry, the equivalent of a sergeant in the American military.

“The second insurgent grabbed the weapon and turned as my second shot hit him in the side. He went down, too,” Harrison told the Sunday Times of London.

The shots — measured via GPS — surpassed the previous record held by Canadian Army Cpl. Rob Furlong, who killed an al Qaeda gunman from 7,972 feet in 2002.

Now THAT can be called “balling the jack”!

Mexico’s illegals laws tougher than Arizona’s

Mexican President Felipe Calderon denounced as “racial discrimination” an Arizona law giving state and local police the authority to arrest suspected illegal immigrants and vowed to use all means at his disposal to defend Mexican nationals against a law he called a “violation of human rights.”

A human right?  That would be a right that is inherently unalienable based on the virtue of being a human being. Is the MexPrez REALLY saying that all humans in the world have an inherent right to be present in Arizona without any certification of citizenship or legal immigration status? Of so, then he had better change his own laws.

But the legislation, signed April 23 by Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, is similar to Reglamento de la Ley General de Poblacion — the General Law on Population enacted in Mexico in April 2000, which mandates that federal, local and municipal police cooperate with federal immigration authorities in that country in the arrests of illegal immigrants.

Under the Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony, punishable by up to two years in prison. Immigrants who are deported and attempt to re-enter can be imprisoned for 10 years. Visa violators can be sentenced to six-year terms. Mexicans who help illegal immigrants are considered criminals. The law also says Mexico can deport foreigners who are deemed detrimental to “economic or national interests,” violate Mexican law, are not “physically or mentally healthy” or lack the “necessary funds for their sustenance” and for their dependents.

“This sounds like the kind of law that a rational nation would have to protect itself against illegal immigrants — that would stop and punish the very people who are violating the law,” said Rep. Steve King of Iowa, ranking Republican on the House Judiciary subcommittee on immigration, citizenship, refugees, border security and international law. “Why would Mr. Calderon have any objections to an Arizona law that is less draconian than his own, one he has pledged to enforce?” Mr. King said.

Here’s a concept: make our laws with regards to Mexico an exact mirror of their own laws. In other words, all the provision of THEIR laws would be applied to THEM when they seek entry to the U.S.

Sounds fair to me!

Official: Suspect Arrested in Times Square Bomb Plot

Surprise, surprise, surprise!

Federal authorities arrested a U.S. citizen of Pakistani descent Monday night at New York’s JFK Airport in connection with the attempted Times Square car bombing, Fox News has learned.

The man was identified as Shahzad Faisal, 30, of Connecticut, according to NBC News.

Police had interviewed the registered owner of the bomb-laden sports-utility vehicle. They said he was not a suspect, but he recently sold the dark-colored 1993 Nissan Pathfinder on Craigslist to another individual, whom the Associated Press reported was a Pakistani-American.

Sort of looks like the web posting claiming that the attempt came from al Qaida of Pakistan may have been true.