Sen. Robert C. Byrd was hospitalized Monday night at his doctor's urging after suffering from lethargy and sluggishness at the Capitol and, later, at his home, a spokesman for the 90-year-old Democrat said. Press secretary Jesse L. Jacobs said the West Virginia senator would be in the hospital overnight for observation.
Byrd, who is the longest-serving senator in history, voted during a 5:30 p.m. roll call Monday, then went home. Jacobs said the senator began to feel ill less than an hour later. He was found to have a fever, and at his doctor's request he was taken to a nearby hospital. Jacobs added that he didn't know which hospital Byrd was taken to.
"It wuz a big one, though!"
Byrd was hospitalized March 5 for tests after a reaction to antibiotics. A week earlier he was hospitalized at Walter Reed Army Medical Center after a fall at home.
That's what usually happens. You fall, break the old hip, into the nursing home, and a year later you're dead.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/03/2008 12:29 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Probably took him to a hospital with his name on it on a road with his name on it in an ambulance with his name on it. Byrd is the personal pork king and a prime example for term limits.
Jan 3, 1959 he was sworn in. NOBODY should spend that much time in any public office.
#3
OS---Term limits: 1 senate (6 years), 3 terms in house (6 years). I heard Robert Byrd talking and blathering about Teddy after Ted's diagnosis. It was senile, it was embarassing, and it was a bad image to project to the rest of the world.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
06/03/2008 16:20 Comments ||
Top||
#4
suffering from lethargy and sluggishness
How could they tell the difference from his usual state?
Changing of the guard in the Democrat Party? Both Teddy K. and Bob Byrd hospitalized at the same time. Almost 100 years of Senate tenure between them.
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy underwent a 3 1/2 -hour targeted brain surgery at Duke University Medical Center today to remove a malignant tumor. The surgery "was successful and accomplished our goals," according to a statement released by the neurosurgeon, Dr. Allan Friedman, at the facility in Durham, N.C.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/03/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Good. Let's hope he can recover and spend time with his family.
Posted by: Steve White ||
06/03/2008 0:13 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Yeah. Lots of time. Like every waking moment for the next 20 years after he figures out politics isn't so great after all! :-)
#5
of course really successful brain surgery would have resulted in him praising welfare reform and urging caution in government solutions to global warming
#9
#7: Apparently. Kinda small, though - Took 'em 2 1/2 hours just to find it.
Nah, they had to be exra careful not to puncture the vacuum, might suck some new ideas in, Can't have that happening.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
06/03/2008 16:46 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Snark of the day to BH6!
Posted by: Thaimble Scourge of the Pixies4707 ||
06/03/2008 19:03 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Kennedy will cling to his Senate chair until they have to pry his cold carcass out of it, after having spendt his last hours on earth trying to pass some godawful piece of legislation on a pity vote for him.
June 3 (Bloomberg) -- Imagine two scales at the airline ticket counter, one for your bags and one for you. The price of a ticket depends upon the weight of both.
That may not be so far-fetched.
``You listen to the airline CEOs, and nothing is beyond their imagination,'' said David Castelveter, a spokesman for the Air Transport Association, a Washington, D.C.-based trade group. ``They have already begun to think exotically. Nothing is not under the microscope.'' He declined to discuss what any individual airline might be contemplating, including charging passengers based on weight.
With fuel costs almost tripling since 2000, now accounting for as much as 40 percent of operating expenses at some carriers, according to the ATA, airlines are cutting costs and raising revenue in ways that once were unthinkable. U.S. Airways Group Inc. has eliminated snacks. Delta Air Lines Inc. is charging $25 for telephone reservations. AMR Corp.'s American Airlines last month became the first U.S. company to charge $15 for one checked bag.
#8
This is well overdue. I have been forced to sit near hogs many times whose blubber oozes across into your seat. The fat asses should go by air freighter or by ship. Walking would also be very beneficial. Since fuel burn is directly related to weight, this should have been done long ago. After all, the Post Office and UPS have been functioning this way for years and years.
#9
Well, it certainly would cut down on overcrowding. Many people would not travel if they were forced to stand publicly on a scale for all to see.
And what about people who are over some limit by only 1 or 2 pounds? Are they going to strip in public in order to meet the limit?
Posted by: Rambler in California ||
06/03/2008 13:06 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Fatties? What about a 6'1" 220 pound male versus a 5'1" 220 pound female?
#11
I'm sure they'd come up w/some DOD style ht/wt standard so as not to discriminate against ht/wt proportion tall folks vs us runts.
Being serious now - how would the elderly fit into this? Some elderly folks can't help but be 10-15 lbs over a normal wt max due to their slower lifestyle, medical conditions and metabolism.
#15
Waddayamean? I ain't over weight; I'm just too short.
I remember checking in at Rhine Main in 1957 and being assigned seats on a Lockheed "Super Connie" based on my and my wife's combined weight. We stayed in the military hotel until the AF got the right weight balance among the waiting passengers.
#16
In bush flights, we get asked our weight all the time, for weight and balance purposes. You do not want to be outside your CG envelope, especially aft of limits when sh*t hits the fan, so to speak.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
06/03/2008 16:32 Comments ||
Top||
#17
True - the same airlines that mismanage their business and then want the gubberment to bail them out. By the time I drive to the airport get there 2 hrs early get hassled going through all the lines, get ripped off on airport food, and God willing the flight is on time I'm almost better off for the same or lesser amount of money spending 12 hrs driving somewhere.
#19
I don't fly, it's too damn much hasle, if I go anywhere it's by (Very economical) Car, Bus, or train.
A month ago I planned to go from Mobile To Columbus Georgia, there is NO train, and Columbus is a huge military base, makes no sense.
I didn't go, had a change of plans, but even so "NO TRAIN"?
(Didn't even consider GreyWays, or is it "Trailhound" now?)
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
06/03/2008 16:57 Comments ||
Top||
#20
I just did a trip from Chicago to Toronto and back. I drove.
Driving time each way, including clearing customs: almost exactly 8 hours on a 525 mile trip.
Flying time each way: 1.5 hr to the airport (O'Hare), wait 2.0 hr (international flight regulation), 1.5 hr in the air, 0.75 hr to clear customs and collect luggage, 0.75 hr for a taxi to the hotel. That's 6.5 hr to fly, assuming the airlines don't run late (heh), versus an 8 hr drive.
No contest. I drove.
Posted by: Steve White ||
06/03/2008 17:00 Comments ||
Top||
#21
"what about people who are over the limit? Are they going to strip in public in order to meet the limit?"
Some people should be paid not to strip.
Posted by: Frozen Al ||
06/03/2008 17:10 Comments ||
Top||
#22
I couldn't resist "weighing in" on this topic. I hate the airlines so damned badly I'd gladly never even see a passenger plane again. Unfortunately, as an expat, I've got to fly occasionally. That said, I do it as little as possible. The treatment is so rude and condescending, from both the TSA and the airlines, that I invariably come off the plane thinking I'd gladly personally execute every one of those terrorist bastards locked up at Gitmo for having started this crap.
I've written numerous letters of complaint to both the TSA and my Congresscritters. I received answers from all, every time, and the responses were so general that I'm absolutely certain they've heard from literally millions of people about these issues. Both the airlines (at least the U.S. ones) and TSA KNOW the flying public hates them--and they couldn't care less.
Posted by: Thaimble Scourge of the Pixies4707 ||
06/03/2008 18:41 Comments ||
Top||
#23
The aspiring singer Aaliyah paid the full fare when they overloaded her return trip from the Bahamas with all the posse and hangers on from a video shoot.
"Further investigations determined the plane was over its total gross weight by several hundred pounds. Eddie Golson, president of Pro Freight Cargo Services at Opa-locka Airport, said workers carted "a pickup truck of freight" from the crash site. Two of the passengers weighed in the region of 300 pounds and sat in the rear of the plane, where the baggage was also stored."
#24
I recommend a cage similar to the one that is sometimes used to check the size of carry-on's for the overhead. The cage could be rigged with sensors that sound an alarm should the fit be too snug. If the ticket agent asks a passenger to step through the cage and he or she cannot, then the passenger buys a first class ticket or two coach tickets.
#25
I recommend a cage similar to the one that is sometimes used to check the size of carry-on's for the overhead. The cage could be rigged with sensors that sound an alarm should the fit be too snug. If the ticket agent asks a passenger to step through the cage and he or she cannot, then the passenger buys a first class ticket or two coach tickets.
#26
I've been an advocate for pre-boarding body cages for years. Similar to the one sometimes used to check overhead carry-on's, if the passenger can't fit through it then he or she buys a business class ticket or two coach tickets.
#27
Make some planes half passengers and half cargo. Make the seats larger or at least better spaced as they used to be. The combination would (a) allow quicker boarding because of less seats (b) greater control over weight because of the cargo (c) require less planes in the cargo fleet.
Cut the number of flight attendants. Ditch the soda cart nonsense that blocks the aisle and annoys the passengers. Instead run a snackbar that passengers can come to.
They also need a much more efficient way of handling luggage. At least at the end of the flight. There is no reason the luggage should take longer than it takes to get the last passenger off.
Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe, whose authoritarian rule has brought widespread hunger to his country, defended his policy of seizing land from whites on Tuesday, saying he is undoing a legacy of Zimbabwe's former colonial masters.
Mugabe spoke to world leaders at a U.N. summit on the global food crisis against a backdrop of sharp criticism over his participation. Some delegations, including those of the United States, Britain and the Netherlands, said they wouldn't talk to Mugabe at the three-day summit at the Rome-based U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization.
Once hailed as a hero of African liberation, Mugabe has come to be widely reviled for presiding over the collapse of Africa's one-time bread basket into a nation where millions go hungry. His government is accused of cracking down on political opposition ahead of a presidential runoff later this month that threatens to unseat him after 28 years in power.
And on Tuesday, the aid group Care International announced that it had been ordered to suspend its operations in Zimbabwe after the government accused it of campaigning for the opposition. The group, which provides aid to about 500,000 Zimbabweans, denies that it encourages or tolerates political activity by staff.
But at the conference, Mugabe struck a defiant toneaccusing Western powers of maneuvering to bring about "regime change" in Zimbabwe. He contended that while land reform was "warmly welcomed" by most of his people, it has "elicited wrath from our former colonial masters."
"The United Kingdom has mobilized her friends and allies in Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand to impose illegal economic sanctions against Zimbabwe," he said.
Although Mugabe pins much of his nation's plight on the sanctions, the measures are narrowly targeted at him and his allies. Humanitarian aid, with the Europeans the biggest donors, continues to flow, but is channeled through aid groups instead of the government.
"I find it very cynical that someone who has driven people in his country into hunger and the country into ruin dares to show up at such a conference," German Development Minister Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul, who is representing her country at the meeting, said on ZDF television Tuesday.
State Department spokesman Tom Casey said Mugabe's "misrule" serves as "an example of what not to do in terms of managing agricultural and food policy."
Mugabe was staying at a posh hotel near the top of Rome's Via Veneto, an elegant street lined with chic cafes.
The summit, which opened Tuesday, is hoping to solve the short-term emergency of hunger caused by soaring prices, and to help poor countries grow enough food to feed their own. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called on nations to minimize export restrictions and import tariffs to help the poor cope with dramatically escalating food prices. He said world food production must rise by 50 percent by 2030 to meet increasing demand.
High fuel costs, speculation, increased demand for meat and dairy products in emerging nations like India and China, and the conversion of crops into biofuel have been blamed for skyrocketing food prices. The soaring prices have widened hunger and sparked riots and protests in several countries in Africa and Asia.
"Some countries have taken action by limiting exports or by imposing price controls," Ban said. "They only distort markets and force prices even higher."
U.N. officials said on Monday that they also intend to request that the United States and other nations phase out subsidies for food-based biofuels, including ethanol. But in his speech Tuesday, Ban only called for "a greater degree of international consensus on biofuels."
That, however, could be difficult: Participants do not even agree on how much a role biofuels play in driving up prices.
"It offends me to see fingers pointed against clean energy from biofuels, fingers soiled with oil and coal," said Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, whose country's sugar cane has long been used to produce ethanol. He insisted that biofuels "are not the villain menacing food security in poor countries."
Silva was alluding to wealthy nation's own farm subsidiaries as a key culprit for food insecurity.
U.S. Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer told reporters he was "surprised" by Silva's comments. Schafer recently criticized Congress for approving a five-year farm bill generously subsidizing U.S. farmers at a time when much of the world is suffering from high food prices.
A previous summit pledge to halve world hunger by 2015 has proven elusive. FAO director-general Jacques Diouf told delegates that at the current rate the target "would not be reached in 2015 but in 2150."
The summit also saw Iran's President Mahmoud Ahamadinejad lash out at the West for allegedly profiting from the hikes.
Some protesters climbed up the lower tier of the Colosseum and sent down leaflets criticizing the Iranian leader, who repeated calls for the disappearance of Israel.
#1
land reform was "warmly welcomed" by most of his people.
Yep, the ones who survived the purge, and got free land.
Dead men don't talk.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
06/03/2008 16:36 Comments ||
Top||
#2
saying he is undoing a legacy of Zimbabwe's former colonial masters.
Unfortunately, that legacy was being Africa's breadbasket.
As opposed to basket case like it is now.
Posted by: Rambler in California ||
06/03/2008 16:50 Comments ||
Top||
Lawyers for the leader of a faction of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change, Arthur Mutambara, were trying to have their client brought to court or have his case dismissed.
Mutambara was arrested at his home Sunday on charges of publishing falsehoods and offending security forces. The charges stem from an article which said the military was running the country, intimidating ordinary citizens and brutalizing opposition supporters.
Mutambara's lawyer, Harrison Nkomo, says the government's actions were unwarranted. "In a democratic society such criticisms of public offices is allowed. And Zimbabwe is no exception to that," said Nkomo. "If they allege to be a democracy they should surely take that kind of criticism."
Posted by: Fred ||
06/03/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Former Bangladesh prime minister Begum Khaleda Zia was taken to a court on Sunday to face a graft charge involving a Canadian oil exploration firm, officials said.
Security was tightened around the makeshift court in the sprawling parliament compound for her first appearance since her arrest in September last year. "The former prime minister was produced before a judge as the court was preparing to start formal prosecution against her," a court official said.
The Anti Corruption Commission (ACC) filed charges against Khaleda in December for failing to recover millions of dollars in compensation for environmental damage caused by fire at a drilling site in northeastern Bangladesh in 2005. The fire occurred due to wrong handling of equipment by experts from Canadian company Niko Resources Ltd, ACC officials said. Khaleda was prime minister from 2001 to 2006.
The ACC also filed a similar case against former prime minister Sheikh Hasina. Niko representatives were not immediately available in Dhaka for comment. In December, a company an official told Reuters in Calgary, Canada, that the firm had not operated unethically in Bangladesh.
Khaleda and Hasina have been held in separate buildings in the parliament compound since their arrest last year.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/03/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) President Hugo Chavez is revamping his intelligence agencies to counter what he calls U.S. attempts to undermine his government. Four new spy agencies will replace the current DISIP secret police and DIM military intelligence agency, Interior Minister Ramon Rodriguez Chacin said Thursday.
A new law has established the General Intelligence Office and the General Counterintelligence Office, both overseen by the Interior Ministry, plus similar military intelligence and counterintelligence components, Rodriguez Chacin told reporters. He did not say how they will differ from the current spy agencies or whether any top officials will be replaced. Rodriquez Chacin announced the change the previous night, saying the new agencies are meant to confront U.S. attempts to meddle in Venezuela's internal affairs.
Posted by: Steve White ||
06/03/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Just about all information about Venezuelas economy, military, power generation, oil pumping ability, PVDA finances etc. are now state secrets. Only the Executive (Hugolito) may give out.
This is via the enabling law.... which runs out in July. Look for more surprises before then.
Posted by: George Smiley ||
06/03/2008 0:24 Comments ||
Top||
A panel of auditors said Monday it found no evidence that a U.N. anti-poverty program in North Korea knew of any counterfeiting, money laundering or other improper financial dealings linked to U.N. money. How about another panel to investigate whether or not the UN has any common sense? These folks fight tooth and nail over $20M. Their army needs to be fed since they are the ones with the guns. Duh.
In response to the report, U.N. Development Program Administrator Kemal Dervis told reporters he would consider and possibly recommend to his agency's executive board that it return to working in the communist-led country, from which the agency withdrew its operations in March 2007.
The three-member audit panel said it could verify that more than three-quarters of nearly $24 million in agency spending between 1999 and 2007 had been properly spent. According to paperwork provided by the number one counterfeiter of the US$100 bill, and just about any other document you could think of.
The panel, chaired by former Hungarian prime minister Miklos Nemeth, also said there was no way that UNDP officials "had any way of knowing" about any misuses of its money by North Korea. That included $2.7 million moved out of the country to a bank that U.S. officials called a potential money launderer.
The panel, however, recommended tightening some financial procedures.
In January 2007, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called for the audit based on allegations by U.S. officials about irregularities in the UNDP program. Two months later, the agency's executive board withdrew its staff and operations after concluding that North Korean authorities were not going to cooperate with UNDP's recommended changes.
The panel criticized UNDP officials for not handing over to authorities $3,500 in counterfeit bills they came across and kept in a safe for more than a decade. But panel members dismissed a former UNDP staffer's claims of retaliation for blowing the whistle on alleged improprieties.
Members of the panel said their review was comprehensive and carefully weighed the evidence "with full objectivity and independence." Dervis whose agency, rather than the panel itself, released the audit report on the UNDP's Web site praised the panel's work. He said its findings essentially cleared his agency of wrongdoing, but added that it "was not right" that the "defaced, unusable" counterfeit bills had not been turned over to authorities sooner.
"It is clear that our complex organization can and should improve further," he told a news conference.
A U.S. Senate investigation said in January that UNDP had left itself open to exploitation, paying $50,000 to Zang Lok Trading Co. a company that U.S. officials said had ties to North Korea weapons sales on behalf of other U.N. agencies.
The report by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations said UNDP paid salaries of local staff directly to the government without verifying how they were disbursed, even though the agency suspected the government was "skimming" money from the payments.
A previous U.N. audit last year also uncovered some problems, including payments by UNDP to North Korean staff and suppliers in hard currency without approval and hiring of government-approved staff in violation of U.N. procedures.
#1
A panel of auditors said Monday it found no evidence that a U.N. anti-poverty program in North Korea knew of any counterfeiting, money laundering or other improper financial dealings linked to U.N. money.
Oh, now the UN is printing it's own money?
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
06/03/2008 16:41 Comments ||
Top||
Exiled Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen, under threat after angering Muslim groups with her work, is living in Sweden with the support of a local municipality, a member of parliament said on Monday.
Cecilia Wikstrom, a deputy chairman of a parliamentary committee on cultural affairs, said the local council of the university town of Uppsala had offered to cover Nasreen's basic living expenses for up to two years so she can write. "I'm not sure whether she is willing to use the whole time," Wikstrom told Reuters, "but we have offered her this sort of scholarship."
Wikstrom, a member of the Liberal Party who represents Uppsala, said she had seen Nasreen on Sunday and that the author was currently out of the country on a trip.
Svenska PEN, the Swedish branch of the international writers' association, said in March that Nasreen had flown to a European location to receive treatment for a heart condition, but it declined to reveal where at the request of the author.
Before that, Nasreen had spent months living in hiding in India. Violent protests by Muslim groups in November forced Indian authorities to put her in a safe house and bar visitors.
Nasreen fled Bangladesh in 1994 when a court said she had "deliberately and maliciously" hurt Muslim religious feelings with her Bengali-language novel "Lajja", or "Shame", in which she argued the Hindu minority in Bangladesh was poorly treated.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/03/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Global Jihad
#1
Excellent! Some town is lucky to have leaders with steel ones...
#3
If Muslims persecute "blasphemers" in their own countries, surely they would seek similar enforcement should we allow them into the West? Of course, but they keep pouring in, getting angrier with each generation. Our immigration policies are like: cockroach feeding.
Please don't judge Muslims by your experience with Muslim co-workers. They act in light of the power of their local community (ummah). The Swedes found early Muslim immigrants to be docile, on the outside. When they reached a certain point, their arrogant gene asserted. Islam is an inherently aggressive ideology of hatred and tyranny.
The firebrand pastor of St. Sabina parish was effectively removed from his duties there Tuesday, according to a statement released by the Archdiocese of Chicago.
In the statement, Cardinal Francis George says he asked the Rev. Michael Pfleger, 59, to "take leave for a couple of weeks from his pastoral duties." The statement said Pfleger "does not believe this to be the right step at this time." "While respecting his disagreement, I have nevertheless asked him to use this opportunity to reflect on his recent statements and actions in the light of the Church's regulations for all Catholic priests," George said.
The recent statements in question were video clips broadcast on You Tube where Pfleger mocked Hillary Clinton for crying on the campaign trail. He suggested her tears were due to "white entitlement" leading Clinton to believe the Democratic nomination should go to her, not Barack Obama.
Pfleger has been a priest for 33 years, serving nearly all that time at St.
Sabina's in the Auburn-Gresham neighborhood.
Fr. William Vanecko, Pastor of St. Kilian's parish, will be temporary administrator of St. Sabina's, the statement said.
"I ask the members of St. Sabina's parish to cooperate with him and to keep him and Fr. Pfleger in their prayers," the statement reads. "They are in mine"
#3
33 years at the same parish? Not supposed to be there more than 8 or so, unless you are sent there by a religious order. Diocesan priests generally do change parishes to prevent such attachments and things like Pfleger has gotten at his Parish.
#4
Well, since the Orthodox and Roman Catholics don't always get along so well, I would recommend a good, conservative Roman Catholic priest, instead. Ideally one from Africa.
Posted by: Rambler in California ||
06/03/2008 19:47 Comments ||
Top||
#8
They've tried to transfer him a couple of times, but he held his breath and stamped his feet so much they relented each time. He's known around the Chicago area as Father Gadfly. It's long past time to give him the bum's rush.
Barack Obama effectively clinched the Democratic presidential nomination Tuesday, becoming the first black candidate to lead a major party into a campaign for the White House. Vanquished rival Hillary Rodham Clinton swiftly signaled an interest in joining the ticket as running mate.
Obama arranged a victory celebration at the site of this summer's Republican National Conventionan in-your-face gesture to Sen. John McCain, who will be his opponent in the race to become the nation's 44th president.
The 46-year-old Obama outlasted Clinton in a historic campaign that sparked record turnouts in primary after primary, yet exposed deep racial and gender divisions within the party.
In a campaign of surprises, Clinton's comments about joining the ticket rated high.
According to one participant in an afternoon conference call among Clinton and members of the New York congressional delegation, Rep. Lydia Velasquez said she believed the best way for Obama to win over Hispanics and members of other key voting blocs would be to take the former first lady as his running mate.
"I am open to it," Clinton replied, if it would help the party's prospects in November, said the participant, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the call was a private matter
#1
CNN NEWS this Guam AM > OBAMA NEEDS ONLY 12 SUPERDELEGATES TO CLINCH DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION.
However, unless MCCAIN screws up royally or suffers a catastophic health setback, POLLS + PUNDITS > OBAMA is still anticipated to lose agz Mccain in November, AS MOSTLY WHITE MAINSTREAM AMER TEND TO PREFER A WHITE REPUBLICAN OLDER MALE + MIL VETERAN, etc. IN TIME OF WAR, CRISIS, OR UNCERTAINTY.
OTOH, RADICAL ISLAM > SAVING THE JIHAD > IMO I don't believe the Islamists can spare the MANY MONTHS = 1-2 YEARS TO HELP OBAMA WIN THE US PRESIDENCY + INITIATE US WITHDRAWAL FROM IRAQ.
* AMERICAN HIROSHIMA event > the Dems-MSM will blame Dubya + GOP [read-MCCAIN]???
#2
MARIANAS VARIETY > CLINTON WANTS AMERICAN SAMOA TO VOTE IN PRESIDENTIAL POLLS.
Good for Hillary, but IMO a AmerSamoa-specific formal vote-referendum on FINAL SELF-DETERMINATION vv USA would be better. I DON'T PERSONALLY OR MORALLY LIKE THE IDEA OF LOCALS NOT HAVING ANY OFFICIAL SAY IN THEIR DESIRED AGENDAS OR FUTURE(S), be it Local to Washington DC or vice versa.
E.g. GUAM + US MARINES RELOCATION > USDOD Mil Planning is normally OPEN-ENDED + SUBJECTIVE, and my sources are still telling me that the anticipated MARINE RELOCATION FROM OKINAWA [includ OUTSOURCING] IS NOT INCONSISTENT WID US PLANS-OPTIONS TO STAY OR WITHDRAW FROM THE WESTPAC REGION. IOW, 'tis a FALSE POSITIVE result as subject to whims of POLITICS.
AFTER 2010 > the next few years and decade will see across-the-board, potens destructive = alterative external and internal pressures on local Guam-WESTPAC resources and "status quo" ability to govern and control its own Govt, Culture, Society, Economy, etc.
Hillary Rodham Clinton has told congressional colleagues she would be open to becoming Barack Obama's vice presidential nominee, saying she would consider it if it would help Democrats win the White House.
Clinton, a New York senator, made the comment on a conference call with other New York lawmakers Tuesday, according a participant on the call.
The senator's remarks came in response to a question from Democratic Rep. Nydia Velazquez who said she believed the best way for Obama to win over key voting blocs, including Hispanics, would be for him to choose Clinton as his running mate.
"I am open to it," Clinton replied, if it would help the party's prospects in November.
THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.
WASHINGTON (AP)Hillary Rodham Clinton will concede Tuesday night that Barack Obama has the delegates to secure the Democratic nomination, campaign officials said, effectively ending her bid to be the nation's first female president.
The former first lady was not ready to formally suspend or end her race in a speech Tuesday night in New York City. But if Obama gets to the magic number of delegates, 2,118, she was prepared to acknowledge that milestone, according to aides who declined to be identified.
Obama effectively secured the magic number Tuesday, based on a tally of pledged delegates, superdelegates who have declared their preference, and another 15 superdelegates who have confirmed their intentions to The Associated Press.
It also included delegates Obama was guaranteed as long as he gained 30 percent of the vote in South Dakota and Montana later in the day.
On NBC's "Today Show," Clinton campaign chairman Terry McAuliffe said that once Obama gets the majority of convention delegates, "I think Hillary Clinton will congratulate him and call him the nominee."
She will pledge to continue to speak out on issues like health care. But for all intents and purposes, the two senior officials said, the campaign is over.
Most campaign staff will be let go and will be paid through June 15, said the officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to divulge her plans.
The advisers said Clinton has made a strategic decision to not formally end her campaign, giving her leverage to negotiate with Obama on various matters including a possible vice presidential nomination for her. She also wants to press him on issues he should focus on in the fall, such as health care.
Universal health care, Clinton's signature issue as first lady in the was a point of dispute between Obama and the New York senator during their epic nomination fight.
Clinton was at home in Chappaqua, N.Y., with her husband, former President Clinton and daughter Chelsea. She was placing calls to friends and supporters and working on a final draft of her speech. She was also resting her voice, which was nearly shot after days of nonstop campaigning.
In a formal statement, the campaign made clear the limits of how far she would go in Tuesday night's speech. "Senator Clinton will not concede the nomination," the statement said.
Clinton field hands who worked in key battlegrounds said they were told to stand down, without pay, and await instructions. Speaking not for attribution because they didn't want to jeopardize their jobs searches, many said they were peddling resumes, returning to their hometowns or seeking out former employers.
Clinton officials have said they would not contest the seating of Michigan delegates at the convention in Denver this August. The campaign was angry this past weekend when a Democratic National Committee panel awarded Obama delegates it thought Clinton deserved.
#2
I think as little as posible on both of them, having said that I hope O'Bama is NOT that stupid.
Hillary as veep is the same as a death-for-O'Bama sentence. (Ask Vince Foster)
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
06/03/2008 17:05 Comments ||
Top||
#4
CNN > UNCONFIRMED - CLinton campaign officio infers that Hillary may still decide to stay in the race to the end [Democratic Convention?].
CONVENTIONAL WISDOM this AM > PUNDITS > BARACK WILL STILL LOSE TO MCCAIN, as due to a variety of major factors. 2008 -2012 > IN ABSENCE OF US-IRAN WAR/CONFLICT AS PER OSAMA BIN LADEN'S DESIRED APOCALYPSE, ISLAMIST IRAN + MILITANTS WILL GO NUCLEAR AMAP ASAP DURING THE TENURE OF POST DUBYA MCCAIN + OBAMA/CLINTON PRESIDENCY.
Hillary wants to be the Domestic-International f"FACE" of any POTUS OBAMA "DIVERSITY" + "PEACE", etc. agenda, however unrlikely or unrealistic the latter Obama agendums are in the face of VARIOUS WORLD CRISES + ESPEC ISLAMIST NUCLEARIZATION. AND, lest we fergit, STATE OF JIHAD + CENTRAL ASIAN DESTABILIZATIONS [Russ-China-India] > AMERICAN HIROSHIMA(S) is still a viable contingency option for Radical Islam.
OTOH, DUBYA'S "LEGACY" going into November 2008 -Jan 2009 = despite his achievements, DEMOLEFT-MSM may blame him for NOT STOPPING IRAN = ISLAMIST NUCLEARIZATION + LOSING CENTRAL ASIA/ASIA TO SAME???
Again, the MOST DANGEROUS PHASE of the WOT lies ahead of us, NOT behind us.
The preponderance of the evidence now suggests that there's nothing there. One of the arguments that made me think there was some fire amid the smoke was the statement on Booman Tribune, attempting to explain that "why'd he" was being heard as "whitey." This sort of explanation suggested that someone perhaps allied with the Obama campaign? Someone in attendance of the event? wanted to explain what people would be hearing on the tape, which suggested that there was a tape, and that some words that sounded like "why'd he"/"whitey" could be heard. The listing of specifics of the comment Medicaid/Katrina/Jena/Iraq also suggested someone had heard the comment, and wanted to put it in context...
But now I find that apparently Booman Tribune was merely paraphrasing another blogger's prediction of what would be on the tape if it ever surfaced. No one claimed to have seen the tape. (That will teach me to put any stock in anything written on a liberal blog.)
Without that, what are we left with? Larry Johnson, a vehemently pro-Hillary and anti-Obama blogger, who in the past was running around telling people Karl Rove was about to be indicted. Republican political consultant Roger Stone, saying he believes it exists. I'm hearing from other reporters that their (secondhand, of course) sources are calling back and adding that they saw Louis Farrakhan on the tape, a detail that they didn't mention before Johnson's update of 9 this morning. Does the presence of Farrakhan seem like a detail that's easy to forget?
If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. But right now I think the evidence suggests this is a hoax, and that we will never see tape of Michelle Obama saying these particular controversial remarks. The timing of this rumor's surfacing is conveniently perfect to scare superdelegates, and the idea that it's in the hands of sinister Republicans explains why fans of Hillary are eager to talk about it but unable to produce it.
UPDATE: I hear from many readers that Bob Beckel said Tuesday morning on Fox & Friends, that a "bomb" was going to drop tomorrow, regarding Michelle Obama. Asked if it was "worse than a college thesis?" Bob said yes, I am told. He said that the Republicans were behind it and it was dumb because it meant that Mrs. Clinton would be the nominee.
I note that despite my readers' hopes, this fits the pattern for rumors like this they're always simultaneously vague but hyped to be huge, and they're always coming just around the corner. Like I said, if I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but this could easily be a lot of folks chasing the same rumors...
Posted by: Mike ||
06/03/2008 08:38 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I will believe it when I see it.
Michelle will have plenty of time and opportunity to stick her foot in her big, fat mouth before the election.
#3
Monday came and went and no tape as promised. That would seem to put it to rest.
I'm sure Republicans will get the blame in the Democratic short-term memory history books but I hope a few Obama people remember it was one of their own party that started this hoax.
That youtube video is part of a harmless practical joke sweeping cyberspace these days. People (kids, mainly) drop that link in random places and when people click on it, it takes them to that long-suffering 80's tune and video that is actually quite hilarious (to some, at least) in all it's 80's glory. The artist's name fails me now but when you click on the link, you have been officially "RickRoll'd". Go figure.
If you can bear to watch it again, the guy in short shorts and suspenders jumping up and off a chain link fence at mark 2:08 never ceases to make me laugh out loud. Not sure why, exactly. Perhaps it's because there's something so terribly ridiculous about that particular moment. Although you could say that about the entire video with little equivocation.
Wouldn't that be called blackmail if the little people did that?
Negotiations are understood to be taking place between the Obama and Clinton campaigns about the Illinois senator helping to repay some of the massive debt incurred by his rival. One of Hillary Clintons donors said that the former First Ladys campaign was as much as $40 million in the red.
In a conference call with major donors this afternoon, contributors were told by Harold Ickes, a senior Clinton adviser, that she was unlikely to pull out of the race until the issue of her massive debts was resolved. The New York senator has lent her own campaign at least $11.5 million.
One source close to a major donor said: Its not about the vice-presidency or any other position she might get. Its about the money in particular the Clinton family money. The Obama campaign might have to reach deeply into its well-stocked coffers in order to secure the full support of Mrs Clinton and her husband Bill in the November general election.
But in a sign that Mr Obama believes a deal can be struck, he said at an event in Troy, Michigan: Mrs Clinton has run an outstanding campaign and she is an outstanding public servant. And she and I will be working together in November.
(Reuters) - Even before debate began on Monday on the first comprehensive climate change bill to reach the U.S. Senate floor, the White House said President George W. Bush would veto it in its current form.
Bush himself slammed the bill, saying it would cost the U.S. economy $6 trillion. His estimate drew quick denials from those who support the legislation, including Sen. Barbara Boxer, a California Democrat and longtime environmentalist.
The Bush administration has consistently opposed economy-wide measures to limit climate-warming emissions of carbon dioxide. The United States is alone among major developed countries in rejecting the carbon-capping Kyoto Protocol, which sets more stringent targets than the bill headed for Senate debate.
"I urge the Congress to be very careful about running up enormous costs for future generations of Americans," Bush said at a White House meeting on the economy and taxes. "We'll work with the Congress, but the idea of a huge spending bill fueled by tax increases isn't the right way to proceed."
He said the bill, known as the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act and set for its first debate in the Senate late on Monday, "would impose roughly $6 trillion of new costs on the American economy."
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said Bush would veto the bill if it arrived on his desk as currently drafted, but added, "It's very unlikely to pass the Senate anyway."
Most Capitol Hill observers acknowledge the bill is highly unlikely to become law before Bush leaves the White House in January.
The number of uncommitted senators is impressive, said Jeremy Symons of the National Wildlife Federation.
"The fence is so crowded you can hear it creaking," Symons said of the fence-sitters on global warming legislation.
Some estimates have put the number of uncommitted senators at up to 20 -- one-fifth of the 100-member Senate.
The bill's supporters maintain that the legislation's cap-and-trade provisions would create jobs and that the cost of doing nothing about climate change justifies action now.
Carbon dioxide, which is emitted by fossil-fueled vehicles and coal-fired power plants as well as from natural sources, is a powerful greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming.
Boxer, who chairs the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and who has shepherded this legislation to the Senate floor, offered a blistering response to Bush's comments.
"Just when we finally have a chance to get off of Big Oil and foreign oil, you can count on the Bush administration to fight us every step of the way," she said in a statement. "Where were they when gas prices went to 250 percent of what they were at the start of this administration? They did nothing."
The Lieberman-Warner bill contains tax relief for consumer energy costs, Boxer said.
"As you can imagine, our opposition to this will be quite strong and we'll be making these points throughout the week," said Keith Hennessey, director of Bush's National Economic Council.
U.S. gross domestic product could be reduced by as much as 7 percent in the year 2050 and gasoline prices -- already at record highs in the United States -- could soar by as much as 53 cents a gallon by 2030, he said.
The legislation the Senate will debate could cut total U.S. global warming emissions by 66 percent by 2050, according to a summary of the measure.
U.S. greenhouse gas emissions would drop by about 2 percent per year between 2012 and 2050, based on 2005 emission levels, under the measure.
The bill would cap carbon emissions from 86 percent of U.S. facilities, and emissions from those would be 19 percent below current levels by 2020 and 71 percent below current levels by 2050, according to a summary of the bill's details released by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.
#1
I hope Bush vetoes this proposed boondoggle. How about Congress putting together an energy bill that makes sense? The consumer could use a some relief from high gas prices whatever that is going to take. If something isn't done, we will be back in the damn dark ages soon.
#2
"Just when we finally have a chance to get off of Big Oil and foreign oil, you can count on the Bush administration to fight us every step of the way," she said in a statement. "Where were they when gas prices went to 250 percent of what they were at the start of this administration? They did nothing."
At least WE want to make things far worse - that's doing something!
/dumb as a box of rocks Boxer
Posted by: Shavith Darling of the Heathen Rus1164 ||
06/03/2008 21:06 Comments ||
Top||
#3
See also STARS-N-STRIPES OP-ED > WORLD POLICEMAN ROLE IS VERY COSTLY, $$$ economically for the USA, + FUEL PROTESTS RAGE AS "GLOBAL SOLUTION" URGED + GUAM PDN > OIL IS THE FIRST DOMINO IS CASCADING WORLD CRISIS.
The candidates say they will pay for their proposals by raising revenue and cutting spending. Here are just a few of the accounting flaws in their platforms.
It's a good thing they're not running for accountant in chief.
When it comes to selling their economic proposals as fiscally responsible, all three presidential candidates have managed to do some funny math.
"Everybody says, let's make the numbers work by not counting certain things," said Howard Gleickman, editor of Tax Vox, a blog by think-tank Tax Policy Center.
Of course, a campaign is more about proposing new ideas than it is crafting the federal balance sheet with an X-Acto Knife. Nevertheless, none of the candidates are immune from double-counting money they say could pay for one or another of their proposals, or proposing cost-saving measures that are tough to quantify.
And they're happy to call each other out on it.
Speaking Sunday on "Meet the Press," Democrat Barack Obama criticized rival Hillary Clinton's plan to pay for her gas tax holiday proposal. "Sen. Clinton says that she's going to use the windfall profits tax. [S]he's already said that she's going to use the windfall profits tax for something else, as I have, and that is to invest in clean energy and other important measures. So that money, she's already spending twice."
The reality: It's not clear how much revenue either candidate's windfall profits tax would raise.
"It depends on how it is structured and what future oil prices are," said Gilbert Metcalf, an economics professor at Tufts University who specializes in taxation, energy and environmental economics. "For what it's worth, the previous windfall profits tax consistently raised less revenue than was predicted," he added.
The Clinton campaign gives as good as it gets. For example, Clinton economic adviser Gene Sperling, in a conversation with CNNMoney.com earlier this year, took the Obama campaign to task for proposing that money saved by drawing down troops in Iraq could be used to pay for some of Obama's proposals. That's money that should be considered emergency spending, Sperling said.
"When Iraq spending goes away, it goes away. You don't use it as a pay-for," he said. "We're assuming that will bring the budget down."
Spread the wealth
Both Democratic candidates, meanwhile, frequently cite their plans to let the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 expire for high-income taxpayers as a way to pay for their initiatives.
The tax cuts are set to expire for everyone by 2011. By letting them expire for only high-income taxpayers would over 10 years capture $1.2 trillion in federal revenue, according to the Tax Policy Center.
Such revenue certainly could go a long way toward paying for Clinton's health care reform - estimated to cost $110 billion a year - or to Obama's health care proposals - estimated to cost $50 billion to $65 billion.
Or it could pay for several of the new income, payroll, savings, education or housing tax credits that both Obama and Clinton have proposed.
Or it could help pay for a permanent fix to the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), a move that would reduce revenue by at least $620 billion over 10 years.
But it can't do it all.
Cut spending, save billions
Clinton and Obama don't rely exclusively on high-income taxpayers to pay for their new ideas. But some of their other cost-saving measures, such as modernizing the health system and reducing wasteful health spending, are not easily quantifiable.
On the Republican side of the ledger, John McCain wants to make permanent all of President Bush's tax cuts and eliminate the AMT altogether. The Tax Policy Center estimates both measures combined could reduce federal tax revenue by nearly $4 trillion over 10 years.
McCain's economic adviser, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, disputes how the center calculates its estimates.
Here's his beef: The Tax Policy Center estimates make two key assumptions - the tax cuts will expire by 2011 and the AMT will hit an increasing number of taxpayers. While that reflects current law, Holtz-Eakin asserts such estimates should be based on the policies in effect now.
"[T]he AMT gets patched [to protect taxpayers] every year - regardless of which party holds power in Congress - but a current law baseline assumes that it will revert to its full-blown form in the future," Holtz-Eakin wrote in a rebuttal to the Tax Policy Center's estimates.
If we did that, Gleickman said, the baseline would also have to reflect other current and expensive policies like the war in Iraq, where McCain has called for an increase of troops.
McCain's critics say his proposals are too costly .
His campaign asserts that his call to extend the tax cuts for everyone and reduce corporate tax rates will stimulate economic growth and maintain a healthy level of tax revenue. But studies - including one by Holtz-Eakin in his capacity as Congressional Budget Office director in 2005 - suggest that tax cuts don't pay for themselves over time.
McCain is also relying on spending cuts to address long-term budgetary concerns. Specifically, he's called for the elimination of earmarks and discretionary programs that don't meet their objectives. And when it comes to shoring up funding for Social Security, he has expressed a preference to reduce growth in benefits.
Those ventures may save a lot of money or not much at all. Everything depends on what McCain could get through Congress. And so far, no presidential candidate has spent a lot of stump time proposing how to do that.
A lotta Dems probably torn between their suicidal desire to flagellate themselves with higher taxes and buying votes. Except it's W who came up with this idea, so I guess the Hair Shirt wins again.
President also says small business owners will take a hit if lawmakers fail to extend his 2001-03 tax relief. But critics say that's not necessarily the case.
President Bush on Monday called on lawmakers to make his 2001 and 2003 tax cuts permanent or risk what the White House has tagged "the largest tax increase in history."
Allowing the cuts to expire would add $1,900 to the tax bill of a family of four with an annual income of $60,000, Bush said. All told, he added, 43 million families with kids would have to pay an average tax increase of $2,323.
"It means a lot if you're trying to save for your family," Bush said. "It means a lot if you're worried about gas prices. It means a lot if you're a hardworking American family." Yeah, Dems. There's how you can mitigate the higher price of gas for those who can afford it the least. Whaddaya think? Or would you rather have something more tied to Dem efforts?
But the political reality is that it's unlikely the tax cuts would be allowed to expire for low- and middle-income families, who have been hurt by the economic slowdown and the rise in food and gas prices.
"No one wants to see them all expire - it would be a large tax increase," said Roberton Williams, principal research associate at the Tax Policy Center and the former deputy assistant director for tax analysis at the Congressional Budget Office.
While Bush has campaigned for years to permanently extend the cuts - all of which sunset by 2011 - his successor will be on the hot seat when Congress debates the issue. And none of the candidates hoping to succeed him has called for tax increases on lower- and middle-income families.
Presumptive Republican nominee John McCain has called for the extension of all the tax cuts, while his Democratic rivals Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have proposed extending them for everyone except high-income taxpayers.
Small business impact
Supporters of the tax cuts contend that letting them expire - even if only for high-income taxpayers - can be detrimental to the economy.
"It turns out that 75% of taxpayers who benefited from the reduction of the top bracket were small business owners," Bush said, noting that small businesses pay taxes at individual income tax rates. "So when you hear 'tax the rich' you're really talking about taxing Mom and Pop businesses."
Williams said that it's true that the majority of taxpayers in the top income tax bracket (currently 35%) report business income, but those taxpayers don't represent the majority of small business owners.
According to a Tax Policy Center analysis, over 90% of small business owners report income that puts in them in the 26% tax bracket or below.
Many of the top-bracket taxpayers who report self-employment income get most of their income from salaries, investments and stock options, Williams said. Of those taxpayers, only 50% make more than half of their total income from their business, and 25% get less than a tenth of their income from their small business, he said.
Supporters of the tax cuts contend that allowing them to expire can have the adverse effect of reducing expected tax revenue for the government. Their argument: Americans would have less incentive to make more money and instead step up their efforts to avoid paying tax at all.
With the tax cuts in place, tax revenue made up 18.9% of gross domestic product last year, said Larry Lindsey, who headed the president's National Economic Council in 2001 and 2002, at a panel discussion in Washington, D.C., preceding Bush's remarks. "That's higher than all but 11 of the last 60 years.... The only cause of revenue growth ... is economic growth."
Budget deficit looms
But critics of the tax cuts say Washington simply can't afford them given the budgetary pressures that will result from the war in Iraq, possible changes to the Alternative Minimum Tax and the growth in Social Security and Medicare. As more Baby Boomers retire, economists don't believe the economy can grow enough to offset the anticipated increases in spending on those entitlement programs.
Williams concedes "we don't know how much revenue would go up" if the tax cuts are left to expire. But, he said, "we know the budget deficit will get larger if we extend them." The Tax Policy Center estimates that an extension of the cuts for everyone except high-income taxpayers could cost $783 billion over 10 years.
Tax cut supporters are urging lawmakers not to wait until 2010 to make their decision about Americans' tab with Uncle Sam.
"Imagine if you're trying to plan - plan your life, plan the future for your small business - and you don't know whether or not Congress if going to keep your taxes low," said Bush. "It makes your environment more uncertain."
Of all the arguments in the debate over the tax cuts, that's one with which even critics can agree.
#1
Dems are so stupid about tax cuts..they envision and mentally masturbate to it supposedly hurting corporations and the evil white industrialists like the bald old dude from the Simpsons ("excellent smithers")..all of whom pass the overhead onto the consumer (econ 101) in actuality it does hurt small business owners and even more so those who are working hard to break into the higher tax brackets i.e. new money and young families...socialism doesn't work because ultimately socialism is not really evil it's just plain stupid.
#3
I'm reasonably close to retirement. Have a very large unrealized capital gain in my retirement account. Expiration of the capital gains tax treatment of those gains (15%) to regular income would be worth several years of retirement to me. If I think the Bush tax changes are going away, I need to retire before they do, or I am working the next few years for, effectively, free.
I'm sure the Armed Forces love their planes and don't like the idea of a fighter drone, but when this milestone is achieved, they are going to have a lot of expensive manned target drones to deal with. As soon as the pilot's physical limitations are removed from the equation, the resulting fighter drones are going to be able to make random 20g turns in rapid succession, and that will be the end of the line for the fighter pilot.
ABOARD THE USS HARRY S TRUMAN - The Navy lags well behind the Air Force in the development of armed drones the unmanned aircraft now used increasingly in Iraq and Afghanistan insisting that its "Top Gun" fighter pilots are still smarter, better and more flexible in combat.
But the contrasting visions for the next generation of America's air arsenal point to wider debates within the military about the pace of incorporating remote-control technology into future battle strategies.
It also touches on differences in military cultures with the Navy coming under criticism for its apparent resistance to substitute fighter pilot training and instincts with aircraft guided by operators who can be thousands of miles away.
For the moment, the Navy is deeply committed to plans for the F-35 fighter jet and developing a drone fleet strictly for surveillance and other non-weapon tasks. The Air Force, meanwhile, has used armed drones for years and appears to embody Pentagon trends to encourage drones as a way to reduce costs and consolidate personnel.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates, in a speech in April, called on the Air Force and other military officials to rethink "long-standing service assumptions and priorities about which missions require certified pilots, and which do not."
Gates added that "unmanned systems cost much less and offer greater loiter times than their manned counterparts making them ideal for many of today's tasks."
But many Navy pilots believe the drone technology has its limits when called on to strike targets, saying that pilots cannot be fully replaced.
"I'm not worried about losing my job, let me put it that way," said Lt. Cmdr. Brice Casey, an F/A-18 fighter jet pilot, speaking after a mission over Iraq from the USS Harry S. Truman, which recently ended a deployment in the Persian Gulf.
The Navy currently uses Global Hawk reconnaissance drones and is developing a helicopter-like unmanned aircraft called the Fire Scout that can take off and land vertically on ships. But neither operate off aircraft carriers or possess strike capability.
Last year, the Navy awarded its first-ever contract for a drone that will be able to operate from a carrier. It isn't scheduled for deployment until 2025 and is also limited to reconnaissance missions.
That puts the Navy many years behind the Air Force, which first used an armed version of the Predator drone in combat in Afghanistan in 2001. The Air Force's latest version, the Reaper, can carry up to 14 Hellfire air-to-ground missiles or alternately, four Hellfires and two 500-pound bombs over Iraq, Afghanistan or other war zones.
Tom Ehrhard, an expert on unmanned aircraft at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments in Washington, predicted it would take pressure from Congress and the defense secretary to "continue to move the Navy down this path" toward an eventual armed drone. Ehrhard is a former Air Force officer.
The Air Force has taken some of its pilots out of the air to staff drones to try to keep up with increased demand from soldiers on the battlefield. But the Navy says drones are no substitute for trained pilots in the cockpit.
Unmanned aircraft are good for targeted strikes, but less effective in quick-changing, dynamic combat situations, said Navy fighter pilots aboard the USS Truman. The pilots contend that technicians piloting drones by video and computer from afar might not get a full visual sense or the intangible "feel" for a combat scene.
Drones also perform well in places with limited anti-aircraft capabilities such as Iraq and Afghanistan but could be easier targets for ground-based rockets in places with more advanced systems.
"There is a lot that I can do and relay and make decisions in real-time based on being at the scene that a guy is going to have a very difficult time making from one camera," said Cmdr. Bill Sigler, head of an F/A-18 fighter jet squadron on the USS Truman.
The Navy officially backs that position.
"Manned aircraft still retain relevancy in scenarios where airborne decision-making is critical to mission success," said Navy spokesman Lt. Clay Doss.
He cited close air support, where pilots provide air cover for troops on the ground, and also direct ground attack "where dynamic maneuvering and/or visual situational awareness is necessary."
The Navy will look at strike capability for future generations of its carrier drone, Doss said. But he stressed that the aircraft would not replace the Navy's fighter pilots anytime in the foreseeable future.
The Navy also worries about drone reliability and safety.
The Navy developed its first unmanned combat aircraft in the 1950s and 1960s. But the Drone Anti-Submarine Helicopter, which operated off destroyers and frigates, was plagued by accidents and pilot error, and half were lost.
The Navy's current program consists of a $646 million contract to Northrop Grumman Corp. to build an unmanned jet, known as the X-47B, able to take off and land from an aircraft carrier. The first test flight is scheduled for late 2009, with a deployment date of 2025.
Since the drone won't carry any weapons, airstrikes will presumably be done by the next-generation F-35, which the Navy is expected to receive in 2015.
But Ehrhard noted a drone carrying the same weapons payload as the F-35 would have two and a half times the range of a manned aircraft without refueling, and could remain over the battlefield 5 to 10 times as long.
He called that increased reach critical as the military reduces the size and number of bases overseas, while needing to monitor remote spots around the globe.
"What the Navy doesn't want is a competitor for the F-35 program," said Ehrhard. "The F-35 program is their strike aircraft, so saying they are going to develop another strike aircraft conflicts with their own program."
Ehrhard said drones with full strike capability operating off aircraft carriers "will always be at least another generation of pilots away."
#1
...What strikes me as odd is that the USAF is - albeit hesitatingly - embracing the UAV while the USN is shying away from it like the Devil from holy water. Turning every ship into a CV seems like something the Navy would want...or perhaps that's the problem.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
06/03/2008 18:13 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"1000-FLAG/NATION" GLOBAL TASK FORCE > humanitarian and OWG-UNO mandated "police actions", etc. We all know how many times "MANO-A-MANO" CONVENTIONAL WARFIGHTING-METHODISMS were suppos to be OBSOLETE, AGAIN AND AGAIN, ala KOREAN WAR, VIETNAM, COLD WAR + even POST-COLDWAR/USSR.
IMO, the Navy fears what lies far into the future i.e. "ROBO-SHIPS" = UNMANNED COMBAT SHIPS + ORBITING BATTLE STATIONS. IOW, THE NAVY FEARS THAT THERE WILL BE NO NAVY [Ocean/Water-borne] AS WE KNOW IT IN THE FUTURE, ONLY A MULTI-CAPABLE GLORIFIED AIR FORCE/AEROSPACE/SPACE FORCE WHOSE AIRBORNE CRAFTS CAN FLY, LAND ON SEA SURFACES, SUBMERGE, AS WELL AS WAGE TRADITIONAL "NAVAL" AND OTHER CONVENTIONAL COMBAT = OTH FORCE PROJECTION LIKE GREAT-GRANDPA DID WAY BACK IN THE 21st CENTURY???
Vice President Dick Cheney on Monday rejected a suspension of the federal gasoline tax as proposed by his party's presumptive presidential nominee, Sen. John McCain. Cheney said it would offer little help to consumers coping with gas prices around $4 a gallon.
The vice president's critique went further than President Bush's own comments on the idea, which appears dead anyway.
"I think it's a false notion, in the sense that you're not going to have much of an impact, given the size of the gasoline tax on the total cost of the gallon of gas," Cheney said when asked about the matter during a luncheon appearance. "You might buy a little bit of relief there, but it's minimal."
The national average for a gallon of regular gasoline on Monday was $3.98, according to a survey of stations by AAA and the Oil Price Information Service. Of that total, the federal tax on gasoline is 18.4 cents per gallon.
Both McCain, R-Ariz., and a contender for the Democratic presidential nomination, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, have proposed suspending the tax.
Bush has said he would consider any idea from Congress, but he was not enthusiastic about it.
Democratic leaders in Congress have shown little interest, too, and no votes are anticipated on the matter in the House or the Senate.
The gas tax is the main source of revenue for the Highway Trust Fund that provides grants for highway and bridge construction and repair.
Cheney said the broader solution is to expand the exploration of energy sources in the United States. Bush has long called for opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska to oil development, which is strongly opposed by environmentalists, most Democrats and a few moderate Republicans.
The vice president spoke in a Q&A session at the Gerald R. Ford Journalism Prize luncheon.
When asked about the scathing tell-all book by Bush's former press secretary Scott McClellan, Cheney said he hadn't read it and had no plans to do so. But he did pointedly comment when asked generally about former administration officials who write such books, saying, "I thought Bob Dole got it about right."
Dole said, among other things, that "there are miserable creatures" like McClellan in every administration who are spurred on by greed. Cheney's comment comes after White House press secretary Dana Perino has said the White House harbors "no ill feelings" toward McClellan.
#2
We've got to increase the supply of energy. If taxes get suspended, that is a short-term feel good fix to get politicians elected or re-elected. Demand will increase, and the prices will be back up before we know it. We need a coherent energy plan that works. Increase the number of nuclear plants, replace fossil fuels with ethanol, take over Saudi fields, drill more, etc. but for Pete's sake and ours get off your duff in Washington and do something.
#3
I figure we'll see old-fashioned rationing next year. It's the obvious direction for the 'government will fix everything' crowd - they get to pick who gets gas and who doesn't, what politician can resist? Doesn't matter to them that the overall population will pay more to get less.
WASHINGTON (AP) -- NASA's press office "marginalized or mischaracterized" studies on global warming between 2004 and 2006, the agency's own internal watchdog concluded.
In a report released Monday, NASA's inspector general office called it "inappropriate political interference" by political appointees in the press office. It said the agency's top management wasn't part of the censorship, nor were career officials.
NASA downplayed the report as old news on a problem that has since been fixed. NASA spokesman Michael Cabbage said the space agency's new policies have been hailed for openness by the U.S. Government Accountability Office.
The report found credence in allegations that National Public Radio was denied access to top global warming scientist James Hansen. It also found evidence that NASA headquarters press officials canceled a press conference on a mission monitoring ozone pollution and global warming because it was too close to the 2004 presidential election.
In addition, the report detailed more than a dozen other actions in which it said the NASA public affairs office unilaterally edited or downgraded press releases having to do with global warming or denied access to scientists.
NASA public affairs officials criticized by the report called it wrong, saying they were always open and truthful.
Not so, according to the report. The report did not directly accuse them of lying, but used more nuanced terms such as "mendacity" and "dissembling." The space agency complained those terms were unjust.
The report concluded that "inappropriate political posturing or advantage" was behind some of these actions.
NASA and the Bush administration instantly drew criticism as a result of the report.
"Our government's response to global warming must be based on science, and the Bush administration's manipulation of that information violates the public trust," said Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg, D-New Jersey.
Mark Bowen, who wrote a book on NASA and Hansen, faulted the report's finding that NASA administrator Michael Griffin and the White House weren't involved in manipulation.
"So many honest people inside NASA and out have demonstrated censorship has occurred," Bowen said.
In its response, NASA's legal office noted that the report showed that actual research on global warming was not interfered with, and that neither NASA senior management nor other senior administration officials were involved.
"The legitimate conclusions ... are those that NASA has already acknowledged and has long since fixed," deputy counsel Keith Sefton wrote in response.
NASA's former press secretary, Dean Acosta, who was accused of telling underlings that there were "too many" global warming news releases, denied manipulations.
"My entire career has been dedicated to open and honest communications," said Acosta, now a spokesman for aerospace giant Boeing Co. "The inspector general's assertions are patently false."
NASA's overall head of public affairs, David Mould, who was also criticized, said the report "got a number of things wrong... I didn't see things that were politically influenced." But Mould also pointed to changes in policy he made after the allegations first came out in 2006, saying "I'm proud of the improvements we made."
Posted by: Fred ||
06/03/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
ION TOPIX > CHINA CONFIDENTIAL [VARIOUS ARTICS] -OBAMA: THE DEMOCRATS ARE ABOUT TO CAPITULATE TO THE FAR LEFT, and possibly to Islamists + other ANTI-US agendists???
#2
So - How are the deceased indians who voted for Tim Johnson back in 2002 over John Thune going to vote today? Barack or Hillary? If it's close I hope they are doing exit polling at the burial grounds....
An estimated two million women are caught each year in the worldwide sex industry while countless children and other women are forced into low-waged jobs, the UN said Tuesday in a renewed effort to fight human trafficking.
The UN said there are no accurate statistics, but the number of women trafficked across borders each year could be twice as high if the count includes those forced into domestic situations.
UN Deputy Secretary General Asha Rose Migiro said international conventions on human rights prohibits slave trade and all forms of slavery, in particular the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
'But even today, millions of people - mostly women and children - are being coerced into human trafficking, which amounts to nothing more than a modern form of slavery,' Migiro said during debate in the UN General Assembly.
'They are threatened with violence and held against their will. They are exploited for sex, forced to work, and even killed for their organs.'
Migiro called on governments to ratify the UN Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons because the crime shocks the conscience of all people.
June (AKI) - Iran has suspended the semi-official FARS news agency for three days for what it claims is the 'false reporting' of the pending removal of a banking official.
The government on Monday closed the agency for 72 hours after reporting that the governor of Iran's central 'Markazi' bank, Tahmasb Mazaheri, would be removed for criticising Iran's economic policies. "The temporary closure of FARS shows that with each passing day, there is a lower tolerance of government critics and that after silencing many dissident voices, now they are 'cleaning up' their own ranks," said Mashaollah Shamsolvaezin, spokesman for the Association for Freedom of the Press in Iran, in an interview with Adnkronos International (AKI).
Mazaheri was alleged to have harshly criticised Iran's monetary policies as the official inflation rate reached 20 percent.
Iranian authorities denied he would be replaced and FARS then also denied the story.
FARS is considered to be supportive of the government of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. "Reading between the lines of this measure, we can see that the government is trying to transform the media into an 'official bulletin' office, depriving them of any possibility of providing information," concluded Shamsolvaezein
Posted by: Fred ||
06/03/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
#1
Does this strike others as funny? I mean, doesn't it go without saying that the Iran news agency puts out false stories? I guess they put out stories that didn't follow the party line.
Can we apply this 72 hour suspension rule to the NYTs? On the other hand--never mind; reduced demand for their tripe will eventually take care of the NYTs.
A feature-length documentary which shows how extreme environmentalism is damaging the lives of vulnerable people from the ban on DDT to the campaigns on global warming.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
06/03/2008 16:12 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Something you will *never* see on TV.
Its not that they want us to return to the dark ages. Its that they want is to return to FEUDAL AGES where they can be the 'Lords and Ladies of the Realm' while us, common folk, are the peasant (or yes the SLAVE) class.
Why else would the Lords of Environmentalism jet-set around the world to exotic places which can't even park all their private jets for 'conferences' while telling us we have to stop using cars to get to and from our workplace.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
June 3 (Bloomberg) -- Imagine two scales at the airline ticket counter, one for your bags and one for you. The price of a ticket depends upon the weight of both. 
Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe, whose authoritarian rule has brought widespread hunger to his country, defended his policy of seizing land from whites on Tuesday, saying he is undoing a legacy of Zimbabwe's former colonial masters. 
Former Bangladesh prime minister Begum Khaleda Zia was taken to a court on Sunday to face a graft charge involving a Canadian oil exploration firm, officials said.
Exiled Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen, under threat after angering Muslim groups with her work, is living in Sweden with the support of a local municipality, a member of parliament said on Monday.
Barack Obama effectively clinched the Democratic presidential nomination Tuesday, becoming the first black candidate to lead a major party into a campaign for the White House. Vanquished rival Hillary Rodham Clinton swiftly signaled an interest in joining the ticket as running mate. 
Hillary Rodham Clinton has told congressional colleagues she would be open to becoming Barack Obama's vice presidential nominee, saying she would consider it if it would help Democrats win the White House. 
The preponderance of the evidence now suggests that there's nothing there. One of the arguments that made me think there was some fire amid the smoke was the statement on 
