Think Progress » Murtha Floats Impeachment As ‘One Way To Influence The President’

Think Progress » Murtha Floats Impeachment As ‘One Way To Influence The President’

Will somebody explain to me why impeachment proceedings come before cutting of funding for the war in the Democratic strategy for confronting the president over the US presence in Iraq?

Oh yeah, because the Democrats are that cowardly and partisan, that is why. For a supposedly honorable representative of the people, John Murtha shows an absolute disregard for the Office of the President of the United States. Forget about George Bush, the fact that a Congressman would be taken seriously when spouting threats of impeachment so ridiculously makes one less than hopeful about the future of the American political landscape. Rep. Murtha is nothing more than a partisan hack, and I find it amazing that there is anyone who can take this fool seriously.


If there is room for Al Sharpton, there certainly better be room for Sen. Gravel...

NH INSIDER- Your Source for NH Politics - Press Releases - Gravel Dismisses CNN, WMUR-TV And Union Leader Statement

CNN issued a press release over the weekend announcing that they had yet to decide if they were going to issue an invitation to former-Senator Mike Gravel to participate in the networked sponsored installment in the Democratic primary debate circuit, and Gravel was needless to say none too pleased by this development.

The brief bulletin issued by CNN on behalf of the network and its partners in
The three debate partners, closely following Federal Election Commission guidelines, established objective criteria to determine who we invite to the debates. Because there are literally dozens and dozens of declared presidential candidates, most of whom we have never heard of, we have to have a method of determining who is invited. Our criteria simply identifies candidates that have measurable public support for their campaign. Because Mike Gravel has not demonstrated measurable public support for his campaign to date, he has not received an invitation. But we have not excluded him (or anyone) from the debate. If he meets our criteria between now and the debate, he will certainly get an invitation.

To his credit, Senator Gravel refrains from stating the obvious, but rather politely insinuates that it is absurd to claim that somehow the Reverends Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, or even activist Ralph Nadar, were somehow more qualified or credible candidates than he is as a former-Senator, which is precisely what the network is insinuating when they attempt to justify their criteria for selecting participants.

To quote the Senator's response to the CNN press release,
“The statement said that there are literally dozens and dozens of declared presidential candidates. That is true but out of those dozens of candidates, how many are former United States Senators who have been given the stamp of legitimacy by the Democratic National Committee, SEIU, AFSCME, ABC, the Nevada Democratic Party, the Center for American Progress Action Fund etc? Only two, former Senator John Edwards and myself. “Though this is not the only criteria for deciding the legitimacy of a candidate as other aspirants may have contributed distinguished public service as an appointed official or as an officer of an NGO or excelled as individual public figures such as Ralph Nader, the Reverend Jesse Jackson and the Reverend Al Sharpton making them eminently worthy, it is one indisputable criteria for defining a legitimate candidate...”
“...The statement confirmed that I had not received an invitation but said that I nor anyone else has been excluded from the debate. It went on to say that if I meet their criteria between now and the debate, I will be invited. What was Orwellian in my not meeting certain criteria which the media organizations would not divulge becomes Kafkaesque when I am now told that I have not been excluded and can still be invited if Imeet this mysterious criteria. CNN, WMUR-TVand the Union Leader sent out invitations weeks ago. I did not receive one. I am told I have not demonstrated measurable public support, which, besides being a galactic misunderstanding of polling numbers ten months before an election is also a self-fulfilling prophecy since being included in the debate would provide me and any other candidate who may have not been invited an important opportunity to secure such public support.”
Senator Gravel and I do not share the same sentiments on matters of policy, but I absolutely support the respect Senator's right to be heard, and I think CNN should be embarrassed by their shameful disrespect for a man who served two full terms in the United States Senate, which is certainly more experience than either of the party's front-runners Barack and Hillary can claim.

Bill Maher bends the truth as bad as anyone...

Bill Maher really gets me worked up sometimes, but usually I give him the benefit of the doubt because he is funny and I think his show serves as a great forum for exposing everything that is extreme and radical in supposedly 'mainstream' America. However, I will not give him a pass tonight after hearing him assert that Pat Tillman "voted for John Kerry" when criticizing the portrayal of Tillman by the Bush Administration. I wonder how Tillman voted for Kerry considering he was killed in April 2004, several months prior to the 2004 elections.

Having researched the claim that Tillman voted for Kerry, I found that in fact Maher's comment is based on an article published in The Nation in 2005, in which it is claimed that Tillman urged his fellow soldiers to vote for Kerry before his death. Interestingly, John Kerry was not even the official nominee for his party until late-August, and though it may have been that Tillman was encouraging his fellow soldiers to vote for Kerry in their respective state primary, that is certainly not how it has been portrayed by Maher.

Another claim made by Maher to back up his claim that Tillman must have been a compassionate liberal like himself is the fact that Tillman read Noam Chomsky. I read Noam Chomsky, as does anyone else who is thoughtful or curious about intellectual issues, but by no stretch does that mean I endorse everything that Chomsky thinks or stands for. The fact is that nobody should be speaking for Tillman, and those that do are just as guilty for dishonoring his memory as the Pentagon. Maher is a good guy, but I think he should choose the issues he covers more carefully because sometimes he comes off sounding like a hack.


Evidence of global epidemic as Taiwan farmers report "millions of missing bees"...

Taiwan stung by millions of missing bees | Tech&Sci | Science | Reuters.com

The inexplicable and potentially devastating disappearance of millions of honeybees in North American and Europe is now thought to be plaguing the Asian continent as well, with bee-keepers in Taiwan reporting today that as many as six million bees have been wiped out by an exceptionally volatile winter climate, which could have a dramatic impact on the quality of Spring crops on the island.

Until this morning I was unaware of any major disturbances to the bee populations outside of the US and select EU states. Given the evidence that we are in fact facing a global epidemic, and since the media is more concerned with non-binding resolutions being voted on predictably in Washington, I think it is essential that I make it my priority to provide a synopsis of any and all developments in the scientific quest to find the missing honeybees.

It will be a few weeks, I assume, before any predictions about the impact the bee's disappearance will have on this years harvest, but reading the chatter in the blogosphere certainly gives one the impression that scientists are trying to lower expectations around the world.

It is likely that no matter what the real impact on crop production may be, speculation amongst traders in the commodities markets are likely to drive prices up, which adds to the list of daily consumer goods that have seen a sharp increase in their market price in recent years and months because of global instability, whether environmental or the result of human conflict. One thing we can all be certain about, the answers to our questions are not going to fall into our laps.


Would Bill Clinton be his wife's Chief of Staff? Would that even be Constitutional?

My recent posting about Bubba's new girlfriend has led me to consider more seriously the implications of another Clinton White House, particularly the role that would be played by the former Commander-in-Chief, President Bill Clinton, who would be in a position to exert significant influence over every administration policy, both foreign and domestic. Though I do not think that Hillary Clinton is going to win (or at least I pray daily this is an accurate prediction) I find some comfort in the fact that Bill would likely view his wife's Administration as a vehicle for repairing his own tarnished legacy and would be inclined to take an active role in the policy-making process. But the more I thought about how a Clinton White House would be structured, considering the clear ambiguity and possible conflict of interest that Clinton loyalists may encounter if a situation arose which Bill may think his wife to be misguided, and thus start issuing orders behind the scenes as if he were still the man of the house. Certainly this wouldn't be a problem- but wait, what if Bill was Hillary's Chief of Staff? Essentially, if he were White House Chief of Staff, Bill might as well be President, since it is widely understood that the day to day business of the Federal government is managed by the president's chief aide. Would this be a violation of the Constitutional amendment limiting the president's two terms in office?

Probably, but it is about time America came to terms with the absurdity of such limitations on the greatest among us, who are unfortunate enough to reach the pinnacle of professional and political accomplishment before most of their peers have even been promoted beyond middle-management. It is sad to see Bill Clinton, so young and so brilliant, but because of the deceptive methods of FDR during an age when the media could be bullied into self-censoring, thus removing from the public record any evidence of his physical handicap and chronic illness. In an age when men can reach great heights before the noon hour of their lives, and the uber-transparent nature of the mainstream media has essentially rebuilt the White House with Saran Wrap, why should we place arbitrary limits on that man's (or woman's) accomplishments. Any country that willingly lays waste to their greatest minds deserves the incompetence they inherit.

Harry Reid tells it like it is, they can't win White House unless US loses in Iraq...

The Democratic strategy heading into campaign season cannot be said any better than it was last week by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who made clear during a Senate press conference that the war in Iraq is lost and cannot be won. This isn't the first time Senator Reid has said this, and I doubt it will be the last, but hopefully at some point it will gain some traction in the mainstream media and the Democratic Party's increasingly radical and inherently anti-American position will become exposed for what it is, a political calculation based on polls and votes. It is one thing to demonstrate an opposition to a policy, but it is another entirely to cast an era in American history to the dustbin and surrender. Before the elections the Democrats spoke more cautiously, and aside from the most liberal and extreme, most candidates spoke less sensationally about the war and the prospects for a favorable conclusion. But they have become drunk with power, and are falling asleep at the wheel before completing even the first lap.

What I find so appalling and indefensible about the Senator Reid's comments is not his opinion, which he is certainly entitled to, but rather his absolute lack of consideration for the fact that history books are not exclusive to Western civilization, and had he thought about his words before he ran his mouth in front of the cameras I would like to believe the Majority Leader would have chosen his them more carefully for fear of becoming the cover boy of all history books used in the Saudi madrases, not to mention the books the Iraqis will soon write about their lessons from this brief democratic experiment. Considering the repeated assertions that the al-Malaki government wishes for the US to remain in the country and continue carrying out its mission of training Iraqi forces and leading the current offensive against urban centers of violence, it is difficult to understand who is advising the Democrats that their defeatist strategy is going to accomplish anything tangible in the war against Islamic extremism; in fact all evidence indicates that NOBODY in or around Iraq is advising them that this is the wise course. That is of course if you don't count Nancy Pelosi's buddy Bashar Assad, who embraces the Majority's plan for withdrawal, along with his buddy Amadine-jihad. I guess we shouldn't forget about Chris Matthews and his mini-cabal of uber-liberal defeatists, as well as the whole lot of journalists and pundits who have jumped on the bandwagon and decided it sounds good to run around the world screaming to the cameras that we concede defeat, terrorists have broken our will.

Quite honestly, this makes me incensed, and if I were a member of Congress you would be able to watch the vain in my forehead pulse as I voiced my decent to the irresponsible opportunism displayed by Senator Reid. Such a comment is wrong on some many different levels that I am having a tough time remembering all of them to include in this post. I hope the Senator suffers in retirement when he realizes that the only thing the world will remember him for is his willingness to embrace defeat in a war against terrorists armed with suicide vests. Disgraceful is the only word that seems appropriate for describing what I think about the Majority Leader (a title he certainly doesn't deserve).

Another thing that sends me into an incensed outburst is the unabashed apologists and Democratic interpreters David Gregory and Tim Russert, who can have the audacity to take the story of Reid's comments and spin the whole thing upside down, trying to downplay what the Senator said, and claiming that "he wouldn't have said that if he had actually thought about it." EXACTLY, if he consciously self-censors his words rather than speak from his heart and expose his true feelings then of course he wouldn't have said what he did, but how is it that two men who claim to be principled journalists could possibly justify a politician not speak frankly about matters of war and peace? It is truly unprofessional and morally reprehensible. If you are going to spend your airtime running cover for Democratic politicians, while simultaneously debasing the president and his staff on everything you can grasp, then there should be a disclaimer emblazoned underneath their faces similar to the disclosures made by stock analysts on CNBC when they are discussing stocks that they are buying themselves.

Throw Nora O'Donnell in with the other shameless defeatists. I have never heard anyone so consumed by the idea of proving American failure. It is a sad day when any American sees it politically advantageous to systematically undermine the international prestige of the very country which they are vying for control over.

NFL Draft: Bear's maybe trade Briggs for 4th pick?

There is rumor that the Tampa Bay Bucaneers have their sights set on Chicago Bear's middle linebacker Lance Briggs, and are willing to deal their 4th pick in the NFL Draft to get him. I have a feeling that Coach Gruden would enjoy having Briggs at the heart of his defense as he tries to take on the Bears for the NFC Championship. But who shall the Bears choose? At the fourth position you can get whomever you want. My guess is Jerry Angelo will be deciding in the next fews days if Grossman is his guy, or if he wants to keep his options open.

I think Grossman is under-rated, because no matter how good Peyton Manning is, it took him eight seasons to get to the Super Bowl, and it only took Grossman one. He is a big time super star who was put in the unfortunate position of having two terrible injuries at the very beginning of his career, which gave him too much time to think about stuff, eventually thinking himself to death. If this fact alone makes him expendable, then Jerry might trade and pick Brady Quinn. I tend to think that if the Bears had a more consistent quarterback they would have been undefeated last season.

Brady Quinn in Chicago would be interesting. With Charlie Weis having trouble at Notre Dame, maybe he could be coaxed out of South Bend to run the offense with Lovey running the defense. Even if Weis can turn it around this year at ND, he plays on Saturday, and could easily make the short drive (more likely chartered flight) to Chicago for a skybox view.

By no stretch of the imagination do I think Quinn is the only person the Bears should think about in the 4th position, but it would be very interesting. Calvin Johnson would be great, but I think they could save that pick and take Dwayne Jarrett at the end of the first round. One mock Draft had him going 40th, which is way too low for a kid as talented and exciting as Jarrett.

Briggs is an exceptional talent, so it would be a shame to see him get away without anything to show for it, so I have no doubt the Bears are lookin' to wheel and deal.


City of Chicago finalizes plans for Spire, set to become tallest residential building in the world...

City panel endorses Spire's latest twist | Chicago Tribune

The Chicago Plan Commission has given its final endorsement to the latest design for the long anticipated Spire, designed by Zurich-based Santiago Calatrava, and if it stays true to this design it will be 150-stories, making it the tallest residential skyscraper in the world. As a resident of Chicago, I welcome the awe inspiring design as the new centerpiece of the most beautiful skyline in the world. Such an addition to the awe inspiring Lake front should be an exclamation point on the city's already promising bid to host the 2016 Olympics, and coming on the heels of Donald Trump's first namesake in the Second City it adds to the increasingly modern and sophisticated fabric of America's only major city with unlimited potential for growth.

I am somewhat surprised by the initial complaints of some about the tower's aggressively futuristic aesthetic, though I am entirely sympathetic with those who are voicing concerns about the impact of the building's design on the gridlock that plague's the Loop during the morning and afternoon commutes. According to the City Planners, Calatrava has adjusted his original sketches, which called for a massive parking structure to wrap around the base of the tower, to instead take the private garage beneath ground, using the freed-up space as a river front park. The decision to make all parking private was also applauded generally amongst the public, since that drastically reduces the possibility that the tower could fall victim to a terrorist attack like that suffered in the parking structure of the World Trade Center in 1992.

The city also assigned a developer, Dublin-based Garrett Kelleher, which leaves the only unanswered question, who is going to finance everything? When Trump broke ground at his site just up the river, the cost of construction was already collected an earning interest because he was able to sell-out the entire structure well in advance. Though the cost of development, as well as the cost of individual condos has not yet been revealed, Calatrava insisted during the press conference following the unveiling of the latest design adjustments that demand is already high, and he is confident that this time he has struck the perfect balance between form and finance.

NY Times article focuses on growing popularity of community colleges...

For Achievers, a New Destination - New York Times

The Sunday edition of the New York Times included an interesting feature article on the growing importance of two-year community colleges, including profiles of the nation's most recognized institutions. Among the standard bearers was a school that I attended briefly, Oakton Community College, located in the northern suburbs of Chicago and serving one of the most affluent and educated communities in the nation. I have heard rumors that Oakton was planning to offer four-year degrees, and they have aggressively developed their facilities. I live all of six blocks from the school's Skokie campus and I can't speak highly enough for the efforts Oakton has made to improve the neighborhood.


Thoughts on the pollenation crisis from Castro and some bloggers...

I am consumed by my recent discovery that the commercial bee population has disappeared without warning. The implications of such a development are monumental, and though there is some attention being paid by the local media and major network outlets, the cable news and newspaper op-ed pages are to preoccupied with trying to understand the psychological disorders that cause people to go on shooting rampages and who is Anna Nicole's baby-daddy. I won't even start on the disgustingly obsessive coverage of the 2008 Presidential Primary, Primary, Press Conference.

The first story is really written by Fidel Castro, and I find it amazing that he is the only world leader I can find making any extensive comment on the matter at all. Typically I would have nothing good to say about Fidel, but today he gets some props, and any previous illusions that I may have harbored about his physical and mental state, or his imminent death and demise have been archived for a date still maybe years to come...Yikes. -->Fidel Castro: Where have all the bees gone?

This article came up in the top ten results on Google for the search term 'bees gone'. The article originates from 1993 and summarizes findings and concerns of scientists at Penn State University, who noticed rather early that there was a trend emerging in US bee populations that indicated a drastic depletion. I find it very interesting that my initial hypothesis, that this is a crisis without warning, was inaccurate and in fact there have been signs for 10-15 years in isolated areas of the US. 1998 article from Penn State Agriculture Magazine: Where have all the bees gone?

The following were a collection of some of my favorites, including the last one which I comment on below. I am going to try to stay on top of how the media covers this issue from here on out, for it is understandable that everyone is consumed with the events of Monday at Virginia Tech, but eventually they will get as sick of the 24-7 obsessive coverage and start recognizing the real (and far less depressing) world of politics, markets and mother nature.

Appalachistan: Bees Gone

New Scientist Environment: Where have all the bees gone?

Scripps News: Where have all the bees gone?

Burningbird: Bee gone

ABC News: Spring Mystery, Where Are All the Bees?

Has the bee crisis been fueled by a complacent, distracted and increasingly unprofessional media? Please feel free to share your thoughts in response to this question, or on the emerging crisis generally.


Bubba's new girlfriend?

The First Post : Bill and Belinda’s excellent adventure

Free Republic: Info on Clinton's New Girlfriend...

Digital Journal: Bill's new girlfriend...

According to the internet magazine The First Post Bill Clinton has been dodging the tabloids with his new "friend", Canadian MP Belinda Stronach. Time magazine counted Stronarch among their list of the 100 most powerful people on the planet two years ago, and despite her withdrawal from a campaign for the premiership last year, she is only 40 and has just recently taken to politics following her divorce from her speed skating superstar husband a few years back.

Bill has been surprisingly low key in the early stages of the presidential campaign, and now it becomes clear where he has been hiding out. Canadian tabloids are not hesitant to imply that the two public figures have a very friendly friendship, and since this is Bill Clinton we are talking about I think its safe to assume that slick Willy is enjoying the curves of more than just the world class alpine resorts.

The question is, will Bill and his extra-curricular activities help or hurt his wife's candidacy- they certainly didn't hurt his public image too badly, though his historical legacy has some battle wounds that will forever shroud his accomplishments in a veil of shame. I have always felt that the best chance for Hillary to win the White House would be if/when she could rid herself of her husbands baggage. I had a terrible dream the other night that President Clinton suffered a coronary and died, which gave Hillary an insurmountable emotional advantage in her primary battle against the young and dashing Illinois Senator Barack Obama. This is a nightmare that I hope to never have curse my peaceful hours of slumber again, for as frightening as President Hillary Clinton sounds, it conjures much more pleasant feelings with the confidence that Bill will be on watch making sure she doesn't screw up the office anymore than it already has been.

Bill will always be Bill, and Bill at his worst is better than Hillary ever, for any reason. Let him have his girlfriends, in fact, let him choose his girlfriend on a primetime reality TV show if he's up to it- but please, please don't let his puppet pull her own strings...


Are you prepared to give up your cell phone indefinitely?

Yesterday I wrote a brief post highlighting a recent study conducted at a German University which indicated that cell phones may be to blame for the sudden disappearence of 60-70% of the honey bees across the United States. Whether cell phones are the primary cause of this disturbing phenomenon is yet unknown, but with at least 1.75 billion cell phones in use around the world, it is apparent that if it were to be determined that the signal which they emit is responsible for the drastic decline in bee populations, there would have to be major steps taken to curb usage, maybe even shut down networks altogether for a period of time until alternative measures can be taken.

Cellular communication has become a near indispensible element of our daily interaction as human beings living and working in a developed country, and many of us would be lost in a world that has become consumed with communications technology. After coming to the realization that there were nearly 2 billion cell phones in service around the world, I began doing a bit more research about the rate of cell phone adoption in society. I was particularly interested to see if there has been a drastic, exponential growth in cell phone users in the last couple years, as this may explain why there had been no previous evidence to suggest bee populations could be at risk because of growth among subscribers. Even more intriguing are the predictions of social theorists and bloggers who have attempted to predict the impact on culture and civilization that these powerful devises will have in the near future.

An interesting post on found on Evolution Shift, David Houle ponders the implications of cellular proliferation in an evolutionary sense, and reaches the conclusion that the convergence of the internet, cellular communication and personal computing will come to a head between the years 2010 and 2015.
"As is often the case, a look into the future first entails a look back to the past. In 1984 there were 25,000 cell phones sold in the U.S. In 1990 that number had grown to 1,888,000 units sold, and in the year 2000 52,600,00 units were sold – a million phones a week! That number has continued to go up. Today, in a country of 300 million people – including infants, young children, and the aged – there are over 210 million active cell phone accounts."
Houle believes that the tipping point and the next social evolution of mankind will come when the world is universally connected, thereby eliminating the constraints of time and space from human communication, which has heretofore been limited in one of these dimensions. When pondering the potential for growth in the global cellular industry Houle states,

"There are now 6 million new subscribers a month in India and 5.25 million new subscribers a month in China. When these growth rates get projected out to 2010 and 2015 it is almost certain that the vast majority of nations in the world, including sub-Saharan countries will have a majority of their citizens using cell phones. This is nothing less than transformative. Some of the countries that will have a 50% plus penetration of cell phones to people are the same ones that a couple of decades ago have less than 10-20 regular phones per 100 people. Think about how much our lives in the U.S. have changed with cell phones. Now imagine it from a base where only 1 in 5 people had land line phones and you can begin to see transformation at work, and play."

An article from 2004 in Engadget claims that cell phone usage doubled in the first four years of the century, increasing from roughly 700 million to 1.4 billion, which is precisely the type of information I was looking for. Growth at such a n unprecedented rate and the accompanying surge in invisible cellular network coverage to meet the demand could feasibly explain why there was not a more gradual drop in the number of bees. It may well be that once we reached a certain point we had passed the point of no return, and I doubt that there will be any great slowdown in the adoption of cellular communication in developing countries because of the competitive advantage it offers to peoples previously isolated from the "civilized world".

This article is purely speculative, as I have no idea if there will ever be a crisis that would demand us to seriously consider the question posed at the outset of this article. However, the evidence presented by the German scientists is very compelling because of the clear correlation drawn between cellular signals and irregular reactions from domestic bee communities. The tragic events that occurred at Virginia Tech yesterday have drawn all attention away from the study and its findings, but I suspect this is only the first of many studies that will fight for the favor of the pop-media. I just hope the next wake up call is followed by another monumental tragedy, for if we ignore the issue too long we may inadvertently wait just long enough that talk is all we have time left to do...


Rethinking Imus...

So when Al Sharpton began his crusade to have Don Imus fired from MSNBC last week I took a strong position in support of Imus, who is one of my favorite media personalities. I rarely miss his MSNBC broadcast and I am very disappointed that I will not be able to see it any longer. However, I have reconsidered my sympathetic feelings for Mr. Imus after listening to Keith Olbermann on Dan Patrick's radio program talking about Imus as a co-worker, Olbermann also being the host of an MSNBC program, made it very clear that Don Imus was not well liked among the staff at the MSNBC New York studios. Apparently he would terrorize young female staffers, making them cry because he would call them names far worse than "nappy headed hos", which is the comment that sent the civil rights leaders into their uproar.

I have great respect for Keith Olbermann, who along with his former-ESPN colleague and Sportscenter co-host Dan Patrick made every morning worth waking up for when I was just a lad who rarely watched cable news but never missed the dynamic duo. I had never considered that Imus was actually as miserable as the on-air personality he occassionally embodies when sparing back-and-forth with his crew, but according to Olbermann, nobody on the MSNBC staff was a big Don Imus fan and they made their voices heard when the station's management was deciding what course of action would be most appropriate. I am surprised Imus was offered and signed a contract extension just recently in light of the way he was viewed by his co-workers, but I suppose the network considered nothing other than the revenue he brought to their station. In the end, it was probably this same cash-flow consideration that led the MSNBC executives to pull the plug on Imus, rather than their genuine concern for their employees and their opinions. I still don't think that Imus should have been fired, but I no longer feel so bad for him.

Where, oh where have the bees gone?

Are mobile phones wiping out our bees? - Independent Online Edition > Wildlife

It seems far-fetched to think that the recent discovery that the bee population in the United States has been depleted as much as 60-70% is the result of the dramatic expansion in the usage of cell phones. However, that is precisely what a recent study conducted at Landau University by Dr. Jochen Kuhn has led some scientists to conclude, as cited in the above link from the UK newspaper The Independent.

Albert Einstein famously said that if all the bees were to disappear, "man would have only four years of life left." Considering the current rate at which scientists believe the bees to be mysteriously doing just that, we may get to test Einstein's theory on something other than space and time in the not-to-distant future.

But what if these scientists are correct in their hypothesis? Is there really anything that can be done to curb our dependence on wireless communications technology to provide balance back to the natural order and repopulate the countryside with our pollinating partners? Is it even reasonably conceivable that we as a global society could even come to a concensus about the causes of this heretofore inexplicable phenomenon in time to do anything about it?

Considering the absurd political posturing that has resulted from the recent increase in public exposure of the highly contentious scientific debate surrounding the causes of and solutions to global warming, I have little hope that this issue will ever get the bipartisan attention that a serious solution would require. Even if it did get serious attention from legislators, how could we possibly expect them to have the imagination necessary to address the problem without ripping down the mobile infrastructure that has become as indispensible as an extra appendage in both the developed and developing worlds. All things considered, we all better pray that these scientists are wrong because we are governed by immature opportunists who have little regard for anything other than winning political points, and I don't know about you, but I have trouble surviving life in the big city without my cell phone. God save the bees...


Unholy ministers tell Imus he should be fired for controversial comments...

I don't know about the rest of you people, but I am really starting to get mad about the uproar over comments made by Don Imus last week which were racial in nature. I watch the Don Imus show nearly everyday, he is one of the funniest and most respectable shock jocks on the radio; certainly more appropriate and interesting than Howard Stern and some of his other competitors. Though his comments were clearly inappropriate, I think that way in which the media has embraced this story and made it into such an important issue is a perfect example of how sensationalized our society has become.

I understand that these young basketball players at Rutgers are very upset about what was said, but lets get serious, they would never have known nor cared about what some old man said if they were National Champions today, instead of runners-up. How can anyone expect 18-22 year-old women who have just suffered the most devastating defeat of their esteemed athletic careers to have a rational or uninfluenced opinion of Imus's off-hand comment. Instead, they have been thrust in front of the camera and told to pass judgement on a man who they do not know and likely do not listen to. The Rutgers head coach gave a 20 minute speech before a live television national audience about her difficulties handling the devastating loss in Sunday's National Championship, the recent passing of her husband, and now she has been thrown to the pack of politically correct bloodhounds- how can we possibly think that she is in a position mentally or emotionally to be passing judgment on Don Imus. We don't need these college athletes to have a press conference expressing their dissappointment with Imus's comments, we know what he said was wrong, and the proper thing to have done would have been to let these young ladies go back to their lives as students and allow them to escape the spotlight while they get over their defeat in the national championship.

The mainstream media could careless however, and with a few respectable exceptions, has crucified Imus by allowing Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson to lead the mass-media lynching against a man that said a something off-hand for a laugh. Don Imus is a former Marine and 30-year veteran of radio and television broadcasting. He is not an arrogant and abrasive loudmouth (at least in my opinion), and to insist that he should be fired for these comments is tantamount to declaring that, as Bill Maher stated on Imus Tuesday morning, Imus should be deprived from his livelihood and have his legacy permanently stained because his comments have deeply upset opportunists and ministers who have no concept of forgiveness and understanding. Matt Lauer asked the Reverend quite directly whether or not he thought that, as a minister, forgiveness was in order, but Sharpton was undeterred and continued his crusade to ruin the life of a man that has earned the admiration of many more respectable and informed people than the opportunistic Reverend. Sharpton should be ashamed and he should lose his program for leading the mob against a legend in the radio business who should never have to answer to a man who obviously cares very little for anything other than putting an old man out of work.

Imus has really impressed me with the gracious and apologetic manner in which he has carried himself over the course of the past few days. He had never struck me as a particularly patient or humble individual, but he has emerged from his flogging at the hands of his colleagues and every black minister in America as the only real victim in the entire ordeal. There will continue to be calls for the veteran DJ to resign, or be fired, but I would be shocked if the MSNBC will drop their biggest (and only) cable news superstar from their morning time slot. Imus has undoubtedly won more viewers from this ordeal than he has lost, since I find it highly unlikely that those of us who have grown to love the old man's style will find anything nefarious about what he said and how it was handled, except possibly an even greater disdain and disrespect for the Unholy Ministers, Sharpton and Jackson.


Cell phones to be kept out of airplanes permanently...

Cell phones in the sky: Not now, not ever! - Wireless World - MSNBC.com

There are very few things in this world that are present in everyone's life at all times, but one of these things is the cell phone each of us has forgotten how to survive without. Unfortunately, because we have all become so dependent upon our mobile phones, nobody has been willing to stand-up and establish a general code of conduct, or prevailing cell phone etiquette for situations such as those that involve interacting with another individual, for example going through a check out line at a grocery store. Nobody has yet had the audacity to say, "look, you on the phone, you're annoying the hell out of me and everyone else here so put the phone away and shut up."

I was little surprised when consumers began demanding access to their cellular phones in the last remaining refuge on earth, where everyone exists in an equally disconnected medium that allows the use of only electronics that are silent. The airlines had been entertaining the idea of removing this ban on cellular phones, and the resulting uproar amongst passengers have now assured that these friendly skies will remain just as inviting as ever, as the FAA has tables the proposal to loosen restrictions indefinitely.

Now all that we need is someone with enough audacity to lead the charge against all of the cellular polluters who blather away about American Idol, or their boyfriends for the entire 30 minute El ride home from work everyday . Personally, I choose not to talk on my phone in front of anyone, except when absolutely necessary, and I appreciate when my friends are similarly respectful. In fact, most of my friends are similarly put-off by rude chit-chatters, so we all try to lead by example. However, not a day goes by during which I can happen to avoid hearing about someone's elses very important and VERY ANNOYING drama. Everyone out there who thinks the world wants to hear your conversations, "SHUT UP!"

Why we should not interfere with Russia's Putin if he seeks to retain power by amending constitution...

Putin keeps Russia guessing over succession: Telegraph

An issue that was given significant attention during the first couple years of Vladimir Putin's second term was the fact that Russia's constitution prohibits him from seeking another term at the helm of the Kremlin, but as of late the issue has faded because of Putin's lack of any indication that he wishes to amend the constitution to give himself that option. However, as his time in office winds down, the Russian President has clearly yet to decide how to proceed on this matter, which leads me to believe that this is going to become a seriously vetted issue within the international media.

There is a clear bias against the amending of the Russian constitution amongst political pundits on the FoxNews Network, and in his only appearance in an exclusive interview on that channel on FoxNews Sunday with Chris Wallace, the veteran anchor tried several tactics in an attempt to get a firm commitment from Putin that he would not, under any circumstances, seek to extend his Presidency through the leveraging of his overwhelming governing majority in the legislative Duma.

President Putin is in the fortunate position of governing with veto-proof executive authority, and if he wants to change the Constitution to give himself limitless opportunity to pursue reelection to his current position it is unlikely that anything can be done, short of a political coup, to prevent him from doing this. To make it an international incident if he were to do so would fly in the face of any maturation that has occurred in the relationships the US and Russia now enjoy. Additionally, it has been US policy since 9-11 that it is perfectly reasonable for General Pervez Musharref, President of Pakistan, to refuse to relinquish power despite the lack of a viable legal reasoning, other than that he is the ideal partner in the war being waged against the Taliban and al-Qaeda.

I had the pleasure of taking a Russian Foreign Policy class while pursuing my undergraduate degree at DePaul University, and half of the class was spent breaking down the background and governing style of the young and complex young Russian President. He is a leader who entered his current position as a reluctant and apprehensive politician with bold policies. He has grown in the past seven years into a very impressive public figure who enjoys widespread popularity throughout the young Russian Republic, which has been in desperate need of a modern political hero since the fall of the Soviet Empire. Any American policy should be one that holds the will and well-being of the Russian citizens above all other concerns, and though the Russian government should be pressed on issues such as censorship and corruption, we should be fortunate to have a stable and thriving Russian government with which to discuss these issues. Now is not the time to push too aggressively, for no such policy will not stop Putin from leading his country for the indefinite future. We need to embrace this fact as a great sign of stability and steady progress at a very early stage in the formation of a "modern" Russian state.

Photo's of Speaker Pelosi in Syria with Bashar Assad...

This picture of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi with Syrian Dictator Bashar Assad is the first I have seen, and it is just as juicy and inexplicable as I thought it might be. Who is the genius that convinced Pelosi that this was a good idea? In my opinion, she might as well be sitting on the anti-aircraft guns flirting with the Viet Cong with Jane Fonda. Just to give a quick photo-profile of Pelosi's host, I thought I would highlight who he hangs around with when their isn't a US Speaker in town.

We can now count the Democratic leader among the closest allies of the Syrian President, which should have been inferred from her party's recent legslative coup, trying to dictate the Bush Administration's foreign policy by using cheap partisan proceedural and non-binding to undermine the president's authority.

Appallingly, the media is totally complicite, and I have no doubt that the editors of every major news outlet understand how damaging these images of Speaker Pelosi are. Now the question is, are they going to make it the story that it deserves to be, or will it be tucked on page 15, with Fox being the exception. I doubt that any of the networks are going to sacrafice the ratings that a story like this should generate, but they (everyone on MSNBC particularly) are proving to be just that dishonorable.


Bush should give Pelosi the old FDR treatment...

The current dispute between the President and the new Speaker over whether Nancy Pelosi's impending visit to Syria and photo-op with Bashir Assad, has reminded me of a story recounted by John Meacham in his recent masterpiece in American historical literature Franklin and Winston. Quoting Churchill from his memoirs when looking back on his first visit to the United States as Prime Minister during Christmas of 1941. Churchill was, as he used to brag, half-American, and had several close friends in American political circles, but Roosevelt granted no exceptions to the caveat that Churchill should not under any circumstances attempt to contact, or accept guests from the Republican party.

During his month long stay in Washington, Churchill had a brief health scare when he began suffering from chest pains. The Executive staff, eager to help the President catch up on sleep, whisked the visiting dignitary to the Gulf shores of Florida, where he spent a few day's skinny dipping. Irritated by Roosevelts stubbornness regarding his contact with the GOP, Churchill told his assistant to get his old friend Wendell Willkie, who happened to have been the Republican nominee in the 1940 election, which he ultimately lost to Roosevelt. After several more minutes of effort than Churchill had the patience for, his aid finally returned to inform the P.M. that "he" was on the phone now.

Churchill recalled some years later:

"I said in effect, 'I am so glad to speak to you, I hope we may meet.... Can you join the train at some point and travel with me for a few hours? Where will you be on Saturday next?'"

"A voice came back: 'Why, just where I am now, at my desk.'

"To this I replied, 'I do not understand.'

"Whom do you think you are speaking to?"

"I replied, 'To Mr. Wendell Wilkie, am I not?"

" 'No', was the answer, 'you are speaking to the President."

"I did not hear this well, and asked , Who?"

"You are asking me', came the answer, 'Franklin Roosevelt."

"I said, 'I did not mean to trouble tou at this moment. I was trying to speak to Wendell Willkie, but your telephone exchange seems to have made a mistake.' "

(Meacham, John. Franklin and Winston, 2004, pg. 160.)

Churchill reflected on the incident with clearly mixed emotions later in life, but Meacham paints a definitive picture of a man that lived at the emotional extremes, and bore heavy senses of both guilt and anxiety. It is obvious events subsequent to this uncomfortable situation gave both parties ever reason to believe that it was a matter without consequence. Roosevelt was not a man that shrugged off disloyalty, and though it never becomes clear whether Roosevelt had anticipated the Prime Minister's fib and wanted to let it be known that he ruled everywhere in his vast country.

If the Speaker wishes to do as she wishes when abroad, and is so irresponsible that she is even considering a photo-op with Bashir Assad in Syria. We should really encourage her to go to Tehran and get intimate with that hostage-crazy President of that misguided government. Clearly the Speaker truly doesn't understand anything about anything, other than maybe a cue-card and the Peace Sign. WARNING NANCY PELOSI!! You are headed for your aircraft carrier moment less than a semester into your first session as the most powerful legislator in the world. If you meet publicly with Assad, you will wake up with a terrible headache from all of the hokka smoke and realize that you messed up really bad, because the only message tomorrow's headlines are going to provoke in voters minds of swing voters and is "mission completely hopeless, lets have cake and tea with Assad and find out what he thinks we can do to further marginalize the President."

Bush would be doing you a favor Nancy if he refused to allow your military aircraft to take you to Syria. He is such a wimp that he may do that because it is gentlemanly and polite, and because he has truly genuine regard for the United States government and would never want the Speaker of the House to embarrass herself in such a way, during her finest hour.

3:42am in Chicago, they had me for about 45 minutes...

How TiSP Works

I am a Google fanatic. I am fascinated by the company and what it represents, every product they offer, and I think that the age in which we live could be amazingly altered in a way that has yet to be even understood. They are the first company that has offered best in class products free of charge across the board. All of those who previously thought it their perogative to receive a fee for services rendered, because of Google alone, these dweebs that had inferiority complexes in their youth, that will never be true again. I have spent the last 36 hours on Google consuming information on their new API's, and building my own custom search engines...

Maybe it is my creepy obsession with the hot young company that led me to seriously consider sticking cables through my toilet to the special, and secret servers. It was weird, but sounded interesting, but then I was distracted, and that was the moment I was had...