Sunday, October 2, 2011

The EPA Gets Caught in a Big Fat Lie


By Alan Caruba

The notion that the Environmental Protection Agency uses “science” to justify their regulations is false, just like most of the claims they issue on various aspects of the nation’s environment. Their favorite scam is to estimate the number of deaths they will prevent with some new draconian regulation.

The EPA is the American equivalent of the Gestapo, a ruthless enforcement agency with a very Green agenda that is opposed to the use of many beneficial chemicals, every form of energy, and the right of people to be left alone.

At the top of its list of priorities is the destruction of the nation’s economy with special attention to all forms of energy production. Manufacturing anything comes next, followed by afflicting the nation’s vast agricultural sector. The EPA insists that dust is a pollutant. You can’t farm without generating DUST.

To understand the threat the EPA poses it is necessary to understand that proposed Clean Air regulations are based on the claim that “global warming” is real, is happening, and is caused primarily by carbon dioxide (CO2). The claim is utterly without any scientific merit..

There is NO global warming. At least not the kind Al Gore lies about.

The North and South Poles are not melting; they gain and lose ice in a perfectly natural cycle that has been going on for billions of years. The polar bears are not disappearing. Drilling for oil in ANWR will have zero effect on the caribou. Et cetera!

With our vast reserves of coal and natural gas, the U.S. does not lack for the ability to generate electricity or to refine oil for transportation.

If you want to stay warm this winter, you better hope that utilities keep producing the electricity for your home or apartment’s heating system. Fifty percent of that electricity is produced by cheap, abundant coal and the EPA is hell bent to shut down as many coal mines as possible, leading in turn to the shutdown of utilities that burn coal. Natural gas accounts for just over twenty-four percent of electricity generation and it need hardly be said that the EPA is wary of fracking, the technology to access it.

Blowing the Whistle on the EPA

The big news—the kind even the mainstream media was unable to ignore—was that the EPA’s own inspector general has released a report accusing the agency of cutting corners regarding the “science” cited to justify its effort to declare CO2 a “pollutant.”

Simply stated, without CO2 all life on Earth dies.

It is a gas that plants use for their growth. From a blade of grass to a giant redwood, all depend on CO2, as do all the crops grown coast to coast. Enormous quantities of corn and wheat are grown that contribute to the U.S. economy, feeding both livestock and humans in wondrous ways. Take away vegetation and the animals die. Take away the animals that grace our dinner plates and we die.

Absurdly, the EPA says it is a “pollutant”, a dangerous hazard to our health.

No, the most dangerous hazard to our health is the EPA.

The EPA insists on ignoring all the other natural sources of CO2 as well as the fact that it constitutes less than one percent, 0.038 percent of the atmosphere. The oceans of the world gather it, store it, and release it. The EPA, though, says that when man is involved, it is pure evil.

Mind you, every human exhales about six pounds of CO2 every day. The fact is that the air Americans inhale daily is clean is due to the agency’s early efforts to mitigate some abuses. Those were the days before the EPA abandoned a rational, fact-based approach to its stated objectives. One of its legacies is the idiotic required inclusion of ethanol in every gallon of gasoline. Made from corn, it actually produces more CO2 to produce and use.

The EPA effort to regulate CO2 came along with the invention of the global warming hoax that claimed CO2 was “trapping” the Earth’s heat. That is why CO2 and others are deceptively called “greenhouse” gases (GHGs). Manufacturing everything from a donut to megawatts of electricity emits GHGs.

Finally, even the EPA’s inspector general blew the whistle on the utterly deceitful way the EPA arrives at its justification for a vast matrix of regulations that has been stifling the economy for years. The IG has charged that the EPA did not meet its own guidelines for peer review to ensure the integrity of the science stated.

Anyone who has been following the rise and fall of the global warming hoax knows that “peer review” has become a highly corrupted practice. Real peer review is critical to the integrity of any scientific study. When major science journals abandoned the peer review process to publish gibberish about global warming, they put all other new scientific studies at risk.

As Marlo Lewis, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, noted, the EPA’s regulation of CO2 emissions would require “230,000 full-time employees to produce 1.4 billion work hours to address the actual increase in permitting functions” that would result if the EPA is allowed to get away with this scandalous hoax. It would cost an estimated $21 billion per year. By contrast, the EPA’s budget request for fiscal year 2012 is $8.973 billion.

The EPA claims that the Clean Air Act gives it the power to regulate CO2, but it does not. It was never intended to, but the Supreme Court in one of its more idiotic rulings opened the door for the EPA claim. In his dissent from Massachusetts v EPA, Justice Antonin Scalia quipped that, as defined by the Court, “everything airborne, from Frisbees to flatulence, qualifies as an ‘air pollutant’”

Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) pointed out that “The EPA’s determination has led to a mountain of Clean Air Act regulations that could cost over a million jobs.” It is noteworthy that Sen. Barrasso said, “EPA administrator Lisa Jackson has regularly assured Congress and the American public that its finding is based on sound scientific practices.” It isn’t. Jackson “should testify immediately,” said Sen. Barrasso, “the American people deserve the truth.”

The EPA has been short on the truth about all of its claims for four decades and needs to be shut down in order to let a truly science-based agency replace it with strict congressional oversight and limitations.

The time is long overdue to pull the plug on the Environmental Protection Agency.

© Alan Caruba, 2011

Comparing Apples and Fire


10/1/2011

Comparing Apples and Fire

 
As I expected, Amazon launched a new tablet this week. When the smoke finally cleared, we were introduced to the Kindle Fire.
The price alone is enough to warm the buying public's response to the Fire. The new tablet carries an eye-popping price tag of just $199. That's without a two-year contract, ads or any other subsidizing gimmick.

Advertisement


Advertise on Komando.com!
 

Still, even that low price may be a bit much for what you get in return.
Naturally, as with any tablet, the Amazon Fire is going up against the mighty Apple iPad 2. Everyone is asking me for a comparison of the two tablets. I can tell you right now, the Fire doesn't begin to come close to being an iPad-killer.
For example, the hardware on the Fire is lacking. It has a dual-core processor, which is nice. However, the screen is only 7 inches, it has a mere 8 gigabytes of storage and there are no cameras or microphones. Battery life is 8 hours. Additionally, there is no 3G version, only Wi-Fi.
Even when comparing only to iPad 2's Wi-Fi version, the Apple product offers so much more: a 9.7-inch screen, a minimum of 16GB of storage, two cameras and a microphone, for starters. Battery life is slightly better at 8.5 hours. When the iPad 3 debuts, it will widen the hardware gap even more.

 1  2  3  Next >

Meet HuffPost's annoying, but relentless conservative

MEDIA MATTERS

Meet HuffPost's annoying, but relentless conservative

'Forgive them God, for they know not what they do'


Posted: October 01, 2011
11:10 pm Eastern
By Dave Tombers
© 2011 WND

A conservative commentator has infiltrated a known bastion of liberal bloggers at the Huffington Post and is hiding in plain sight.
"The Relentless Conservative," hereafter known as RC, began a series of columns in June with commentary titled "Why the Left Should Listen to the Right."
His anonymous article openly declared that he was setting up shop in the enemy camp but that it would be good for Huffington Post readers: They should embrace learning more about their enemies on the right.
He told his readers things such as:
"Well Huffington Post readers, you will now have the opportunity to hear, regularly, conservative opinion that should rankle you deeply and, if I get it right, will make you angry at yourselves and at the liberal elected officials you've installed. My core concern was, is and will remain the good of the country and all its people of whatever persuasion."
And:
"Nothing is as maddening as attempting a political conversation with liberals. Believe me, I've tried. It's almost as if they cannot accept another worldview, that the only opinion about government that exists – or matters – is theirs."
(Story continues below)
  

Within hours, Huffington Post readers put their keyboards to work letting the conservative writer know what they thought of him. One commenter had this to say:
"Let the Republicans go peddle their junk in places with like-minded people, like churches." - HUFFPOST SUPER USER Raker.
Another added this:
"Okay, I don't usually suspect this of conservatives but there absolutely HAS TO BE someone on their side with a little more brains than this guy has." – Huffpost Pundit Jmpurser.
RC quickly updated his column to call out some of what he described as "anonymously vicious" and "over-the-top spiteful" reactions.
He added this to the updated piece:
"Once again, liberals are convicted, judge and jury, of hypocrisy.

"I'm not first to claim that liberals apparently have a hearing disorder that kicks in only when they are confronted with conservative thought. It's been a major criticism of the left for decades now.

"There must be something to it, especially when I exhort people – Huffington Post readers, in this case – to listen to each other and perhaps, just maybe, get along together to solve the real problems facing this country."
More Huffington Post readers responded with comments like this:
"Dear Relentless Conservative, I feel like kissing you with my mouth wide open and swirling my tongue deep inside because I just threw up in my mouth after reading your column."
WND spoke with RC, who says the anonymity of his conservative columns on a liberal blog is for good reason.
"I truly feel like there are some seriously deranged liberals out there. Though they try to make it appear as if only deranged conservatives are prone to violence, I feel the opposite is true," he told WND.
RC said that he pitched the idea of an anonymous, conservative column on the Huffington Post to Arianna Huffington herself, after meeting her at a United Nations event in New York.
He pitched the idea like this: "Ms. Huffington, you and I couldn't be any more different politically. However, something you and I share in common is our unique ability to make ourselves understood and our opinions heard in print or on TV."
He told WND that she replied, "Yes and so?"
RC then explained his vision to Huffington, after which she replied, "I would love that."
The vision? "I would be attracting more readers – conservative, liberal and everything all the way to apolitical readers, readers period – to her site which she readily agreed she needs," RC told WND.
Not long after that, "The Relentless Conservative" began running a featured column on the pages of The Huffington Post.
His first column, "Why the Left Should Listen to the Right," had so many comments from readers that it was picked up by the Wall Street Journal online.
While some comments attacked RC personally and some simply said, "This is a joke, right?," RC proved something that he had intuitively guessed; there already are conservatives watching the site.
Some of the comments verified that:
  • "Keep posting brother."
  • "You are right."
Then there was this comment:
"Bravo, bravo. Finally I can read an honest contributor at the Huff & Puff, without getting ill."
According to RC, having conservative readers on their site was a surprise to Huffington and her staff.
"The HuffPo has many more conservative readers than even they thought. The conventional wisdom was that there were almost NO conservative readers of HuffPo," he told WND.
Reader comments aside, writing for the Huffington Post has produced other headaches for the conservative columnist. He told WND that sometimes the editors have taken longer than normal to publish his work, and sometimes have miniscule issues to work out.
"When I have to follow up with them about my columns on hold, they normally have a few, usually rather serious concerns regarding my wording being 'threatening,' a fact-checking issue or some journalistic minutiae or the other. It seems suspicious to me, but they assure me it is not."
Some articles never make it to the site, which forced RC to confront one editor with, "I know you don't like my politics, and I don't much like yours, but can we set that aside and get down to business?"
Another issue he deals with is prime positioning. His conservative pieces have never made it to the homepage. You have to do some hunting through the site to turn them up. He hopes to resolve that with Huffington in the near future.
Even so, RC says the comments following his columns prove that he is on to something. He told WND that he feels he's even gotten through to a few of the "less dense" liberal readers.
He says, "Out of the many foul-mouthed, hateful missives in the comment sections of my article, a few truly common-sense, Thomas Paine-like ones come shining through."
When WND asked RC if he's always been conservative he replied, "Nope, like Winston Churchill's great quote: 'If you're not a liberal at 20, you have no heart, if you're not a conservative at 40, you have no brain.'"
RC recalled that he rode his bike down to George McGovern campaign headquarters to volunteer during the Democratic nominee's 1972 presidential run against Nixon.
"I hated Nixon, which I believe is a dynamic of youth," he said. "Nowadays, I grimace when I think of myself doing that; idiot kid."
For now RC plans to continue reaching out to the Huffington Post readers with his steady voice of conservatism.
"It never ceases to amaze how after the fall of communism and the freeing of hundreds of millions of Russians, Eastern Europeans and Europeans, that anybody could justify or even attempt to, any political beliefs or leanings resembling communism, socialism or Marxism/Leninism. It's all just evil," he said.
"And the latte-sipping, BMW-driving, 'Limousine Liberals' who talk such a good game about caring about their fellow man … these are the people I'd like to talk some sense into; to shake by the shoulders until they wake up.
"Forgive them God, for they know not what they do," he said.

Obama administration filled with activists for globalism Seeking 'climate change adaption,' crackdown on firearms, gun sellers

Posted: October 01, 2011
7:50 pm Eastern

By Aaron Klein
© 2011 WND


Jonathan Greenblatt

The newly appointed chief of President Obama's Social Innovation and Civic Participation Council is a member of a globalist organization whose activists can be found throughout the Obama administration.
Jonathan Greenblatt was appointed the new head of Obama's Social Innovation Unit earlier this month.
Greenblatt is the founder of a civic service company that works in partnership with Google and the Huffington Post. He has several ties to Google.
WND reported last week that until his appointment to the Obama administration, Greenblatt served as the director of a social justice group funded by George Soros.
The organization, the Aspen Institute, works closely with Soros and even was reportedly used by the billionaire in a failed attempt to engineer the defeat of President Bush in the 2004 elections.
Now it has emerged that Greenblatt is a member of the globalist group Pacific Council on International Policy, or PCIP. He previously chaired PCIP's energy and environment committee and served on its globalization committee.
The PCIP was founded in 1995 in partnership with the Council on Foreign Relations.
The group says it is the "premier international affairs organization focused on policy issues of special resonance to the West Coast."
(Story continues below)
  

Its goals include "building our network of globally oriented business, civic and government leaders." Also, the group aims to convene exchanges with global policy makers and opinion leaders while partnering with organizations around the world to "promote mutual understanding and coordinated action."
The group recently led a taskforce on so-called climate change adaption. Its recommendations include building government funds to support large-scale "climate adaption" projects.
PCIP last year released a major report on U.S.-Mexico border security that recommended the U.S. government crackdown on gun sellers.
The report says: "The United States should intensify efforts to curtail the smuggling of firearms, ammunition and bulk cash into Mexico by aggressively investigating gun sellers, regulating gun shows, reinstituting the Clinton-era ban on assault weapons, conducting targeted inspections of southbound traffic and providing leads to a more robust Mexican Customs authority."
The PCIP is funded by the Ford Foundation, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and the Rockefeller Foundation.
In an online question-and-answer session with the PICP, Greenblatt told the group he believes the world "needs to pursue policies that blend a long-term commitment to sustainable development with opportunities for widespread economic prosperity in emerging markets."
Asked to list his favorite global resources online, Greenblatt says he follows the Twitter account of economist Jeffrey Sachs.
Sachs is a Soros-funded economist. He is a member of the Soros-funded Institute for New Economic Thinking, or INET, which holds yearly conferences in the mountains of Bretton Woods, N.H., that openly seek to restructure the world economy. Last year, Sachs keynoted the event.
Sachs also founded the Millennium Promise Alliance, a nonprofit organization that says it is dedicated to ending extreme poverty and hunger.
Critics have called the Millennium group, which is funded by Soros to the tune of $50 million, a wealth-redistribution scheme.
Investor's Business Daily reported the Millennium goal called for a "currency transfer tax," a "tax on the rental value of land and natural resources," a "royalty on worldwide fossil energy projection – oil, natural gas, coal," "fees for the commercial use of the oceans, fees for airplane use of the skies, fees for use of the electromagnetic spectrum, fees on foreign exchange transactions, and a tax on the carbon content of fuels."
Global group abounds in Obama administration
Meanwhile, multiple Obama administration members are also activists in the PCIP.
Earlier this week, WND reported Obama's pick for Commerce secretary is a PICIP member.
Obama's ambassador to France, Charles Rivkin, is a member of the PCIP. Last October, he invited a 29-member delegation from the PCIP to a conference in France for the stated purpose of discussing Arab and Islamic relations in the country.
Rivkin was at the center of a scandal when WikiLeaks released a cable in which he proposed the U.S. Embassy in France initiate a multipronged effort to "engage" and help to "empower" France's Muslim minorities.
Rivkin called the effort a "Minority Engagement Strategy," which was largely directed at Muslims in France.
WND found other PCIP members inside the Obama administration.
James B. Steinberg, deputy secretary of state, serves on the PICP board of directors. He also serves on the science and security board of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, a journal that argued during the Cold War for the U.S. to hand its nuclear weapons to an international organization.
The Bulletin, as WND reported, was founded by scientists who were accused of spying for the Soviets and passing along vital nuclear secrets.
Vilma S. Martinez, U.S. ambassador to Argentina, is the chairman of the PCIP's Mexico Study Group.
Former Utah Gov. Jon M. Huntsman Jr., a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, was appointed by Obama as ambassador to China in August 2009. He is a PCIP founding director.
Jeffrey L. Bleich, Obama's appointment for U.S. ambassador to Australia, is a PCIP member.
Diana Farrell, deputy director of the National Economic Council, is a member of the PCIP as well as the Council on Foreign Relations and the Bretton Woods Committee. She is a frequent speaker on U.S. global engagement.
Byron Auguste, a member of Obama's White House Council for Community Solutions, serves on the PCIP board. He is also on the board of trustees of the Center for American Progress, which is funded by Soros and led by John Podesta, who served as co-chairman of Obama's transition team.
Last year, PCIP member Steven Myers joined the State Department's advisory committee on international economic policy.
John B. Emerson, appointee for Obama's advisory committee for trade policy and negotiations, is a member of both the PCIP and CFR.
In April, Obama nominated PCIP member Janet Yellen to serve as vice chairman of the Federal Reserve.
PCIP member Alan D. Bersin was appointed commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
Last March, Obama appointed PCIP member Michael Camunez to the position of assistant secretary for market access and compliance in the Department of Commerce.
Ernest James Wilson, a member of the PCIP board, was elected chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting in September 2009. He served as a policy advisor on Obama's presidential transition team on matters of communication technology and public diplomacy.
Organization accuses U.S. of 'structural racism'
Greenblatt, meanwhile, also serves as director of the Impact Economy Initiative at the Aspen Institute.
Aspen's mission statement says the nonprofit seeks "to foster values-based leadership, encourag[e] individuals to reflect on the ideals and ideas that define a good society, and ... provide a neutral and balanced venue for discussing and acting on critical issues."
The group leads a number of social justice global initiatives and espouses an ideology that government intervention is necessary to fix what it claims are various social and racial injustices that permeate U.S. society.
Aspen's website says the group is dedicated to repairing what it terms "structural racism."
The group contends that "public policies, institutional practices, cultural representations, and other norms work in various, often reinforcing ways to perpetuate racial group inequity in every key opportunity area, from health, to education, to employment, to income and wealth."
A member of Aspen's board is Henry Louis Gates Jr., a Harvard professor who sparked a national race controversy in July 2009 when Obama criticized local Cambridge police who had arrested Gates after a burglary had been reported on his property.
Aspen runs a program that provides training and seminars for federal judges.
'Clandestine' Soros summit
Soros has provided significant funding to the Aspen Institute. His Open Society Institute has provided more than $400,000 to the group since 2004.
The New Yorker magazine reported on a 2004 "clandestine summit meeting" that took place at the Aspen Institute.
"The participants, all Democrats, were sworn to secrecy," said the magazine, including Soros and four other billionaires who "shared a common goal: to use their fortunes to engineer the defeat of President George W. Bush in the 2004 election."
Soros himself spoke at numerous Aspen events, including a 2004 seminar entitled "America's Role in the Fight Against Global Poverty" that also featured Al Gore as a speaker.
Aspen hosted Soros in 2006 for a talk about his new book "The Age of Fallibility: Consequences of the War on Terror."
Discover the Networks notes that Jim Spiegelman, Aspen's director of communications, formerly worked as a "special assistant" to Soros.
Also, Arjun Gupta, who serves on Aspen's board of overseers, is a vice president at the Chatterjee Group, which advises the Soros Fund Management Group.
Meanwhile, Greenblatt is the founder and president of All for Good, an open source, Web-based initiative that says it seeks to engage more Americans in service. It has the largest database of volunteer listings ever compiled and provides content to a wide range of government, nonprofit and personal websites.
Greenblatt has stated he was inspired to found All for Good in December 2008 by Obama's call for more participatory civic service.
Greenblatt formerly served on the Technology and Innovation working group of the Obama-Biden Presidential Transition team.
All for Good was built by a group of volunteers from Google, the Craigslist Foundation and other organizations, reportedly with input from Arianna Huffington. The group currently maintains strategic partnerships with Google and the Huffington Post.
With additional research by Brenda J. Elliott

Supreme Court Could Impact 2012 Election


Several Requests for Hearing at Supreme Court Could Impact 2012 Election

Published October 02, 2011
| Associated Press
WASHINGTON -- The nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, who serve a life term without having to seek election, soon will have to decide whether to insert themselves into the center of the presidential campaign next year.
The high court begins its new term Monday, and President Barack Obama's health care overhaul, which affects almost everyone in the country, is squarely in its sights.
The Obama administration's request last week that the justices resolve whether the health care law is constitutional makes it more likely than not that they will deliver their verdict by June 2012, just as Obama and his Republican opponent charge toward the fall campaign.
Already, Republican presidential contenders use virtually every debate and speech to assail Obama's major domestic accomplishment, which aims to extend health insurance to more than 30 million people now without coverage.
If as now expected the justices agree to review the law's constitutionality, those deliberations would certainly define the court's coming term. Their decision could rank as the court's most significant since the December 2000 ruling that effectively sealed George W. Bush's election as president.
Health care is only one of several issues that the court could hear that would make for a "fantastic Supreme Court term," said former acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal, now in private practice at the Hogan Lovells law firm.
Other high-profile cases on the horizon concern immigration and affirmative action, hot-button issues at any time and only more so in an election year.
Less likely, though still with a chance to make it to the court this year are cases involving gay marriage and the landmark Voting Rights Act that some Southern states argue has outlived its usefulness.
Decisions about whether to even consider health care, affirmative action and immigration are a month off or more.
In the meantime, the justices will take up a First Amendment case looking at the regulation of television broadcasts as well as a couple of appeals involving the Fourth Amendment protections in the U.S. Constitution against unreasonable searches and seizures. One of those cases is a digital age dispute over the government's power to track a suspect's movement using a GPS device, without first getting a judge's approval.
Among the cases involving criminal defendants is one from an inmate awaiting execution in Alabama who missed a deadline to appeal his death sentence because the big-firm lawyers in New York who had been handling his case for free moved on to new jobs and letters from the court clerk sat in the firm's mailroom before being returned to sender.
The case of Cory Maples, convicted 15 years ago in the shooting deaths of two men, presents the question: "How much poor representation can one criminal defendant receive" before it violates the Constitution? said University of Maryland law professor Sherrilyn Ifill.
A lawsuit over a baby's passport also will be before the court in a case that has a taste of Middle Eastpolitics and a fight between the president and Congress.
Jerusalem-born Menachem Zivotofsky's parents want his U.S. passport to list his birthplace as Israeleven though U.S. policy does not recognize the once-divided city as belonging to Israel. Congress, though, passed a law in 2002 giving Jerusalem-born U.S. citizens that option. Presidents of both parties have directed the State Department to ignore the law, saying it wrongly interferes with the president's powers.
Just over a third of the 48 cases the court has so far agreed to hear are of interest to the business sector, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. But that list includes few big-ticket cases, unlike last term's victories for business interests in major cases seeking to limit consumer and employee access to the courts. Foremost among those was the decision to throw out a class-action lawsuit on behalf of up to 1.6 million female Wal-Mart employees.
The absence of high-profile business cases comes as something of a relief to Allison Zieve, the general counsel for Public Citizen, a not-for-profit group that calls itself a countervailing force to corporate power.
"The court seems more open to the plaintiffs' side in smaller civil rights cases. Smaller cases may be better for consumers," Zieve said.
The nation's major broadcasters are focused on one case that has the potential to reshape regulation of the airwaves. The federal appeals court in New York threw out the Federal Communications Commission's rules that apply when children are likely to be watching. That includes a ban on the use of curse words as well as fines against broadcasters who showed a woman's nude buttocks on a 2003 episode of ABC television's "NYPD Blue."
The television networks argue that the policy is inconsistently applied and outdated, taking in only broadcast television and leaving unregulated the same content if transmitted on cable TV or over the Internet.
"Singling out broadcast television doesn't make much more sense anymore," said Jonathan Cohn, a former Justice Department official. Cohn's law firm, Sidley, Austin, represents Fox Television Stations in the case. The administration is defending the FCC's indecency policy.
In an earlier version of the same case, the justices and lawyers discussed the policy for an hour without uttering any of the offending words.
The court is beginning its second year with the same complement of justices after consecutive terms of welcoming new members, Sonia Sotomayor and then Elena Kagan.
Those two justices, on the liberal-leaning side of the court, voted together on almost every case last year. The same was true for Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito on the other side of the ideological spectrum.
Last year, Kagan sat out seven of the 12 cases the court heard in its first month because of her prior work as the Obama administration's top Supreme Court lawyer. This October, she will be absent from just one case, involving Congress' power to give copyright protection to works by foreign composers, directors and other artists, among them Sergei Prokofiev's "Peter and the Wolf," that long have been in the public domain.
There have been various calls for Kagan, as well as for Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, to sit out the health care case, but no indication that any of those justices intends to do so. Critics cite Kagan's former administration position, Scalia's address to the U.S. House tea party caucus, which opposes the law, and the public advocacy against the law by Thomas' wife, Ginny.
Also unlikely in the next year, with the presidential election imminent, is a retirement, At 78, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is the oldest justice, but has said repeatedly she's not going anywhere anytime soon.

Facebook Files Paperwork to Set Up Political Action Committee


Facebook Files Paperwork to Set Up Political Action Committee

Published September 28, 2011
| NewsCore
Facebook is looking to help its friends reach high places by setting up a political action committee (PAC) to fund candidates in 2012, ABC News reported Tuesday.
The social networking giant, which has 800 million users, filed the PAC paperwork this week.
The PAC "will give our employees a way to make their voice heard in the political process by supporting candidates who share our goals of promoting the value of innovation to our economy while giving people the power to share and make the world more open and connected," Facebook spokesman Andrew Noyes told The Washington Post.
The move follows PACs being set up by a number of other tech giants, including Google and Microsoft.
Google employees have donated $570,000 to their PAC this year, the Post reported, with CEO Larry Page contributing the maximum $5,000 amount to the fund.
Microsoft employees have contributed $722,000 to the company's PAC.
Tech companies have also hosted a number of political events recently, strengthening their ties to Washington.
Last week's FOX News Republican presidential debate was co-sponsored by Google and on Monday Facebook hosted a town hall-style meeting with three House Republican leaders.
LinkedIn also hosted a town hall event with President Barack Obama on Monday.

Featured Post

RT @anti_commie32: Keep up the great work!!! https://t.co/FIAnl1hxwG

RT @anti_commie32: Keep up the great work!!! https://t.co/FIAnl1hxwG — Joseph Moran (@JMM7156) May 2, 2023 from Twitter https://twitter....