Exclusive: No ice at the North Pole

and he would be a Great veepee. Much safer hunting partner. Not conjoined at the nethers with oil corps(e).

...being an organizer, a docter, a father, an example...leave him out of the frey in the political loop...don't corrupt howard!

The Northwest Passage is the upside to global warming. Google it.

What better place to have another war over sovereignity than the NW Passage!

Godot Bubba

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/27/its-my-party-ill-cry-if-i_n_109735.html

What does Bill Clinton want?"

Barack Obama quickly determined what Hillary Clinton wants in the aftermath of defeat: a major role in the general election campaign, a star turn at the convention, help with her debt, and Obama's support for elected officials who backed her. The big-time holdout turns out to be her husband.

Bill is more complex. He wants respect, absolution and love.

The former president and Obama have not talked, and, by all accounts, the man of the Clinton household remains hurt and resentful. Associates provide a variety of explanations for the Bill Clinton dilemma, none of them mutually exclusive.

Some say Bill Clinton not only wants Obama to reach out to him, but to also promise to lift the cloud of alleged racism -- an accusation that continues to eat at the man once dubbed the nation's "first black president." Clinton, these folks suggest, wants Obama to publicly exonerate him of the charge that he played the race card in the primaries.

Beyond that, some associates say, Bill Clinton wants Obama to reach out to him as a mentor, a guide who can lead Obama through the labyrinth of a tough presidential election. "Bill wants to be honored, to return to the role of Democratic elder statesman, and get rid of this image of him as a pol willing to do anything to win," said one associate.

If the question is, do I want Bill Clinton campaigning for us, for the ticket, leading into November, the answer is absolutely yes. I want him involved. He is a brilliant politician. He was an outstanding president. And so, I want his help, not only in campaigning, but also in governing. And I'm confident that I'll get that help," Obama declared on June 25.

While Obama awaits a response from Mr. Clinton, blogger Marc Ambinder has been conducting an on-line poll asking whether 1) Obama should bend over backwards to make sure Bill Clinton campaigns for him in the fall 2) Obama should ignore Bill Clinton entirely or 3) Obama should ask Bill Clinton politely, but if Clinton says no, Obama should ignore him.

With a total of 2,292 votes cast, answer number 3 - "ask politely, if 'no,' ignore Clinton" - was decisively ahead with 1,765 votes, or 77 percent of Ambinder's responses; answers 1 and 2 drew 10% (240 votes) and 13% (287 votes) respectively.

http://www.alternet.org/audits/89452/?ses=ac9830a2b7099192111bfb8cf852fe6b

Cheap oil is no more and the global projection of military and economic power it made possible is no longer viable. In May 2008 the price of oil hit a new high of $135 a barrel in contrast to the historic inflation adjusted price of $27.00. We are only beginning to awake as a nation to the reality that our reign as a global superpower is coming to an abrupt end. (See the summer 2008 issue of YES! Magazine.) If we hold to business as usual, we will exhaust what remains of our power and credibility in a bloody and violent no win-competition to consume the last tree, fish, drop of oil, drink of potable water, and breath of clean air -- sealing our own fate as well as that of our species.

When I was driving through the high desert a few years ago from CA to NM I remember stopping at a state run 'rest stop' and using the facilities.  They were just latrines, no flush toilets, but there was no odor, no nothing.  If they can do it in the high desert, we can do it everywhere else.

Co-incidentally, daughter has printed out a price comparison for tap water and bottled water, per 1000 gallons:

los Alamos = $3.72

Evian  = $3,474.15

Fiji  =  $4,769.10

Arrowhead =  $2,611.65

obama's got to stop carrying bottled water with him or, at least, don't let it be seen, like his cigs.

I've felt a bit put off by Edwin's "failed conservative values" project though he obviously means well. Now I think it's because a value is not something that's prone to either success or failure. Conservatives value authority--someone giving directions and someone else following them. The reason they value authority is because they assume that others know better how things ought to be done and because, in following someone else's directions, they can be assured that their behavior is "correct." Regardless of the outcome of a particular action, in being obedient, they've done the right thing.
Clearly, this strategy works for them. Individuals having to make choices is not a desideratum. The Church of Rome simplifies things by reducing the virtuous life to one choice--to follow the directives of the Church. To a certain extent, the unitary executive is a secular version of that system. Scalia and Thomas are both intellectual Catholics and probably appreciate the certainty that comes with having just one law--the obligation to render obedience to whatever authority has been legitimately set in place.
Just as the Pope is rendered infallible by being elected by his peers, the unitary executive theory assumes that the president's decisions are in the national interest, even if the nation is destroyed in the process.

I read that Iowa lost two people yesterday due to another horrific storm.  

------

The link fairy isn't with me this morning but here's an interesting article from Bloomberg News.  Chuck Hagel is NOT planning to support McCain.  His wife is an Obamacan - guess he is as well.  My soon-to-be 83 yr old dad wants Barack to pick Hagel.  My yellow-dog mom wants Hillary.  I would love Feingold.  Anyway here's the link:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aQ0hfm1KRlp4&refer=politics

We're going to have a heat wave this wknd - and I'll be on Mercer Island for a wknd of lacrosse - under a big tent!  Best to all! ;-)

http://firedoglake.com/2008/06/27/extremes-of-justice/

As Congress prepares to make the Bush administration's dream of retroactive telecom immunity come true, I can't help but think of the vast legal gulf between the telecoms who will never need to defend themselves in court, and the Gitmo detainees who may never get the chance to.

On the one hand, the Bush administration, the GOP, and most of the Democratic leadership are working to ensure that the telecoms will be given blanket amnesty after clearing the laughably low hurdle of showing that the most dishonest government in American history told them their actions were lawful.

On the other, the Bush administration, the GOP, and 44 feckless Democrats (12 Sens., 32 Reps.) pushed through the Military Commissions Act which declared that the Gitmo prisoners were not entitled to a trial to contest their detention.  Even after the Supreme Court ruled the MCA unconstitutional, President Bush expressed his intent to bypass their ruling legislatively.  (Indeed, the MCA itself was just such a response to Hamdan v. Rumsfeld.)  In the Republicans' legal bizarro world - which far too many Democrats inhabit - a terrorist suspect's rights are the exact mirror image of a telecom's.

Are the telecoms guilty?  I think they probably are, but we'll never know.  Are the detainees innocent?  I think many of them are, but if the Bush administration gets its way, we'll never know that either.

Throw in the trumped-up, politically tainted prosecutions and convictions of Democrats like Georgia Thompson, Don Siegelman, and Paul Minor, the kid-glove treatment of Republican congressmen and allies like Jack Abramoff's bribees, Halliburton/KBR, and Blackwater, and you have the state of "justice" under the Bush administration.  It has as much in common with the true meaning of the word as the Gitmo detainees have in common with the telecoms

http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slideshow/photo//080624/ids_photos_en/r3902863361.jpg/

REFILE - QUALITY REPEAT Rock star Bob Geldof gestures as he sits next to Sierra Leone's Minister of Mineral Resources Alhaji Abubakarr Jalloh (L) during a news conference in Freetown June 24, 2008. The Irish singer made a visit to the country to encourage investment in large-scale agriculture. <cite id="captionCite">REUTERS/Katrina Manson (SIERRA LEONE)</cite>