jackson33

I also am going to see what the hearings have to offer, but am concerned about the experience. A couple thing to keep in mind today, not that it means anything; She feels there is no constitutional basis, for allowing 'same sex marriage'. She is Jewish and would be making the Court 6 Catholic, 3 Jewish... To my knowledge has never been married. She would be the 3rd setting, from NYC, the 5th from NY or NJ and the 5th that graduated from Harvard. Breyer from California and Thomas from Georgia. She would drop the average age of the Justices from 67 to 64. Since obviously this does not look much like America, emphasis should be on whether the candidate will rule according to the Constitution or to their person background and experiences.

California, current unfunded obligations are estimated from 380B$ to over 500B$ (half a trillion), with an ever INCREASEING number of retirees and an apparent loss of people (Expected to lose 3 House Seats, next years, representing near 2 million or more people. To meet these obligation, they have no other means to achieve this than raise taxes, or issue bonds (loans with interest) which WILL simply reduce all sources of the tax base.

Something DID set off 'Institutional Sell programs', but I'll question if any software used by the professionals or day traders could be the cause. First, any trade set up and submitted will be based on what's available (it won't accept a sell of 1B if you don't have 1B). Second, any price too far off what's the current (open sell) is not very common, to the point of the panic, usually, 'price limits' are used. Third, it's not likely to ever be known, but would suspect a series of sells on PG or any DOW stock, set off a chain reaction, leading to the panic from those Institutional sell orders. Forth, all major market fell simultaneously (called "in sympathy") and to near the same averages, meaning there were probably thousands of individuals/brokers, looking for some reason to sell. You could see some of the same (volatility, 200+ points in a short period) this morning and may this afternoon (near a Friday Close). In after hours trading last night, selling did continue, until pre-market activity today brought out bargain hunters. In not suggesting this is advise, but if we have a 100+ point down turn near the close, I'll be in their after hours buying. Having gone through all that, your still looking at a rather short time loss of 6-8% loss, in US Market Values, over a four days and this is being blamed on Greece or the possibility of a chain reaction, throughout Europe. Think about this, the strongest monetary unit this week has by far been the US Dollar, yet we have any number of States in no better shape than Greece itself, especially on domestic obligations and with in that State.

The Cross is certainly a Religious Symbol, where to many religions but not all and would/should be restricted to use by the Federal Government. If promoted, by implication or practice (placing a cross on all Federal Buildings or in any National Park), that would be unconstitutional IMO. However in this case, two factors are involved and the heart of the case. First the land was transferred to allow (PRESERVATION) and this land was public land, when the Cross was Constructed. I don't know a State or where the Federal Government, has annexed or bought historical religious monuments, buildings (churches), designated of Historical Value, then torn down. In fact, it would be my humble opinion, the land should never have been transfer in the first place and the cross allowed to be maintained by the Federsl Government, as hundreds of other items on those million plus acres are today. I also feel for Government to destroy any symbol of significant value to any particular religion, is unconstitutional. Would your judgement, be any different (than SCOTUS) if you knew when the Mojave National Preserve, actually became a National Preserve. The Cross was placed in it's current position in 1934 (on private land) and the Preserve established in 1994. http://digital-desert.com/mojave-preserve/

The political/diplomatic argument, was and remains, the US had never disclosed ANY policy, nor IMO should they have this time. The reason, is well display here, in that different people will assume different meanings. Nuclear weapons, have always been used as a deterrent, by any means diminishing that purpose has or could never have served a purpose. Think someone mentioned, the US Policy is to fight "tic for tack", which is also not true. If some Nation starts blowing up people in our shopping malls, where not going to send our troops anyplace to blow up their shopping centers or are we about to use humans to do the job. Historically, the US has used any means to achieve the end of a conflict it has, to beat the enemy into submission.

Doc; You arguing with the choir. First and as stated, this was new to me and only passed on the first article to confirm what 'swansont' had mentioned. Second and as stated, this would WORRY ME MORE, than the Arizona ID Law. Third, the Federal is about as inefficient on this issue (IMO), as any of their regulations and full of loopholes. I'll assume Arizona, backed up Federal Laws, as many States do and will simply discontinue that process.

bascule; Frankly, I don't think Obama, has any idea how anything in a Free Market Capitalism system/society actually works, is promoting and trying to enact a Socialist System, that he and his basic insider advisors feel will work and in their opinion, truly believing is best for any society. His latest off the cuff statement "I wonder when enough is enough" referring to earnings, pretty well say's it all. It's that excess wealth that's out their in the economy that Capitalism draws its ability to grow, not the Federal Government, which I believe he and again the Administration, would like to control. As for his recent Statements on allowing off shore drilling in selected areas, it's my understanding, those selected leases were already available under Bush's plan and not acted on since they took over. Never the less, he was responding to Palin's "drill baby drill" which was getting more attention (politically) trying to show moderation for the 2010 elections and the primaries in many States, already being decided. As for the Katrina comparisons, they are identical in many ways, but had to keep with in the Executives jurisdiction. That is both Bush and Obama could only work with the information available and IMO, in both cases were getting poor information from the source of the problems. I'm not happy with the Republicans on this, but I'm less happy with the Democrats, making this a political issue, already scheduling HEARINGS for BP Executives, so they can slam bang them with swear words to accommodate a political base. My expected results; Off Shore Drilling, will be at a stand still, if not reduced by Monday, for years to come, that's Guithners policy of taking advantage of a crisis is essential in politics and will no doubt affect Nuclear Power Plants as well. We WILL have 4.00/5.00 Gasoline Prices in this Country, THIS summer and they will not go down in the fall, as the rest of the world recovers from the current SAID down turn. Both China and India are running REAL GDP growths of 7-10%. Drilling in the Gulf or off shore National Boundaries will continue, not by the US but by every other interested Country in the World. Worse yet, I expect to see power shortages THIS summer in many US areas, never seen before, you might also watch corn prices (largest single product used for food for humans AND animal food,feed) while they try to avoid the problems.

Reasonable Suspicion, to satisfy probable cause has long been an acceptable practice (phrase). Trying to alter the meaning of the term 'Suspicious' in the Arizona Law wording, is NOT warranted. An older case in part;

P; I offered those links for informational purposes only, not to argue them. I am sure, under two or three arguments, the bill itself will be struck down, long before taking effect. I have also stated the entire purpose of the Arizona Legislature was to draw attention, to a major problem in the border States, which Arizona is suffering the most from crimes that evolve around 'Drug Trafficking'. I'll give you or anyone that has the time to read the ACTUAL BILL, finding what you might think is unconstitutional. Also as previously stated, there is no mention of extending 'probable cause' (your word, profiling) or in fact 'due process', which is everyone's first thought, but doubt the bill can past a Constitutional Test on authority of a few demands placed on law enforcement, probably being struck down, by the Arizona SC... http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf

Offered as informational....

Seems to me bascule, has objected to several sources on political issues from both sides the spectrum and as offered by others. However, I also think he has a particular bias opposing primarily FNC and apparently now Newscorp, which I've heard from other folks that simply don't like Murdock, one iNow being MA, from Australia on another forum. He has been a controversial figure in media, long before his entry into the US markets. The proposed moratorium, however is a suggested censorship, according to his viewpoints, which I also feel he has no idea how many sources that would actually involve, including reporters involved virtually everyplace on Earth. He and many others, have probably unknowingly quoted sources tied to NC. http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/news-corporation/holdings.html

Breaking News From FOX NEWS; Poll; Most Americans OK with NO protestants, on the Supreme Court....