Hunter-gatherer?

From Bush's mouth: we shouldn't worry about competition from China and India. And because -- we can out-compete those countries if we're wise about what we do here at home. And one of the wisest things we can do is to make sure our children have got the skills necessary to fill the jobs of the 21st century.

It's funny how much cow manure can come out of W's mouth. I happen to know how outsourcing is done. The managers are asked to identify the high tech jobs that can NOT be outsourced and explain WHY such jobs can not be outsourced. Everything else is outsourced to India. No one cares if the people who are fired have 'the skills necessary to fill the jobs of the 21st' or even the 22nd century. If the Indians can do it for less money then highly-educated Americans lose their jobs and that's that.

Or... maybe, in Bush's brilliant mind, the jobs of the 21st century are: waiter, cabby driver and hunter-gatherer.

Tough, Tougher... no TOUGHEST yet? I am disappointed.


And Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean is also correct when he said last week that “the first thing we want is tough border control.” - Newt Gingrich, National Review Online.

"It would have worked if they had enforced it," says Rep. Dan Lungren, R-Calif., who played a leading role in the 1986 debate and in passage of a much tougher measure in the House in December. [...] Even if the Senate passes a bill, it would have to reconcile its version with the bill passed in the House in December, which takes a far tougher approach. [...] But he and others involved in the debate then, including Specter, said another piece of the earlier plan, tough employer sanctions, never fully materialized. [...] Last December, Sensenbrenner led the House effort to pass tougher legislation. - BY CHRIS MONDICS, Knight Ridder Newspapers.

From the desk of Teddy Kennedy

Our plan is even tougher and more effective than the others on the table because not only does it include these strong enforcement provisions but it will also break the cycle of illegality."

Some people have tried to frame the debate between the Judiciary Committee bill and Senator Frist's bill as a debate between those who would be tough on enforcement and those who would not.

The differences between these two bills, and the issues at stake in amendments being considered, concern what we do in addition to these tough new enforcement provisions.

Our bill is not only tough on immigration enforcement; it also takes necessary steps to repair the broken immigration system so that enforcement can be effective.

The Frist bill is tough on enforcement. Our bill is tough and smart.

So let's have an honest debate: do we want comprehensive reform which combines tough enforcement, earned legalization, and a sensible temporary worker program. Or do we want enforcement only?

Why nukeing Iran is advantageous to the Bush?

I am going to be very brief because it's late so, here it is:

The Bush will find it most convenient to nuke Iran because, once he drops the nukes, he can make any claim he wants on what it is that it was nuked. Let's face it: no one is going to go to 'ground zero' and check it. So, unlike Irak, where the Bush dropped shocking and awesome bombs on all those places and, it turned out later that the only 'weapons of massive destruction' that were used were those used by the Bush, in Iran he will be able to say that he destroyed all kinds of nukular facilities and saved the world in the process.

IF he's got the guts to nuke Iran.

Come again tomorrow because, if I have time, I will demonstrate why nukeing Iran could be VERY good for America's middle class. Or not. We'll analyze.

The Bush keeps repeating that we got all these "jobs that Americans won't do" (and I suppose the country goes down the drain if no one takes them) and he is never challenged by anyone in the audience. So, my suggestion would be for the Bush himself to challenge the nation.

This is what he needs to do:

The Bush should support his statement by posting half a dozen jobs that he believes that 'Americans don't want and the illegals must get them' and let's see if there are any applicants.

He could also post another half a dozen jobs that 'Americans are too dumb to perform so they need to be outsourced to smart Injuns'.

He could post some toll-free number for the applicants to call and he could speak with them and maybe even interview them and decide whether they are qualified or willing to take the jobs. If there are no applicants, then he should be able to push the Congress into passing 'amnesty' on all the alien law-breakers and their children and make 'outsourcing' the law of the land. If not... then maybe he could outsource himself to some country that he really, really loves. Like Israel. Or Iraq. Or Mexico.

Reuel Marc Gerecht - Should 'we' bomb his house while he is in it?

I believe that we should bomb him because:

- He wears a beard.
- He has fewer relatives in the US that may attempt to avenge his death than the Iranians that we might kill if we bomb Iran.
- He advocates the bombing of other countries.
- The left corner of his mouth tends to fly up - Cheney-style.
- A good, wholesome bombing would help him stay alert for a long time.
- His air defenses are relatively weak, certainly weaker than Iran's.
- His house is not as far as Iran - the fuel economy should be significant.
- One single, very low-yield nuclear bunker buster should do the job.
- One less nut advocating the bombing of other countries on American territory.

Note: The bozo whose house 'we' may end up bombing has published an article in The Weekly Standard titled To Bomb Or Not To Bomb. And, like 'they' used to say: "you live by the bomb, you die by the bomb" - after all this IS the golden rule.

Why is gas expensive today? - some of the root causes

Act one (circa 1970’s):

Nixon goes to China and Americans and Chinese play ping-pong together. All ping-pong equipment to be sold in the States soon to be ‘made in China’. The so-called ‘détente’ with East Europe allows for the beginning of timid manufacturing outsourcing in the form of ‘mixed capital’ enterprises where the communist state would hold at least 51% of the shares and provide the cheap labor while the Western partner would transfer know-how and technology.

Act two (late 1970’s):

Increasingly larger numbers of Third World immigrants, legal or not, are making it into the country. Hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese refugees are followed by Iranians, then Nigerians, then the Marielito Cubans. Mexicans, Dominicans, Haitians find that settling America illegally is surprisingly easy and that there are no significant downsides.

The US population increases, the ethnic mix changes. Traffic jams become really annoyng.

Act three – consolidation (1990-2005):

The US population doubles between 1950 and 2006, from 150 million to 300 million. (It is not clear if the 300 million figure counts the illegals. It probably does not.) Most of the population increase is attributable to immigrants and their immediate offspring. Many politicians and their media partners keep repeating that 'more' people in the country is 'better'. No one bothers to explain 'why'.

Low-wage and sometime undemocratic and unfree countries such as China are increasingly successful at persuading American and other Western-based manufacturers to move production off their home base and make more things abroad. They demand that increasingly more know-how is transferred to them and sometimes they demand that certain goods are manufactured inside their country and that certain technology transfers are made before they would allow those goods on their market.

Individual 'average' Americans find it increasingly difficult to compete with cheap, foreign labor. It’s manufacturing workers first, then, increasingly, white collar workers. Paying tens of thousands of dollars for a well-rounded education or to major in fields such as ‘computer science’ doesn’t appear to be worth it, given the reality of such jobs being outsourced. The non-outsourceable jobs that natives used to find safe: plumber, roofer, cab driver are now grabbed by illegals or new immigrants who happen to be mortgage-free and hungry to make a buck. Jobs such as 'lawyer' and 'politician' appear to be safe for the time being.


Conclusion (2006 and beyond)

The increased industrialization of Third World's over-populated countries increases the world-wide demand for oil.

The doubling of the US population in 50 years coupled with the US no longer building nuclear power plants and actually destroying some salmon-unfriendly hydro-power plants causes for the US oil demand to increase.

The US government invasion of Iraq and its increase hinting that Iran may be the next major oil producer to be attacked adds to the price of oil.

The eroding purchasing power of US citizens – given that more and more good paying jobs are outsourced abroad makes oil less affordable.

The US Congress' inability to act in ways that would advance the US national interest on issues such as immigration, outsourcing and a national energy policy guarantees that the situation is unlikely to improve.

The media fascination with ‘price gouging’ can only confuse the public and prevent the nation (if such a thing still exists) from focusing on the root causes of the problem.

No memories in afterlife?

:05 PM AVRWC: poor Mr. Tarkovsky - no more stuffed peppers for him :(
2:06 PM IL: he is in his afterlife, he's got something not available for us
2:08 PM AVRWC: like... total amnesia? it seems that most of our memories have a sensory basis so... absent sensory organs... do you believe there would be anything left to remember? as in 'individual memories'
2:10 PM IL: In most cases, I don't think so... That would keep them attached to this life.... But sometimes it does not work, that's why we have ghosts :-)
2:12 PM AVRWC: so the ghosts are not dead completely and they have something material that's attached to the spirit - that makes sense.
2:13 PM IL: yes, that's why some people can see them... there must be something material attached
2:14 PM AVRWC: hmmm... so you could capture them with a vacuum cleaner - like in the Ghostbusters movie.
2:16 PM IL: :-)))) was it a vacuum cleaner? they called it some sophisticated word
________________________________________ 14 minutes
2:31 PM AVRWC: yes, but it was probably a vacuum cleaner. they just made it look flashier for the movie, to make it look more spectacular.
I have an ion air filter in my room. do you think it would hurt the ghosts if they were sucked inside?
________________________________________ 5 minutes
2:37 PM IL: well if you did not see ghosts in your room, they are just probably too afraid of that filter :-)
2:40 PM AVRWC: or maybe they get sucked in and zapped as soon as they show up. I watched a great formerly TV series - on DVD - 'Kingdom Hospital' - it's a Steven King adaptation of a Norwegian TV series... great ghost story with lots of humor and horror. but they were not aware of the theory we just discussed
2:42 PM IL: you mean, vacuum cleaners, or ghost's materiality?
2:43 PM First can be patented, second one - copyrighted :-)
AVRWC: kind of both. I am sure they do a lot of vacuum cleaning at hospitals and yet the ghosts there were walking around free.
________________________________________ 6 minutes
2:50 PM IL: those cleaners were not flashy enough
2:54 PM AVRWC: it's possible that a very powerful ghost - one that has lots of materiality left in it - can't be sucked into a normal VC and can keep itself away from AC, ionic breezes or microwave ovens. on the other hand, once this theory gets wide acceptance, I would not be surprised to see some pro-ghost advocacy groups fighting to ban the use of vacuum cleaners or even the possibility of creating drafts at sites known to be populated by the undead.
2:57 PM IL: It's quite possible... :-)

The Wages of Fear
_________________________________

Dear Ms. Cafferty,

Do you and your fellow journalists understand that there is some correlation between the price of oil and the price of gasoline?

Let me explain: the more expensive the oil, the more expensive the gasoline.

Now, why is the price of oil hitting new records every day? Hmmm... could there be some connection between the price of oil and Bush and crew 'all options on the table' statements when asked whether they are planning to nuke oil-producing Iraq? There probably is a connection but God forbid you, news guys over-strain your brains.
__________________________________

Hmmm... I bet Cafferty won't be reading this on CNN.


If the Bushies continue to throw empty words at Iran, oil will be at $100 by Memo Day. If the Bushies actually do something beligerent (doubtful), oil hits $200, China goes into economic crisis and turns unpredictable. If the Bushies throw a small nuke at Iran, it's the end of the US as we know it, the 'survival of the fittest' law will be the only law that matters.

The American Thinker seems to be at it again. I found the following pearl of wisdom in General Amnesia: A Tale of Two Zinnis : Gen. Anthony Zinni, who has now conspicuously stated that he never saw any proof that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction or was in any way an imminent threat. Then, the 'Thinkers' are linking to another of their own articles to prove... well... that their quoted Zinni statements do nothing to contradict that he never said that Iraq had WMD's.

Anyways, let's not forget that the Bush gang sent hundreds of thousands of young Americans on a quest to find that which didn't exist. Quest which then (pre Abu Ghraib) became a fight for 'human rights', then the struggle to fix roofs on schools, then the war against the 'terrorists' that the invasion created, then the struggle for democracy and electricity.

Way to go Thinkers. After all, you're not calling yourselves 'honest'. Are you?