Two Points of View on Stimulus From Same Man; Different Sources:
This is sorta interesting. On February 20th, the Miami Herald posted a story concerning the comments of Congressman James Clyburn of South Carolina regarding the stimulus package recently passed and signed into law. He names four Republican governors who are considering not accepting some of the federal monies and says its an “insult” to Black Americans. The four Republicans in question are all from Southern states. Curiously, the Congressman does not mention that the Republican governors from Alaska, Idaho and Minnesota have taken the same position. The story is also interesting in that it sorta buries the part about how Clyburn is clashing with the governor of his own state who also is considering turning down the cash and how Clyburn wants the legislature to by-pass the governor if he indeed follows through.
On February 23, the District Chronicles put out a story concerning the stimulus and the reaction from the Congressional Black Caucus. In the story, Rep. Clyburn is featured but the story makes no reference at all concerning his accusations against the southern governors in opposition.
Then we have News Blaze, out of California. News Blaze has a story on the subject of Clyburn’s comments with a group that it calls “Black Activists” discounting Rep. Clyburn’s comments.
Here is the video of the interview on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” in which Clyburn made the comments. Click here to decide what you think.
This story, it seems to me, has not gotten the attention that it might otherwise get. While there are opposing viewpoints on the internet and in local papers, a few cable channels have gone over it a bit but the national news shows seem to have chosen not to look into it too much. In my view, the charge is so powerful that it probably should deserve a bit more scrutiny and discussion by the main stream press. I don’t get why its not a bigger story. But, the next time there is a shark attack in Florida, it will be the lead story.
Would You Like Some More Ice? Well, it seems that there has been another error related to Global Warming. This one comes from the National Snow and Ice Ice Data Center. They report the monthly change in Arctic Ice. In 2007, the Arctic Ice was reported at an all-time low since it has been studied, which only goes back about 30 years. Last year, there were reports that the polar ice cap might melt away altogether over the summer. Instead, the ice actually grew, at times quite rapidly. It was generally reported as the second lowest ice coverage ever recorded, which was true, but it also could have been reported as an increase in the coverage from the previous year. After a trend of growth, suddenly at the outset of this year, the growth seemed to have slowed dramatically. It seems that careful observers noted a problem in the data. That prompted the folks at the NSIDC to review the data and, sure enough, they had sensor problems. As it turns out, there is a lot more ice than previously reported….like enough to cover the state of California. (Arctic Sea-Ice News Feb 18, 2009…search if the date has changed) Now, this doesn’t mean that the polar ice cap is just fine and dandy; it’s still below the 30 year average. And the amount of “extra ice” is not necessarily as large as it sounds in relative terms. But, this data could cover up a trend and it does raise questions about data collection and the doom and gloom prounouncements that follow. Just last year, a report came out about a huge increase in global temperatures until it was discovered, again by outside observers, that the data was in gross error as a huge chunk of stations in Russia malfunctioned and put out data from the previous month. (See Whatsupwiththat) That made a big difference because the month in question was the transition from Summer to Fall(October 2008) so a bunch of summertime temperatures corrupted the turning-fall data.
Two things….how much other data is corrupted? The two I’ve cited here are not all there is..here’s some more questionable data. It should be troublesome that outside sources had to discover the errors and that the experts otherwise would have not noticed. Should we be basing geo-political policy on a data collection system that is obviously flawed? Perhaps it’s coincidence, but the errors in collection always seem to favor the Al Gore perspective. Aren’t there ever any mistakes that say we are cooler than we really are?
On This Date in History:
We’ve seen power grabs by presidents…how about by the Supreme Court? Much of the accepted power of the various branches of government is not spelled out by the Constitution but instead it was just assumed and everyone just shrugged their collective shoulders. In this case, it was the Supreme Court itself that on this date in 1803 assumed a role that was not specifically granted in the Constitution. What is odd is that the court took power by claiming it had no power.
In the final hours of his term, President John Adams made 42 judicial appointments. Due to bureaucratic bungling, some of the commissions were not sent out until after Adams’ term expired. The new President, Thomas Jefferson, told Secretary of State James Madison to refuse to accept those appointments. One of the appointees did not roll over and went to the Supreme Court to force the administration to accept his commission. Now, the Constitution says nothing about the Supreme Court having the ability to rule regardng the constitutionality of acts of Congress. William Marbury wanted his judicial appointment and James Madison opposed it. Thus we had Marbury v. Madison before the court. Chief Justice John Marshall knew that Madison and Jefferson wouldn’t accept the ruling if they ruled in favor of Marbury and that would weaken a Supreme Court which at that time really didn’t have equal power to Congress and the President.
His solution was to rule that the court had no jurisdiction since the Judiciary Act of 1798 was unconstitutional. Jefferson called Marshall’s logic “twistifications” but otherwise did not object. Neither did anyone else. Marbury didn’t get his seat but the United States Supreme Court assumed the power to interpret the Constitution and determine whether or not laws were unconstitutional, a provision the United States Constitution does not contain. Perhaps some day a Supreme Court will rule that the Marshall Supreme Court was itself unconstitutional!
Weather Bottom Line: Nothing too exciting or different. Everyone will get above freezing by early Tuesday afternoon. Highs will be in the upper 30’s and low 40’s. High clouds may help hold a lid on things. Warm front on Wednesday may produce a few showers but more noticable will be the afternoon temperatures moving into the low to mid 50’s. We’ll be around 60 or so on Thursday. As a cold front comes through, rain chances will rise by Thursday night and Friday morning with the possibility of t’storms. Still too early to tell if there will be strong storms in the area. My guess is that the best chance will be in the lower Mississippi Valley and Red River Valley but its not out of the question that area of unsettled weather might migrate our way. There will be a fairly strong subtropical jet nosing up but I suspect that the timing will not be all that suitable for stronger storms in our region. Worth watching though. Colder than average temperatures reappear for the end of the week into next weekend.