Earth like planet out there

Found: The New Earth
By MICHAEL HANLON - More by this author »

Last updated at 22:33pm on 24th April 2007

Comments

It's got the same climate as Earth, plus water and gravity. A newly discovered planet is the most stunning evidence that life - just like us - might be out there.

Above a calm, dark ocean, a huge, bloated red sun rises in the sky - a full ten times the size of our Sun as seen from Earth. Small waves lap at a sandy shore and on the beach, something stirs...

This is the scene - or may be the scene - on what is possibly the most extraordinary world to have been discovered by astronomers: the first truly Earth-like planet to have been found outside our Solar System.

The discovery was announced today by a team of European astronomers, using a telescope in La Silla in the Chilean Andes.

The Earth-like planet that could be covered in oceans and may support life is 20.5 light years away, and has the right temperature to allow liquid water on its surface.

This remarkable discovery appears to confirm the suspicions of most astronomers that the universe is swarming with Earth-like worlds.

We don't yet know much about this planet, but scientists believe that it may be the best candidate so far for supporting extraterrestrial life.

The new planet, which orbits a small, red star called Gliese 581, is about one-and-a-half times the diameter of the Earth.

It probably has a substantial atmosphere and may be covered with large amounts of water - necessary for life to evolve - and, most importantly, temperatures are very similar to those on our world.

It is the first exoplanet (a planet orbiting a star other than our own Sun) that is anything like our Earth.

Of the 220 or so exoplanets found to date, most have either been too big, made of gas rather than solid material, far too hot, or far too cold for life to survive.

"On the treasure map of the Universe, one would be tempted to mark this planet with an X," says Xavier Delfosse, one of the scientists who discovered the planet.

"Because of its temperature and relative proximity, this planet will most probably be a very important target of the future space missions dedicated to the search for extraterrestrial life."

Gliese 581 is among the closest stars to us, just 20.5 light years away (about 120 trillion miles) in the constellation Libra. It is so dim it can be seen only with a good telescope.

Because all planets are relatively so small and the light they give off so faint compared to their sun, finding exoplanets is extremely difficult unless they are huge.

Those that have so far been detected have mostly been massive, Jupiter-like balls of gas that almost certainly cannot be home to life.

This new planet - known for the time being as Gliese 581c - is a midget in comparison, being about 12,000 miles across (Earth is a little under 8,000 pole-to-pole).

It has a mass five times that of Earth, probably made of the same sort of rock as makes up our world and with enough gravity to hold a substantial atmosphere.

Astrobiologists - scientists who study the possibility of alien life - refer to a climate known as the Goldilocks Zone, where it is not so cold that water freezes and not so hot that it boils, but where it can lie on the planet's surface as a liquid.

In our solar system, only one planet - Earth -lies in the Goldilocks Zone. Venus is far too hot and Mars is just too cold. This new planet lies bang in the middle of the zone, with average surface temperatures estimated to be between zero and 40c (32-102f). Lakes, rivers and even oceans are possible.

It is not clear what this planet is made of. If it is rock, like the Earth, then its surface may be land, or a combination of land and ocean.

Another possibility is that Gliese 581c was formed mostly from ice far from the star (ice is a very common substance in the Universe), and moved to the close orbit it inhabits today.

In which case its entire surface will have melted to form a giant, planet-wide ocean with no land, save perhaps a few rocky islands or icebergs.

The surface gravity is probably around twice that of the Earth and the atmosphere could be similar to ours.

Although the new planet is in itself very Earth-like, its solar system is about as alien as could be imagined. The star at the centre - Gliese 581 - is small and dim, only about a third the size of our Sun and about 50 times cooler.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/technology/technology.html?in_article_id=450467&in_page_id=1965

Ballot Option Would Show Intent of Voter

Finally, a common sense option that should be on every ballot in the country. None of the Above! There are many races where a voter simply doesn't want to vote for any of the candidates listed, and doesn't want to write in a name, even a fake name. By including the option to leave the race blank, the voter's intent is documented.

That should be the law in every state.

'I Choose Not To Vote' May Soon Be Ballot Option
Option Could Not Win Race

POSTED: 5:42 pm EDT April 23, 2007
UPDATED: 11:48 am EDT April 24, 2007


TALLAHASSEE, Fla. -- Maybe a congressional race was so nasty that a large number of voters simply didn't want to check the box next to either candidate.

That's what state Sen. Mike Bennett said he believes happened in the now-infamous District 13 congressional race.

Hoping to prevent a repeat, he persuaded the Senate Ethics and Elections committee to approve a bill, SB-494, on Monday that would require ballots to have the additional option of "I choose not to vote."

http://www.local6.com/news/12933300/detail.html

Polled to Death

Tracking some polls on opinions of partial-birth abortion... it seems there has been consistency over the years with about two-thirds of the American public opposed to partial-birth abortion... So why has it taken so long for our elected officials to catch up?

What Now, Lifers?: Ditch partial-birth - pro-life movement strategy
National Review, Feb 19, 2001 by John J. Miller

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_3_53/ai_70433369

Ebbing Support For Abortion On Demand
CNN/TIME poll finds fewer Americans support unrestricted access
By Keating Holland/CNN

WASHINGTON (Jan. 16) -- In a significant shift, fewer Americans today support unrestricted access to abortion than six years ago, according to a new CNN/TIME poll.

In 1992, nearly half the country believed a woman should be able to get an abortion if she wanted one no matter what the reason. Today, only 38 percent favor abortion on demand.

Now, 43 percent of people surveyed believe that abortion should only be legal in certain circumstances, such as when the woman's health in endangered or when the pregnancy results from rape or incest.

Sixteen percent believe abortion should be illegal in all circumstances. And nearly three-quarters of Americans think that the government should ban the procedure sometimes called "late-term" or "partial-birth" abortion except in cases where the mother's life is in danger...

Partial-Birth/Late-Term Abortion Should Be...
Legal 19%
Illegal 74
Not sure 7

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/01/16/poll/

Same articles, different headline tags

PARTIAL-BIRTH HYPOCRITES
by Robert Novak

April 23, 2007 -- WHEN the Supreme Court Wednesday upheld the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act passed by Congress in 2003, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told a press conference: "I would only say that this isn't the only decision that a lot of us wish that [Justice Samuel] Alito weren't there and [former Justice Sandra Day] O'Connor were there." Does that mean Reid was repudiating his Senate vote for the bill restricting abortions? No, he told me, he was talking about other decisions by Alito...

http://www.nypost.com/seven/04232007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/partial_birth_hypocrites_opedcolumnists_robert_d__novak.htm

Abortion ruling has Reid, Dems in tricky spot
April 23, 2007
BY ROBERT NOVAK novakevans@aol.com

http://www.suntimes.com/news/novak/353423,CST-EDT-NOVAK23.article

Partial pro-life Dems

By Robert Novak
Tuesday, April 24, 2007

WASHINGTON -- When the Supreme Court Wednesday upheld the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act passed by Congress in 2003, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told a press conference: "I would only say that this isn't the only decision that a lot of us wish that (Justice Samuel) Alito weren't there and (former Justice Sandra Day) O'Connor were there." Does that mean Reid was repudiating his Senate vote for the bill restricting abortions? No, he told me Thursday, he was talking about other decisions by Alito.

Reid reflects a dilemma on abortion among Democrats who are flying high against dispirited Republicans. Delivering a fetus and then crushing its skull, a procedure called "partial birth abortion" by its critics, is massively unpopular. Its prohibition is favored 61 percent to 28 percent in the most recent poll (Fox News, March 2006). But the abortion rights lobby is adamant against any erosion of Roe v. Wade...

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/columnists/guests/s_504192.html

When a diet isn't a diet

When a diet isn't a diet? When you want to keep the weight off for the rest of your life.

Diets don't keep the weight off for life... so says yet another study, according to a guest appearing on Fox 'n Friends.

You have to learn what your unique relationship with food is, says an author, Gerard J. Musante, who published, The Structure House Weight Loss Plan.

OK, just don't call it a diet, that's the key. Call it a lifestyle change. That makes sense since nobody likes or wants to be restricted in their eating for the rest of their lives.

Constitutional reform should be a time-consuming process

The next wave of reforms includes those which are amendments to the PA Constitution which alter more than the rules and regs under which the state legislators operate.

Such changes to the PA Constitution by amendments should be time consuming.

That the process for amending the PA Constitution needs two sessions of the legislature for passage, then the referendum by voters, isn't a negative. That process includes deliberation, discussion, education, and enough time for voters to reasonably consider which amendments are absolutely necessary, and which are not.

Legislative reform a time-consuming process
Friday, April 20, 2007
By Ed Blazina, Pittsburgh Post-GazetteThe special state House commission that changed some of the House's secretive ways of operating in just two months could find it will take years to implement its next wave of reforms...

...Any constitutional changes would require approval in two sessions of the Legislature and by a voters' referendum. The earliest a referendum could occur would be 2009...



http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07110/779668-181.stm

David Stewart talks about U.S. Constitutional Convention

Founding Fathers discussion on C-Span Washingtton Journal interview with David O. Stewart, author of The Summer of 1787.

Stewart said the Framers of the Constitution of the United States were against the popular election of the president...

caller started revolutionary.com says the news is communistic... says there isn't a free-market with the subsidized news on cable networks... asks about protection in Bill of rights and freedom of the Press...

another caller asks about a government bank, federal reserve...

see webcast video of program

Washington Journal Entire Program (04/20/2007)

http://www.c-span.org/homepage.asp?Cat=Series&Code=WJE&ShowVidNum=9&Rot_Cat_CD=WJ&Rot_HT=206&Rot_WD=&ShowVidDays=100&ShowVidDesc=&ArchiveDays=30

Stewart will appear on Sunday programming
8 PM April 22, 2007 David Stewart Author

http://www.q-and-a.org/

Question submitted to Stewart

Will you please clarify whether the founding fathers formed the United States as a republic, or a representative democracy, and explain the differences between a republic and a democracy.

Sanjaya Takes Good Leaves Bad Behind

Interviewed on Fox 'n Friends, recently dismissed 17 year old American Idol contestant, Sanjaya was asked what he thought after being tromped by Simon Cowell.

Sanjaya said he takes the good and leaves the bad behind...

As to Simon's harsh criticism, the youth said, that's his opinion.

That says it all, doesn't it - the youth is already an example of success. What an attitude. He's sure to be an example to millions of youths around the world - and he's only 17.

He may be gone from the competition, but not from influence by his positive attitude.

Now just who is his "life coach?"

'American Idol' Says Sayonara to Sanjaya
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
By ERIN CARLSON

NEW YORK — Sanjaya Malakar, the under-talented but unflappable singer who horrified and captivated millions in his improbable "American Idol" run, was finally voted off the show Wednesday night. When the result was announced, Malakar wiped away tears and got a big hug from LaKisha Jones, the next lowest vote-getter. "I'm fine," he told Ryan Seacrest. "It was an amazing experience."

"I can promise you: We won't soon forget you," Seacrest replied.

Malakar then performed one last song, "Something To Talk About." Putting his own twist on the song, the 17-year-old known for his pretty looks and ever-changing hairstyles ad-libbed: "Let's give them something to talk about ... other than hair."

On Tuesday night's show, Simon Cowell had slammed his performance as "utterly horrendous." And for once, the notoriously mean judge was vindicated.

"I'm beginning to sense something here," a grinning Cowell said when Malakar wound up in the bottom three.

Six contestants are now left: Jones, Blake Lewis, Jordin Sparks, Chris Richardson, Melinda Doolittle and Phil Stacey.

Malakar was routinely savaged by Cowell as he developed into one of the weakest, most awkward "Idol" finalists ever. Still, the gangly teen managed to outlast better singers by cultivating an unlikely fan base that helped him survive round after round of viewer elimination.

http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Apr18/0,4670,TVAmericanIdol,00.html

Testimony of Experts on Voting Issues

Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Elections and Voting
Ensuring Fairness and Accuracy in Elections Involving Electronic Voting Systems

On Wednesday, the Information Policy, Census, and National Archives Subcommittee will hold a hearing on ensuring fairness in elections involving electronic voting machines.

The following witnesses will testify:

Hon. Gracia Hillman, Commissioner, U.S. Election Assistance Commission
Mr. Randolph Hite, Director, Information Technology Architecture and Systems, U.S. Government Accountability Office
Hon. Robin Carnahan, Secretary of State, State of Missouri
Avi D. Rubin, Ph.D., Technical Director, Information Security Institute, Department of Computer Science, Johns Hopkins University
Mr. John S. Groh, Vice President, Election Systems & Software International, and Chairman, Election Technology Council
Diane Golden, Ph.D., Director, Missouri Assistive Technology Council (on behalf of the National Association of Assistive Technology Act Programs)

http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1248

Reference

Vote PA message board

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/VotePA/

Court Recognizes Pennsylvania Voters' Right to Reliable, Secure Voting Machines
April 12, 2007

'Great Victory' in Challenge to Use of Systems in 56 Counties Statewide

PHILADELPHIA, April 12 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- A Pennsylvania court
held late today that voters have a right under the commonweath's
constitution to reliable and secure voting systems and can challenge the
use of electronic voting machines "that provide no way for Electors to know
whether their votes will be recognized" through voter verification or
independent audit.
The ruling by the Commonweath Court allows the continuation of a suit
filed last year by 26 individual Pennsylvania voters against the Secretary
of State that challenged the certification of Direct Electronic Voting
systems (DREs) used in 56 counties across the state.
"This is a great victory for Pennsylvania voters," said Mary Kohart, a
partner at Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, one of the lawyers representing the
group of voters. The case, which ultimately seeks the decertification of
the DREs, was also brought by the Public Interest Law Center of
Philadelphia (PILCOP) and Chester County attorney Marian K. Schneider.
The 4-3 decision was sharply critical of the Pennsylvania Secretary of
State's actions in certifying the DREs. Judge Rochelle Friedman, who
authored the majority opinion, noted the certification was the result of
"deficient examination criteria" which "do not approximate those that are
customary in the information technology industry for systems that require a
high level of security."
"Because Electors have no way of knowing whether their votes will be
honestly counted by DREs that are not reliable or secure and that provide
no means for vote verification or vote audit," the voters sufficiently
raised a violation of the Pennsylvania constitution in their suit, the
court declared.
"Across the country, both state legislatures and Congress are realizing
that DRE voting systems cannot be trusted," said Michael Churchill, a
lawyer with PILCOP. "More and more states are requiring optical scan paper
ballots that voters mark directly or through a ballot-marking device."

Procedurally, the court's decision overruled the Secretary of State's
16 preliminary objections against the voter's August 2006 complaint. The
objections claimed that the voters had no legal right to proceed with their
case and no legal right to obtain the relief that they sought.
In the voters' complaint, they alleged that the DREs failed during
elections in Pennsylvania and in other states by losing votes, registering
votes for one candidate when the voter was attempting to vote for another
candidate; causing high "undervote" rates; failing to register votes when
the ballot contained only one question; counting votes twice; failing to
print "zero tapes" to demonstrate that no lawful votes were stored on the
machine prior to the election; printing "zero tapes" after votes had been
cases; reporting phantom votes and other irregularities.
Schneider noted that last fall's elections across the country showed
the unreliability of the machines. "The 2006 elections demonstrated that
DREs repeatedly failed by breaking down, switching votes, losing votes and
not providing the security necessary for a functional democracy," she said.

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/04-12-2007/0004564747&EDATE=

See discussion of the issue at VotePA message board

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/VotePA/message/2958

PA Judges: Voting Machines Certification Lawsuit Can Proceed

Voting machine lawsuit proceeds
State sought to have complaint dismissed
Saturday, April 14, 2007
By James O'Toole, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Commonwealth Court has rejected the state's objections to a suit challenging the testing and use of new electronic voting machines, including those recently adopted in Allegheny County.

The court, on 4-3 vote, allowed the suit to proceed as it dismissed 16 preliminary objections filed by attorneys for Secretary of the Commonwealth Pedro Cortez, who, in his role as the state's chief elections official, had certified the direct electronic voting systems whose reliability the plaintiffs attack. Among the systems in question are the iVotronic touch screen machines used for the first time in Allegheny County last year.

The plaintiffs, echoing the complaints of activists and voting watchdog groups across the country, maintain that the newer machines place reliable elections at risk by failing to produce a paper record that can be verified by the voter. The suit includes a litany of examples of voting machine mistakes and anomalies in elections across the country. Among them was the apparent under-count of thousands of votes in a disputed Florida congressional election last November.

In a statement responding to the ruling, Mr. Cortes emphasized that it had dealt solely with preliminary legal issues.

"The court's decision was not a final determination of the facts of the case," he said.

The majority opinion of the narrowly divided court, however, suggested some sympathy with the plaintiff's contentions. Written by Judge Rochelle Friedman, the opinion notes that a variety of the systems certified by Mr. Cortes, "produce no contemporaneous external paper record that would allow voters to verify that their votes were counted accurately.''

The ruling also faults the state elections department for failing to establish uniform testing criteria for the machines, thus denying voters a benchmark for challenging certification procedures.

The three dissenters, who joined in an opinion written by Judge Mary Hannah Leavitt, rejected the plaintiffs' arguments along with the rationale of most of the majority opinion. The minority said Mr. Cortes acted within his discretion in certifying the machines...

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07104/778003-181.stm

Related

Opinion

http://origin-www.courts.state.pa.us/opposting/cwealth/out/442md06_4-12-07.pdf

Vote PA message board discussion

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/VotePA/message/2959

On the right legislative track in PA

State Senate OK bills to cap judicial pay
Thursday, April 19, 2007

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

State senators yesterday approved a bill to stop the salaries of Pennsylvania's 1,000 elected judges from automatically rising when federal judges receive raises -- a provision that is a remnant of the 2005 government pay raise law.

The bill, which passed 49-1, still requires approval from the House and Gov. Ed Rendell to become law.

Aides to Mr. Rendell and House Democratic leaders did not immediately say whether they support the bill. The House Republican leader, Sam Smith, R-Punxsutawney, said his caucus would take a serious look at the legislation.

"I think it would be an improvement over what the current law is," Mr. Smith said in an interview.

The pay-raise law was repealed in November 2005 -- four months after it was enacted -- after a public outcry. But the state Supreme Court reinstated the portion of the law that raised judicial salaries and tied their future raises to the salary structure of federal judges.

The court ruled in September that repealing the judges' pay raise was barred by a constitutional provision meant to prevent the Legislature or governor from punishing judges for unfavorable rulings by reducing their pay.

Current judicial salaries are $175,236 for justices of the state Supreme Court; $165,342 for judges of the Superior and Commonwealth courts; and at least $152,115 for county judges...

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07109/779183-85.stm

Push for PA Constitutional Convention Premature

Agree wholeheartedly, wait the normal route out for reforms.

A limited convention is in the eye of the beholder...

Exactly, what is one's limitation, is another's opportunity.

Philadelphia Inquirer Editorial
Posted on Mon, Apr. 16, 2007 A Constitutional Convention?Give the legislature a shot
The push in Pennsylvania to hold a constitutional convention, a rare and drastic device for reforming state government, is premature.
A state Senate committee has been gathering testimony around the state, including at a hearing in Philadelphia last week, on the possibility of holding a convention with as many as 150 citizen-delegates.

These elected delegates would consider amending the state constitution to, for example, cut the size of the legislature, impose term limits on legislators, or to allow "initiative and referendum" ballot questions in Pennsylvania (much like Propositions A through Z for which California has become so notorious).

Calls for this grassroots revolution grew louder after the legislature's scandalously self-serving pay-raise vote in July 2005. Neither the subsequent repeal of the pay raise, nor the election last November of 54 new legislators, has derailed the idea of a convention.

"There is a disconnect between the people of Pennsylvania and their government," said state Sen. Jeffrey E. Piccola (R., Dauphin), chairman of the state government committee.

Not so fast. This step is not necessary, at least not yet.

The years-long process of organizing a constitutional convention could very well end up covering some of the same ground of reform that the legislature is now plowing.

A bipartisan panel appointed by Speaker Dennis O'Brien (R., Phila.) already has enacted some rules to make the House more open and less vulnerable to the whims of party leaders. Having completed those "inside baseball" changes, the speaker's commission is now turning to reforms that the public should appreciate more.

The panel will hold three hearings, beginning Thursday, on term limits, campaign finance limits, the size of the legislature and the state's open-records law. Some of these topics, if they turn into proposals, would take the form of amendments to the state constitution.

The panel will meet in Philadelphia at 9 a.m. April 26, in Room 202 of the Convention Center. Anyone who can't attend is invited to send suggestions to reform@speakerobrien.com.

This House commission, co-chaired by Reps. Josh Shapiro (D., Montgomery) and David Steil (R., Bucks) has been diligent and has stuck to its promised schedule. It has accomplished a considerable amount since January. Last week, the panel approved a plan to select half the members of the House Ethics Committee randomly, rather than having them chosen by party leaders.

It's more proof that the spirit of change, ushered in by voters last fall, is still active inside the Capitol. That process should be allowed to play out for a few more months.

"A constitutional convention should wait until we give this legislature an opportunity to do its work," Shapiro said. He's right.

Critics of allowing the legislature to propose amendments to the constitution say it's a time-consuming procedure. A proposed amendment on term limits, for example, would need to be approved in two successive legislative sessions. The earliest it could come before voters would be November 2009.

But a constitutional convention is not exactly a swift vehicle of reform, either. Piccola said if the legislation that he is drafting gets approved without delay, the earliest a convention could be held would be January 2009.

Another potential pitfall with a convention is its scope. Piccola envisions a gathering in which hot-button issues such as gun control, abortion and the death penalty would be off-limits. But his committee vice chairman, Sen. Michael Folmer (R., Lebanon), said a constitutional convention was the only way to address "pressing issues," including "tort reform," a perennial target of conservatives.

A limited convention is in the eye of the beholder.

"It's an expensive, long, drawn-out and uncertain process," said Robert Williams, a professor at the Rutgers University School of Law in Camden. "Be careful what you wish for."

Before committing the state to this extraordinary step, let's see whether a reinvigorated legislature can achieve the needed results...

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20070416_Editorial___A_Constitutional_Convention_.html

Media Role in Gun Control Revitalization

Nationwide, the focus is naturally on the tragic devastation at Virginia Tech. The media can't help itself, as overall they have been shown to lean to the liberal side of the political question time and time again. Virtually on Day One, Monday, as events unfolded on the campus, the media was already inviting guests on programs to speak about the revitalization of gun control issues on the agenda of Congress.

CNN

MSNBC

Fox News Hannity and Colmes

Check them out to find what was discussed, and will continue to be discussed.

The Fix Chris Cilliazza
Parsing the Polls on Gun Control
Washington Post
In the wake of the Virginia Tech tragedy, the issue of gun control is likely to reemerge in the national political debate. But will the Monday's terrible massacre fundamentally reshape American public opinion about guns and gun control? And will gun control now join Iraq, health care, terrorism and the economy as key issues around which voters will make their decisions at the ballot box?

Recent and historical polling information suggests the answer to both questions is no. Polling on gun control has remained remarkably consistent for the past decade or so, with external events -- even emotionally powerful ones -- not moving the dial in any appreciable way.

Let's Parse the Polls!

Scan recent surveys that touch on guns and gun control and you realize quickly that it has not been a matter of political debate in quite some time. Last fall, a question on gun control was included in an October Post/ABC News survey.

The sample was asked whether they favored or opposed "stricter gun laws." Sixty-one percent said they favored tighter restrictions while 37 percent opposed more stringent regulations.

Not surprisingly, Democrats were generally more supportive of more gun restrictions than Republicans. Seventy-three percent of Democrats favored stricter laws, compared with 52 percent of Republicans who said the same; 56 percent of independents supported tighter strictures.

The same trend was seen when voters were differentiated by ideology. Seventy-one percent of liberals backed stricter gun laws, followed by 61 percent of moderates and 55 percent of conservatives.

It's interesting to note that the Post/ABC poll was in the field shortly after the the shooting at an Amish schoolhouse in Pennsylvania -- the third fatal school shooting in a week's time. Events like the Amish school shooting or even Columbine incident -- i.e. ones that managed to make gun violence in schools a part of the daily debate for several years -- don't have any long-term impact on Americans' overall beliefs about gun laws. Since 1989, an average of 63 percent have expressed support for stricter gun laws -- regardless of external events.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2007/04/parsing_the_polls_gun_control.html

Protect your pet recalls

Rice protein concentrate added to contaminated ingredient in pet foods...

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070418/pet_food_recall.html?.v=4

Partial Birth Abortion No Longer Option in U.S.

Supreme Court upholds ban on partial birth abortion in 5-4 ruling.

Court Backs Ban on Abortion Procedure

Apr 18 10:18 AM US/Eastern
By MARK SHERMAN
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court upheld the nationwide ban on a controversial abortion procedure Wednesday, handing abortion opponents the long- awaited victory they expected from a more conservative bench.
The 5-4 ruling said the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act that Congress passed and President Bush signed into law in 2003 does not violate a woman's constitutional right to an abortion.

The opponents of the act "have not demonstrated that the Act would be unconstitutional in a large fraction of relevant cases," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion.

The decision pitted the court's conservatives against its liberals, with President Bush's two appointees, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, siding with the majority.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia also were in the majority.

It was the first time the court banned a specific procedure in a case over how—not whether—to perform an abortion.


http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8OJ2HV82&show_article=1

Court backs ban on partial-birth abortions
Mark Sherman - Associated Press Writer
OneNewsNow.com
April 18, 2007

http://www.suntimes.com/news/novak/353423,CST-EDT-NOVAK23.article

Supreme Court Upholds Partial-Birth Abortion Ban

Robert Barnes
Washington Post Supreme Court Reporter
Thursday, April 19, 2007; 12:00 PM

Washington Post Supreme Court reporter Robert Barnes was online Thursday, April 19 at noon ET to discuss Wednesday's 5-4 ruling upholding a Congress-passed law banning partial-birth abortion, which could mark a more conservative trend on social issues with Justice Kennedy in the court's ideological center...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/04/18/DI2007041801582.html?nav=rss_nation/special

Anti-depression drugs effect in Virgina Tech slaughter?

When speaking to a guest who offered the Washington Post had reported Cho Seung-Hui trained using an online video called Counterstrike, Bill Hemmer noted the Washington Post pulled the reference to the video, suggesting the item was unsupportable.

The two men discussed when and how the reference was pulled, with the guest saying he searched the site and the reference still came up in a summary.

Prescription Medications may have been found, Fox News reporting the possibility is as yet unconfirmed.

There has been very little reporting of Cho's therapy for depresssion which may have included prescriptions for anti-depression medications!

Fox News yesterday appeared to be the only media outlet to interview experts on the connection between violent tendencies and outright violence by individuals who've been on such prescription drugs!

Chilling picture emerges of Virginia Tech gunman
Railed against `rich kids' and `debauchery" on campus
By Adam Geller
Associated Press
Article Launched: 04/17/2007 08:25:01 AM PDT

BLACKSBURG, Va. - The gunman in the Virginia Tech massacre was a sullen loner who alarmed professors and classmates with his twisted, violence-drenched creative writing and left a rambling note in his dorm room raging against women and rich kids.
A chilling picture emerged Tuesday of Cho Seung-Hui - a 23-year-old senior majoring in English - a day after the bloodbath that left 33 people dead, including Cho, who killed himself as police closed in.

News reports said that he may have been taking medication for depression and that he was becoming increasingly violent and erratic.

Despite the many warning signs that came to light in the bloody aftermath, police and university officials offered no clues as to exactly what set Cho off on the deadliest shooting rampage in modern U.S. history.

http://origin.mercurynews.com/ci_5686446

Virginia Tech shooter reportedly on anti-depression meds, increasingly angry leading up to massacre
Suspected killer of 33 - including himself - left note railing against 'rich kids, 'debauchery' and 'deceitful charlatans'
The Associated Press
Article Last Updated: 04/17/2007 12:00:32 PM MDT

BLACKSBURG, Va. - The gunman suspected of carrying out the Virginia Tech massacre that left 33 people dead was identified Tuesday as an English major whose creative writing was so disturbing that he was referred to the school's counseling service.

News reports also said that he may have been taking medication for depression, that he was becoming increasingly violent and erratic, and that he left a note in his dorm in which he railed against ''rich kids," ''debauchery" and ''deceitful charlatans" on campus.

Cho Seung-Hui, a 23-year-old senior, arrived in the United States as boy from South Korea in 1992 and was raised in suburban Washington, D.C., officials said. He was living on campus in a different dorm from the one where Monday's bloodbath began...

http://www.sltrib.com/News/ci_5686225

Hearing Doesn't Show Outcry for PA Convention

Lengthy, expensive process... seems not everybody is on the PA Constitutional Convention train-wreck... Even Surrick offers a proposition that doesn't necessitate convening a convention...

Net the Truth Online

Officials hold 3d hearing on revamping Pa. governmentTwo state senators listened to expert witnesses discussing the need for a constitutional convention.
By Vernon Clark
Inquirer Staff Writer
At the University of Pennsylvania Law School, two state senators heard testimony yesterday on the convening of a constitutional convention for the reform of state government.
State Sens. Jeffrey E. Piccola (R., Dauphin) and Michael Folmer (R., Lebanon) held the third hearing on the topic, listening to the views of three speakers: an area lawyer and author, a Rutgers University law school professor, and the president of the local League of Women Voters. Previous hearings were held in Harrisburg and Pittsburgh.

The constitutional convention is being considered in light of recent problems in state government, including the legislative pay-raise scandal. No firm time frame has been set for a convention - which could take up a potpourri of political issues - but the concept continues to be studied by the state Senate Government Committee.

In an ornate lecture hall, Robert B. Surrick, a lawyer who wrote the book Lawyers, Judges and Journalists: The Corrupt and the Corruptors, told the senators and about 15 spectators that voters are clueless with regard to the election of judges.

"Voters will vote for a candidate if the candidate is from a county near where they live," Surrick said. "They will vote on name recognition regardless of how the name is known, good or bad."

He added that race plays a large part, saying a "law-and-order" candidate blatantly "appeals to those who believe all blacks belong in jail."

Surrick suggested using a "reform plane" in which the state would be divided into seven judicial districts, and judicial candidates would have to present themselves to "the local newspapers, bar associations, service clubs, etc."

This would allow voters to gain a better understanding of candidates' qualifications, he said.

Kay McKenna, president of the League of Women Voters of Southeastern Pennsylvania, said that while her organization does not have a position on proposals to hold a constitutional convention, her group was "concerned about what steps are necessary to produce a convention that will have constructive and credible outcomes for government reform."

McKenna said one area of concern was redistricting. "If reduction in the size of the legislature, which the League supports, is a subject that comes before a constitutional convention, it should be preceded by reform in the way legislative districts are drawn."

Robert F. Williams, a professor at Rutgers University School of Law, told the senators that holding a constitutional convention is "a lengthy and expensive process."

"Be careful of what you wish for," Williams told the senators.

Williams also noted that most people who serve in a constitutional convention say it is the most important thing they have done in their career.

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local/pa/main_line_delaware/20070412_Senators_hear_ideas_on_a_constitutional_convention_for_Pa_.html

Oath-breakers at fault not PA Constitution

We still disagree that a Constitutional Convention is necessary to enact any of the reforms or amendments legitimately called for to make our elected officials reform themselves. A convention is not necessary to enable the reform of THOSE WHO BETRAYED their oaths to the PA Constitution. Vote them out next time.

The PA Constitution does not need "modernized" because hundreds of state legislators enacted the illegal payraise/unvouchered expenses of 2005.

Piccola is wrong. It isn't government that needs reformed - it is the kind of state representatives and senators who are willing to break their oaths of office who need booted out of office. To some extent, that was done with some 55 newcomers elected to state office in 2006 elections. They are currently mounting reforms upon themselves. More hearings on additional reforms are being held, aside from the Piccola hearings on a convention.

There is no need to open up the PA Constitution to a potentially unrestrainable Constitutional Convention.

All of the reforms offered can be done through the normal legislative amendment process.

It is disheartening to hear Sen. Piccola, and others, go on about limiting a convention.

They haven't considered the precedent-setting Philadelphia Convention...

Pennsylvania's Constitutions and the Amendment Process - Where it Began, Where it is Now
By Ann Liivak, former Reference/Special Collections Librarian
23 Pennsylvania Law Weekly 324 (March 27, 2000)

Philadelphia Convention
Less then two weeks after the Declaration of Independence, the citizens of Philadelphia were inspired to form a convention for drafting a constitution for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The Provincial Assembly and the governor were ignored, and the convention not only entered upon the task of forming the constitution, but superseded the old government by assuming the legislative power of the commonwealth and establishing a Council of Safety with extensive powers to rule in the interim.

The elected delegates debated, drafted, and on Sept. 28, 1776, passed and proclaimed the Bill of Rights and Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania signed by "Benj. Franklin, Prest." The Constitution of 1776 provided that the power of amending the constitution would rest with a Council of Censors as it found necessary. The Constitution of 1776 was considered one of the most democratic state governmental structures of the times, even though it was not submitted to the electorate for ratification or adoption...

http://www.jenkinslaw.org/collection/researchguides/publications/ann-constitutions.php

Now that's what is called a precedent. If it's done once, without constraints, it can be done again, and there would be no stopping an unlimited convention from replacing not only our Declaration of Rights, but the uniformity clause and who knows what all else...

More coming soon...

Net the Truth Online

Time to revise Pa. Constitution
By Jeffrey E. Piccola
Tue, Apr. 10, 2007
Over the last two years, the actions of Pennsylvania's General Assembly, executive branch, and judiciary regarding pay raises and bonuses, to name just a couple of issues, have sparked a public outcry for the reform of state government. The type of institutional change being called for can be accomplished only by revising the Pennsylvania Constitution.

There are two ways to change the constitution: an amendment by the General Assembly or a constitutional convention. When Abraham Lincoln spoke to the nation in his first inaugural address in 1861, he said of a pending amendment to the United States Constitution: "To me, the convention mode seems preferable to the amendment process in that it allows amendments to originate with the people themselves, instead of only persuading them to take or reject propositions originated by others not especially chosen with a purpose." I believe President Lincoln was right. That is precisely why a constitutional convention has relevance for Pennsylvania state government in this age of reform.

As chairman of the Senate State Government Committee, I held the first of a series of three statewide public hearings a month ago to discuss legislation that would provide for the convening of a constitutional convention. (The second was held in Harrisburg recently.)

The first question these hearings seek to answer is whether this is a proper time to hold a convention. Given the number of scandals that have rocked the state capitol of late, I believe we have reached a tipping point that necessitates a convention. There is precedent for this: The 1874 convention was triggered by a number of scandals. Public outcry at the time was such that a convention was warranted. I believe we are facing a similar set of precipitating circumstances now.

Second, can the changes that have been proposed in the current climate be adequately addressed in the traditional way of amending the constitution, or is a convention merited at this time? Since 1968, amendments to the constitution have been made in a piecemeal fashion. Amendment proposals can be initiated only through the General Assembly and must pass two consecutive legislative sessions before they can be put before voters. Further, each amendment can encompass only one subject. This is an arduous process that can take up to four or more years to accomplish. A convention could bypass this long process and place multiple amendments before the people within a year or two.

Third, what would be the structure, operating procedure and mechanics of such a constitutional convention, including decisions regarding the number of delegates, timeline, and place of the meeting?

The 1968 convention is our nearest model of reference, but unfortunately, that model is dated. Delegate selection in 1968 was controlled by the county parties, which would surely be unpopular today. The 1968 convention had a limited three-month time frame, which in my judgment would not afford enough time for serious deliberation. In addition, the Internet may allow the citizens to have direct participation in the convention process. All of these factors must be considered when crafting a convention.

The final reason for conducting these hearings is to discuss what limits and subject matter should be placed before a convention for its consideration. Should we restrict the convention's reach to a few specific items that go to the core of how government functions in Pennsylvania? If so, what should those subjects be? A constitutional convention may not be the best forum to tackle controversial social issues. However, it may be the perfect body to discuss the legislative process, the size of the General Assembly, term limits, salaries for legislators and judges, and reapportionment.

During the public hearings, witnesses from a broad spectrum of viewpoints have testified, and I invite the citizens of Pennsylvania to provide us with their testimony. A window of opportunity for reform now exists, but how long that window might be open, or even how wide it is, are not yet known.

State Sen. Jeffrey E. Piccola is a Republican who represents Dauphin and York Counties.

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/pa/20070410_Time_to_revise_Pa__Constitution.html
http://www.piccola.org/

Border Patrol Agents Wives Talk

On Glenn Beck's program, wives of two border patrol agents, Ramos and Compean, speak about the situation of their husbands' prosecution and incarceration...

Duncan Hunter also speaks about the unfairness of the sentences of 11 and 12 years for the two men.

94 members of Congress have signed the Congressional pardon, Hunter says...

Another woman speaks about her husband's case. Ashley Hernandez, wife of Gilmer Hernandez. The bullet he discharged was at the van's tires...

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/gb.html

Global Warming Jokester

How snow can you go?
WEATHER | Falling fluff causes havoc, sets record -- and more is on the way

April 12, 2007
April snow's the worst.

Forget what the weather forecasters said -- you didn't really expect this: a record 2.9 inches of snow, topping the mark of 2.3 inches for April 11 set in 1957...


http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/338364,CST-NWS-snow12.article