Luke_Wilbur

I thought you all would like this quote:

Soon he will have is own reality show.

This is a bad joke. Barack Obama is Christian and not Islamic. Even if he was Muslim it should not matter. There are many good Muslim people.

Iraq’s infrastructure is continuing to improve and U.S. assistance projects are having a real impact on the lives of Iraqis, rebuilding vital public service facilities, supporting the emergence of democracy, and establishing a foundation for a strong economy. At a cost of $13.4 billion, in a building program the size of which has not been seen since the reconstruction of central Europe under the post-WWII Marshall Plan, USACE is jumpstarting reconstruction by tending to critical repairs and improvement projects in oil, electricity, potable water and sewerage; much needed facilities for healthcare, education, governance and security; and transportation improvements for roads, railways, bridges, air and sea ports. The World Bank 2004 estimate to rebuild the electrical system is $20 billion. With a U.S. IRRF funding allocation of $4.3 billion, USACE has achieved program goals for providing more power more equitably across Iraq through key infrastructure improvement in electrical generation, transmission, and distribution. Peak daily power generated has exceeded the pre-war level of 4,300 megawatts and is exceeding 9,500 megawatts as more generation is brought on line. Work in the oil sector carried out by USACE at a cost of $1.7 billion has ensured the Iraqi oil industry has the capacity to produce 3 million barrels per day of oil, natural gas production capacity of 800 million standard cubic feet per day, and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) production of 3,000 metric tons per day to meet domestic need. Projects included key repairs at refineries and gas-oil separation plants, repairing pipelines, reworking oil wells, and overhauling the Al Basrah Oil Terminal offshore in the Arabian Gulf. The Coalition Provisional Authority estimate to rebuild the oil infrastructure in Iraq was $8 billion. The remaining shortfall is being addressed by the Iraqi Ministry of Oil, the South Oil Company and North Oil Company. In the water sector, the goal of 1.1 million cubic meters per day of potable water as the GRD portion set by the Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund has almost been reached. An estimated 3.8 million more Iraqis have access to potable water than did before the start of the program. USACE projects range from multimillion dollar water treatment plants--like those completed at Erbil and Nasiriyah--to compact water units provided to rural communities. Across Iraq, 908 water projects are improving living conditions for Iraqis. Currently 718 of the projects have been completed. They range from new wastewater treatment plants, such as the $78 million Phase II of the Fallujah Wastewater System project, to rehabilitation of preexisting facilities and lift stations.

I like this clip from a gig they did at Wilmer's Park in 1993.

Many organizations that I meet are internally driven and are not peering out on what is happenning in their market place. Marketing is very relevant for all business leaders as the principle of knowing who your customer is and pleasing them is important whatever field you work in. Companies need to explain the benefits of their products to their customers and the right marketing tools can help to increase the success of products.

Here is a press release from the Satish Dhawan Space Centre, SHAR Antrix Corporation is happy to announce that its second full-fledged commercial launch has been successfully completed today. After the final count down, PSLV-C10 lifted off from the First Launch Pad (FLP) at SDSC SHAR at 09:15 Hrs with the ignition of the first stage. Incidentally this is the 25th Satellite Launch Mission from SDSC, SHAR. The launch of TECSAR was executed under a commercial contract between Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) and ANTRIX Corporation. It may be recalled that the first major commercial launch of PSLV (PSLV-C8) took place on April 23, 2007, when it successfully launched an Italian astronomical satellite, AGILE. The 300 kg TECSAR satellite was placed into its intended orbit with a perigee (nearest point to earth) of 450 km and apogee (farthest point to earth) of 580 km with an orbital inclination of 41 deg with respect to the equator. TECSAR was placed in orbit 1185 sec after lift off. PSLV has emerged as the workhorse launch vehicle of ISRO with eleven consecutively successful flights so far. Since its first successful launch in 1994, PSLV has launched eight Indian remote sensing satellites, an amateur radio satellite, HAMSAT, a recoverable space capsule, SRE-1, and two primary satellites and six small satellites for foreign customers. Besides, it has launched India’s exclusive meteorological satellite, Kalpana-1, into Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit (GTO). PSLV is also slated to launch India’s first spacecraft to moon, Chandrayaan-1, in 2008. http://www.isro.org/pressrelease/Jan21_2008.htm

Management of Israel Aerospace Industries Ltd. (IAI) announced that an advanced imaging satellite produced by IAI, employing synthetic aperture radar (SAR) technology, was successfully launched into orbit today (January 21, 2008, 05:45 Israel time) on an Indian Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV). The satellite, under the brand name TECSAR, was launched at the SHAR test field in southeast India in collaboration with a team of Indian and Israeli experts. The launch was carried out in accordance with a cooperation agreement between the Government of India and IAI relating to space activities. The TECSAR's signal was received at the IAI ground station 80 minutes after launch (07:10 Israel time), immediately upon its reaching the station communication range. By all indications so far, the satellite is functioning properly. The satellite is now orbiting the Earth, and IAI's engineers and scientists have commenced the prescribed series of in-orbit tests to verify its performance. Due to the complexity of the TECSAR, as compared to satellites previously produced by IAI, the in-orbit tests are scheduled to continue for several weeks, and the first images are scheduled for receipt 14 days after launch. The TECSAR is the first satellite of its kind developed in Israel, and ranks among the world's most advanced space systems. It carries a SAR payload, designed to provide images during day, night and all weather conditions, including under cloud cover. The satellite is controlled and monitored by an IAI-based ground station. This satellite was designed, built and integrated by IAI's scientists and engineers, with the MBT Space division acting as prime contractor and Elta Systems Ltd., an IAI subsidiary, provided the SAR payload. The project included contributions from other IAI divisions, as well as from leading Israeli hi-tech companies such as Rafael, Tadiran-Spectralink and Rokar. The TECSAR joins an impressive list of satellites developed, produced and launched by IAI. As of today, 11 satellites from the Ofeq, EROS and Amos brands have been launched, including seven satellites currently in orbit. These successes contributed to IAI's recent award of a material contract to develop the Amos 4 communications satellite. Itzhak Nissan, IAI's President & CEO said: "IAI's management is very proud of this achievement, which serves as additional proof of IAI's great technological and administrative capabilities, and of IAI's leadership in the Israeli space industry and other areas of advanced technology." http://www.iai.cospam/sip_storage/files/4/35694.wmv

Rob is the only man that I will trust to do electrical work in my home. He is a certified Master Electrician. Better yet, he is a hard and honest worker. I just want to spread the good word. RJBeasley Electric, LLC PO Box 1073 Stevensville, MD 21666 410/604/3950 P 410/604/3948 F

Would you want John McCain over Hillary Clinton? Barack Obama? John Edwards?

This simple video explains it all. The heart of the issue for striking writers is securing payments from DVD sales and "new media" such as internet downloads of television programs, which most industry experts believe will become the dominant delivery platform within a decade. Maybe we should look at the strike is an opportunity for Americans all over the country to get off their couches and do something more productive with our lives.

What do you not like about John McCain?

Antimatter, which annihilates matter upon contact, seems to be rare in the universe. Still, for decades, scientists had clues that a vast cloud of antimatter lurked in space, but they did not know where it came from. Science Fiction Shapes the Future One of the best attempts for the public to understand this concept was Star Trek's "Mirror Universe" was first recorded as visited by James T. Kirk and several officers from the USS Enterprise in 2267. This parallel universe coexists with our universe on another dimensional plane. The universe was so named because many people and places seemed to be the exact opposites of their "normal" selves in "our" universe, but with numerous "good" aspects now "evil", and vice versa. Mirror-universe Spock While antimatter propulsion systems are so far the stuff of science fiction, antimatter is very real. The mysterious source of this antimatter has now been discovered "stars getting ripped apart" by neutron stars and black holes. CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, is one of the world's largest and most respected centres for scientific research. Its business is fundamental physics, finding out what the Universe is made of and how it works. At CERN, the world's largest and most complex scientific instruments are used to study the basic constituents of matter - the fundamental particles. By studying what happens when these particles collide, physicists learn about the laws of Nature. The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is a gigantic scientific instrument near Geneva, where it spans the border between Switzerland and France about 100 m underground. It is a particle accelerator used by physicists to study the smallest known particles – the fundamental building blocks of all things. It will revolutionise our understanding, from the miniscule world deep within atoms to the vastness of the Universe. Within the LHC, the world's largest particle collider, protons do not race around the 27 km ring at near the speed of light of their own accord. Instead they are guided by huge 1700 magnets have been connected together, implying a total of about 40 000 leak-tight welds (1 0km worth!) and 65 000 electrical 'splices' of superconducting cables through eight separate sectors. Each of these sectors must be sealed in a vacuum and cooled to a freezing '271.3°C, just 1.9 degrees above absolute zero. In fact the whole ring consists of a wealth of electrical lines and piping forming an intricate system running the full 27 km of the LHC, which must connected before the beam can run. Two beams of subatomic particles called 'hadrons' - either protons or lead ions - will travel in opposite directions inside the circular accelerator, gaining energy with every lap. Physicists will use the LHC to recreate the conditions just after the Big Bang, by colliding the two beams head-on at very high energy. Teams of physicists from around the world will analyse the particles created in the collisions using special detectors in a number of experiments dedicated to the LHC. What Antimatter All elementary particles, such as protons and electrons, have antimatter counterparts with the same mass but the opposite charge. For instance, the antimatter opposite of an electron, known as a positron, is positively charged. Antimatter is the extension of the concept of the antiparticle to matter, whereby antimatter is composed of antiparticles in the same way that normal matter is composed of particles. For example an antielectron (a positron, an electron with a positive charge) and an antiproton (a proton with a negative charge) could form an antihydrogen atom in the same way that an electron and a proton form a normal matter hydrogen atom. Furthermore, mixing of matter and antimatter would lead to the annihilation of both in the same way that mixing of antiparticles and particles does, thus giving rise to high-energy photons (gamma rays) or other particle-antiparticle pairs. The particles resulting from matter-antimatter annihilation are endowed with energy equal to the difference between the rest mass of the products of the annihilation and the rest mass of the original matter-antimatter pair, which is often quite large. There is considerable speculation both in science and science fiction as to why the observable universe is apparently almost entirely matter, whether other places are almost entirely antimatter instead, and what might be possible if antimatter could be harnessed, but at this time the apparent asymmetry of matter and antimatter in the visible universe is one of the greatest unsolved problems in physics. When a particle meets its antiparticle, they destroy each other, releasing a burst of energy such as gamma rays. In 1978, gamma ray detectors flown on balloons detected a type of gamma ray emerging from space that is known to be emitted when electrons collide with positrons — meaning there was antimatter in space. What exactly generated the antimatter was a mystery for the following decades. Suspects have included everything from exploding stars to dark matter. The debut of antihydrogen An atom of antihydrogen consists of an antiproton and a positron (an antielectron), which makes it the simplest antiatom. Unfortunately, this does not make it any easier to produce in the lab. Persuading the antiprotons and positrons to combine together was a challenge that no one had managed to solve until the PS210 at CERN created the first atoms of antihydrogen in 1995. It was a difficult task both for the physicists and for the operation team at CERN's Low Energy Antiproton Ring (LEAR) - the main machine used for the experiment. The researchers allowed antiprotons circulating inside LEAR to collide with atoms of a heavy element. Any antiprotons passing close enough to a heavy atomic nucleus could create an electron-positron pair; in a tiny fraction of cases, the antiproton would bind with the positron to make an atom of antihydrogen. The process was complicated, time-consuming and required a lot of effort but it led to a ground-breaking achievement. When the announcement of the production of 9 antiatoms at CERN was made early in 1996, the news travelled around the world to be reported in newspapers, on radio and on television. However, the fleeting existence of the antiatoms meant that they could not be used for further studies. Each one existed for only about 40 billionths of a second, travelling at nearly the speed of light over a path of 10 m before it annihilated with ordinary matter. Artificial production The artificial production of atoms of antimatter (specifically antihydrogen) first became a reality in the early 1990s. An atom of antihydrogen comprises a negatively-charged antiproton being orbited by a positively-charged positron. Stanley Brodsky, Ivan Schmidt and Charles Munger at SLAC realized that an antiproton, traveling at relativistic speeds and passing close to the nucleus of an atom, would have the potential to force the creation of an electron-positron pair. It was postulated that under this scenario the antiproton would have a small chance of pairing with the positron (ejecting the electron) to form an antihydrogen atom. In 1995 CERN announced that it had successfully created nine antihydrogen atoms by implementing the SLAC/Fermilab concept during the PS210 experiment. The experiment was performed using the Low Energy Antiproton Ring (LEAR), and was led by Walter Oelert and Mario Macri. Fermilab soon confirmed the CERN findings by producing approximately 100 antihydrogen atoms at their facilities. Now, an international research team looking over four years of data from the European Space Agency's International Gamma Ray Astrophysics Laboratory (INTEGRAL) satellite has pinpointed the apparent culprits. Their new findings suggest these positrons originate mainly from stars getting devoured by black holes and neutron stars. As a black hole or neutron star destroys a star, tremendous amounts of radiation are released. Just as electrons and positrons emit the tell-tale gamma rays upon annihilation, so too can gamma rays combine to form electrons and positrons, providing the mechanism for the creation of the antimatter cloud, scientists think. Integral stands for the International Gamma-Ray Astrophysics Laboratory. Description Integral is the first space observatory that can simultaneously observe objects in gamma rays, X-rays, and visible light. Its principal targets are violent explosions known as gamma-ray bursts, powerful phenomena such as supernova explosions, and regions in the Universe thought to contain black holes. Launch 17 October 2002 (Proton launcher from Baikonur, Kazakhstan). Status: In operation. Journey Integral circles the Earth in a highly elliptical orbit once every three days. It spends most of its time at an altitude higher than 60 000 kilometres - well outside the Earth's radiation belts. It does this to avoid the background radiation effects which would interfere with the measurement of gamma rays. Notes Integral is the most sensitive, accurate, and advanced gamma-ray observatory ever launched. The SPI instrument on board ESA's Integral has performed a search for 511 keV emission (resulting from positron-electron annihilation) all over the sky. The figure represents the results of this search: the all-sky map in galactic co-ordinates shows that 511 keV emission is - so far - only seen towards the center of our Galaxy. The SPI data are equally compatible with galactic bulge or halo distributions, the combination of a bulge and a disk component, or a combination of a number of point sources. Such distributions are expected if positrons originate either from low-mass X-ray binaries, novae, Type Ia supernovae, or possibly light 'dark matter'. Billions and billions The researchers calculate that a relatively ordinary star getting torn apart by a black hole or neutron star orbiting around it - a so-called "low mass X-ray binary" - could spew on the order of one hundred thousand billion billion billion billion positrons (a 1 followed by 41 zeroes) per second. These could account for a great deal of the antimatter that scientists have inferred, reducing or potentially eliminating the need for exotic explanations such as ones involving dark matter. The Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope (GLAST) will open this high-energy world to exploration and help us to answer these questions. With GLAST, astronomers will at long last have a superior tool to study how black holes, notorious for pulling matter in, can accelerate jets of gas outward at fantastic speeds. Physicists will be able to study subatomic particles at energies far greater than those seen in ground-based particle accelerators. And cosmologists will gain valuable information about the birth and early evolution of the Universe. GLAST will carry two instruments, the Large Area Telescope (LAT) and the GLAST Burst Monitor (GBM), to study the extreme universe, where nature harnesses energies far beyond anything scientists can achieve in their most elaborate experiments on Earth. In November of 2007 Scientists of the Pierre Auger Collaboration announced that active galactic nuclei are the most likely candidate for the source of the highest-energy cosmic rays that hit Earth. Using the Pierre Auger Observatory in Argentina, the largest cosmic-ray observatory in the world, a team of scientists from 17 countries found that the sources of the highest-energy particles are not distributed uniformly across the sky. Instead, the Auger results link the origins of these mysterious particles to the locations of nearby galaxies that have active nuclei in their centers. The results appearred in the Nov. 9 issue of the journal Science. Active Galactic Nuclei (AGN) are thought to be powered by supermassive black holes that are devouring large amounts of matter. They have long been considered sites where high-energy particle production might take place. They swallow gas, dust and other matter from their host galaxies and spew out particles and energy. While most galaxies have black holes at their center, only a fraction of all galaxies have an AGN. There have been conjectures about its possible link with the production of high energy particles. Scientists think that most of the galaxies present black holes in the centre, with a mass of between one million and thousand million times the solar mass. The one of the Milky Way, our galaxy, has about 3 million solar masses. Galaxies with an active nucleus seem to be those which have suffered any collision with another galaxy or any important disturbance in the last hundred million years. The AGN capture the mass that falls in their gravity field releasing prodigious amounts of energy in particle jets. Auger’s result shows that AGN can produce the most energetic particles in the Universe. Antimatter Cloud Discovered Data from the European Space Agency's "Integral" satellite indicated that the cloud's distribution is similar to that of a group of binary star systems containing black holes or neutron stars. From NASA's article: "The cloud itself is roughly 10,000 light-years across, and generates the energy of about 10,000 Suns. The cloud shines brightly in gamma rays due to a reaction governed by Einstein's famous equation E=mc^2. Integral found that the cloud extends farther on the western side of the galactic center than it does on the eastern side. Integral found certain types of binary systems near the galactic center are also skewed to the west. Because the two "pictures" of antimatter and hard low-mass X-ray binaries line up strongly suggests the binaries are producing significant amounts of positrons." Georg Weidenspointner at the Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics and an international team of astronomers made the discovery using four-years-worth of data from Integral. The cloud shows up because of the gamma rays it emits when individual particles of antimatter, in this case positrons, encounter electrons, their normal matter counterpart, and annihilate one another. One signature of positron-electron annihilation is gamma rays carrying 511 thousand electron-volts (keV) of energy. There has been a vigorous debate about the origin of these positrons ever since the discovery of the 511 keV emission from the centre of the galaxy by gamma-ray detectors flown on balloons during the 1970s. Some astronomers have suggested that exploding stars could produce the positrons. This is because radioactive nuclear elements are formed in the giant outbursts of energy, and some of these decay by releasing positrons. However, it is unclear whether these positrons can escape from the stellar debris in sufficient quantity to explain the size of the observed cloud. Integral is currently the only mission that can see both the 511 keV radiation and the hard LMXBs. Weidenspointner and colleagues will be watching keenly to see whether it discovers more LMXBs and, if so, where they are located. “The link between LMXBs and the antimatter is not yet proven but it is a consistent story,” says Weidenspointner. It has real astrophysical importance because it decreases the need for dark matter at the centre of our galaxy. Notes for editors: ‘An asymmetric distribution of positrons in the galactic disk revealed by gamma rays’ by Georg Weidenspointner et al. is being published on 10 January, in the journal Nature. For more information: Georg Weidenspointner, Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics Email: Georg.Weidenspointner @ hll.mpg.de The catch? Right now it would cost about One-Hundred-Billion dollars to create one milligram of antimatter. One milligram is way beyond what is needed for research purposes, but that amount would be needed for large scale applications. To be commercially viable, this price would have to drop by about a factor of Ten-Thousand. And what about using antimatter for power generation? - not promising. It costs far more energy to create antimatter than the energy one could get back from an antimatter reaction. Right now standard nuclear reactors, which take advantage of the decay of radioactive substances, are far more promising as power generating technology than antimatter. Something to keep in mind, too, is that antimatter reactions - where antimatter and normal matter collide and release energy, require the same safety precautions as needed with nuclear reactions. Now that they have witnessed the death of antimatter, the scientists hope to see its birth. "It would be interesting if black holes produced more matter than neutron stars, or vice versa, although it's too early to say one way or the other right now," Skinner explained. "It can be surprisingly hard to tell the difference between an X-ray binaries that hold black holes and neutron stars." Weidenspointner, Skinner and their colleagues, detailed their findings in the Jan. 10 issue of the journal Nature.

After years of detailed study and analysis, the Food and Drug Administration has concluded that meat and milk from clones of cattle, swine, and goats, and the offspring of clones from any species traditionally consumed as food, are as safe to eat as food from conventionally bred animals. There was insufficient information for the agency to reach a conclusion on the safety of food from clones of other animal species, such as sheep. FDA today issued three documents on animal cloning outlining the agency's regulatory approach – a risk assessment; a risk management plan; and guidance for industry. The documents were originally released in draft form in December 2006. Since that time, the risk assessment has been updated to include new scientific information. That new information reinforces the food safety conclusions of the drafts. In 2001, U.S. producers agreed to refrain from introducing meat or milk from clones or their progeny into the food supply until FDA could further evaluate the issue. The U.S. Department of Agriculture will convene stakeholders to discuss efforts to provide a smooth and orderly market transition, as industry determines next steps with respect to the existing voluntary moratorium. The agency is not requiring labeling or any other additional measures for food from cattle, swine, and goat clones, or their offspring because food derived from these sources is no different from food derived from conventionally bred animals. Should a producer express a desire for voluntary labeling (e.g., "this product is clone-free"), it will be considered on a case-by-case basis to ensure compliance with statutory requirements that labeling be truthful and not misleading. Because clones would be used for breeding, they would not be expected to enter the food supply in any significant number. Instead, their sexually reproduced offspring would be used for producing meat and milk for the marketplace. At this time, the agency continues to recommend that food from clones of species other than cattle, swine and goat (e.g., sheep) not be introduced into the food supply. An animal clone is a genetic copy of a donor animal, similar to an identical twin, but born at a different time. Cloning is not the same as genetic engineering, which involves altering, adding or deleting DNA; cloning does not change the gene sequence. Due to their cost and rarity, clones are intended to be used as elite breeding animals to introduce desirable traits into herds more rapidly than would be possible using conventional breeding. Risk assessment The risk assessment finds that meat and milk from clones of cattle, swine, and goats, and food from the sexually reproduced offspring of clones, are as safe to eat as food from conventionally bred animals. The science-based conclusions agree with those of the National Academy of Sciences, released in a 2002 report. The assessment was peer-reviewed by a group of independent scientific experts in cloning and animal health. They found the methods FDA used to evaluate the data were adequate and agreed with the conclusions set out in the document. The risk assessment presents an overview of assisted reproductive technologies widely used in animal agriculture, the extensive scientific information available on the health of animal clones and their sexually reproduced offspring, and an assessment of whether food from clones or their sexually reproduced offspring could pose food consumption risks different from the risks posed by food from conventionally bred animals. These conclusions were first presented in draft documents over a year ago. Since then, the agency has updated the risk assessment with data that became available, as well as taking into account comments from the public comment period. "After reviewing additional data and the public comments in the intervening year since the release of our draft documents on cloning, we conclude that meat and milk from cattle, swine, and goat clones are as safe as food we eat every day," said Stephen F. Sundlof, D.V.M., Ph.D., director of FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. "Our additional review strengthens our conclusions on food safety." Risk management plan The risk management plan outlines measures that FDA has taken to address the risks that cloning poses to animals involved in the cloning process. These risks all have been observed in other assisted reproductive technologies currently used in common agricultural practices in the United States. FDA is currently working with scientific and professional societies with expertise in animal health and reproduction to develop standards of care for animals involved in the cloning process. Although the agency is not charged with addressing ethical issues related to animal cloning for agricultural purposes, FDA plans to continue to provide scientific expertise to interested parties working on these issues. Guidance for industry The guidance for industry addresses the use of food and feed products derived from clones and their offspring. It is directed at clone producers, livestock breeders, and farmers and ranchers purchasing clones, and provides the agency's current thinking on use of clones and their offspring in human food or animal feed. In the guidance, FDA does not recommend any special measures relating to the use of products from cattle, swine, or goat clones as human food or animal feed. Because insufficient information was available on clones from other species, e.g., sheep clones, to make a decision on the food consumption risks, the guidance recommends that food products from clones of other species continue to be excluded from the human food supply. The guidance states that food products from the offspring of clones from any species traditionally consumed for food are suitable to enter the food and feed supply.

Sorry for the confusion, but I need you to clarify how this can be done in the present system. How can a Republican be President, with a HARDCORE Democrat Vice President? They both run as an independant party ticket? Mike Bloomberg? I think Republicans and Democrats will try to lock him out of the debates. Did you see how the Nevada Court ruled that MSNBC can bar Kucinich from the Presidential Debate. Senior Clark County District Court Judge Charles Thompson vowed to issue an injunction halting the nationally televised debate if MSNBC failed to comply. NBC Universal filed and won an emergency appeal to the Nevada Supreme Court to overturn the judge's decision. I like your idea human, but I just don't see how it would work.

So are you talking about having general elections that would give The winner of the most popular vote gets to be President. The runner up gets to be Vice President. I am reminded of the election of 1800 Working closely with Aaron Burr of New York, Jefferson rallied his party, attacking the new taxes especially, and stood for the Presidency in 1800. Prior to the passage of the 12th Amendment, a problem with the new union's electoral system arose. He tied with Burr for first place in the Electoral College, leaving the House of Representatives (where the Federalists still had some power) to decide the election. After lengthy debate within the Federalist-controlled House, Hamilton convinced his party that Jefferson would be a lesser political evil than Burr and that such scandal within the electoral process would undermine the still-young regime. The issue was resolved by the House, on 17 February 1801 after thirty-six ballots, when Jefferson was elected President and Burr Vice President. Burr's refusal to remove himself from consideration created ill will with Jefferson, who dropped Burr from the ticket in 1804 after Burr killed Hamilton in a duel. http://www.washdc.com/2325

Investigators from five countries, led by Eric Rignot of NASA's fabled Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), used interferometry radar from four satellites to build a picture of the periphery of Antarctica. They sought to measure the velocities of glaciers that shift ice to the coast from the massive sheets that cover Antarctica's bedrock. They built up a picture of around 85 per cent of Antarctica's coastline thanks to the data supplied by the European Space Agency's two Earth Remoting Sensing (ERS) satellites, the Canadian Radarsat-1 and Japan's Advanced Land Observing satellites. "Most of the mass loss is from the Pine Island Bay sector of West Antarctica and the northern tip of the Peninsula, where it is driven by ongoing, pronounced glacier acceleration. Pine Island Bay host the two largest dischargers of ice in Antarctica, Pine Island Glacier and Thwaites Glacier. "Over the time period of our survey, the ice sheet as a whole was certainly losing mass, and the mass loss increased by 75 percent in 10 years," according to the study, published online by the specialist journal Nature Geoscience.

The Ulysses spacecraft today is making a rare flyby of the sun's north pole. Unlike any other spacecraft, Ulysses is able to sample winds at the sun's poles, which are difficult to study from Earth. Ulysses has flown over the sun's poles three times before, in 1994-95, 2000-01 and 2007. Last week, solar physicists announced the first indications of a new solar cycle. Visiting the pole at this time may lead to new insights about solar activity. "This is a wonderful opportunity to examine the sun's north pole within a transition of cycles," said Arik Posner, Ulysses program scientist at NASA Headquarters in Washington. "We've never done this before." Many researchers believe the sun's poles are central to the 11-year ebb and flow of solar activity. When sunspots break up, their decaying magnetic fields are carried poleward by vast currents of plasma. This makes the poles a sort of graveyard for sunspots. Old magnetic fields sink beneath the polar surface 200,000 kilometers deep (about 124,000 miles), all the way down to the sun's inner magnetic dynamo, which generates the solar magnetic field. There, dynamo action amplifies the fields for use in future solar cycles. "Just as Earth's poles are crucial to studies of terrestrial climate change, the sun's poles may be crucial to studies of the solar cycle," said Ed Smith, Ulysses project scientist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif. Each previous flyby revealed something interesting and mysterious. One puzzle has been the temperature of the sun's poles. In the previous solar cycle, the magnetic north pole was about 80,000 degrees Fahrenheit (more than 44,000 degrees Celsius), or 8 percent cooler than the south. The current flyby may help solve this puzzle because it comes less than a year after a similar south pole flyby in Feb. 2007. Mission scientists will be able to compare temperature measurements, north versus south, with hardly any gap between them. Ulysses also discovered the sun's high-speed polar wind. At the sun's poles, the magnetic field opens up and allows solar atmosphere to stream out at a million miles per hour. By flying around the sun, covering all latitudes in a way that no other spacecraft can, Ulysses has been able to monitor this polar wind throughout the solar cycle and has found that it is acting a bit odd. "Twelve years ago, just before the previous 'sea change' between solar cycles, the polar wind spilled down almost all the way to the sun's equator. But this time it is not. The polar wind is bottled up, confined to latitudes above 45 degrees, " said Posner. Launched in Oct. 1990 from the space shuttle Discovery, Ulysses is a joint mission of NASA and the European Space Agency.

I think we need to focus on what Ron is stating. 1992 to 2003, the trade deficit with China grew from $18.3 billion to $124.0 billion, which is larger than the deficit with any other country. However, much of the increase in imports from China reflects a shift away from imports from other Asian countries rather than an increase in total imports. In fact, while U.S. imports attributable to China increased from 5 percent in 1992 to 12 percent in 2003, the share of imports from other Pacific Rim countries declined from 34 percent to 21 percent. We also need to underderstand that during this same period the displacement of production cost Americans 1.5 million U.S. jobs. Walmart China Strategy No one will argue that Wal-Mart is a unique company in terms of its impact and its influence on changing corporate business and labor practices. As the largest retailer on Earth, Wal-Mart is most conspicuously unique in terms of its size. With nearly 3,550 stores visited by roughly 100 million people each week, Wal-Mart is a convenient shopping mecca for American consumers. Reporting $256 billion in revenues for the 2004 fiscal year, Wal-Mart ranks as the world's largest corporation by sales -- even pulling in $33 billion more than oil giant Exxon-Mobil, the world's second highest income-earner. As the largest retailer on Earth, Wal-Mart is most conspicuously unique in terms of its size. With nearly 3,550 stores visited by roughly 100 million people each week, Wal-Mart is a convenient shopping mecca for American consumers. Did you know Wal-Mart is responsible for approximately 10 percent of the United States' trade deficit with China. It is remarkable how easily the benefits of open trade can elude our nation in the absence of a true commitment to international cooperation. China has moved aggressively up the product ladder from labor-intensive non-durable products (e.g., clothes and shoes), to more sophisticated machinery and durable goods.China now accounts for the entire $32 billion U.S. trade deficit in Advanced Technology Products (ATP). China is also rapidly gaining advantage in more advanced industries such as autos and aerospace products. Where Are the Jobs for America? The claim that new trade agreements will create jobs and raise incomes in the United States has frequently been made by supporters of these agreements in both Republican and Democratic administrations. President Bush called the Senate’s 2002 approval of fast-track trade negotiating authority (or Trade Promotion Authority, as it is now labeled) a "historic moment" that would lead to the creation of more jobs and more sales of American products abroad (Bush 2002a). Two weeks later, at his economic forum in Texas, he argued that “it is essential that we move aggressively [to negotiate new trade pacts], because trade means jobs. More trade means higher incomes for American workers.” The Clinton administration confidently forecast that the huge U.S. trade deficit with China would improve if Congress ratified the agreement to bring China into the WTO. President Clinton called the agreement “a win-win result for both countries”. He pointed to growing exports to China that “now support hundreds of thousands of American jobs,” and claimed, “these figures can grow substantially with the new access to the Chinese market the WTO agreement creates”. I understand that our government leaders embrace varying issues at different times, reflecting, among other things, the relative standing of their economies in the international order, and the priorities imposed by their level of economic development. I challenge our leaders to adapt to this change before outside interests shape our country's future for us.

From the video it seems that Obama was actually singing the National Anthem. So, I think his patriotism is not really in question. I think alot of people do not really know about observances and holidays. I remember in grade school I was taught the 'Pledge of Allegiance.' But, I never had to stand up in class during and give the Pledge of Allegiance during high school or college. No one actually formally taught me the The National Anthem, "The Star Spangled Banner" until I was in the military. Although, it was quite clear at every major sporting event I went to what the custom is to do.

There is a 'chain' email going around about a picture where Barack Obama does not have his hand on his heart during the National Anthem. http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29...1446035,00.html The laws relating to the flag of the United States of America are found in detail in the United States Code. TITLE 36--PATRIOTIC AND NATIONAL OBSERVANCES, CEREMONIES, AND ORGANIZATIONS Subtitle I--Patriotic and National Observances and Ceremonies Part A--Observances and Ceremonies CHAPTER 3--NATIONAL ANTHEM, MOTTO, FLORAL EMBLEM \1\ MARCH, AND TREE Sec. 301. National anthem ( a ) Designation.--The composition consisting of the words and music known as the Star-Spangled Banner is the national anthem. ( b ) Conduct During Playing.--During a rendition of the national anthem-- ( 1 ) when the flag is displayed-- ( A ) all present except those in uniform should stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart; ( B ) men not in uniform should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold the headdress at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart; and ( C ) individuals in uniform should give the military salute at the first note of the anthem and maintain that position until the last note; and ( 2 ) when the flag is not displayed, all present should face toward the music and act in the same manner they would if the flag were displayed. http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/ge...=Cite:+36USC301

Congress needs to make appropriate responses to this critical situation. To restore our country to normal economic health Congress and the President need to appropriate funds to rebuild our infrastructure. We need to repair our bridges, schools, roads, and the environment. Such investments would address existing needs that would otherwise go unmet during a downturn. Such investments would be less likely than other kinds of expenditures to "leak" to other countries through purchases of imports. They would generate jobs not only for those working directly on these projects but would also boost and expand the businesses that supply parts and materials.

110TH CONGRESS 1ST SESSION H. R. ll To direct the Administrator of General Services to reimburse certain jurisdictions for the costs of obtaining paper ballot voting systems for the general elections for Federal office to be held in November 2008, to reimburse jurisdictions for the costs incurred in conducting audits of the results of the general elections for Federal office to be held inNovember 2008, and for other purposes. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Mr. HOLT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee A BILL To direct the Administrator of General Services to reimburse certain jurisdictions for the costs of obtaining paper ballot voting systems for the general elections for Federal office to be held in November 2008, to reimburse jurisdictions for the costs incurred in conducting audits of the results of the general elections for Federal office to be held in November 2008, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Confidence in Voting Act of 2007’’. PAYMENTS TO CERTAIN JURISDICTIONS CONDUCTING 2008 GENERAL ELECTIONS. ( a ) REIMBURSEMENT FOR CONVERSION TO PAPER BALLOT VOTING SYSTEM. ( 1 ) IN GENERAL. The Administrator of General Services shall pay to each eligible jurisdiction an amount equal to the sum of the following: ( A ) The documented reasonable costs paid or incurred by such jurisdiction to replace any voting systems used to conduct the general elections for Federal office held in November 2006 that did not use or produce a paper ballot verified by the voter or a paper ballot printout verifiable by the voter at the time the vote is cast with paper ballot voting systems. ( B ) The documented reasonable costs paid or incurred by such jurisdiction to obtain nontabulating ballot marking devices that are accessible for individuals with disabilities in accordance with the requirements of section 301(a)(3) of the Help America Vote Act of 25 2002. ( C ) The documented reasonable costs paid or incurred by such jurisdiction to obtain ballot marking stations or voting booths for the protection of voter privacy. ( D ) The documented reasonable costs paid or incurred by such jurisdiction to obtain paper ballots. ( 2 ) ELIGIBLE JURISDICTION DEFINED In this subsection, an ‘‘eligible jurisdiction’’ means a jurisdiction that submits to the Administrator (and, in the case of a county or equivalent jurisdiction, provides a copy to the State), at such time and in such form as the Administrator may require, an application containing— ( A ) assurances that the jurisdiction conducted regularly scheduled general elections for Federal office in November 2006 using (in whole or in part) a voting system that did not use or produce a paper ballot verified by the voter or a paper ballot printout verifiable by the voter at the time the vote is cast; ( B ) assurances that the jurisdiction will conduct the regularly scheduled general elections for Federal office to be held in November 25 2008 using only paper ballot voting systems; ( C ) assurances that the jurisdiction has obtained or will obtain a sufficient number of non-tabulating ballot marking devices that are accessible for individuals with disabilities in accordance with the requirements of section 301( a )( 3 ) of the Help America Vote Act of 7 2002; ( D ) assurances that the jurisdiction has obtained or will obtain a sufficient number of ballot marking stations or voting booths for the protection of voter privacy; ( E ) assurances that the jurisdiction has obtained or will obtain a sufficient number of paper ballots; ( F ) such information and assurances as the Administrator may require to make the determinations under paragraph (1); and ( G ) such other information and assurances as the Administrator may require. ( 3 ) DETERMINATIONS OF REASONABLENESS OF COSTS. The determinations under paragraph ( 1 ) of whether costs paid or incurred by a jurisdiction are reasonable shall be made by the Administrator in consultation with the Election Assistance Commission. ( 4 ) PAPER BALLOT VOTING SYSTEM DEFINED. In this subsection, a ‘‘paper ballot voting system’’ means a voting system that uses a paper ballot marked by the voter by hand or a paper ballot marked by the voter with the assistance of non-tabulating ballot marking devices described in paragraph ( 1 )( B ). 8 ( b ) REIMBURSEMENT FOR PROVISION OF EMERGENCY PAPER BALLOTS BY JURISDICTIONS USING DIRECT RECORDING ELECTRONIC VOTING SYSTEMS. ( 1 ) IN GENERAL The Administrator shall pay to each eligible jurisdiction an amount equal to the documented reasonable costs paid or incurred by such jurisdiction to obtain emergency paper ballots (and related supplies and equipment) that may be used in the event of the failure of a direct recording electronic voting system in the regularly scheduled general elections for Federal office to be held in No19 vember 2008. ( 2 ) ELIGIBLE JURISDICTION DEFINED. In this subsection, an ‘‘eligible jurisdiction’’ means a jurisdiction that submits to the Administrator (and, in the case of a county or equivalent jurisdiction, provides a copy to the State), at such time and in such form as the Administrator may require, an application containing ( A ) assurances that the jurisdiction will post, in a conspicuous manner at all polling places at which a direct recording electronic voting system will be used in such elections, a notice stating that emergency paper ballots are available at the polling place and that a voter is entitled to use such a ballot upon the failure of a voting machine; ( B ) assurances that the jurisdiction counts each such emergency paper ballot cast by a voter as a regular ballot cast in the election, and does not treat it (for eligibility purposes) as a provisional ballot under section 302 ( a ) of the Help America Vote Act of 2002, unless the individual casting the ballot would have otherwise been required to cast a provisional ballot; ( C ) such information and assurances as the Administrator may require to make the determinations under paragraph (1); and ( D ) such other information and assurances as the Administrator may require. ( 3 ) DETERMINATION OF REASONABLENESS OF COSTS. The determinations under paragraph (1) of whether costs paid or incurred by a jurisdiction are reasonable shall be made by the Administrator in consultation with the Election Assistance Commission. ( c ) AMOUNTS. There are authorized to be appropriated to the Administrator $500,000,000 for payments under this section. Any amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization under this subsection shall remain available until expended. SEC. 3. PAYMENTS FOR CONDUCTING MANUAL AUDITS OF RESULTS OF 2008 GENERAL ELECTIONS. ( a ) PAYMENTS. ( 1 ) ELIGIBILITY FOR PAYMENTS. If a State, county, or equivalent location conducts manual audits of the results of any of the regularly scheduled general elections for Federal office in November 17 2008 (and, at the option of the State or jurisdiction involved, conducts audits of elections for State and local office held at the same time as such election) in accordance with the requirements of this section, the Administrator shall make a payment to the State, county, or equivalent location in an amount equal to the documented reasonable costs incurred by the State, county, or equivalent location in conducting the audits. ( 2 ) CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE AND COSTS. ( A ) CERTIFICATION REQUIRED In order to receive a payment under this section, a State, county, or equivalent location shall submit to the Administrator (and, in the case of a county or equivalent jurisdiction, shall provide a copy to the State), in such form as the Administrator may require, a statement containing ( i ) a certification that the State, county, or equivalent location conducted the audits in accordance with all of the requirements of this section; ( ii ) a statement of the reasonable costs incurred by the State, county, or equivalent location in conducting the audits; and ( iii ) such other information and assurances as the Administrator may require. ( B ) AMOUNT OF PAYMENT The amount of a payment made to a State, county, or equivalent location under this section shall be equal to the reasonable costs incurred by the State,county, or equivalent location in conducting the audits. ( C ) DETERMINATION OF REASONABLENESS OF COSTS. The determinations under this paragraph of whether costs incurred by a State, county, or equivalent location are reasonable shall be made by the Administrator in consultation with the Election Assistance Commission. ( 3 ) TIMING OF PAYMENTS. The Administrator shall make the payment required under this section to a State, county, or equivalent location not later than 30 days after receiving the statement submitted by the State, county, or equivalent location under paragraph ( 2 ). ( 4 ) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS There are authorized to be appropriated to the Administrator $100,000,000 for payments under this section. Any amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization under this subsection shall remain available until expended. ( b ) AUDITS DESCRIBED. ( 1 ) IN GENERAL. An audit conducted in accordance with this section is an audit administered by a State, county, or equivalent location, without advance notice of the precincts selected, consisting of the random selection of precincts or alternative audit units to be audited and hand counting of the votes cast on the paper ballots used in the election (including paper ballot printouts verifiable by the voter at the time the vote is cast) attributable to those precincts or alternative audit units, and the comparison of the results of those hand counts with the corresponding final unofficial vote count (as defined by the State, county, or equivalent location) of the votes cast in the election. ( 2 ) COMPLETENESS With respect to each precinct or alternative audit unit audited in accordance with the method selected under subsection ( c )( 2 ), the State, county, or equivalent location shall ensure that a voter verified paper ballot or paper ballot printout verifiable by the voter at the time the vote s cast is available for every vote cast in the precinct or alternative audit unit, and that the tally produced by counting all of those paper ballots by hand is compared with the corresponding final unofficial vote count (as defined by the State, county, or equivalent location) announced with respect to that precinct or audit unit in the election. ( 3 ) DETERMINATION OF ENTITY CONDUCTING AUDITS; INDEPENDENCE STANDARDS An audit administered by a State, county, or equivalent location in accordance with this section shall be overseen by an entity selected for such purpose by the State, county, or equivalent location in accordance with such criteria as the State, county, or equivalent location considers appropriate consistent with the requirements of this section, except that the entity must meet a general standard of independence as defined by the State, county, or equivalent location. ( 4 ) REFERENCES TO ELECTION AUDITOR. In this section, the term ‘‘Election Auditor’’ means, with respect to a State, county, or equivalent location, the entity selected by the State, county, or equivalent location under paragraph ( 3 ). ( c ) NUMBER OF BALLOTS COUNTED UNDER AUDIT ( 1 ) IN GENERAL.—The hand counts of the paper ballots administered by the Election Auditor of a State, county, or equivalent location under this section with respect to an election shall occur in at least 3 percent of all precincts or equivalent locations (or alternative audit units used in accordance with the method provided for under paragraph ( 2 )). ( 2 ) USE OF ALTERNATIVE SAMPLING MECHANISM Notwithstanding paragraph ( 1 ) (and subject to the completeness requirement set forth in sub2section ( b )( 2 )), a State, county, or equivalent location may adopt and apply an alternative sampling mechanism to determine the number of paper ballots which will be subject to hand counts in accordance with this section with respect to an election, so long as the alternative sampling mechanism uses the paper ballots verified by voters or paper ballot printouts verifiable by voters at the time the vote is cast to conduct the audit and the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology deter1mines that the alternative sampling mechanism will be at least as statistically effective in ensuring the accuracy of the election results as the sample size specified under paragraph ( 1 ). ( d ) PROCESS FOR ADMINISTERING AUDITS. ( 1 ) IN GENERAL The Election Auditor of a State, county, or equivalent location shall oversee the administration of an audit conducted under this section in accordance with the following procedures: ( A ) The Election Auditor shall commence the audit within 24 hours after the State, county, or equivalent location announces the final unofficial vote count (as defined by the State, county, or equivalent location) in each precinct in which votes are cast in the election which is the subject of the audit. ( B ) The Election Auditor shall complete the audit, resolve discrepancies discovered in the audit, and submit the audit report required under subsection ( f )( 1 ), prior to the certification by the State, county, or equivalent location of the results of the election. ( C ) Within each precinct or alternative audit unit, and subject to the completeness requirement set forth in subsection ( b )( 2 ), the audit shall include all ballots (including absentee ballots in accordance with the procedure set forth in subsection ( e )( 3 ) or otherwise, early ballots, and provisional ballots) cast by all individuals who voted in or are under the jurisdiction of the precinct or alternative audit unit with respect to which the audit takes place, without regard to the time, place, or manner in which the votes were cast. ( 2 ) USE OF ELECTION PERSONNEL. In administering the audits, the Election Auditor may utilize the services of jurisdiction personnel, including election administration personnel and poll workers, without regard to whether or not the personnel have professional auditing experience. ( 3 ) LOCATION The Election Auditor shall administer an audit conducted under this section at the location where the ballots cast in the election are stored and counted after the date of the election, or such other appropriate and secure location agreed upon by the Election Auditor and the individual who is responsible under State law for the custody of the ballots, and in the presence of the personnel who under State law are responsible for the custody of the ballots. ( 4 ) ADDITIONAL AUDITS IF CAUSE SHOWN ( A ) IN GENERAL If the Election Auditor finds that any of the hand counts administered under this section do not match the final unofficial vote count of the results of an election, the Election Auditor shall oversee the administration of hand counts under this section of such additional precincts (or equivalent jurisdictions) as the Election Auditor considers appropriate (in accordance with the procedures described in subparagraph ( B )) to resolve any concerns resulting from the audit and ensure the accuracy of the results. ( B ) ESTABLISHMENT AND PUBLICATION OF PROCEDURES GOVERNING ADDITIONAL AUDITS Prior to the date of the regularly scheduled general election for Federal office held in November 2008, a State, county, or equivalent location shall establish and publish procedures for carrying out the additional audits under this subsection, including the means by which the State, county, or equivalent location shall resolve any concerns resulting from the audit with finality and ensure the accuracy of the results. ( 5 ) PUBLIC OBSERVATION OF AUDITS Each audit conducted under this section shall be conducted in a manner that allows public observation of the entire process sufficient to confirm but not interfere with the proceedings. ( e ) SELECTION OF PRECINCTS ( 1 ) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph ( 3 ), the selection of the precincts in the State, county, or equivalent location in which the Election Auditor of the State, county, or equivalent location shall oversee the administration of hand counts in an audit conducted under this section shall be made by the Election Auditor on an entirely random basis using a uniform distribution in which all precincts in the State, county, or equivalent location have an equal chance of being selected, in accordance with procedures adopted by the State, county, or equivalent location, except that, consistent with the other requirements of this paragraph, in the case of an audit conducted by the State, at least one precinct or alternative audit unit shall be selected at random in each county or equivalent jurisdiction. ( 2 ) PUBLIC SELECTION The random selection of precincts under paragraph ( 1 ) shall be conducted in public, at a time and place announced in advance. ( 3 ) MANDATORY SELECTION OF PRECINCTS ESTABLISHED SPECIFICALLY FOR ABSENTEE BALLOTS If a State, county, or equivalent location establishes a separate precinct for purposes of counting the absentee ballots cast in an election and treats all absentee ballots as having been cast in that precinct, and if the State, county, or equivalent location does not make absentee ballots sortable by precinct and include those ballots in the hand count administered with respect to that precinct, subject to the completeness requirement set forth in subsection ( b )( 2 ), the State, county, or equivalent location shall divide absentee ballots into audit units approximately equal in size to the average precinct in the State, county, or equivalent location in terms of the number of ballots cast, and shall randomly select and include at least 3 percent of those audit units in the audit carried out in accordance with this section. ( 4 ) DEADLINE FOR ADOPTION OF PROCE5DURES Prior to the date of the regularly scheduled general election for Federal office held in November 2008, a State shall adopt and publish the procedures described in paragraph ( 1 ). ( f ) PUBLICATION OF RESULTS As soon as practicable after the completion of an audit conducted under this section, the Election Auditor of a State, county, or equivalent location shall submit to the Administrator the results of the audit, and shall include in the submission a comparison of the results of the election in the precinct as determined by the Election Auditor under the audit and the final unofficial vote count in the precinct as announced by the State, county, or equivalent location and all under votes, overvotes, blank ballots, and spoiled, voided or cancelled ballots, as well as a list of any discrepancies discovered between the initial, subsequent, and final hand counts overseen by the Election Auditor and such final unofficial vote count and any explanation for such discrepancies, broken down by the types of ballots which were subject to the audit. ( g ) REPORTS BY ADMINISTRATOR The Administrator shall publish promptly all reports on the results of audits conducted under this section that are submitted pursuant to this section. ( h ) DEADLINE FOR APPROVAL OF ALTERNATIVE BALLOT SAMPLING METHODS BY NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY The Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology shall, not later than 30 days after receiving a request by a State, county, or equivalent location for approval of an alternative ballot sampling method under subsection ( c )( 2 ), respond to the State, county, or equivalent location with confirmation as to whether or not the method is at least as statistically effective in ensuring the accuracy of the election results as the procedure described in subsection ( c )( 1 ). SEC. 4. STUDY, TESTING, AND DEVELOPMENT OF PRODUCTS AND PRACTICES TO ENSURE ACCESSIBILITY OF PAPER BALLOT VERIFICATION AND CASTING FOR CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS. ( a ) STUDY, TESTING, AND DEVELOPMENT. The Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (hereafter in this section referred to as the ‘‘Director’’) shall study, test, and develop products and practices that ensure the accessibility of paper ballot verification and casting for individuals with disabilities, for voters whose primary language is not English, and for voters with difficulties in literacy, including the mechanisms themselves and the processes through which the mechanisms are used. In carrying out this subsection, the Director shall specifically investigate existing and potential methods or devices, including non-electronic devices, that will assist such individuals and voters in creating voter verified paper ballots, presenting or transmitting the information printed or marked on such ballots back to such individuals and voters in an accessible form, and enabling the voters to cast the ballots. ( b ) REPORT Not later than June 30, 2009, the Director shall submit a report to Congress on the results of the studying, testing, and development of products and practices under subsection ( a ). ( c ) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS There are authorized to be appropriated to the Director to carry out this section $3,000,000, to remain available until expended. SEC. 5. DEFINITIONS. In this Act ( 1 ) the term ‘‘Administrator’’ means the Administrator of General Services; and ( 2 ) the term ‘‘State’’ includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, and the United States Virgin Islands.

Yeah, my buddy Alan is a preacher in Danville, Virginia. He called me up this December and told me that the whole town is changing. There are new stores popping up everywhere. I think the town is getting prepared for all the miners and support workers. Alan thought that this may be the biggest deposit of uranium ever found. The only thing he did not like was how the local government is keeping this hush, hush. There are alot of farms in this location. I wonder if the big guys are quietly buying up all the mining rights. We are standing on the brink of a perpetual energy crisis. The uranium boom will last for many years. It sure would be good for economy.

Human, I agree that this of major concern. Egypt may be building this as deterrent, but more likely its economic. People are giving their lives for energy. But, really where is all this energy going? Where is the gross revenue going? I bet, into the pockets of few.