| |
|
Wednesday, December 6, 2006
|
|
Here's an analysis (pdf) of the 2006 election from the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. They write, "In the November 2006 elections, a ballot measure banning same sex marriage failed for the first time in Arizona. In addition, similar measures on the ballot in nine states in 2006 attracted substantially less support than in 2004. To what extent does this indicate that the national wave of enthusiasm for banning same-sex marriage has subsided? And how are lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) voters responding to a continued focus on issues that so clearly affect their lives?
"In this report, we explore these questions using election returns and exit poll data
compiled by the National Election Pool."
Thanks to Andrew Sullivan for the link.
"denver 2006"
9:07:11 PM 
|
|
Captains Quarters: "The Iraq Study Group released its long-awaited report today, and while it has some important information on the current state of our operation in Iraq, its recommendations descend from some strange Utopian vision of peace and brotherhood that only exists in the fevered imagination of the so-called realists. The ISG calls for a 'support group' of nations surrounding Iraq and relies on their supposed self-interest in a stable and functional Iraq."
Victor Davis Hanson (via Hugh Hewitt): "...they're talking about a country that once fought Italy, Japan and Germany all at once, defeated them, and then turned around and started the Cold War...I mean, the Cold War resistance of the Soviet Union, and they're saying that this same country, now twice the size, with much more material and military wealth, can't fight in Afghanistan and Iraq at once. That's sort of the poverty of their imagination, that we've taken our eye off the ball in Afghanistan, got bogged down in Iraq, and now we're helpless. We need Jim Baker to come in, we need Syria to come in, we need Iran to come in to help us. It's absurd, but it seems to be the prevailing opinion now."
"2008 pres"
6:52:59 PM
|
|
Wow, water will start flowing into the Owens Valley, out in California, again. This is a big deal indeed. Here's the story from the Christian Science Monitor. They write, "At a dusty desert ceremony 235 miles north of the city Wednesday, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa will close a century-long chapter on what may be the biggest water grab in the history of the American West. Mr. Villaraigosa will push a button to send water flowing down a 62-mile stretch of rocky culverts and scrubland once known as the Lower Owens River. The move effectively turns the clock back to 1913, before city fathers diverted the water that flowed down from the Sierra-Nevada Mountains, and channeled it to Los Angeles. That diversion, orchestrated after years of backroom deals (chronicled in the 1974 classic, 'Chinatown'), helped give rise to America's second-largest city. But it turned the mountain-ringed valley into a desert. Now, several officials call the current effort the most ambitious river restoration ever attempted in the US. It will create a flowing river through what is now dry land dotted only with tiny pools of runoff. The project comes after decades of animosity between northern and southern California that led to a 1970 court case and a 1997 promise by the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) to return the water by 2003...
"Mr. Nahai says that because four new pumps will then return the redirected water to the L.A. aqueduct after its 62-mile journey, the project will barely affect L.A.'s water supply. But the new agreement will mean Los Angeles customers will have to find about 9,000 acre feet of water - roughly the needs of 9,000 homes for one year - from other sources, such as the Colorado River, or through better reclamation, reuse, and conservation. But Nahai and other officials say the city has been successful with conservation efforts as a result of public education campaigns, tested during intermittent droughts since the 1980s. Though Los Angeles has added more than 750,000 residents since 1986, it uses the same amount of water today as then."
"colorado water"
6:08:18 AM
|
|
Democrats are bucking their image and organizing to further the recent gains seen here in the west, according to the Denver Post. From the article, "A group of the West's most influential Democrats is creating a new organization to try to capitalize on the party's recent success in the Rocky Mountain states and deliver the region's electoral votes to the Democratic ticket in 2008. The New West Project, headquartered in Denver, will conduct research and develop strategies to secure and exploit recent Democratic gains in the Western states, party sources said. At least four Western governors - Janet Napolitano of Arizona, Bill Richardson of New Mexico, Brian Schweitzer of Montana and Bill Ritter, Colorado's governor-elect - are expected to lead the group's advisory council, the sources said. Incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, Sen. Ken Salazar of Colorado and other members of Congress will provide "strategic guidance.' Reid confirmed the creation of the new organization, which he said would 'build upon the leadership of people such as governors Napolitano, Richardson and Schweitzer' and 'work to focus attention on the West.'[...]
"Doug Sosnik, who was a political adviser and White House counselor to President Clinton, is set to be the group's president, and Rep. Alice Madden, the Colorado House majority leader, will serve as vice president. Salazar said the new group would work to 'develop a regional Democratic strategy' that would shift the political spotlight "away from the coasts" and to the interior West. 'A few years ago, there was a sense that Democrats had been buried forever and that Republican domination in those states would characterize the first quarter of the new century,' Salazar said. 'We have succeeded in reversing those trends. We now have governors in five of the eight (mountain) states and have elected a U.S. senator in Montana ... and Colorado.' Reid spoke of how political analysts focused on Ohio's role in the 2004 election, where a switch of about 60,000 votes would have delivered the state's 20 electoral votes - and the White House - to the Democrats. But that same small swing of 60,000 out West, Reid said, would have won Democratic candidate Sen. John Kerry the 19 electoral votes of Nevada, Colorado and New Mexico, and the presidency. The Rocky Mountain region, Reid said, has been 'simply ignored in the past' by national Democrats. Recent gains by Democrats in Colorado, Arizona, Montana and other mountain states have demonstrated that Westerners "are not bound and determined to vote red (Republican) anymore.' In addition to promoting Western opportunities within the Democratic Party, sources said, the new organization will conduct polling research, analyze data from recent elections and stage conferences where prospective candidates, political scientists and other analysts can discuss the West and the Western electorate."
"2008 pres"
5:49:03 AM
|
|
What is the Sun's effect on climate change? Here's a story from the Innovations Report. From the article, "How much of global climate change is caused by fluctuations of the Sun's radiation? A reliable assessment of human-induced global warming requires an answer to this question. Now it appears that the influence of the solar cycle on Earth's climate is much less than most atmospheric scientists assumed so far. This is the argument of Jan Kazil, Edward R. Lovejoy, Mary C. Barth and Keran O'Brien from NOAA, NCAR, the University of Colorado and Northern Arizona University. They published their findings in the on-line journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics of the European Geosciences Union...
"During the minimum phase of the Sun's decadal activity cycle, the solar magnetic field weakens and allows more galactic cosmic rays to reach Earth's atmosphere. It appears that global cloud cover and reflectivity could be enhanced at solar minimum compared to solar maximum, and more sunlight reflected back to space.
"This is caused by a complex chain of events whereby more ions lead to an increased aerosol production in the atmosphere. In this paper Kazil and colleagues show that this effect accounts for a variation in warming of the Earth by the Sun of no more than 0.22 W/m2 in the course of a solar cycle. A second finding supports the theory that aerosol particles observed near the surface of tropical oceans may have their origin at higher altitudes, where they form from convectively lifted near-surface air.
"Clouds are brighter than the Earth's surface and reflect a considerable amount of the incoming solar radiation back to space. Hence, they strongly influence the planet's temperature and climate. Aerosols, which are small particles in the air, are essential for the formation of cloud droplets, and changes in aerosol concentrations and properties affect the reflectivity of clouds. Aerosols are either directly emitted into the atmosphere or form from gas phase constituents such as sulphuric acid.
"Atmospheric ions are likely to act as agents for the formation of liquid aerosols via the formation of "seed particles" (called condensation nuclei) because they greatly stabilize small clusters of molecules with respect to evaporation.
"The main source of ions in the atmosphere are galactic cosmic rays, whose intensity is modulated by the decadal solar activity cycle. It has therefore been suggested that the change in ion production resulting from the modulation of galactic cosmic rays by the solar cycle influence atmospheric aerosol concentrations. This, in turn, leads to a variation in cloud cover, and consequently the amount of sunlight reflected back to space."
"2008 pres"
5:43:31 AM
|
|
|
© Copyright 2009 John Orr.
Last update: 3/15/09; 12:16:15 PM.
|
|
|
