McCain, offshore drilling, China and Cuba

So the latest thing that has people on the far left and far right screaming is that McCain wants to lift ban on offshore drilling. The Right says he needs to drill ANWAR too, the Left says it proves he's not serious about the environment or global warming.

To me, it proves he's very much a genuine centrist. A centrist is willing to compromise, which always infuriates the extremists who are unwilling to bend.

I've been maintaining that many of the environmentalists are really just leftists wanting to use environmental causes to fight capitalism. Here is a good example. They don't want to let us drill off our coastlines, but they say nothing about Cuba hiring China to drill for oil just outside of where our drilling rights end. From last Friday's Nealz Nuze:

SO ... IS CHINA REALLY DRILLING OFF CUBA?

Yesterday Florida Senator Mel Martinez said that China drilling off the coast of Cuba was merely an urban legend. So because we here at the Neal Boortz Show are so incredibly fair and balanced ... we have tried to get to the bottom of this mystery. Here's what we found.

All the way back in 2004, China's Petrochemical Corporation known as Sinopec signed a memorandum of understanding with Cuba's national oil company, known as Cupet to explore four oil blocks in Cuba. Keep in mind that both of these companies are owned by their communist governments. China's Sinopec conducted six months of geological studies of the four Cuban blocks. This was the first attempt by Sinopec, China's second largest oil and gas company, to enter oil and gas exploration and production in Cuba.

Then in 2005, China's Sinopec signed an agreement with the Cuban government to jointly produce oil in Cuba off the coast of Pinar del R�o. Ok so let's get this straight. The governments of China and Cuba enter into a production sharing agreement ... what exactly does that mean? This is when the Cuban government awards the execution of exploration and production activities to an international oil company like Sinopec. The contractor bears the mineral and financial risk of the initiative and, when successful, recovers capital expenditure and costs incurred in the year (cost oil) by means of a share of production.

So now, for your reading pleasure (and Mel Martinez's) is a timeline of China's oil exploration efforts in Cuba. This is from the World Security Institute ...

2005

January 31: Cuba and China signed a contract in Havana providing for the Asian giant's participation in extracting oil from a deposit off the island's north shore, the press reported. The deal is between Cubapetroleos and the Chinese oil company Sinopec, said the official daily newspapaer Granma. In December, Fidel Castro announced discovery of oil at a site offshore from Santa Cruz del Norte, some 55 kilometers (33 miles) east of Havana. The deposit is believed to hold some 100 million barrels of "light" crude, or the equivalent of 14 million tons. (EFE, Prensa Latina, 31/1/05)
February 8: China's oil giants began cultivating their virgin soil in Cuba. China Petroleum & Chemical Corporation (Sinopec), as the first comer, has inked a contract with Cuba Oil Company (Cubapetroleo) to jointly exploit oil in the Caribbean country. Under the terms of their contract, the two sides will join forces to prospect and exploit a potential oil-producing region. Chinese experts believe it is a significant beginning of the cooperation between China and Cuba in the petroleum industry. (SinoCast, 8/2/05)
March 22: Chinese oil drilling equipment has begun arriving in Cuba as state-run Cubapetroleo (Cupet) and its foreign partners prepare to significantly increase drilling along the northwest coast, industry sources said. "Four service units and a small rig have arrived and we are waiting for more," said a Cuban oil service manager, asking his name not be used. There are currently five rigs operating along the northwest heavy oil belt, an 80-mile (128-km) stretch of coast in Havana and Matanzas provinces from whence come all of Cuba's 70,000 to 80,000 barrels per day of heavy crude at 8 API to 18 API and with a high sulfur content. The poor-quality oil is burned in modified power plants and factories. (Reuters, 22/3/05)

April 6: The operator of China's second-largest Shengli oilfield is stepping up overseas exploration, spending more on such ventures this year as the world's No. 2 oil user grapples with falling reserves, officials said. Shengli Oilfield Administration Bureau, a unit of state-run Sinopec Group, will spend about $40 million drilling for oil and gas in Cuba, Iran and central Asia in 2005, company officials said. "This will be the heaviest spending in a year and we expect the pace to continue in the next few years," a Shengli executive told the press. Shengli, which is among the first Chinese companies to venture abroad, will sink a total of eight wildcat and appraisal wells this year, four in Kazakhstan, two in Iran, and one each in Cuba and Kyrgyzstan. (Reuters, 6/4/05)

November 24: PetroChina Great Wall Drilling Co., Ltd. and Petroleum Company of Cuba held a ceremony for signing two drilling service contracts on November 3, 2005. It is the second-time cooperation between Great Wall Drilling Co., Ltd. and Petroleum Company of Cuba after the signing of a one-year petroleum service agreement on one 1500HP drilling rig and one 2000HP rig on April 8 this year. The contract signed this time includes three 2000HP drilling rigs. The contract has a period of one year and a value of over US$24 million. The project will be launched in January 2006. (China Chemical Reporter, 24/11/05)

December 22: Sinopec of China signed an agreement earlier this year to jointly produce heavy oil with Cupet in westernmost Pinar del R�o province, with drilling expected to begin in 2006. (The Oil Daily, 27/12/05)

Still not convinced Senator Martinez? Here are some more reports from 2005 from the Energy Intelligence Group and National Post's Financial Post & FP Investing in Canada.

... China is seeking oil everywhere and Cuba is no exception. Three large Chinese companies, SINOPEC, Petro China and CINOOC - China National Offshore Corporation, are involved in a large agreement, perhaps already underway, for coastal and deep-water explorations. Most significant to this topic, especially in light of other Chinese investment in Cuba, is the fact that Sinopec, China's second largest oil company, has stated a goal of helping boost Cuba's domestic oil production and producing 60% of its oil needs by 2006 ... Additional plans for exploration and development of other blocs of potential reserves were announced by two other Chinese oil companies, China National Petroleum Corp. and China National Offshore Oil Corp., after talks with CUPET, Cuba Petroleum. Some exploration will be in coastal regions but much, based on the better quality of the oil, will take place in off-shore deep waters.

Let's cut to the chase ... and pardon me if I scream here:

The point isn't that China is not presently drilling for oil within 90 miles of the U.S. The point is that they CAN! --- and, thanks to the Democrat congress --- we CAN'T.

Democrats would like us to wrangle over what IS happening. The issue is what CAN happen. They can drill. We can't. They're planning to. We aren't. Even government educated Democrat myrmidons can understand that.

So Cuba, with China's help (and the help of the Leftists in the USA), can drain the oil reserves WE don't ALLOW ourselves to drill, by drilling on the edge where our water rights end. The Commies win, we loose. Because we LET them.

John McCain, Global Warming, Cleaner Air, Silver Lined Clouds and Sweet Lemonade

I've been ranting a lot lately about supporting our candidate, even when you can't agree with him on many issues. It's clearly difficult when you don't agree with your party's potential leader. I've compared it to making lemonade out of lemons. Perhaps it's my turn to make the lemonade.

Anyone who's read my blog knows what I think about the global warming hoax. Anyone who sees the news knows that John McCain is actively playing up to it.

Yes, it bothers me. Many times in my life, I've embraced the philosophy of finding silver linings in clouds, or making lemonade out of lemons. And yes, I've applied it to this. I'll start with the cloud first. Yes, I found the silver lining. For me it is thus:

Pat recently used the word "Watermelons" to describe many of the people who dominate the environmental movement; they are green on the outside, red on the inside. Their concern for the environment is only skin deep, it's really just a cover for their leftist anti-capitalist agenda. Their main purpose is to use environmentalism to attack capitalism, the same way many leftists support gay rights, radical feminists and black separatists; they care nothing for these causes, they are just supported by leftists to be used as a means to an end.

I consider myself "green" in the genuine sense; things like recycling and conserving energy and using resources efficiently, and conserving our environment by developing renewable resources are, to me, wonderful conservative ideas. Authentic environmentalism doesn't bother me, but the watermelons like Al Gore and company do.

When president Bush first mentioned global warming in his state of the union address, I was quite annoyed with him. I suspect he was simply trying to address an issue that has many Americans concerned, because he is supposed to be president of all the people, and as such it's necessary to stretch yourself at times to address issues that may not be your own, or at least not your priority.

I expect the same with John McCain, but he has walked through the door George Bush opened, and taken this issue to the next level. What good could come out of this? I can honestly think of a few things:

1.) If he treats the issue moderately, he will be appreciated by moderates who want to see something done, while simultaneously taking some of the wind out of the sails of the loonies and the radical left who are egging them on.

2.) Many of the solutions that are desired by global warmist believers also mesh nicely with concerns of many Republicans like myself. Developing alternative energy sources, including nuclear power, reducing dependency on oil, conserving energy, less waste of resources... if we can agree on these things, even if it's for different reasons, then why shouldn't we?

3.) We end up with cleaner air. Is this a bad thing? We all need to breath, and so will future generations. The pollution we release into the air can't be called back, it just keeps building up. It builds up gradually and we don't notice. Then one day, it's too late. Nuclear waste can be contained, and 80 percent of it can now be recycled. Other alternate energy sources don't pollute. Placing caps on emissions would provide incentive to support and speed their development.

Ok, that's the silver lining. But there are dangers inherent here. No matter what McCain does, the radical left will scream that it's not enough, and push for more, to try and damage our economy as much a possible. But by treating their concerns seriously and attempting to do something about it, he's also entering a tug-of-war contest, that will bring him close to the edge of the hoax abyss. If he can maintain his position and balance, fine. If he gets pulled over the edge, it could be disastrous.

So then comes the question: can we make lemonade out of this? I'm willing to try, but it depends on how far left he gets dragged. If he's pulled too far, the lemons will be so sour that I doubt any amount of sugar could fix it. I'm hoping he can build enough moderate support in this cause, to anchor him and keep him away from the cliff's edge, where the extremists want to go. If he can maintain the necessary balance, I will support him in this... but cautiously.

Can We Sue Al Gore and Carbon Credit Sellers?

Here is a scathing article by Eric Creed of Cityview magazine:

The Greatest Hoax Ever Perpetrated

[...] OK, I am a skeptic. When every lunatic liberal leftist on the face of the planet says we need to close down the carbon emissions of industry (carbon caps) and spend trillions of dollars trying to fix something that (1.) we don’t know if we caused it (the factual evidence says we didn’t), and (2.) if we did cause global warming, is it really in our power to fix (reverse) it, red flags go up. Many leading scientists firmly believe that more CO2 in the atmosphere is actually good for the planet. David Archibald, PhD, at the Biology Department of San Diego State University, is one of those leading scientists. In a lecture given at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change, Dr. Archibald said that more CO2 in the atmosphere will give us a lusher environment and actually increase plant growth rates in addition to increasing the sustainability of crops in arid regions. [...]

This article is full of details about the fraudulent data that Al Gore and company have been peddling. At one point, it's suggested that Al Gore and people selling carbon credits should be sued for fraud. It would expose the financing behind the global warming hoax and allow testimony by reputable scientists who are informed with the complete data, not the faulty, incomplete and deliberately misleading computer models Al Gore has been using. Apparently this has been happening in Britain, and the real Inconvenient Truths have finally started to be debated honestly.

It's fine for people to be concerned about the environment, but debate and discussion about it has to be open and honest, and not ignore FACTS such as the sun's influence, and how the Earth's history is full of abrupt climate changes:

Study of Greenland Ice Finds Rapid Change in Past Climate

We have nothing to fear from the truth. Liars are a different matter.
     

President Bush Didn't Lie. Duh.

This isn't news to me. But to see it explained in detail, in the MSM, especially from a left-leaning source like the L.A. Times, is shocking:

Bush never lied to us about Iraq

[...] Four years on from the first Senate Intelligence Committee report, war critics, old and newfangled, still don't get that a lie is an act of deliberate, not unwitting, deception. If Democrats wish to contend they were "misled" into war, they should vent their spleen at the CIA.

In 2003, top Senate Democrats -- not just Rockefeller but also Carl Levin, Clinton, Kerry and others -- sounded just as alarmist. Conveniently, this month's report, titled "Whether Public Statements Regarding Iraq by U.S. Government Officials Were Substantiated by Intelligence Information," includes only statements by the executive branch. Had it scrutinized public statements of Democrats on the Intelligence, Foreign Relations and Armed Services committees -- who have access to the same intelligence information as the president and his chief advisors -- many senators would be unable to distinguish their own words from what they today characterize as warmongering.

This may sound like ancient history, but it matters. After Sept. 11, President Bush did not want to risk allowing Hussein, who had twice invaded neighboring nations, murdered more than 1 million Iraqis and stood in violation of 16 U.N. Security Council resolutions, to remain in possession of what he believed were stocks of chemical and biological warheads and a nuclear weapons program. By glossing over this history, the Democrats' lies-led-to-war narrative provides false comfort in a world of significant dangers. [...]

(bold emphasis mine) It's also worth noting that Weapons of Mass destruction were NOT the ONLY reason for the war. Hussein was destabilizing the region, he was certainly intent on developing WMD's, and by removing him, we got rid of the biggest WMD - himself.

Unfortunately, removing Saddam Hussein also got rid of Iran's biggest enemy in the region. Iran just needs to get rid of the US influence in the region now, so they can annex Iraq and it's oil to fuel their war machine and fund their global ambitions. It's yet another reason why we can't just pull out and leave. Iran is the other half of the equation that still needs to be dealt with.

And yes, we freed up Iraq so it could sell oil on the world market again, making us less dependent on the Saudis. If you think that's a bad thing, then shut up about gas prices. You can't have it both ways. Duh.

The article was written by James Kirchick, who is an assistant editor of the New Republic. There are some criticisms within it about Mitt Romney's father who was governor of Michigan. What's he got to do with it? Read it and find out, if history interests you.
     

Police Scanners part II; back to the $100 models

In an earlier post, "Learning Ham Radio; start with a Police Scanner?", I was looking at $200 scanners, attracted by all the bells and whistles. But since then, I've gotten my "Two-Way Radios & Scanners For Dummies" book, and after reading up on them, I think the $100 range would suit me fine.

Here are the top three I'm looking at now, from Radio Shack:


200-Channel VHF/AIR/UHF Desktop Scanner with 1-Touch Service
Some good friends of ours own this model, and recently they came to visit and brought it with them, so I got to see first hand how it works. Easy to use, and good reception. They use it in town, but even out here it picked up the police and sheriff's departments just fine. It gets 200 channels, and is programmable. It goes for $100, but I've seen it on sale for $79. It's got good reviews by users, but some reviewers claim it's little more than a toy. The one drawback I could see is that it only runs on AC power, no option for batteries, so if your power goes out, you're out of luck.


PRO-82 200-Channel Handheld Scanner
This model is also 200 channels. The manual is easy to read (the manuals for all these units are available for download as .pdf files), and it can run on batteries and is very mobile, great for traveling. It's $100.


PRO-433 1,000-Channel Triple-Trunking Desktop/Mobile Scanner
This last model is the one I think I'm leaning towards. It costs $120, but for that $20 more you get 1000 channels, 800Mgz capability, more frequencies, the ability to scan trunked radio systems, the option of batteries and the flexibility of mobility and portability. It's also gotten great reviews from customers.

I don't think any of the places I'd be scanning are using trunking, but if they upgrade to it later, I'll still be able to listen. I'll read up on them more, then visit our local Radio Shack and start asking questions, and see if I can clarify what would be the best for my situation.

I've also got the book: "Ham Radio For Dummies" by Ward Silver, the same author who wrote the scanner book, and I'm looking forward to reading it too. But first things first, and I think it will be focusing on a good scanner and making that purchase.
     

What it means to me, to be Republican

404

Page Not Found

Discovery Returns, Mission Accomplished

So what did they get done, besides the usual goofy zero gravity pics?





Plenty! They installed the main components of the Kibo science lab, the largest module on the station. Below is the interior of the lab:



Here is the exterior, with the storage unit placed on top:



Astronaut Nyberg looks out the shuttle window at the station as the shuttle departs:



Here is a closeup of the installed modules, taken from the shuttle after it departed:



Same photo, bigger view:



You can see more photos from the mission here:STS-124 Mission Photos

You can read more about the mission's conclusion here:
NASA, Astronauts Celebrate Successful Mission

Seven astronauts flew space shuttle Discovery back to NASA's Kennedy Space Center on Saturday to end the latest construction mission to the International Space Station.

Commander Mark Kelly and Pilot Ken Ham were at the controls of Discovery as it glided through Florida skies to touch down on time at 11:15 a.m. EDT.

Kelly, Ham and Mission Specialists Karen Nyberg, Ron Garan, Mike Fossum and Japan's Akihiko Hoshide spent 14 days in orbit installing the Japanese Pressurized Module to the space station. The module is the largest section of the Japanese laboratory called "Kibo," or hope. Garrett Reisman also returned onboard Discovery. He spent three months living on the space station.

Talking to the news media a few hours after landing, the crew of STS-124 beamed about the flight.

"I think I have the best space shuttle crew of all-time," Kelly said.

Although there are more pieces to add on future flights, Fossum said the addition of Kibo made the station look nearly complete.

"It was a great feeling of accomplishment as we backed away (from the station)," he said.

Hoshide, one of the astronauts of the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, spent time on Earth monitoring Kibo's preparation for space. Saying goodbye to it in orbit was not easy.

"When we went to close the hatch, that was a tender moment, it was kind of sad," he said.

NASA and Japanese officials hailed the flight just after landing.

"I can't think of a mission really that's been better than this one," said Bill Gerstenmaier, NASA's associate administrator of Space Operations. "We're starting to break that tie to planet Earth and get out and do what exploration is."

Discovery returned to its base in good shape, said Michael Leinbach, shuttle launch director.

"It's just a terrific day here at the Kennedy Space Center." [...]

     

Vicious Dustmop Attacks German Shepard

Hat Tip: Tammy Bruce
     

Democrats, Republicans, and Gas Prices

Which party has better for bringing down gas prices? From the Powerline blog:

Doing Something Constructive About Oil Prices

Republican whip Roy Blunt put together this chart showing the practical effects of Democratic vs. Republican policies on the price of gasoline at the pump; click to enlarge:

Follow the link to the Powerline blog for more details.
     

McCain has appeal to evangelicals, even as he clashes with some of their leadership

From Steven Waldman for the WSJ:

The Myth of McCain’s Weakness Among Evangelicals

[...] But is this conventional wisdom really true? Or to be more precise, Sen. McCain clearly has a problem with evangelical leaders — but does he really have a major problem with evangelical voters?

On the contrary, Sen. McCain won the nomination in part because he did far better than expected with rank-and-file evangelicals. [...]

In a recent Rasmussen poll, Sen. McCain was winning 58% of evangelicals, and his Democratic rival, Sen. Barack Obama, was winning 32%.

Running Stronger Among Rank and File

Why would Sen. McCain be doing so much better among evangelical voters than evangelical leaders?

First, the leadership’s disgust with Sen. McCain stems from the candidate’s treatment of them. His “agents of intolerance” speech was not an attack on evangelicals, but on a few of their leaders.

Second, some of the issues over which Christian leaders have chastised Sen. McCain are inside-the-beltway concerns that don’t resonate with rank-and-file voters. For instance, Christian leaders often cite Sen. McCain’s authorship of campaign finance legislation that they believe would restrict their lobbying and advocacy abilities. Most voters care little about this issue.

Third, though he’s reluctant to talk about his personal faith, in many ways Sen. McCain is substantively in perfect alignment with today’s evangelical voters. They tend to be conservative but have veered from the religious right on a few issues, one of which is climate change – the exact issue that Sen. McCain has highlighted as his point of departure with Republican orthodoxy.

Fourth, Sen. McCain’s support of the Iraq war, his war-hero history and his emphasis on fighting terrorism appeals to those Christians who feel that fighting Islam has risen to the top of the list of important issues for Christians. For many Christians, Islamofascism is the new “gay marriage.” [...]

I think there are some excellent insights in this article. Evangelicals are not a monolithic bloc that all think exactly the same, there is some diversity among their views, and they can be more flexible on some issues than they are generally given credit for. They are also capable of understanding which candidate will ultimately serve their interests best, even if they can't agree with that candidate on every issue.

John McCain has by no means got the evangelical vote "in the bag", but neither has he lost it. Evangelicals were leary of Reagan at first too, but he was eventually able to gain their support. McCain may be able to do the same.


Related Links:

While I'm no fan of Newsweek, this interview with John McCain was pretty good, addressing their BS very directly:

How to Beat a Rock Star: ‘Substance.’
There is, McCain says, 'a right change and a wrong change.' His general-election case, in his own words.

And these two posts from Pat are also worth reading:

A new post-partisan mood?

It's a "Democratic year" and McCain is the best Democrat

Since Reagan's time, conservative Democrats have been essential for Republicans to win elections. It's true now, more than ever.
     

Is Carbon Dioxide actually our Friend?

In praise of CO2
With less heat and less carbon dioxide, the planet could become less hospitable and less green

[...] Until the 1980s, ecologists had no way to systematically track growth in plant matter in every corner of the Earth -- the best they could do was analyze small plots of one-tenth of a hectare or less. The notion of continuously tracking global production to discover the true state of the globe's biota was not even considered.

Then, in the 1980s, ecologists realized that satellites could track production, and enlisted NASA to collect the data. For the first time, ecologists did not need to rely on rough estimates or anecdotal evidence of the health of the ecology: They could objectively measure the land's output and soon did -- on a daily basis and down to the last kilometre.

More from FP Oil Watch

The results surprised Steven Running of the University of Montana and Ramakrishna Nemani of NASA, scientists involved in analyzing the NASA data. They found that over a period of almost two decades, the Earth as a whole became more bountiful by a whopping 6.2%. About 25% of the Earth's vegetated landmass -- almost 110 million square kilometres -- enjoyed significant increases and only 7% showed significant declines. When the satellite data zooms in, it finds that each square metre of land, on average, now produces almost 500 grams of greenery per year.

Why the increase? Their 2004 study, and other more recent ones, point to the warming of the planet and the presence of CO2, a gas indispensable to plant life. CO2 is nature's fertilizer, bathing the biota with its life-giving nutrients. Plants take the carbon from CO2 to bulk themselves up -- carbon is the building block of life -- and release the oxygen, which along with the plants, then sustain animal life. As summarized in a report last month, released along with a petition signed by 32,000 U. S. scientists who vouched for the benefits of CO2: "Higher CO2 enables plants to grow faster and larger and to live in drier climates. Plants provide food for animals, which are thereby also enhanced. The extent and diversity of plant and animal life have both increased substantially during the past half-century."

Lush as the planet may now be, it is as nothing compared to earlier times, when levels of CO2 and Earth temperatures were far higher. [...]

The article goes on about the extensive benefits, including more abundant food. But if we are to believe radical leftists who claim that CO2 is a bad thing, what would it REALLY mean if we were seriously try to stop it? This next article tells us about the many sacred cows of the environmental movement that would be skewered by serious attempts to limit CO2:

Inconvenient Truths: Get Ready to Rethink What It Means to Be Green

[...]Winning the war on global warming requires slaughtering some of environmentalism's sacred cows. We can afford to ignore neither the carbon-free electricity supplied by nuclear energy nor the transformational potential of genetic engineering. We need to take advantage of the energy efficiencies offered by urban density. We must accept that the world's fastest-growing economies won't forgo a higher standard of living in the name of climate science — and that, on the way up, countries like India and China might actually help devise the solutions the planet so desperately needs. [...]

The article goes on to give 10 Green Heresies that environmentalists need to embrace if they are serious about stopping greenhouse gases. You may find them shocking, even if you aren't "green"!
     

John McCain: Take a Chance on Me

Shocking scandal: John McCain is an ABBA fan:

McCain controversy

[...] "He said that a lot of people won't admit that they love ABBA, but he would," radio jock Rich Berra says. "Then he asked us if it was old-fashioned to like ABBA, and we said that it wasn't old-fashioned at all."

Well, what could they say? Granted, ABBA broke up back in the '80s and was seen as wildly unfashionable for a time. However, the fab foursome has gained a whole new respect in recent years thanks to the success of the stage musical Mamma Mia!, which uses an all-ABBA score. A movie version opens July 18; we're sure McCain will catch it opening weekend.

The jocks also got the politico to drop an even bigger ABBA bomb: Before campaign speeches, he'll listen to the group's Take a Chance on Me to pump himself up.

"Those are the kind of hard-hitting political questions we ask," Berra says.

McCain spokesman Jeff Sadosky says it's not unusual for his boss to make unscheduled calls into radio programs. [...]

If you don't remember the song "Take a Chance on Me", here is ABBA's music video to refresh your memory:



I didn't care much for ABBA when I was a kid, but now it seems nostalgic. And like so many things I didn't care for in my youth, I find myself liking them a lot now.

Regardless of music preferences, John McCain's the best candidate we have, and he's got my vote.
     

Clinton subdued at last; Obama VS McCain

While this is a great cartoon, I'm sure this isn't the last we'll see of Clinton, although this may well be the end of her 2008 campaign. Where did she go wrong, and where does the election go from here? John O'Sullivan at the British Telegraph provides and interesting perspective:

Amid Barack Obamamania, John McCain could still win the US presidential election

[...] Despite all the praise for her gallant uphill fight, Mrs Clinton blew a sure thing. As the candidate of inevitability, she lost. As the candidate of competence, she won most major battleground states, but lost the nomination because her campaign failed to organise in the smaller states. As the candidate with an unrivalled Democratic Rolodex, she lost the "super-delegates".

Even her late emergence as the friend of Joe Sixpack reflected her loss of most other Democratic constituencies rather than her recruitment of a new political base. She is a very implausible leader of a white working class that is drifting steadily towards the Republicans.

Her campaign's excuse for defeat - that sexism trumped racism - implicitly accuses all Democrat voters of being bigots. It leaves behind a poisonous atmosphere of internecine identity politics on the Left. None of this augurs well for her post-2008 presidential prospects - whoever wins in November.

John McCain is probably the only Republican who could win the presidency in a year when almost any Democrat should beat almost any Republican. Voters prefer Democrats to Republicans by 15 per cent.

Even if McCain makes it to the White House, their opponents may win the Senate majority sufficient to override a presidential veto. McCain might well campaign in the final days on the theme "Help me to restrain a rampaging Democrat Congress". [...]

(bold emphasis mine) The author goes on to examine the road ahead for McCain and Obama, and what they will have to achieve to win. And interesting analysis from across the pond.


Related Link: I'm grateful to Obama for one thing
     

Iran, Nukes, and No Second Chances

I generally like to think optimistically about world affairs. I like to think that no matter how screwed up a situation becomes, that it can be reversed or corrected later. But there are some instances where that's extremely unlikely. Iran, nuclear weapons technology and Amadinejad are a prime example.

Thomas Sowell spells it out plain and simple:

Obama and McCain and Iran

[...] While all sorts of gushing is going on in the media, and posturing is going on in politics, the biggest national sponsor of terrorism in the world-- Iran-- is moving step by step toward building a nuclear bomb.

The point when they get that bomb will be the point of no return. Iran's nuclear bomb will be the terrorists' nuclear bomb-- and they can make 9/11 look like child's play.

All the options that are on the table right now will be swept off the table forever. Our choices will be to give in to whatever the terrorists demand-- however outrageous those demands might be-- or to risk seeing American cities start disappearing in radioactive mushroom clouds.

All the things we are preoccupied with today, from the price of gasoline to health care to global warming, will suddenly no longer matter.

Just as the Nazis did not find it enough to simply kill people in their concentration camps, but had to humiliate and dehumanize them first, so we can expect terrorists with nuclear weapons to both humiliate us and force us to humiliate ourselves, before they finally start killing us.

They have already telegraphed their punches with their sadistic beheadings of innocent civilians, and with the popularity of videotapes of those beheadings in the Middle East.

They have already telegraphed their intention to dictate to us with such things as Osama bin Laden's threats to target those places in America that did not vote the way he prescribed in the 2004 elections. He could not back up those threats then but he may be able to in a very few years.

The terrorists have given us as clear a picture of what they are all about as Adolf Hitler and the Nazis did during the 1930s-- and our "leaders" and intelligentsia have ignored the warning signs as resolutely as the "leaders" and intelligentsia of the 1930s downplayed the dangers of Hitler.

We are much like people drifting down the Niagara River, oblivious to the waterfalls up ahead. Once we go over those falls, we cannot come back up again.

What does this have to do with today's presidential candidates? It has everything to do with them. [...]

(bold emphasis mine) As much as I like to be optimistic, I also believe in being a realist. Hitler did not have the Atom Bomb, and we defeated him before he got it. If he had succeeded in getting the Atom Bomb... can you imagine the horror?

We are facing a very similar situation now. The term of our next president will likely be the last window of opportunity to stop this. Will we? If we don't, Sowell is right, nothing else we're fussing about now is going to matter.

Sowell is not a McCain fan. But Sowell compares McCain to Obama on the Iran issue, and makes a compelling case as to why it's important not to "sit this one out". Now is not the time for moral paralysis. We need to support the Republican candidate now, more than ever. Our very lives may depend on it.


Related Links:

Amadinejad talks crazy on Iranian TV, with help from a "Death to Amercia" chorus

Iranian Theocracy prepares the Iranian people for the "Return of the Mahdi"

Iran's pressing needs and Iraq's vulnerability

Why Obama Must Go to Iraq
     

John McCain's speech in New Orleans

From the Associated Press:
Excerpts of Republican John McCain's speech Tuesday

Excerpts of Republican John McCain's speech in New Orleans on Tuesday, as prepared for delivery and provided by the McCain campaign:

Good evening from the great city of New Orleans. Tonight, we can say with confidence the primary season is over, and the general election campaign has begun. I commend both Senators Obama and Clinton for the long, hard race they have run. Senator Obama has impressed many Americans with his eloquence and his spirited campaign. Senator Clinton has earned great respect for her tenacity and courage. The media often overlooked how compassionately she spoke to the concerns and dreams of millions of Americans, and she deserves a lot more appreciation than she sometimes received. As the father of three daughters, I owe her a debt for inspiring millions of women to believe there is no opportunity in this great country beyond their reach. I am proud to call her my friend. Pundits and party elders have declared that Senator Obama will be my opponent. He will be a formidable one. But I'm ready for the challenge, and determined to run this race in a way that does credit to our campaign and to the proud, decent and patriotic people I ask to lead.

___

The wrong change looks not to the future but to the past for solutions that have failed us before and will surely fail us again. I have a few years on my opponent, so I am surprised that a young man has bought in to so many failed ideas. Like others before him, he seems to think government is the answer to every problem; that government should take our resources and make our decisions for us. That type of change doesn't trust Americans to know what is right or what is in their own best interests. It's the attitude of politicians who are sure of themselves but have little faith in the wisdom, decency and common sense of free people. That attitude created the unresponsive bureaucracies of big government in the first place. And that's not change we can believe in.

You will hear from my opponent's campaign in every speech, every interview, every press release that I'm running for President Bush's third term. You will hear every policy of the president described as the Bush-McCain policy. Why does Senator Obama believe it's so important to repeat that idea over and over again? Because he knows it's very difficult to get Americans to believe something they know is false. So he tries to drum it into your minds by constantly repeating it rather than debate honestly the very different directions he and I would take the country. But the American people didn't get to know me yesterday, as they are just getting to know Senator Obama. They know I have a long record of bipartisan problem solving. They've seen me put our country before any president — before any party — before any special interest — before my own interest. They might think me an imperfect servant of our country, which I surely am. But I am her servant first, last and always.

I have worked with the president to keep our nation safe. But he and I have not seen eye to eye on many issues. We've disagreed over the conduct of the war in Iraq and the treatment of detainees; over out-of-control government spending and budget gimmicks; over energy policy and climate change; over defense spending that favored defense contractors over the public good.

I disagreed strongly with the Bush administration's mismanagement of the war in Iraq. I called for the change in strategy that is now, at last, succeeding where the previous strategy had failed miserably. I was criticized for doing so by Republicans. I was criticized by Democrats. I was criticized by the press. But I don't answer to them. I answer to you. And I would be ashamed to admit I knew what had to be done in Iraq to spare us from a defeat that would endanger us for years, but I kept quiet because it was too politically hard for me to do. No ambition is more important to me than the security of the country I have defended all my adult life.

Senator Obama opposed the new strategy, and, after promising not to, voted to deny funds to the soldiers who have done a brilliant and brave job of carrying it out. Yet in the last year we have seen the success of that plan as violence has fallen to a four year low; Sunni insurgents have joined us in the fight against al-Qaida; the Iraqi Army has taken the lead in places once lost to Sunni and Shia extremists; and the Iraqi government has begun to make progress toward political reconciliation.

None of this progress would have happened had we not changed course over a year ago. And all of this progress would be lost if Senator Obama had his way and began to withdraw our forces from Iraq without concern for conditions on the ground and the advice of commanders in the field. Americans ought to be concerned about the judgment of a presidential candidate who says he's ready to talk, in person and without conditions, with tyrants from Havana to Pyongyang, but hasn't traveled to Iraq to meet with General Petraeus, and see for himself the progress he threatens to reverse.

I know Americans are tired of this war. I don't oppose a reckless withdrawal from Iraq because I'm indifferent to the suffering war inflicts on too many American families. I hate war. And I know very personally how terrible its costs are. But I know, too, that the course Senator Obama advocates could draw us into a wider war with even greater sacrifices; put peace further out of reach, and Americans back in harm's way.

___

In just a few years in office, Senator Obama has accumulated the most liberal voting record in the Senate. But the old, tired, big government policies he seeks to dust off and call new won't work in a world that has changed dramatically since they were last tried and failed. That's not change we can believe in.

The sweeping reforms of government we need won't occur unless we change the political habits of Washington that have locked us in an endless cycle of bickering and stalemate. Washington is consumed by a hyper-partisanship that treats every serious issue as an opportunity to trade insults; impugn each other's motives; and fight about the next election. This is the game Washington plays. Both parties play it, as do the special interests that support each side. The American people know it's not on the level. For all the problems we face, what frustrates them most about Washington is they don't think we're capable of serving the public interest before our personal ambitions; that we fight for ourselves and not for them. They are sick of the politics of selfishness, stalemate and delay, and they have every right to be. We have to change not only government policies that have failed them, but the political culture that produced them.

Both Senator Obama and I promise we will end Washington's stagnant, unproductive partisanship. But one of us has a record of working to do that and one of us doesn't. Americans have seen me put aside partisan and personal interests to move this country forward. They haven't seen Senator Obama do the same. For all his fine words and all his promise, he has never taken the hard but right course of risking his own interests for yours; of standing against the partisan rancor on his side to stand up for our country. He is an impressive man, who makes a great first impression. But he hasn't been willing to make the tough calls; to challenge his party; to risk criticism from his supporters to bring real change to Washington. I have.

Excellent and to the point, as usual.
     

Amadinejad talks crazy on Iranian TV, with help from a "Death to Amercia" chorus

I suppose you have to give Amadinejad credit for being open about his intentions. From IRINN TV (Iran) - Broadcast June 2, 2008:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: "The Countdown for the Decline of America's Demonic Power Has Begun. Zionist Germ of Corruption Will Be Wiped off the Face of the Earth."







Here is a link to the Video Clip. Here is a partial transcript. How does one "talk" to such a person in any meaningful way?

So Obama won't meet with our General Petraus, but he does want to meet with Amadinejad. It's not as if nobody else has tried that. What does Obama think he can say that is going to make a difference? What does one say to the New Hilter?

I think Iran would be alright if they were just allowed to have a real election. The ruling party has never allowed it, because they know they would loose their power. If a real election could occur, this lunacy could be stopped, by the Iranians themselves.


Related Links:

TV in Iran: a selection of offerings

Ahmadinejad continues his Lunatic agenda
     

Illegal Immigration is a Pain to Spain. But is it also making Spain the Gateway to Europe?

Spain granted an amnesty to almost a million illegals three years ago, the largest amnesty in Spain's history. Today, they now have another million illegals, along with a soring crime rate and growing unemployment.

Recently Spain has been attacking Italy's new government, which has been cracking down on illegal immigrants in Italy. More from Soeren Kern at the Brussels Journal:

Why Spain Lectures Other Countries on Immigration

Italian voters in April returned Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi to a third term in office. The center-right leader was given a strong mandate to crack down on runaway immigration and spiraling street crime, two hot-button issues that are intrinsically linked, not just in the minds of Italians, but in those of many other Europeans too, especially in Spain.

As a result, Spanish Socialists are (rightly) worried that Berlusconi’s get-tough approach will jeopardize their own fantastical vision of turning Europe into a post-modern multicultural utopia.

[...]

Since Spanish Socialists (more often than not) have trouble winning arguments on their own merit, the preferred tactic is to demonize their opponents instead. And so De la Vega’s comments were echoed by the new Spanish Minister for Labor and Immigration, Celestino Corbacho, who felt obliged to accuse Berlusconi of wanting “to criminalize those who are different.”

[...]

Apart from the strategic threat that Italy’s immigration crackdown poses to the post-nationalist multicultural vision that Spanish Socialists have for Europe, there are two more practical (and inter-related) reasons why the Socialist Party has latched onto the immigration issue: Domestic politics and fear that the immigrants expelled from Italy will come to Spain instead.

During the recent general election campaign in Spain, survey after survey showed that Spanish voters perceived the center-right Popular Party to be far better equipped than the Socialist Party to tackle the issues of immigration and crime.

[...]

As a result, the Socialists are now trying to make these issues their own. But they are doing so by reframing the question of immigration through the use of post-modern word games that give the appearance that they have a more benevolent approach.

[...]

By rewarding illegal immigrants with Spanish (and thus European) documentation, Zapatero has unleashed what is known as the “call effect” to people as far away as Kashmir who now believe that Spain is an easy gateway into Europe. [...]

It's quite a dance Spain is doing. The article goes on to give more details of Spain's predicament, and how it fits into immigration in Europe as a whole. The socialists in Spain have been using every trick in the book to vilify their opponents, but it's wearing thin as reality sets in and grates away at the Spanish Public. Their current government sounds like the city council of Berkeley, CA. Strident and hysterical, posturing while lacking real content or ability to accomplish or solve anything.

Lots of high drama in this story, with accusations being hurled. But as the pressure builds, it looks to me like... somethings gotta give. I'll be watching.
     

Kibo Lab attached, to be activated today

Yesterday, the Discovery crew unloaded the pressurized Kibo space lab from Discovery's cargo bay, and attached it to the station.


The spacewalk crew unbolted it, and two astronauts inside the station attached it to the station using a robot arm, while the spacewalk crew got on with other repairs outside the station.


Here is an illustration that shows where the Kibo lab has been attached on the station:


Today the astronauts will complete all the internal hookups, and open the lab up. Here is some information from NASA's mission summary .PDF file:

NASA Mission Summary, SPACE SHUTTLE DISCOVERY (STS-124)

FACTS & FIGURES

• STS-124 is the 123rd space shuttle flight, the 26th flight to the station, the 35th flight for Discovery and the third flight in 2008.

• The Kibo laboratory—which means “hope” in Japanese—is the country’s major contribution to the station and will enhance the research capabilities of the space station.

• The JPM will be the largest habitable module on the space station and is equipped with its own airlock and robotic arm for external experiments.

• The final components of Kibo will be assembled in space on shuttle mission STS-127.

• The RMS main arm can handle up to 14,000 pounds of hardware. The small fine arm, when attached to the main arm, handles more delicate operations. Each arm has six joints that mimic the movements of a human arm.

• The JPM is 36.7 feet long and 14.4 feet in diameter, about the size of a large tour bus.

• The main arm measures 32.5 feet long, and the small fine arm measures 6.2 feet.

• Kibo experiments and systems are operated from the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency's control center called the Space Station Integration and Promotion Center, just north of Tokyo.

• Experiments in Kibo focus on space medicine, biology, Earth observations, material production, biotechnology and communications research.

• To help prevent the glove cuts seen in recent missions from recurring, both spacewalkers will wear gloves with special patches on the thumb and index finger for the first time. The patches are made of the same protective vectran material already used in the palm of the gloves, but in a much tighter weave. In this form, the fabric is called TurtleSkin. It is up to four times more resistant to damage.

When all the components are in place, the Kibo lab unit should be configured like this:


The porch-like attachment is for performing experiments outside the station, using robotic arms. I believe the porch-platform is scheduled to brought up and added on in a future mission.

More about todays activities:

Crews to Enter Japanese Lab Today

The shuttle and station crews will open the newly installed Japanese laboratory Kibo for business today. Hatch opening is planned for 4:52 p.m. EDT. The experiment module was installed on the Harmony Node’s port side Tuesday.

After a leak check, mission specialists Karen Nyberg and Akihiko Hoshide will prepare Kibo for activation before opening the hatches. Shortly after entering Kibo with Hoshide, Expedition 17 Commander Sergei Volkov will sample the air and test for contamination. They will wear protective goggles and masks until they are sure the Japanese lab’s air is clean.

Mission Specialists Mike Fossum and Ron Garan will review procedures for their second spacewalk and sleep in the U.S. Quest airlock tonight to purge the nitrogen from their bodies. During Thursday’s spacewalk, the second of the mission, the spacewalkers will outfit the new lab and prepare the Japanese logistics module for relocation.

You can check the link for progress updates. They have already fixed the malfunctioning Zero-Gravity Space Toilet. That should make life in space a bit easier.
     

A busy day at the International Space Station

The Shuttle Discovery docked yesterday, and today their work begins:

STS-124 Commander Mark Kelly works inside the Quest airlock with Expedition 17 Commander Sergei Volkov. Photo credit: NASA TV

STS-124 to Conduct First Spacewalk, Install JPM

Mission specialists Mike Fossum and Ron Garan are scheduled to kick off STS-124’s first spacewalk at 11:32 a.m. EDT. During the 6-½ hour excursion, the pair will retrieve a shuttle inspection tool, service and inspect components of a solar alpha rotary joint and prepare the largest component of the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency’s Kibo laboratory for installation on the International Space Station.

The spacewalkers’ first task is to transfer the Orbiter Boom Sensor System (OBSS) from the station’s truss to space shuttle Discovery. The OBSS, which attaches to the shuttle’s robotic arm for detailed inspection of the shuttle’s heat shield, was left at the station for STS-124 during the previous shuttle mission to provide room for the giant Kibo module in Discovery’s payload bay.

Next, the spacewalkers will prepare Kibo’s Japanese Pressurized Module (JPM) for installation. After inspecting the common berthing mechanism on the Harmony Node’s left side and opening a window cover, Fossum and Garan will work together in the shuttle’s cargo bay to remove contamination covers from the JPM’s docking surfaces. Fossum will also disconnect heater cables and remove locking bolts from the shutters of the JPM’s forward window.

For their final tasks, Garan and Fossum will move to the station’s starboard solar alpha rotary joint, which began experiencing increased vibration and power usage in the fall of 2007. Garan will install a replacement of one of the joint’s 12 trundle bearing assemblies. Meanwhile, Fossum will inspect a potentially damaged area on the joint and try out several techniques for cleaning debris from the surface of the joint’s race ring.

While Fossum and Garan work outside the orbital outpost, mission specialists Karen Nyberg and Akihiko Hoshide will use the station’s robotic arm to remove the JPM from the shuttle’s payload bay and install it on Harmony.

An Astronauts work is never done. You can visit the page for more links and info about the mission.
     

The next best thing to Stopping the U.N.

... is to go over their heads. To start an organization of Democratic countries that don't kow-tow to Dictatorships and Theocracies, as John McCain is proposing:

McCain proposal for joint action gains support

WASHINGTON - Gaining ground this political season is a proposed League of Democracies designed to strengthen support for the next president's overseas agenda and ensure a global leadership role for the United States.

John McCain, the virtually certain Republican presidential nominee, has endorsed the concept of a new global compact of more than 100 democratic countries to advance shared views and has discussed the idea with French and British leaders.

"It could act where the U.N. fails to act," he said last month, and pressure tyrants "with or without Moscow's and Beijing's approval."

McCain said the League might impose sanctions on Iran, relieve suffering in the Darfur region of Sudan and deal with environmental problems. [...]

The article goes on to say how some people favor the formation of such a political body, to limit the military power of the United States, while still others fear it would be used by the U.S. to circumvent and compete with the U.N.

A bit of competition for the U.N. might be a good thing, because sure are ineffective the way they are. As for limiting U.S. military power, aren't plenty of countries already trying to do that anyway? It's nothing new. Those who wish to do so will keep trying, no matter what.

If we can't actually disban the U.N., then we need something as a counter balance to make it shape up or get kicked. This could be it.
     

How often are questions "distractions" ?

If you are Barack Obama, it would seem the answer is "quite often".


While certainly that claim might be applicable sometimes, it seems that the Messiah is starting to make a habit of it, as a way of avoiding the criticism and questioning all candidates have to put up with:

Obama’s Shiny Quarter Problem

William Teach provides us with many examples of Obama claiming questions are a distraction, and concludes:

[...] Now, we all know about Obama’s gaffes, some which are silly, and we all could make, and others which are whoppers. But, what does it tell you about Barack “the man who wants to be the leader of the world’s only remaining super power” Obama that he is not able, and is unwilling, to discuss issues that are important to other people? That everything that doesn’t come on his cue cards is a distraction? Everything that looks bad for him is handled as “eh, whatever.” For a man who is running primarily on his character, doesn’t paint a pretty picture when he cannot respond to critisism about his character.

If he wins the general election in November, will he call anything that is not important to him, but important to the American People, a distraction?

Essentially, the whole distraction thing is a way to distract from Obama’s pitiful record, his lack of governing knowledge, his extreme leftist viewpoints, and his poor character.

Other candidates aren't dismissing questions as distractions. Obama's continual use of this claim just adds credibility to the charge that he's an elitist who feels he's above having to deal with being questioned like other candidates. I think it's also yet another example of his inexperience in politics.
     

France regulates country music dancing

What is big government and taxes for, if not regulating and financing dangerous activities like Line Dancing to American Country Music:

Oui-Ha! France brings line dancing craze under state control

[...] The French administration has moved to create an official country dancing diploma as part of a drive to regulate the fad. Authorised instructors who have been on publicly funded training courses will be put in charge of line dancing lessons and balls.

The rules, which come into force next year, come after the rapid spread of country and western in France, where an estimated 100,000 people line dance several times a week. Jean Chauveau, the chairman of the country section of the French Dance Federation, said: “It's growing at a crazy rate. There are thousands of clubs and more are springing up all the time.”

He said the French shunned the square dancing that is popular among country and western fans in the United States because it involved physical contact. “They don't want to take anyone by the hand or anything like that,” he said. But they were passionate about line dancing, where participants follow the steps without touching anyone else. “I think this corresponds to the individualism of our times,” Mr Chauveau said.

[...]

Mr Chauveau said the trend illustrated France's “complicated and ambiguous” relationship with the United States. “We love American magic and the American dream,” he said. “But we hate Americans when we confront the hard reality of their behaviour throughout the world. We go for the cowboy hats but not George Bush.”

In a peculiarly Gallic approach to the phenomenon, French civil servants say line dancing should be submitted to the same rules as sports such as football and rugby. This means imposing training courses for line dancing teachers and a state-approved diploma for anyone who wants to give lessons or run clubs.

Amateur instructors will have to take 200 hours of training under the new rules. Professionals will get 600 hours, including such subjects as line dancing techniques, “the mechanics of the human body” and the English (or at least Texan) language. They will also learn how to teach line dancing to the elderly.

The cost of the courses, about €2,000 (£1,570) for the professionals and €500 for the amateurs, will be largely met by taxpayers. Mr Chauveau said the regulations highlighted the French state's obsessive desire to organise all public activity. [...]

Government controlled line dancing, an expression of the "individualism of our times"? Those funny European ideas. It just makes me think of that expression, "Big hat, no cattle".

But just when you think you've found another good reason to despise the French, they go and do something like this:

French Families Honor US Fallen At Normandy

I can get annoyed by the things they say and do sometimes, but things like the above link make it hard to stay mad at them. How can it be possible to remain continuously vexed with a country whose citizens donate their time to something like Les Fleurs de la Mémoire? Our relationship with France has always been... complicated. And it probably always will be. It's part of what makes the French French.
     

Learning Ham Radio; start with a Police Scanner?

While reading many sites on the internet about Ham Radio, I came across this bit of advice for Ham Newbies from Ron Hashiro in Hawaii:

Getting Started in Ham Radio

Your first ham radio station

So, you're studying for your first amateur radio license -- probably the Technician Class license -- and wondered what kind of equipment to get in the meantime. If I could do it again with modern equipment, here are some of my thoughts.

Enjoy, and feel free to drop me an e-mail if you have any questions.

First: The receiver

I feel the first thing to buy for ham radio is not the radio transmitter itself, but a decent receiver. If you pass your exam for the Technician Class license, you'll be able to talk on the VHF (50, 144 Mhz band) and UHF frequencies (440 Mhz band) as soon as your license is processed by the FCC. (By the way, these days, the VEC-FCC process takes as little as a week to complete, and you can transmit as soon as you can see your callsign on any of the various web callsign databases on the Internet. When I was first licensed, it took about 6-8 weeks, and you had to wait for the processed license paperwork to arrive in the mail.)

So, the initial temptation might be to get a transmitter or a combination transmitter-receiver called a transceiver. But, you might underbuy or overbuy on your equipment. So, it makes sense to try it out on a comparatively inexpensive solution. Get a "police" scanner first.

Scanners can go through a number of frequencies very quickly. You can monitor all the popular repeaters and simplex frequencies in a matter of about one or two seconds. I listen to the local frequencies with a scanner, and when I hear someone that I want to talk with, I turn on my radio (if it's not on) and make a contact.

For fun, you can also add the local aviation, weather and other frequencies to monitor -- and lock them out if you don't feel like listening to it at the moment. Best of all, they cost around $100 or so new. If you're fortunate to find a used model, your cost might be less.

Any old time ham will tell you that a good, solid and sensitive receiver is a must because there's an old adage "If you can't hear 'em, you can't work'em." -- meaning that if you can't hear the other station, you can't make a two-way contact with them. That makes sense. But, starting out, you probably don't need a top-of-the-line scanner. If you go to your nearest Radio Shack, you'll find a number of police radio scanners available. You can get started with one of these. See Radio Shack Scanners for starters. Look for one that you can attach an external antenna.

I would get a model that plugs into the AC wall outlet, so I wouldn't have to worry about charging or changing batteries. You can program a number of interesting ham frequencies: the nearest VHF and UHF repeaters on your island. Then, you can listen to the amount of conversation present, and get an idea of how strong the repeater signals are in your area. That'll determine how much radio and antenna to buy next. You'll also hear how conversations are made on the air, and that'll help you pass the Technician exam. [...]

Ron's page has lots of further useful advice for purchases later on as well. I'm just excerpting the first part because that's where I'm at right now; I have no equipment, and I'm facing my first purchase.

This sounds like good advice. I have no idea what kind of radio traffic I can receive where I live. A scanner will put me in touch with what is happening locally. I'm not sure at this point how much I'm going to get into Ham Radio, but I figure I can't go wrong starting with a scanner. If it helps me pass the Technician exam eventually, so much the better.

So the question is, what kind of scanner to buy? I have looked at Radio Shack on-line, and Amazon.com too. There are so many scanners to choose from. I thought these looked promising:

Uniden Bearcat BCT8 BearTracker Warning System with 800 MHz TrunkTracker III

Uniden BC898T 500 Channel Programmable Base Scanner with TrunkTracker III

UNIDEN BC-246T Compact Hand Held Scanner

Now these scanners are all in the $200 range, rather than the $100 range that Ron spoke of. As I read reviews posted from buyers, a lot of people complained about the cheaper scanners being older "outdated" models using inferior technology. These models were rated higher for satisfaction, but then more expensive stuff usually is. The TrunkTracker feature seems important, but how important is it? Would a cheaper scanner do? Or would I find myself saying "darn, if only I had been willing to spend a bit more..."? It would be nice to get a satisfactory purchase the first time.

I generally prefer radios with dials and knobs, rather than buttons. But it seems like everything has buttons nowadays. One reviewer warned against analog radios, saying they cannot pick up digital transmissions. Reading the customer reviews can make your head spin, especially when you don't understand all the jargon yet. I did find this one review for the Uniden Bearcat BCT8 amusing:

By Hilow "SurfDog" (San Francisco, CA USA)

This scanner has no problem keeping track of ALL radio traffic. I live in densely populated San Francisco near the entrance to the bay and right under the GG bridge. This little scanner gets it all. CHP, Bridge Patrol, Bridge Electricians, Bridge Shuttle bus. SFPD, SFFD, EMS. Yellow Cab, DPT, Harbor Pilots, Tugs, laundry delivery trucks, totally (too much information)TMI! In search mode I get signal from as far north as San Rafael (Marin County) as far east as Oakland as far south as Burlingame with the supplied telescopic antenna! For mobile applications ditch the supplied little wire antenna'n get a magnetic roof mount.

Bear Tracker works. Had it on the road 2day and it picks off Mobile Extenders left and right.

Programing is as easy as spending a few hours in search mode and entering the stations as you get them. The Trunk tracking feature rocks. In time you will be able to tell who is who. Dont want that Freq? Delete it easily.

A well designed and easy to use product. Crystal clear reception, intelligent layout and the pre-programmed freqs. are amazing.

Pricy perhapes, but worth it. I feel like I have been scanning for years and this is only my 4th day.

5 stars for delivering the goods, in spades. I am very happy.

TMI! LOL! Having lived in San Francisco for 23 years, it brought back memories. The atmosphere there always seemed so "busy". Is it any wonder, with all that radio traffic going through your brain, 24/7, in addition to all the commercial TV and radio stations as well?

When I visited South African in 1983 with Pat, there was a quietness there that seemed remarkable. At that time the South African government controlled commercial TV and radio stations, and there weren't many of them. In fact, the TV stations then only broadcast in the evening. I attributed much of the quietness to the dearth of broadcast frequencies in the air.

Many years later, when we moved here to rural Oregon, I experienced a very similar quietness like I had in South Africa.

We have one broadcast TV station within range of our house. The station is in the nearest big town. You need a special antenna to receive it, but it still comes in badly so we never watch it. In theory we have 18 commercial radio stations within range of our house, according to the internet. But in fact, we can receive only a handful of them. That may be good reason to spend a bit more to get a quality scanner, to make sure I can get the best reception. I may have to look into getting a decent antenna too.

I'm not sure how much radio traffic I can pick up here. We are close to the Oregon coast, and we often see Coast Guard helicopters flying by. There is a sizable airport in town too, so I'm sure there is Air and Marine radio traffic. And since there is an active Ham Radio club in town too, there has got to be a considerable amount of local activity for a scanner to pick up, I would think.

I've ordered a book, "Two-Way Radios & Scanners For Dummies", to see if I can get up to speed on what the different scanner features mean, and help me understand what I should look for in a scanner for my particular situation. I don't know if it's silly to buy a scanner for $200, when I could buy a transceiver for that or even less (and one with knobs too!). Perhaps it's a silly comparison to make; there are lots of variables to consider that I don't fully understand yet.

In the meantime, if anyone has some advice or would like to post about their own scanner purchasing experiences, please feel free to do so here.
     

Discovery Shuttle Launch a Success: both the Shuttle and the ISS are easily seen from Earth

'Huge Day' for NASA, Japan

May 31
6:45 p.m. EDT
Commander Mark Kelly promised "the greatest show on Earth," and space shuttle Discovery delivered with a thundering, fiery arc stretching over Florida's East Coast on Saturday. The launch began a 14-day mission for Kelly and his crew of seven astronauts as they install a new Japanese-built laboratory module on the International Space Station.

As the astronauts got used to their new surroundings in space, NASA officials on Earth basked in the satisfaction of a flawless countdown and liftoff from NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

"(It was) obviously a huge day," said NASA Administrator Mike Griffin. "A huge day for the space station partnership, for the Japanese Space Agency, for NASA and, really, for the people who hoped to see the space station do what it was designed to do, to be a place in orbit where we can learn to live and work in space."

[...]

Next up for the STS-124 mission is a two-day chase across space to link up with the International Space Station. It will take the crew several hours of robotic arm maneuvers and spacewalks to connect the Pressurized Module of Japan's Kibo laboratory to the station. The 36-foot-long module is the largest habitable section to be launched to the orbiting research post.

Both the International Space Station and the Discovery shuttle are visible to the naked eye. The ISS travels a fast orbit over the earth, and sees as many as 14 sunrises and sunsets in one day! When it passes over where you live, you may have several opportunities to see it in one night. I had published the following link previously, as a way to find out when the ISS is flying over where you live:

Find out when the ISS passes over your city

If you go to the page and type in your country and the city you live in, it will give you a schedule of when the ISS will be visible to you, weather permitting. Well it now also offers you the schedule of the Discovery Shuttle too. And as the two get closer together over the next few days, you might even see them flying together right up until they dock.

When they attach the Kibo lab, I expect the station and docked shuttle will appear larger and brighter than ever. I'll be watching for it.