Source: http://news.feedzilla.com/en_us/stories/politics/top-stories/187508687?client_source=feed&format=rss
john galt post office hours post office hours coptic coptic breaking bad season finale breaking bad season finale
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Countdown to crash of Russia's failed Mars probe (Reuters)
MOSCOW (Reuters) ? Russia's failed Mars probe Phobos-Grunt was expected to plummet back to Earth Sunday, sending space officials scrambling to predict where it would hit in the countdown to re-entry.
Space agency Roskosmos said debris from its doomed 14-ton spacecraft, which includes 11 tons of toxic rocket fuel, would likely fall to Earth between 1750 GMT and 1834 GMT, possibly in the Atlantic Ocean about midway between Brazil and West Africa.
Due to constant changes in the upper atmosphere, which is strongly influenced by solar activity, the exact time and place of the satellite's return is unknown.
Earler, Roscosmos said the site could be anywhere along an elliptical orbit over a broad swathe of the globe, from roughly as far north as London to the same latitude as the heel of Argentina.
Igor Marinin, editor of a space journal published by Roskosmos, earlier said he expected it to fall in the Atlantic Ocean some 1,200 km (750 miles) from Buenos Aires.
"In my view, it is most likely to fall in the southern part of the Atlantic Ocean, but the picture is constantly changing because the atmosphere is shifting and shaking so it is very difficult to predict an uncontrolled descent," he told Reuters.
Russia's Interfax news agency cited a Russian space industry source as saying it could fall on land, about 120 km (75 miles) west of the northern Argentinian city of Rosario.
Experts say the falling space junk poses little risk. The probe's aluminium fuel tank is expected to burn up high in the atmosphere.
"If anyone gets to see it, it will be a fabulous show. I don't think there has been an explosion of such a large volume of fuel in space history," Marinin, editor of the journal Novosti Kosmonavtiki, told Reuters.
The $165-million spacecraft, designed to retrieve soil samples from the Martian moon Phobos, was meant to be Russia's first successful interplanetary mission in over two decades.
But it became stuck in orbit after a botched launch on November 8, and has since been slowly losing altitude due to gravity's pull.
Some 20 to 30 small pieces of debris with a total weight of 200 kg (440 lbs) could hit Earth, Roskosmos said, adding that a tiny radioactive cargo of Cobalt-57 was too small to cause harm.
One component likely to survive re-entry is a small return capsule specifically designed to crash-land back on Earth in 2014, mission scientist Alexander Zakharov said.
"This is the capsule that was meant to bring back samples from Phobos, it's disappointing," Zakharov said. "We're hoping Roskosmos will approve a new craft to accomplish this mission."
Phobos-Grunt was one of five botched launches last year that marred celebrations of the 50th anniversary of Yuri Gagarin's pioneering first human space flight and hurt Moscow's pride.
In an apparent attempt to deflect blame, Russia's space agency chief hinted last week that foreign sabotage might be the reason.
"I don't want to blame anyone, but there are very powerful means to interfere with spacecraft today whose use cannot be ruled out," Vladimir Popovkin told the daily Izvestia.
Stargazers worldwide are watching for reentry, including the Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordinating Committee, an offshoot of the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space.
Under a U.N. space convention, Russia could be liable to pay compensation for any harm caused by bits of falling spacecraft.
In 1981, the Soviet Union paid Canada $3 million for the cost of cleaning up radioactive debris scattered in the crash of a Soviet nuclear-powered reconnaissance satellite, Kosmos 954.
With most of the planet's surface covered by water, Russia's errant space probe is likely to splash into the ocean.
When NASA's defunct Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite fell out of orbit in September, it showered debris into the Pacific Ocean. Germany's Rosat X-ray telescope re-entered a month later over the Bay of Bengal.
(Reporting By Alissa de Carbonnel; editing by Philippa Fletcher)
2005yu55 advanced search alexander the great personhood amendment haynesworth haynesworth ohio issue 2
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
North Dakota Ad Might Be Racy, but it is Also a Success (ContributorNetwork)
COMMENTARY | The Associated Press is reporting an advertisement promoting tourism in North Dakota has come under fire for being too racy. As the article notes, the ad features two guys and three girls flirting through a window through a hotel bar. The Valley View News is even reporting the tagline -- "Drinks, Dinner, Decisions. Arrive a guest. Leave a legend." -- attracted a lot of negative attention on social media site Facebook. Of course, in a twist the ad actually worked.
Even though WDAY News is reporting the ad could be sending the wrong message, the point is that a message is being sent. When it comes to promotion, generally the more outlandish the better. Would Lady Gaga be as popular without the clothes and the attitude? A little controversy goes a long way, and can really stretch advertising dollars.
According the AP report the ad has been removed from the website, but there can be little doubt folks around the U.S. are talking about tourism in North Dakota. Sure, the tagline is a little suggestive, but it is not like this was the first time sex was used to sell something. The advertising agency that created it should be commended, because the message was delivered. Really, the ad could not have performed any better if it was scripted.
The bottom line is that successful advertising gets people talking. Once that talking turns into clicking and researching, the effectiveness of any particular campaign is increased dramatically. All the uproar means is that folks actually took the time to find the ad, which means the ad worked. In this particular case, the flirty photo with a suggestive tagline gets people thinking and maybe even dreaming, about what is up to the individual person. If nothing else, North Dakota looks a lot more fun than it did last week.
chanukah chanukah david archuleta david archuleta hobbit trailer greenhill nj plane crash
On ACA, the election has last word (Politico)
Think the Supreme Court is where the future of President Barack Obama?s health care law will be settled? Think again.
The real verdict on the future of Obama?s signature achievement will come in November ? and the law?s supporters say a Republican sweep could pose a bigger threat to the law than the nine justices ever could.
Continue ReadingThe court is expected to hand down its decision at the end of its term in June. But most legal observers doubt that it will strike down the?whole of the?Affordable Care Act, even if it finds the mandate unconstitutional.
In contrast, the Republican candidates are all on record as promising to scrap the whole thing.
While a Republican president wouldn?t be able to hand out waivers for states to get out of all of the health law?s requirements, as some of the presidential contenders suggest, he?d be able to direct the new?Health and Human Services secretary to slow-walk pivotal programs, dramatically relax the regulations and possibly defund the law.
Front-runner Mitt Romney has pledged to repeal the law, and his policy aides are figuring out just how much dismantling could be done through the White House and HHS, without congressional action.
?I do think the law itself is in jeopardy? if a Republican wins the White House, said Neera Tanden, who served as a senior adviser for health reform at HHS during the legislative debate and is now president of the Center for American Progress.
A new president and HHS secretary would have a lot of power during their first year in office. That?s when HHS will have to finalize all the regulatory details for the state or federal health insurance exchanges where many consumers will buy coverage after 2014.
The concern of the law?s backers is based in part on the unknown: It?s unclear exactly how far a Republican administration would go to slow down the law, especially if there is backlash over getting rid of its popular pieces.
And it?s unknown whether the Senate or House will be controlled by Democrats, who could stop legislative efforts to repeal or defund the law. Even if they lose control of the Senate, Democrats may still have enough votes to be able to slow down or block efforts to repeal the law signed by Obama nearly two years ago.
Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA and a strong supporter of the law, said the election is the ?most important development for the future of health care that could take place this year.?
Pollack said he?d be even more concerned about a Republican winning the White House if the Senate and House are controlled by Republicans, too, allowing them to run the table on repealing the health law.
Joseph Antos, a health policy expert at the American Enterprise Institute who opposes the law, agreed that the election matters more than the Supreme Court ? but he also said Republicans may have to compromise on repealing the whole law if they get public backlash over repealing its most popular provisions.
?I can?t see a Republican getting rid of guaranteed issue,? Antos said, referring to the provision that requires insurance companies to accept all applicants regardless of their medical history. ?Certainly no Republican is going to change the provision that says children under 26 can sign on to their parents? plans.?
John McDonough, who helped draft the health law as a senior adviser in the Senate and is now a professor at the Harvard University School of Public Health, sees the most extreme outcomes of Election Day like this: Republicans take the White House, and both chambers of Congress, allowing them to repeal significant pieces of the law through reconciliation. (That?s assuming there is little chance Republicans get a filibuster-proof majority ? though if they did, they could repeal the law immediately.)
turducken power rangers jungle fury power rangers jungle fury ufc 139 fight card houston nutt houston nutt peter marshall
Monday, January 16, 2012
Business Experience, Arnold Kling | EconLog | Library of Economics ...
Will Wilkinson summarizes some discussion of the relevance of business experience to being President. One of the tropes that he mentions (without endorsing it) is that "business people don't realize that when you come to Washington you just can't boss people around. It's not as easy as it is when you're CEO."
Actually, that is completely wrong. In business it is actually really hard to get people to do what you want. In fact, understanding that fact is exactly what sets CEOs apart from policy wonks. Policy wonks think that you write a law and that solves a problem. They think that you promulgate regulations and people do not figure out how to game those regulations.
Someone with business experience would never announce a mortgage loan modification program and expect it to be implemented in a matter of weeks (remember, a mortgage is a legal document that is somewhat antiquated with procedures that differ by state and local jurisdiction; remember that, prior to 2008, mortgage servicers had very few staff with any experience at all in loan modification; remember that when you introduce entirely new parameters into a highly computerized business process, somebody has to determine which systems are impacted, gather requirements, redesign databases, develop logic to protect against data input errors, develop a test plan,...). Someone with business experience would not enact a program that fines companies for failing to use a fuel that does not yet exist. Someone with business experience, I dare say, would understand that chaotic organization has consequences.
I am not saying that business experience is the be-all and end-all. I am not saying that it should be required of a Presidential candidate. But when Congress and the Administration are permeated with people who lack business experience, this has consequences, and the consequences are not good.
Source: http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2012/01/business_experi.html
pacquiao vs marquez junior dos santos junior dos santos evelyn lauder devin hester devin hester shayne lamas
Steve Colbert talks about presidential ambitions (AP)
WASHINGTON ? Comedian Stephen Colbert says that just because his name won't appear on Saturday's ballot in South Carolina's Republican primary doesn't mean he couldn't become president, or even pope, someday.
In an oftentimes awkward, meandering interview on Sunday, Colbert told ABC's "This Week" that he established a presidential exploratory committee last week that consists of "someone who is good with explosives," a mountain climber and a brain in a jar. He likened himself to a "one-man Louis and Clark" expedition looking for his Sacagawea.
Colbert said if his quest for presidency doesn't work out, he would be willing to throw his weight behind one of the other candidates. He said: "All they have to do is come kiss my ring like they did Donald Trump's."
Colbert grew up in South Carolina.
penn state riot penn state riot state college pa wilson ramos kidnapped mcqueary mike mcqueary joe paterno fired
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)