It ain't the deficit that's the problem

It's the spending, or the lack of taxes. Since WWII US federal taxes have yielded a revenue of about 20% of GNP. In other words one dollar out of every five dollars goes to the government. That's a LOT of money. Up until Obama, the federal government spending was about the same as revenue, maybe a touch more.
Now that we have Obama, spending has jumped up to 25% of GMP, and due to Great Depression 2.0, federal revenue has dropped and the deficit is now 7-8% of GNP and getting worse.
Obama hasn't quite dared ask for more taxes (yet). He'll get around to it sooner or later. He hasn't said a thing about cutting spending. Right now the federal government is paying its bills by borrowing money, and since the it has the best credit rating on the planet, it has no trouble borrowing all it needs. That cannot last. When the unpaid US debt gets too high, lenders will stop lending to us. Then to pay its bills the government will print new money. Which will destroy the value of the dollar. Everything we have saved up for college, retirement, the new house, will turn to wastepaper.
Conclusion. We have to cut spending, cut it down to 20% of GNP, or, jack up taxes to cover the spending. Trouble with that is spending rises to meet income. Raise taxes, the Congress will spend more.

BP gets lucky

Preliminary reports on web & TV say that BP has capped their wild gulf well and the cap is holding, oil tight. Thank the good lord. These are preliminary reports, based largely on underwater video. As of this writing, BP hasn't come right out and said they got it capped. This may be an excess of caution, plus fear that the cap won't hold, but, so far it's looking good. Lets hope every thing stays together.

Winston's War Churchill 1940-1945 by Max Hastings

"And never was heard, a discouraging word". This WWII bio/history gathers up all the discouraging words passed around during the war and prints them. It's all there, British ruling class appeasement, military defeats, labor unrest, anti Churchill members of parliament, and military adventures that either didn't pan out or never got out of committee. The author is a Brit, and he is out to reinterpret the hell out of WWII history.
Despite the load of dirt, the book is unsatisfying. It does not get to the meat of the great wartime controversies. For instance the great Anglo American debate over "2nd Front Now" versus the North African landings is glossed over. It's mentioned, but the author glosses over the issues, assumes the reader is familiar with them which is a little much really. WWII buffs like me know the story but at this remove in time, it is unreasonable to expect the general reader to remember this level of detail. And he omits key details, such how the British view point (do North Africa) carried the day.
The author trashes the British Army for loosing repeatedly, but he never really gets to the root of the matter. Len Deighton did a much better job in his "Blood, Tears, and Folly". Deighton blames a British school system that allowed the bulk of children to drop out in middle school, whereas the German school system prided itself on getting its students high school diplomas. According to Deighton German troops were nearly all high school graduates whereas the British troops were largely high school dropouts.
The book is interesting, but it isn't going to become a favorite due to its downer material.

Toy STory 3

I saw it last night. Charming. This sequel is every bit as good as the preceding Toy Stories were. Gotta hand it to Pixar, they can do good sequels. Their technique improves, the scenes are more and more realistic. The story is a heart breaker, Andy is grown up, 17, and going off to college. Andy's toys are in dire straights, given to a day care center run by a sadistic teddy bear. Escaping from daycare, they wind up in a packer truck headed for the dump. There is a happy ending. By a miracle they escape the dump's incinerator and make their way back to Andy, who boxes them up and donates them to a very little, very cute, girl. Brings a lump to your throat.

NSA to monitor internet

"US plans Cyber Shield to Utilities, Companies" read the headline in the Wall St Journal. Fearful of cyber attack that might shut down the electric grid or other critical infrastruction, NSA is running a secret surveillance program that gathers who knows what information to "protect" critical infrastructure from hackers.
The article went on to say that electric companies are using the public internet to remote control generators, switches, tranformer banks and other equipment. NSA claims that their top secret internet monitoring software can protect against cyber attack.
Trouble is, it won't work. If the hacker knows equipment internet addresses he can monitor traffic and decode it, learn the passwords, and then take control by transmitting perfectly genuine command messages. No way NSA can tell the difference between legitimate command messages from the electric companies and dangerous messages from hackers. Bits is bits, and they all look alike, ones or zeros.
Real fix. Command and control of critical infrastructure shall NEVER go over the public internet. Electric companies must be required to buy private circuits to operate the electric grid. The public internet is just too vulnerable. Unless we want the lights to go out all over the country just before the next Al Quada atrocity, we must harden the command and control network.

How far should the Nanny State go?

Table saws. Old power tool, the most essential power tool in the wood shop. I started out using my grandfather's Walker Turner 8 inch saw more than 50 years ago. That saw went to my brother, and I moved on to a radial arm saw.
These things are dangerous, no doubt about it. They will sever any body part coming in contact with the blade. I still have all ten fingers, but my brother, who is at least as careful as I am, got cut badly a few years ago.
Some years ago, a safety device was invented. Electronics sense contact between flesh and blade and a clever mechanism stops the blade so rapidly that fingers survive with minor scratches. They do an impressive demo, running a hot dog into the spinning blade. The hot dog emerges unsliced. The inventor has raised capital, started a company to make tablesaws incorporating his "SawStop" technology.
The trial lawyers are moving into the field. One of them sued a leading maker of tablesaws for selling ordinary saws, lacking the "SawStop" technology, after an accident. The court agreed with the trial lawyer, and ruled the maker liable for selling an ordinary tablesaw. The case is under appeal.
The trial lawyer found a sympathetic reporter at NPR to did a piece on All Things Considered advocating his position. The NPR piece advocated federal regulations requiring the new, and costly, "SawStop" technology to be made mandatory on all new tablesaws.
Is this wise or fair public policy? Today conventional tablesaws and SawStop tablesaws compete in the market place. Consumers largely buy the conventional saws because they are considerably cheaper. Most people are deciding that the extra safety of the "SawStop" isn't worth the substantial extra cost. Should federal regulation prevail over the wisdom of the market place? Is the extra safety worth the cost? Who should make this decision, the individual or the government?

NASA to make the Muslim world feel good ?

Damn, that's new. I thought NASA was about space travel, not touchy feely relations with a hostile culture. I mean we have the State Dept and the Peace Corp, and a raft of non governmental organizations all just so eager to improve US relations with the whole world. I think NASA should concentrate on space exploration and let the touchy feely stuff go to agencies that do that sort of thing full time.
Kennedy started up NASA to get the the moon, ahead of the Russians. NASA was supremely successful in this task. Once accomplished, NASA turned to building and then operating the Space Shuttle, Hubble Space Telescope, and a bunch of interplanetary missions. Shuttle being the big end of the stick. Trouble is, Shuttle turned out to be dangerous to fly, and expensive to boot. So the Shuttle is going away, and NASA doesn't have anything to do.
NASA tried to build a new ground to orbit system based on a brand new rocket and a great big capsule. They could have bought working rockets from Space X, Lockheed and Boeing, but instead squandered their funding on a brand new design. Obama hasn't decided what NASA should do in the space exploration business, so he has drafted them into the world wide PR campaign.
I liked it better when NASA did space travel.