Thankfully this has not impact on the temperature here on Earth.

There were no sunspots observed on 266 of the year's 366 days (73%). To find a year with more blank suns, you have to go all the way back to 1913, which had 311 spotless days: plot. Prompted by these numbers, some observers suggested that the solar cycle had hit bottom in 2008.

Maybe not. Sunspot counts for 2009 have dropped even lower. As of March 31st, there were no sunspots on 78 of the year's 90 days (87%).

It adds up to one inescapable conclusion: "We're experiencing a very deep solar minimum," says solar physicist Dean Pesnell of the Goddard Space Flight Center.

"This is the quietest sun we've seen in almost a century," agrees sunspot expert David Hathaway of the Marshall Space Flight Center.

Clearly now is the time to regulate the economy through a carbon cap and trade system in an effort to offset, um something (freedom and prosperity mostly).

Graph It, Baby [ace]: Some time back Retired Geezer/Man of Substance pointed out this post debunking global warming.

Now, does anyone notice in that graph Drew posted that sunspot activity is oddly congruent with late nineties warming followed by cooling throughout the 2000s?

Look at this chart. Which does warming seem to track with more closely -- solar activity (or inactivity) or rising or falling CO2 ("The Invisible Assassin") levels?

I have to quote the commenter again who wrote this (sorry, I forget which wisenheimer it was):

If only there were some... natural explanation for falling and rising temperatures.

Such a hypothetical source of warming would have to be massive, however. On the order of magnitude of our own Sun.

And in Obama's presser, he just said:

if china/india citizens used same energy average america does, "we'd all be melting by now"

Right.

Quote thanks to AHFF Geoff.

Posted by: DrewM at 09:12 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 326 words, total size 2 kb.

Captain Ed writes that there might be a deliberate redaction after "stand down."

I don't know if there's a cut there; it could be the cell phone dropping for a second. If there is a cut, though, it might rescue the Times to some extent; the reporter might have explained that her bosses were just worried about the source's reliability. (Anita Moncrief was a disgruntled employee, accused of putting personal expenses on her ACORN corporate credit card.)

But that wouldn't save the NYT, as most whistleblowers are disgruntled for one reason or another. The reporter was asked to "stand down," presumably from digging up evidence that would support Moncrief's story -- and if they bothered themselves to find such evidence, Moncrief's state of gruntledness would be irrelevant, wouldn't it?

NYT needs to explain its decisions. It apparently won't comment beyond a vague statement that they decide which stories to publish or not publish dozens of times a day.

Ms. Moncrief did get her story out a bit -- though not with anything like the follow-the-leader dissemination the NYT would have provided. Nor with the follow-on investigating that a NYT mention would have spurred throughout the press.

I also wonder how much the NYT deliberately delayed the story getting out, by promising Ms. Moncrief they'd run it if she kept it exclusive to them, delaying, delaying, delaying the whole time, hoping to keep the story from coming out before the election entirely. Until, one might guess, she demanded to know if the story would ever run, thus spurring the NYT's reporter to apologize for the spiking.

John Fund's Oct. 30, 2008 WSJ piece explains the accusations:

Ms. MonCrief testified that in November 2007 Project Vote development director Karyn Gillette told her she had direct contact with the Obama campaign and had obtained their donor lists. Ms. MonCrief also testified she was given a spreadsheet to use in cultivating Obama donors who had maxed out on donations to the candidate, but who could contribute to voter registration efforts. Project Vote calls the allegation "absolutely false."

She says that when she had trouble with what appeared to be duplicate names on the list, Ms. Gillette told her she would talk with the Obama campaign and get a better version. Ms. MonCrief has given me copies of the donor lists she says were obtained from other Democratic campaigns, as well as the 2004 DNC donor lists.

In her testimony, Ms. MonCrief says she was upset by Acorn's "Muscle for Money" program, which she said intimidated businesses Acorn opposed into paying "protection" money in the form of grants.

She's not the only whistleblower, either:

Acorn insists it operates with strict quality controls, turning in, as required by law, all registration forms "even if the name on them was Donald Duck," as Wade Rathke told me two years ago. Acorn whistleblowers tell a different story.

"There's no quality control on purpose, no checks and balances," says Nate Toler, who worked until 2006 as the head organizer of an Acorn campaign against Wal-Mart in California. And Ms. MonCrief says it is longstanding practice to blame bogus registrations on lower-level employees who then often face criminal charges, a practice she says Acorn internally calls "throwing folks under the bus."

Posted by: Ace at 08:39 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 581 words, total size 4 kb.

The market is up and it didn't cost a trillion or so dollars in taxpayer money to do it either.

Financial stocks led the rally, getting a big boost after the Financial Accounting Standards Board relaxed accounting rules forcing banks to value their assets at current prices. The change should help banks reduce losses.

Another positive indicator on the economy also lifted Wall Street sentiment. Factory orders posted a large increase in February, coming on the heels of better-than-expected readings on pending home sales, manufacturing activity and auto sales the day before.

"Everyone is in a buying mood," said Eric Ross, director of research at brokerage Canaccord Adams. "Everyone is feeling good. ... A lot of this is simply confidence."

Gee, Obama is out of the country 2 days and confidence is restored! Maybe America's new "unofficial royalty" would like to take their road show on an extended tour.

Before you get too excited, while today's stock rally didn't cost a trillion in taxpayer money, the leaders of the G20 did decide to pour a trillion dollars into the IMF and the World Bank, so you know, pony up suckers.

Posted by: DrewM at 07:58 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 214 words, total size 2 kb.

It's science, so it must be true.

Caught Twittering or on Facebook at work? It'll make you a better employee, according to an Australian study that shows surfing the Internet for fun during office hours increases productivity.

The University of Melbourne study showed that people who use the Internet for personal reasons at work are about 9 percent more productive that those who do not.

Study author Brent Coker, from the department of management and marketing, said "workplace Internet leisure browsing," or WILB, helped to sharpened workers' concentration.

"People need to zone out for a bit to get back their concentration," Coker said on the university's website (www.unimelb.edu.au/)

"Short and unobtrusive breaks, such as a quick surf of the Internet, enables the mind to rest itself, leading to a higher total net concentration for a days' work, and as a result, increased productivity," he said.

Ace of Spades HQ...Helping the economy one 'accidential' lesbian Pr0n link at a time.

I eagerly await the inevitable next story which will show this study is tainted because it was funded by money from the Big Blog lobby.

Posted by: DrewM at 07:16 AM | Comments (2)
Post contains 228 words, total size 1 kb.

The news yesterday that Obama's aunt, Zeituni Onyango, has almost a year before her next immigration proceeding was met with outrage from many, for example Michelle Malkin, and grumblings of special treatment, from our own Blogger-in-Chief. So let's talk about what happens in removal proceedings.

In a case like this, where removal proceedings have been reopened after an order of removal the first thing that happens is a status hearing so that the immigration judge can find out how the parties want to proceed.

On the one side is the respondent. That's what the alien is called in removal proceedings; kind of like "defendant" in criminal proceedings. On the other is a trial attorney (known as a "TA") from the Department of Homeland Security. The TA is roughly analogous to a prosecutor. The immigration judge works for the Department of Justice.

So several things can happen at the first hearing after reopening, but the point of the hearing is to find out what relief the respondent is seeking. Remember, she's just had her case reopened and she has an outstanding order of removal. So she needs to immediately apply for relief and appear eligible for it. In Onyango's case, we don't know what she's applying for because the proceedings are closed, but I suspect all she's got is another shot at asylum based on changed conditions in Kenya.

That's probably what she did yesterday. She and her attorney show up at court and tell the judge that they intend to seek asylum (again). They might have the application and supplemental documentation already, but that's not usually required. The judge will set a deadline for filing of the application. Once that's accomplished, the judge will set a date for what is called a merits hearing. At a merits hearing, the court takes testimony and hears the parties' arguments. Usually the judge issues an oral decision on the day testimony is completed, but in complicated cases may chose to issue a written one instead.

Yesterday, the immigration judge scheduled a merits hearing on Onyango's application for February 4, 2010. Ten months between hearings is not unusual in immigration court, at least at the "Big Four" immigration courts in San Fransisco, Los Angeles, New York, and Miami. I'm a little surprised this Boston IJ has such a crowded schedule that he's taking ten months between hearings, but it does not surprise me. The immigration courts are seriously overworked, in part because of a hiring freeze on staff and new judges that has been going on for a few years. (BTW, that hiring freeze was just lifted because of the Omnibus Appropriations Act passed in February, so things might speed up as positions left vacant for years start to get filled.)

In short, what happened yesterday is exactly what was expected to happen. I don't think Onyango's proceedings should have been reopened and I suspect that the immigration judge impermissibly circumvented the regulations on reopening to do it. But now that she is back in front of a judge, her case is going the way all the others do. There has been no special treatment that I have seen.

Oh, and while I'm thinking of it: That "little-used provision in U.S. immigration rules that allows denied asylum claims to be reheard" is the one of the most common filing in immigration court. It is not "little-used", as the AP reported and as almost everyone repeated. A motion to reopen based on changed country conditions is very frequently filed and most frequently denied by immigration judges.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 04:37 AM | Add Comment
Post contains 597 words, total size 4 kb.

It was all 'April Fools', right?

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 04:00 AM | Comments (1)
Post contains 14 words, total size 1 kb.

Dave in Texas posted on this earlier in the day, but in case the thread has gone cold and you missed out on commenting, hereÂ’s a reprise from AP via the Seattle Times. Or whatever else your little black hearts desire to yak about. (I got to see most of these same dickheads in person during the 1999 WTO riots. Anecdotes, I have a few) This just builds on DaveÂ’s post a little bit.

”LONDON — Chanting G-20 protesters clashed with riot police in central London on Wednesday, overwhelming police lines, vandalizing the Bank of England and smashing windows at the Royal Bank of Scotland. An effigy of a banker was set ablaze, drawing cheers.”

”Some bolder financial workers leaned out office windows, taunting the demonstrators and waving 10 pound notes at them. Two men - one wearing a suit - exchanged punches before police intervened.”

”Protesters pelted police standing guard at the Royal Exchange with paint, eggs, fruit and other projectiles, and a small group of anarchists, skinheads, and masked protesters repeatedly attacked a police cordon flanking the Bank of England. Some in the crowd urinated against the bank and the message "Built on blood" was scrawled in chalk in front of the building. Police helicopters hovered above. A particularly ferocious balaclava-wearing mob broke into a closed RBS bank branch and stole keyboards, using them to break windows. Other protesters spray-painted graffiti on the RBS building, writing "Class War" and "Thieves." Mounted riot police eventually pushed them back.

Posted by: Open Blog at 07:18 PM | Add Comment
Post contains 661 words, total size 4 kb.

Drew wrote about the Attorney General's disregard for the U.S. Constitution this morning and about how the A.G. doesn't care whether a law is constitutional, but only whether a non-frivolous argument can be made in court. I want to emphasize something.

As an attorney, Eric Holder has sworn several oaths. When he was admitted to a state bar association he swore to uphold and defend the laws and the constitution of that state. When he was admitted to practice in any federal court he swore to uphold and defend the laws of the United States and the U.S. Constitution. And when he became Attorney General he swore again.

Just two months ago Holder took the oath:

“I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter.”

To some attorneys these are just words, not binding. Some attorneys are despicable creatures who do not admit any allegiance that stands in the way of their ambition. Today it turns out that Eric Holder is one of those attorneys.

That man stood and took the same oath that I did and it meant nothing to him. I am ashamed.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 05:15 PM | Add Comment
Post contains 257 words, total size 2 kb.

Yes. Yes yes yes.

Here's how fucking taken with himself he is: When I saw commenters speculating about this, I thought, "No way. Come on guys, don't be ridiculous."

That's how ridiculous this is. So ridiculous I discounted it as too ridiculous and thought those suggesting it were ridiculous.

But here's what's on the iPod, among pictures of the queen's previous visits (as if she doesn't have an entire staff of court photographers for that purpose):

* Photos from President ObamaÂ’s Inauguration

* Audio of then-state senator ObamaÂ’s speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, and

* Audio of President Obama 2009 Inauguration Address

Remember Gordon Brown's gifts had great historic import, and were intended to flatter the recipient. So Obama decided, "Okay, historic import, eh?" And so the greatest historic achievement he could conceive of was his own fucking election.

And of course his gift, rather than flattering the recipient, instead flatters himself.

Here's how CNN headlined the story earlier, by the way:

A "special" iPod. As if it's specially handcrafted from scrimshaw and hobbit-skins. Instead of just loaded with a few Wal*Mart 99 cent downloads.

As special as the Special Olympics.

Dave from Garfield Ridge wrote earlier to me:

Can I be embarrassed about my Commander-in-Chief yet?

The President. . . of the United States. . . visits the Queen of England. . . our mother country. . .

. . .And he makes her a mix tape.

Even worse -- a mix tape of his own songs. From his garage band, Barack Obama & the Golden Unicorns.

Thanks to Slublog for the CNN headline catch.

Posted by: Ace at 05:06 PM | Comments (2)
Post contains 290 words, total size 2 kb.

A nation of men, not laws. I'm glad we finally got that one right.

Zeituni Onyango, the Kenyan aunt of President Obama, emerged this morning after a brief, closed-door hearing in US Immigration Court in Boston and smiled broadly.

"Praise God," Onyango said softly, holding her head high as she was surrounded by a throng of men in suits.

Judge Leonard I. Shapiro continued Onyango's case until Feb. 4, 2010, which allowed her to stay in the United States until at least that date, according to Fatimah Mateen, a spokesperson for the court. At the initial appearance, the judge explained the deportation charges against Onyango and detailed her rights. Mateen briefed reporters in the lobby of the courtroom, standing beneath a framed photograph of Onyango's nephew, President Obama.

"Ms. Onyango's case is being treated just like any other case before an immigration judge," Mateen said.

Onyango plans to apply for permanent residency in the United States, according to Mike Rogers, a spokesman for Onyango's lawyers, whose legal strategy remains unclear.

"The decision as to Ms. Onyango's request to stay permanently in the United States will be made during a second hearing," Rogers said.

JackStraw says to read the comments, which are harder-edged than one might expect in the Boston Globe. But, of course, everything on the internet is national, and one can imagine that rightwing blogs are highlighting this while Gleen Grenwald, Defender of the Constitution, is entirely silent.

Still, here's a representative comment:

Obama stayed out of the case huh?

Two other hearings she was ordered deported....this time all of a sudden the rules changed?

Laws are for little people who don't know any big people.

JackStraw says that Obama's popularity won't last long. I don't know if he'll ever become decidedly unpopular -- he has 46% who will sing his praises even if he accidentally blows up the earth. But I can see his job approval sinking down to that danger-zone 50% level.

How far can you coast on charm? I hope not very far. But alas far enough to get you into a position of enormous responsibility.

Speaking of things that seemed crazy-funny at the time but now seem pretty meh.

Posted by: Ace at 01:45 PM | Comments (2)
Post contains 398 words, total size 3 kb.