Earth from 3 Billion Miles Away

Photograph of planet Earth taken in 1990 by Voyager 1

CARL SAGAN:   "From this distant vantage point, the Earth might not seem of particular interest. But for us, it's different. Consider again that dot. That's here, that's home, that's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.

The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of this pixel on the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner, how frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds.

Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the Universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves.

The Earth is the only world known so far to harbor life. There is nowhere else, at least in the near future, to which our species could migrate. Visit, yes. Settle, not yet. Like it or not, for the moment the Earth is where we make our stand.

It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience. There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another, and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known."

                                     -Carl Sagan Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space (1994)

Cheering Immaturity

This article by Thomas Sowell touches upon one my all time pet peeves: the expectation of liberals that the world should operate on a quota system, when the reality is that outcommes depend on inputs.

Please No Romney, No Palin

Mitt:  Don't run in 2012.  You are nothing but a carpet-bagging, slightly more conservative version of Bill Clinton.  Like Bill, you have proven that you  will do anything, say anything to get elected.  You are a carpetbagger and an unprincipled opportunist.  Not only will I not vote for you, I will oppose you.

Sarah: Don't run in 2012.  You are a lightweight; you lack what the pundits called "gravitas" in 2000.  Turned out that W had a hell of a lot more gravitas than the Associated Press gave him credit for when 9/11 struck.   You have none.  You lack a conversational understanding of most of the issues which you would confront as the leader of the free world.   Love the glasses, but I can't support you.

People I can support:

Bobby Jindahl
Paul Ryan
Mitch Daniels

ObamaCare Redux

I highly recommend an excellent overview/summary of the shortcomings of ObamaCare at the Weekly Standard ("REPEAL - How and Why Obamacare Must Be Undone"). In it, Yuval Levin eloquently makes the case for repeal of this monstrosity, both as to the whys and the practical possibilities.

The Wall Street Journal Opinion blog also has a great article discussing immediate real world impacts of ObamaCare on the financial statements of some major American companies such as AT&T, Deere & Co., Caterpillar and others.

Thanks again to Barry, Nancy, Harry and the other fools who made all of this possible.

Toyota's Redemption

I have been following the "runaway Toyota" stories with great skepticism for a while.  They are reminiscent of the Audi 5000 stories that circulated in the mid-1980s.

In today's news, the NHTSA looked at the "black box" of a Toyota Prius which allegedly suffered from the sudden acceleration problem. Turns out that the black box (which records various metrics of vehicle operation) showed no braking and wide open acceleration in a New York case.  In the case of the Audi 5000, the car was ultimately exonerated.

Now that the fools that are operating these killer Toyotas know that there IS a black box, and now that doubt has been cast on the driving abilities of the people who have experienced problems with their Toyota, my modest prediction is that this story is going to wind down in the media, and that reports of these incidents will stop.

Of course, if you are dumb enough to throw rubber, winter floor mats on top of the carpeted ones (which are actuallyfastened to the floor), you deserve what you get.

We Have Race on the Brain

We Have Race on the Brain

Anyone Can Do Anything (Article by B.B. Robinson, Ph.d)

Black History Month is an ideal time to measure progress. This year is especially appropriate as we embark on a new decade.


Some indicators of progress are how blacks are catching up with their white counterparts with regard to income, education and political participation. In the latter two categories, reports say blacks made marginal progress. But we have not yet really progressed on equalizing incomes.

Some might argue this income disparity is of overwhelming importance and must be rectified immediately. They may contend it directly affects education and other opportunities.

Our nation's unfortunate history of discrimination has residual effects that remain today. There are also post-civil rights era problems related to entitlements that breed a reliance on government. We can acknowledge these problems, but we must not dwell on them.

To keep from spending the next 90 years debating reasons for this income disparity, let's focus on what can be done to increase black earnings. Solutions include encouraging more blacks to train in the financial, mathematical and scientific fields. Entrepreneurship is also ideal - starting one's own business to actually become the employer.

Classroom education alone is not sufficient to boost income levels. There are too many blacks with doctoral degrees who lack jobs or have jobs that earn less than one might expect. Put simply, their degrees are not in growing or lucrative fields.

Rather than focusing on great black scholars or heroes this Black History Month, why not focus more on black Americans who achieved financial success and how they did it? Think about BET founder Robert Johnson or the late venture capitalist Reginald Lewis.

Americans earning the most money do not necessarily have a multitude of advanced diplomas adorning their walls. Instead, they are thinkers who bring about new wealth-generating ideas. They are go-getters with the drive and ambition who are willing to take the risks to get ahead.

This is not to say the most successful people aren't educated. They can have such degrees, but their smarts aren't always obtained in school.

Think about how many university professors are very wealthy. Not many. What professors can do successfully is impart wisdom upon others. They can school someone about becoming a doctor or a lawyer or to understand the world of business. But what then?

It all comes down to how someone applies his talents. Anyone can do virtually anything when given the proper training.

Oprah Winfrey, for example, was a television reporter who used her ambition and talents to become a media mogul. She did not enter her profession with a Harvard MBA.

Black Americans must understand that anyone can do almost anything - from plumbing to nuclear physics. There's little holding most Americans back if they are given the proper training and have the ambition to succeed.

Again, it's not always education as much as it is training. Put a young mind that is willing to learn in the proper position, and that young mind will master the job. We can't be fooled that one must first obtain a advanced degree to be a success.

Those who know will tell you that, the first day on the job, even the newly-minted Ph.D. may be told by an experienced supervisor to "forget everything that you learned at the university."

Black History Month should help to identify wealthy and successful black Americans. People should learn how they became wealthy and commit themselves to replicating that model.

If we use self-study, mentoring and commit ourselves by supporting each other (especially black businesses), then we can certainly produce considerably more wealthy black Americans. In turn, those wealthy blacks can help other blacks become wealthy because "anyone can do anything."

*****

 
B.B. Robinson, Ph.D. is a member of the national advisory council of the black leadership network Project 21. You can visit his website at www.blackeconomics.org. Comments may be sent to Project21@nationalcenter.org.


SOURCE:  The National Center for Public Policy Research.

Bipartisan Indifference to Controlling Health Care Costs | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary

Bipartisan Indifference to Controlling Health Care Costs | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary

Posted using ShareThis

Obama Watch - Nov. 8 2008

Memories are faulty. Big E is going to try to keep track of Barry Obama's

3. Income Tax Cut for 95% of America. Never mind that about 40% of Americans don't currently PAY income tax; BO promised during the campaign that he would give a tax break to the 95% of Americans making less than $250,000 per year.

1. From the Obama Campaign Website (http://www.barackobama.com/taxes/11-8-08)

-No family making less than $250,000 will see their taxes increase.

- Typical middle class family will receive well over $1,000 in tax relief

- Families making more than $250,000 will pay either the same or lower tax rates than they paid in the 1990s .

- Cut taxes overall, reducing revenues to below the levels that prevailed under Ronald Reagan (less than 18.2 percent of GDP). "The Obama tax plan is a net tax cut – his tax relief for middle class families is larger than the revenue raised by his tax changes for families over $250,000. Coupled with his commitment to cut unnecessary spending, Obama will pay for this tax relief while bringing down the budget deficit."

If Barry does all this, I will vote for the fool in 2012.

4. Fiscal Stimulus Package. From BO's press conference 11-7-08:

"If it [stimulus package] does not get done in the lame-duck session, it will be the first thing I get done as president of the United States . . . A fiscal stimulus plan that will jump-start economic growth is long overdue. I've talked about it throughout this - the last few months of the campaign . . . we should get it done.""

While I have little doubt that Barry, Harry and Nancy will try to dust off the ineffective gimmick of sending out $500 checks; I doubt that it will get done before March and I guarantee you that it won't be effective.

Obama Watch - Nov. 7 2008

Big E will be memorializing the gaffes, mis-steps, scandals, contradictions and campaign reneges of the ill-fated Obama Administration.

Let's see: today is Friday November 7. The election is 3 days old.

Item 1: Obama's New Politics. This is going to be a "post-partisan" administration pursuing new politics, one that rises above entrenched partisan rifts to unite a divided country. Remember "Change We Can Believe In"? So who is Barry's first appointment? Rahm Immanuel, a retro play (was senior advisor to Bill Clinton from 1993 to 1998), one of the most partisan choices available. Yah, "New Politics." Right.

Item 2: Cut and Run in 16 Months. We heard often during the 21 month Obama campaign about how opposed he was to the Iraq war, and his plan to get the troops out in 16 months, despite the fact that major combat operations had already been over for years, the efficacy of the 2007 troop surge had exceeded expectations, and the U.S. role had already been reduced to peace-keeping and transitioning the job of keeping the peace to the Iraqi military.

"Barack Obama will work with our military commanders to begin the phased withdrawal of our troops out of Iraq in the first 16 months," Sen. Jack Reed told delegates at the Democratic National Convention in August. This strategy is still being touted on Barry's transition website today. http://change.gov/agenda/iraq/

That would mean troops out May20, 2010. Won't happen. And Big E will be there to document that failure.

Hillary's Comeuppance

This excellent article by the Associated Press is an excellent summary of how Hillary got to be where she is today.

Her biggest problem is that she is not likable; that's not a fault, it's a fact. But surrounded by yes-men and sycophants, she never heard that. It's like the worst of the worst on American Idol: all of their lives they have been singing in the church choir, and they are shocked when they learn that the larger world is a much harsher judge.

Bolstered by her own hubris, she always believed that this was her turn, and still can't seem to grasp that she'll have to wait for another day to get her ride on the carousel.

Muddled Vision for Champaign County Nursing Home

Today's News-Gazette article about the Champaign County Nursing Home really gets to the crux of the problem behind this debacle of local government. I confess I haven't been paying attention, but it appears that the place we find ourselves in today is the result of a lack of clear goals for this facility.

County homes have historically been a place where folks without means (either because of age, infirmity or mental illness) were allowed to live. They were clearly charitable institutions, funded largely by taxpayer subsidy. There was no discussion about breaking even, or making a profit; the budget discussion was about how to pay the bills.

Here in Champaign County (home of the dysfunctional 27-member County Board), there appear to be competing visions regarding the County's $27 million investment. [Not surprising, given that the biggest dream that some of the members have is to get elected to the worst-in-the-nation Illinois General Assembly, or worse, to be mayor of Urbana. ]

Some apparently expect the home to run on at least a break-even basis. But if that is the case, why is government involved at all? Is there a lack of private nursing home companies out there? Not likely. Why in the world would an impotent county government imagine that it is in a better position than a professional private company to run this operation? If the goal is to minimize expense to taxpayers, sell the damn thing to a professional operator and cut your losses.

It is not a little ironic that the idea of booting impoverished Medicaid recipients is being floated. If the goal of the facility is to provide refuge to those who would otherwise be out in the cold, this step would be absolutely contraindicated.

So what's it going to be, you dummies? A decision to provide heavily-subsidized care, or to make the facility a self-sufficient enterprise? The choices could not be more stark, but resolution will require courage and clear-thinking. I, for one, am not holding my breath.

Its NOT the Economy, Stupid

The economy showed "remarkable signs of resilience Friday as job losses slowed, the dollar gained a bit of muscle for a change and there were even indications that food prices may be easing." The unemployment rate actually decreased by 1/10th of 1%, although the actual number of jobs decreased.


While the economy is obviously taking a rest, those who traffic in gloom and doom will have to temper the hand-wringing a bit.

That's bad news for the Hill and Barack crowd, who are heavily engaged in the rhetoric that we are all going to hell in a handbasket, NOW.

We heard the same tripe in 1992, when, despite evidence that the economy had started to rebound in late summer, the disaster drum continued to be beaten, all to the benefit of a certain New Democrat from Arkansas.

This year, let's all keep in mind that (a) the economy has ups and downs, (b) we are probably in a down, (c) in life, it's almost never as great or terrible as we think, and (d) the news media is slow to pick up on change, as the inertia pushes last month's story about 6 months past its prime.

My question: is is REALLY that bad?

The phony-baloney 'subprime mortgage mess' is a total red herring; 99% of Americans are indifferent.

Gas prices? Yes, they've gone up, along with the price of eggs, groceries and everything else that is transported by truck. Call me insensitive and elitist, but I'm hard-pressed to believe that an additional $20 a week for gas is going to ruin anyone's life.

The stock market? Sure, your 401(k) has taken a beating. But, unless you are retiring tomorrow, it's just numbers on a piece of paper.

The truth? Things are about like they've been for a long time. To hell with any politician who tells you any different.

Al Gore = Henny Penny

According to Wikipedia, global warming is the observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth's near surface air and oceans in recent decades and its projected continuation. Former Vice President has appointed himself the world's gadfly on the issue, and has won accolades from the save-the-whale set for his efforts. (The cynical view is that he is using the issue as a medium for shedding his "Wooden Al" persona in an effort to garner support for an '08 run for prez).

Let's big picture this thing.

First, who with a functioning brain would expect the earth NOT to be warming? Think about it - the sheer number of warm human bodies has multiplied hundreds of times in the last millenium. Even the most primitive cultures start fires, and the most developed among us heat our dwellings and drive vehicles powered by combustion engines. In other words, Al, damn straight human activity is warming the earth! And since there are more of us every day, expect that trend to continue.

Second, no one really knows just how quickly the earth is heating up, and no one knows what the effects are going to be, either short or long run. The earth is too big and long term weather patterns too complex to understand with much certainty. Anyone who claims too strongly to the contrary is reading tea leaves. Myopia sets in when such calculations are made. For example, while arctic glaciers might melt (massive flooding!), have the geniuses making such calculations factored in the additional moisture that the warmer atmosphere will hold?

Third, any effects will come about gradually. The sky is not going to just cave in one day, Al.

Fourth, in the big picture, who cares if the world does warm up? Will it be such a tragedy if we lose some coastline in Florida? If you can grow produce in Illinois? If there is an uptick in severe storms?

Finally, given the vast and diverse number of persons and activities on this earth, it is highly unlikely that trivial and silly efforts by developed countries to 'reduce greenhouse gases' will have any meaningful effect. In other words, by far the greatest contributors to global warming are non-discretionary: we need to generate heat to warm our homes, manufacture goods, and transport people and things around the world. Even if everyone on the earth started using solar power tomorrow, think about the aggregate amount of heat from sunlight that we would be trapping and absorbing!

Global warming is inevitable. Enjoy it and think about moving to Minnesota.

School Desegregation / Integration

Today, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in two cases (Meredith v. Jefferson County Public Schools (Louisville, KY) and Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District (Seattle, WA)) challenging the ability of public schools to use race as a factor when assigning students to schools.

My question: why does anyone think, in 2006, that it is appropriate to use race as the basis of eligibility for ANYTHING?

While desegregation might have been a necessary tool to jerk America out of the Jim Crow south in the 1950s and 1960s, those days are long since past. At some point, we need to stop using race as a factor, even in supposedly benign ways and with the stated goal of remediating past discrimination.

Is it fair and just to bus kids (regardless of race) across town just so their neighborhood school can be "racially balanced"? No.

Is it fair and just to deny black parents the right to send their kids to a neighborhood school, if that is what they want to do? No.

Is it fair to give one kid the last spot in an elite school, at the expense of some other kid, who goes to a lessser school? No.

None of these things was fair, just or right when it was being done to black kids, and it's not fair, just or right now for anyone else.

Let's take race off the school application, the job application, and the scholarship application. Race should be as irrelevant as the color of one's eyebrows or one's height. THAT is the colorblind ideal of the civil rights movement, not blind adherence to a quota or preference system that is badly outdated.

The Real Reason for Declining Enrollment in Champaign Schools

Jim Dey had another informative piece in Saturday's News-Gazette regarding declining enrollment in Unit 4 schools, and the corresponding increases in enrollment at private schools and schools in satellite communities such as Mahomet and St. Joe.

Of course, most of the dialogue involving our schools concerns issues of race and the continuing consent decree that mandates federal district court involvement in monitoring efforts to improve educational opportunities for racial minorities.

While I would readily concede that racism is alive and well in Champaign-Urbana (and everywhere else on this planet), I think there has been too much focus on racsim as the source of Unit 4's troubles.

The unfortunate part of the consent decree mess is that the focus has shifted from the old utilitarian "greatest good for the greatest number" to an incredible over-emphasis on student skin color and a need for administrators to weigh each decision, first and foremost, on disparate impact considerations.

In my view, the biggest part of the exodus from Unit 4 schools involves issues of class, rather than race. For the same reason that wealthy families in New England send little Muffy and Charles off to rich-kid prep schools, middle class Champaign county families send their kids to relatively expensive private schools locally: they want their kids to intereact with kids of similar socio-economic means.

While there are a handful of idealists who believe that there is educational value in having their (privileged) kids hang out with kids who live in trailer parks, there are far more who go to great lengths to avoid those kinds of interactions.

Elitist snobbery? Sure. Racism? Not so much. It's easy to confuse race and class, because a disproportionate number of blacks fall on the lower end of the economic spectrum.

My kids go to private school, not because I hate black people or poor people. They go to private school because they can get a great education and make friends with kids who come from achievement-oriented families who make education and personal success a priority. They go because order and discipline is a constant requirement, can be meted out swiftly and uniformly, and can include expulsion, where the situation demands it.

Can you attend public schools and get a great education? Sure.

Are there families of modest means (including single-parent families) who are achievement-oriented and upwardly mobile? Certainly.

Are there kids at private school (including weathly and "upper class" kids) who are a horrible influence on the kids around them, and who come from wholly-dysfunctional families? Without a doubt.

Are there kids in public schools who are brilliant and headed for a lifetime of success? Yes.

Am I somehow sheltering my kids from the 'real world'? Probably.

But what I am really doing is sending our kids to schools that, on balance, give them the best educational environment.

Unit 4 Consent Decree - October 19, 2006 Order

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

SA'DA JOHNSON, ET AL.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

BOARD OF EDUCATION CHAMPAIGN
COMMUNITY UNIT SCHOOL
DISTRICT #4,

Defendant.

Case No. 00-1349

Having found Defendant’s brief to be largely unresponsive to the Court’s July 31, 2006 Order in that it did not, in collaboration with Plaintiff’s, adequately address specific targets, steps, and responsibility for accelerating the progress of African American students as agreed under the Second Revised Consent Decree, the Court hereby orders Defendant to work collaboratively with Plaintiffs to produce a plan that is responsive to the Court’s Order, and which addresses all areas of the Consent Decree including all objectives and goals as stated in the Education Equity Implementation Plan.

The proposed plan must be reviewed and approved by the Monitoring Team. Any disputes that arise during the negotiation of this plan should be submitted for mediation. The plan should include a mutually agreed upon process for fulfilling the District’s good faith commitment for the provision of student seats in North Champaign. The plan must be submitted to the Court no later than January 15, 2007.

ENTERED this 19th day of October, 2006.

s/Joe B. McDade
JOE BILLY McDADE
United States District Judge

Thanks, Ken!

Thanks, Ken! Lest anyone thought that you actually have a brain, you have now gone and eliminated all doubt. In today's News-Gazette, His Idiocy has proclaimed, in pure, simple-minded fashion, that 'if we don't increase the tax rate, we haven't increased the tax.'

What a moron! Let's see, yesterday, the city taxed and spent $100. Today the city taxed and spent $120.

I know it's hard, dumb ass, but you just increased taxes by $20. Whether that increase was accomplished by increasing the rate or increasing the levy, what's the difference? Taxpayers are paying $20 more.

I guess, in Pirok's simple-minded world, if my house increases in value by 10%, the cost of everything the city does must have also increased 10%. Wake up, Ken! There is virtually NO logical relationship between increased housing values and the cost of city services. If you wanted to increase the total levy by the Consumer Price Index, that would be one thing. But to just leave the rate constant in the face of dramatically escalating values and then delude yourself into thinking that taxes are static is just dumb. Even Ken's sister, Kendra, agrees with that.

Now, unless you are a moron as big as Ken, you know that the price of providing city services increases over time, and, all things being equal, the city has to collect additional tax revenue to provide those same services.

The larger question (not sure Ken-boy has ever considered this) is whether the city could (and should) get by with less. Has it ever occurred to the city council that it would be OK, even noble, to reduce the overall tax levy?

I think all the booze has killed the 17 brain cells that KP was born with.

Mark Foley

The following is copied in its entirety from Redstate.com:

"Here's an interesting bit of transcript. This bit involved the Congressman having an explicit IM conversation with a 16 year old with whom he had sexual relations. "M" is the Congressman. "B" is the minor.

M: What you gonna wear?

B: Well, my peach underwear, like you told me to. I was hoping that we could do something really special but I see that's not gonna happen, I guess.

M: I was definitely gonna stick [. . . .] in you.

B: Really?

M: Right in my office. I was gonna [. . . .] too.

B: Really?

M: I was looking forward to it.

B: Yeah, I been thinking about a lot times we had together. We had some really good times.

M: Uh-huh, that summer when I used to [. . . .] you out south in that Riverdale apartment?

Of course that was Mel Reynolds, not Mark Foley. And Mel got a pardon from Bill Clinton." Credits: www.redstate.com; www.polipundit.com

Gas Prices and Politics - The Phantom Connection

Brent Baker credits Brian Williams for adding to the silly speculation about a link between the recent decline in gasoline prices and the upcoming mid-term elections.

USA Today dutifully reports a statistical relationship between gas prices and President Bush's popularity rating.

OK, one more time. I'll go slow.

1. Retail gasoline prices are driven by several 'macro' factors. What the President of the United States or his Big Oil friends want those prices to be is not one of those factors.

The biggest factor is the price of crude oil in the world market, a market that is dominated by OPEC, the oil cartel.

The second biggest factor is refining, as refiners change the mix of their production among gasoline, diesel fuel, kerosene, and other petroleum-based products. Those refining decisions, in turn, are affected by wholesale prices (refiners produce what will bring the highest price).

The third factor is consumer demand. In the fall, demand for gasoline drops, as consumers' summer travel is over. Plus, persistent high prices may have finally caused people to drive less, to save money. Demand for heating oil increases, as consumers in northern climes fill their tank for the winter heating season. So, the late September drop in gasoline prices is completely consistent with declining demand for gasoline.

2. Basic Economic Theory. Sorry, I probably didn't go slow enough on one point, which is this: the most basic element of microeconomic theory is that the price of a good is a function of the relationship of the supply of that good with the demand for it. If demand is constant, a greater supply means that prices will decline, as buyers have leverage against sellers and can price shop. A decreased supply means that prices increase. This is pretty intuitive.

A slightly more advanced concept is that suppliers adapt to the marketplace. When gas prices are high, refiners will produce more, thus lowering the price. Of course, that takes time, as producers may have existing contractual obligations to deliver alternative products, for somme period of time, or may have to make changes to their production process to switch to a more profitiable product.

3. The President Doesn't Have That Much Power. There are a lot of things the POTUS can do: declare war, hand out discretionary funds, establish relationships with foreign governments.

But there are a lot of things the President can't do jack squat about: he can't control the capital markets (though in times of turmoil he might give a rah-rah speech to calm everyone down), interest rates, gas prices, or oil prices.

He doesn't have that power, and his "big oil" buddies don't either. The whole thing is driven by huge, worldwide economic forces that are beyond EVERYONE's control (yes, even OPEC, to a great extent).

4. Everything You See Is Not a Conspiracy. Grow a brain, and realize that, in this big, crazy world we live in, every little happening or occurrence is NOT a big conspiracy. Sometimes we, as 'little people,' imagine that there are big, powerful people out there with lots of strings to pull and lots of things to control.

While there is such a thing as influence, and people DO manipulate governments and markets, those manipulations are on a tiny, micro level. They are things like getting your 3-acre lot re-zoned, or getting a $100,000 grant from corrupt Governor Blagojevich.

Huge, world-wide commodities markets are not manipulated by a guy who spends most of his day meeting with the Girl Scout troop from Cleveland who sold the most Girl Scout cookies.