Zach Wamp must be getting desperate, as he suggests that if things don’t go the right way in ‘10 and ‘12, secession may be in the cards (because, you know, it worked out so well the last time it was attempted):

“I hope that the American people will go to the ballot box in 2010 and 2012 so that states are not forced to consider separation from this government,” said Wamp during an interview with Hotline OnCall.

He lauded Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX), who first floated the idea of secession in April ‘09, for leading the push-back against health care reform, adding that he hopes the American people “will send people to Washington that will, in 2010 and 2012, strictly adhere” to the constitution’s defined role for the federal government.

“Patriots like Rick Perry have talked about these issues because the federal government is putting us in an untenable position at the state level,” said Wamp, who is competing with Knoxville Mayor Bill Haslam (R) and LG Ron Ramsey (R) for the GOP nod in the race to replace TN Gov. Phil Bredesen (D).

Look, I’ve liked Wamp for a long time. He used to be my congressman. But this kind of nuttery is not helpful and should make voters think twice about supporting him.

Via Outside the Beltway

Robert Putnam and Jeb Bush talk sense on immigration:

Proponents and opponents of immigration agree on one thing: Learning English is crucial to success and assimilation. Yet learning a language as an adult is hard, so first-generation immigrants often use their native tongue. Historically, English has dominated by the second or third generation in all immigrant groups. Most recent immigrants recognize that they need to learn English, and about 90 percent of the second generation speak English, according to the Pew Hispanic Center. Research by sociologists Claude Fischer and Michael Hout published in 2008 suggests that English acquisition among immigrants today is faster than in previous waves.

Residential integration of immigrants is even more gradual. Half a century ago, sociologist Stanley Lieberson showed that most immigrants lived in segregated enclaves, “Little Italy” or “Chinatown,” for several generations. This segregation reflected discrimination by natives and the natural desire of “strangers in a strange land” to live among familiar faces with familiar customs. Only with suburbanization, encouraged by government policy in the 1950s and 1960s, did the children and grandchildren of the immigrants of the 1890s and 1900s exit those enclaves. That many of today’s immigrants live in ethnic enclaves is thus entirely normal and reflects no ominous aim to separate themselves from the wider American community.

Immigrant intermarriage, then and now, also demonstrates steady progress over generations. In the 1960s, more than half a century after Italian immigration peaked, about 40 percent of second-generation Italians married non-Italians. This pattern characterizes today’s immigrants: 39 percent of U.S.-born Latinos marry non-Latinos, according to the Pew Research Center. Intermarriage among second-generation Asian Americans is even more common. Today’s immigrants are, on average, assimilating socially even more rapidly than earlier waves.

Unfortunately the demagogues completely ignore all this, instead choosing to spread hysteria and ignorance (which is much more profitable).

Enjoy the burgers, BBQ, and beer, but don’t forget what it’s all about..

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

The following photos were taken in and around Siem Reap, Cambodia, during my visit (May 24-27, 2009).

The streets of Siem Reap.

A common sight in Siem Reap.

Temple ruins made famous by Tomb Raider.

Killing Fields Memorial, dedicated to the victims of the Khmer Rouge government. Note it contains the bones of victims who could not be identified.

President Obama is set to call for an overhaul of the immigration system:

Obama has said a comprehensive solution means “accountability for everybody” — from the U.S. government meeting its obligation to secure the border, to businesses facing the consequences of knowingly employing illegal immigrants, to those who enter the country illegally owning up to their actions before they can begin the process of becoming citizens.

Recent developments on immigration influenced his decision to give a speech, White House officials say, most notably Arizona’s enactment of a tough anti-immigrant law and protests across the country against it.

“He thought this was a good time to talk plainly with the American people about his views on immigration,” spokesman Bill Burton said.

I’d have to hear the details before forming an opinion on this plan, though I’m generally supportive of a path to earned legalization for illegal immigrants already in the U.S. Given that it’s an election year, however, it’s highly unlikely that anything will pass. Republicans, even those prone to support immigration reform, are in no mood to help the president, and Democrats from competitive districts will also be cautious about touching the subject.

President Obama is aware of this and realizes the prospects for passage aren’t good. This is probably an attempt by Obama to rally Hispanic support, a group with which he has seen his approval rating drop dramatically.

I think Drew Curtis is overestimating the value of web commenters:

He said only one percent of Web comments have any value and called the rest “garbage.”

Michael Gerson has a great column in today’s WaPo, arguing that American politics are becoming increasingly divided not between ideologies but between the calm, sane, and rational versus the loud, hateful, and outrageous. Read it all, but here’s the highlight:

But when members of the Ugly Party are exposed, generally they respond differently. Obscenity? The real obscenity is an unjust war, or imposing socialism or devotion to Israel. It is an argument that makes any deep policy disagreement an excuse for verbal violence. Or an offense against taste and judgment is dismissed as humor and satire.

The alternative to the Ugly Party is the Grown-Up Party — less edgy and less hip. It is sometimes depicted on the left and on the right as an all-powerful media establishment, stifling creativity, freedom and dissent. The Grown-Up Party, in my experience, is more like a seminar at the Aspen Institute — presentation by David Broder, responses from E.J. Dionne Jr. and David Brooks — on the electoral implications of the energy debate. I am more comfortable in this party for a few reasons: because it is more responsible, more reliable and less likely to wish its opponents would die.

Not only does this rage shut down reasonable debate, it also turns many people off to politics. Your average American, for example, regardless of his or her politics, doesn’t pray for the death of Rush Limbaugh, or celebrate when Ted Kennedy dies. If they see one side doing this, it may push them to the other side, but if BOTH sides are doing it, they get turned off by both parties and stay home. Of course, that might be what both political parties want: only the predictable partisans showing up to vote and the unpredictable independents staying home.

For the pundits, though, it probably boils down to money. The Limbaughs, Becks, and Olbermanns of the world are getting much richer than the Brooks and Dionnes.

Australia’s new Prime Minister is not religious and does not pretend to be:

“I’m not a religious person,” [Julia] Gillard told ABC radio.

“I was brought up in the Baptist Church but during my adult life I’ve, you know, found a different path. I’m of course a great respecter of religious beliefs, but they’re not my beliefs.”

“I am not going to pretend a faith I don’t feel. And for people of faith the greatest compliment I could pay to them is to respect their genuinely held beliefs and not to engage in some pretence about mine. I think it’s not the right thing.”

With very few exceptions, do you think any American politician would make such a statement? Certainly no candidate seeking national office would do so and expect to win. Of course, most everyone realizes that a good number of our political leaders are simply faking their beliefs for the sake of electoral gain. From a religious perspective, this deception is far worse than Prime Minister Gillard’s honesty, but as most Americans won’t elect a nonreligious person, this is what politicians will continue to do.

Via OTB

The United States will not return North Korea to its list of state sponsors of terrorism over their role in sinking a South Korean ship:

“In our view, it was a provocative action but one taken by the military or the state against the military of another state,” U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Philip Crowley said Monday in his explanation of why the sinking didn’t constitute an act of international terrorism.

When asked if the sinking was an “act of war,” Crowley called it a “violation of the existing armistice between North and South,” adding the United States continuously evaluates information that may affect the status of nations on the terror list.

Legally, this is true: sinking a military ship does not constitute terrorism, which is defined by the deliberate targeting of civilians. For some bizarre reason, North Korea was removed from the state sponsors of terrorism list by George W. Bush in what was obviously a mistake.

The attack clearly was an act of war, however, but I can understand why Crowley, for diplomatic reasons, might not want to explicitly state this.

On May 27, 2009, while visiting Siem Reap, Cambodia, I took a short trip to the floating villages. While there I took the following photos.

Departure.

At an orphanage school in the village.

Must be rush hour.

A Catholic Church.

A crocodile. Fortunately, it is kept in a pen and not allowed to swim free in the village.

In an article that reads like something from The Onion, Congressman Louie Gohmert (R-TX) claims to have uncovered a terrorist plot to breed baby jihadists in the U.S.:

Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert, speaking on the House floor last week, cited as his source a “retired FBI agent.” He said the agent explained to him that foreign terror groups are looking to “game our system” by sending pregnant women to the United States to give birth to terrorists-in-training, who would have the added advantage of U.S. citizenship. Of course, the plot wouldn’t come to fruition for decades.

“It appeared they would have young women, who became pregnant, would get them into the United States to have a baby. They wouldn’t even have to pay anything for the baby,” Gohmert said. “And then they would return back where they could be raised and coddled as future terrorists. And then one day, 20, 30 years down the road, they can be sent in to help destroy our way of life.”

This is one of the most creative (not to mention ridiculous) conspiracies I’ve ever heard, but obviously there are numerous problems with it, the most notable being, how exactly is it known that such children would grow up to be terrorists? It’s true that many children can be raised and/or brainwashed to believe certain things, but it’s by no means a given that a child will adopt his parents’ political views wholesale. And even if he is convinced that America is evil, it’s quite another to strap a bomb to one’s chest (or fly planes into buildings, etc.).

Of course, an even bigger question might be, if these women are terrorists and they’re already in the United States, why wouldn’t they go ahead and launch an attack of their own, instead of simply coming here, giving birth, and returning home with the hope that in 20-30 years their little bundle of joy might kill someone? Seems to me if you already have a terrorist on the ground in the U.S., it would be smarter to go ahead and use them to launch an attack today, instead of waiting several decades for their children (who may not even become terrorists) to do so.

I don’t think Gohmert thought this through.

Second Amendment advocates won a major Supreme Court victory today:

The Supreme Court ruled for the first time Monday that the Second Amendment provides all Americans a fundamental right to bear arms, a long-sought victory for gun rights advocates who have chafed at federal, state and local efforts to restrict gun ownership.

The court was considering a restrictive handgun law in Chicago and one of its suburbs that was similar to the District law that it ruled against in 2008. The 5 to 4 decision does not strike any other gun control measures currently in place, but it provides a legal basis for challenges across the country where gun owners think that government has been too restrictive.

“It is clear that the Framers . . . counted the right to keep and bear arms among those fundamental rights necessary to our system of ordered liberty,” Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote for the conservatives on the court.

There’s no doubt that Justice Alito is correct on that point, and I view this decision favorably. However, this ruling really doesn’t clear up very much and is likely to lead to a new round of Constitutional jurisprudence, as Doug Mataconis points out. Still, it is a step in the right direction.

Senator Robert Byrd, the longest serving-member of Congress, died this morning at the age of 92. Widely known as a master of Senate rules and procedure, and nicknamed the ‘King of Pork’ (a title he relished), Byrd had served in Congress since 1953 and in the Senate since 1959. To put this in perspective:

When Byrd entered Congress in 1953, a postage stamp cost 3 cents and American kids were clamoring for a new toy called Mr. Potato Head. Dwight Eisenhower was president, Winston Churchill was Britain’s prime minister and Josef Stalin was still the Soviet Union’s leader.

Like a lot of politicians, Byrd probably overstayed his welcome a bit. In his later years, he was very frail. Even so, you have to give the guy credit. He loved the Senate and devoted his life to public service. Politics aside, we should all extend our thoughts and prayers to his family.

During my stay in Siem Reap, Cambodia, I was blessed to watch both a sunset and sunrise over the ancient structure. These photos were take on May 25 and May 26, 2009.

The sun is in retreat.

A rainbow in the distance.

There goes the sun…

The next morning.

Here comes the sun. On solstice, it will rise directly over the center of the structure.

Everyone knows that Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak founded Apple Computers back in 1976. But did you know there was a third founder?

If Ron Wayne, now 76, weren’t one of the most luckless men in the history of Silicon Valley, it wouldn’t have turned out like this.

He was present at the birth of cool on April Fool’s Day, 1976: Co-founder — along with Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak — of the Apple Computer Inc., Wayne designed the company’s original logo, wrote the manual for the Apple I computer, and drafted the fledgling company’s partnership agreement.

That agreement gave him a 10 percent ownership stake in Apple, a position that would be worth about $22 billion today if Wayne had held onto it.

Unfortunately, Mr. Wayne did not hold onto the stock, instead selling it back for $800 less than two weeks later. Poor guy could have been a billionaire.

It reminds be a little of Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, who together in the 1930s created Superman. They later sold the rights to DC Comics for $130 (though they were later awarded an annual stipend and were acknowledged as creators).

On this day in 1950, Communist North Korea invaded South Korea, setting off the Korean War, which would eventually involve all the great powers of the day: the United States, Great Britain, China, and the Soviet Union, making it a major Cold War battleground. Before a ceasefire was reached in 1953, nearly 4 million Korean civilians on both sides were killed or wounded (just over 5% of the population of the Korean peninsula), in addition to almost 137,000 South Korean soldiers and almost 37,000 U.S. soldiers killed. Remembered in the U.S. as the “Forgotten War,” the Korean War was one of the most brutal wars in the world history.

Since the 1953 armistice was signed, South Korea has gone from an impoverished backwater to one of the world’s leading economic powers, with a standard of living comparable to the U.S. North Korea, on the other hand, remains impoverished, oppressed, hostile, and isolated, though nuclear-armed.

It’s worth remembering that the Korean War officially never ended; an armistice was signed, but not a formal declaration ending the war. The ironically-named Demilitarized Zone separating the two countries remains the most heavily fortified in the world. Tensions continue to flare between the countries, most recently over the sinking of a South Korean ship by a North Korean submarine. Idealists dream of someday reunifying the countries, but unfortunately the prospects aren’t good, at least not in our lifetimes.

Article: Divided Koreas commemorate start of Korean War - Yahoo News

Angkor Wat is a Hindu temple, later converted to a Buddhist temple when Cambodia was converted to that religion in the late 1200s, located near Siem Reap, Cambodia. Built in the early 1100s, it was the capital of the Khmer Empire until its mysterious decline in the 1300s.

For many years, Angkor Wat was neglected, particularly during the period of Khmer Rouge and the following civil war, which lasted until about 1997. Today there is an effort to restore the temple and other ruins, and the site has done much to bring tourists into the poverty stricken Cambodia.

I visited the area in May 2009 and was amazed by what I saw. One thing that cannot be captured in these pictures is the sheer size of Angkor Wat, which seems to go on forever.

The following photos were taken on May 24, 2009, during a day at the ruins.

The entrance to Angkor.

View from above.

Congress has an approval rating of 20%, according to a recent Gallup poll, which is nearing a record low. Obviously, this doesn’t bode well for Democratic incumbents in swing districts, although most incumbents will still win reelection. This doesn’t necessarily mean Democrats will maintain control, however; after all, even during the Republican revolution of 1994, 90% of incumbents seeking reelection won.

I have lots of photos I want to post, but have fallen way behind. So now I’m going to try my best to catch up, starting with a trip to Shanghai from May 21-23, 2009.

The streets of Shanghai, China.

Entrance to the famous Yuyuan Garden.

Inside the Yuyuan Garden.

Chinese Dairy Queen. Interesting to me as my first job was at Dairy Queen.

The Shanghai skyline.

Shanghai nightlife.

A Buddhist temple.

The Oriental Pearl Tower.

The top of the Oriental Pearl Tower has a glass bottom. Those are my feet on the bottom. It’s a long way down…

View from the tower, including smog.

This is pretty cool:

Twenty-first century laser technology has opened a window into the early days of the Catholic Church, guiding researchers through the dank, musty catacombs beneath Rome to a startling find: the first known icons of the apostles Peter and Paul.

Vatican officials unveiled the paintings Tuesday, discovered along with the earliest known images of the apostles John and Andrew in an underground burial chamber beneath an office building on a busy street in a working-class Rome neighborhood.