Would you like a little RADIATION with that salmon?

The Fukishima disaster is the gift that just keeps on giving.  Plan on eating?  Like seafood?  You may reconsider after looking at this site:

http://caravantomidnight.com/28-signs-that-the-west-is-being-absolutely-fried-with-nuclear-radiation-from-fukushima/  

Think you're safe if you don't eat seafood because you live in the Midwest?:  

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2535074/Radiation-readings-Missouri-snow-DOUBLE-normal-levels-San-Francisco-beach-FIVE-TIMES-safe-levels.html  

Here are the important questions at this point as I see them:

1.  Why haven't the world's governments and the U.N. put TREMENDOUS pressure on the Japanese government to deal effectively with this mess?

2.  Why wasn't the s.o.b. 'Chernobyl-ed' at the very BEGINNING of this?  The Soviet Union had a similar but MUCH less serious situation occur at Chernobyl in 1986.  It used a low-tech, simple solution:  dump a butt-load of lime on top of the thing and then dump a butt-load of concrete on top of that, effectively entombing it.  This is not a permanent solution, but it gives the mess time to cool down (say, 200 years!) and gives US time to come up with a more long-lasting or even (pray) PERMANENT fix.  Oh, NOW, I'm told, we CAN'T use that SIMPLE solution because, due to the damage done inside reactor number 3, there is now FRESH water leaking INTO the plant underground as well as salt water, both of which are now exiting the plant into the Pacific Ocean RADIOACTIVE.  The 'Chernobyl' solution PERHAPS could still be used but concrete used to bury the mess would have to be of a type which sets (hardens) in salt and brackish (fresh water which has a low level of salt in it) water.  I don't know if such a concrete exists.  Do you?

The following are simply things that I've heard and seen through my sources (primarily, at least, "Coast-to-coast AM")  It seems, according to "Coast", that one reason the Japanese government isn't eager to bury the whole mess is because they've been storing plutonium at that site.  Plutonium, as you may know, is usable in making nuclear weapons, which for Japan would be against treaty.  Why would Japan, a nation which has foresworn offensive military capability, want nuclear-weapons-grade materiel?  I can think of two reasons and they're right in Japan's neighborhood.  In fact, Japan is having trouble with ONE of them RIGHT NOW!!  Those two reasons are, in order:

1.  China

2.  Russia (with whom Japan has a historically contentious relationship)

Kind of brings back those old "Cold War" feelings!  And the ol' friendly glowing stuff is getting into our water and the food chain too!!  Gives me a little warm tickle right . .  HERE!  Or is that RADIATION?  SWEET DREAMS!

Oh, and here's the latest, folks!  Japan is considering restarting its nuclear reactors!  This reminds me of the old song lyric:  "When will they ever learn?  When will they ever learn?"

http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/bulletin/japan-drafts-return-to-nuclear/?tag=nl.e660&s_cid=e660&ttag=e660&ftag=TRE4eb29b5

Please note that though the above-linked article in my opinion shows a bias toward nuclear power I am in no way in favor of nuclear power.  One reason for this is that human nature can never be discounted in any human endeavor.  This includes the temptation of a contractor or subcontractor to use substandard materiel or practices in the construction of any project, including nuclear power plants.

Some Questions On the Approval Of the Health Care Affordability Act By the U.S. Supreme Court

So, the U.S. Supreme Court has just upheld the Health Care Affordability Act of 2011.  I have many questions about this.  One of these is, why did U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Elena Kagan, who voted for this monstrosity, not recuse herself from the arguments and from the voting on this case?  After all, she was U.S. Solicitor General when the law was formed and was apparently instrumental in its' formation.  She should be required to explain to the Congress AND TO THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA via television, radio and press, in sworn testimony, why she did not recuse herself from this case.  Her explanation of why her voting on this case did not involve a massive conflict of interest should be very interesting indeed!

In another note, I think you will be VERY INTERESTED in this:  according to a source in Backwoods Survival Blog, the U.S. government is preparing for CIVIL WAR.

Nugent's Folly

I guess with everyone else and their brother commenting on Ted Nugent's comments on the ramifications of Barack Obama's possible reelection next year, I'll have to chime in.  First, Ted's comments are frequently bombastic and perhaps at least A LITTLE over-the-top.  That being said, as far as I can determine, Ted said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ILLEGAL!!!!!  Plus, we have this little thing called the FIRST AMENDMENT to our Constitution.  If memory serves me correctly, this says that we have the 'right of free speech', something like that.  The Supreme Court has held that you can't create a public danger, i.e., yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater, etc.  Did Ted do this?  No!!!!!!!  Did he say ANYTHING which might cause a REASONABLE PERSON to react in a way which endangers the current occupant of the White House???  NO!!!!!!!  Also, the last time I checked, rock stars had not yet been exempted from the protections afforded them under the First Amendment!!!  I guess that pretty well says it!  Oh:  here's a link to educate you on at least some of what he actually said:   http://music-mix.ew.com/2012/04/20/ted-nugent-secret-service-obama-nra/

How This Blog Is Different

Unlike many sociopolitical blogs, I do not believe it is necessary or particularly a favor to you to write an entry every day.  This may change at some point.  I will, however, try to comment promptly when an issue comes up which I believe to be important.

Reinventing the Wheel

I am restarting this blog.  I am currently considering a change in direction in light of President Obama's recent passage of the https://www.google.com/search?q=National%20Defense%20Authorization%20Act&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&source=hp&channel=np and the reported plan by President Obama to give YOUR MONEY to the Muslim Brotherhood by Executive Order.  I realize that one purpose of the giving of such funds could be to "buy influence" with the Brotherhood and within their circles.  Nonetheless, the money would still be used for their purposes.  Based in part on these developments, I believe that developments threatening our American freedoms are moving MUCH FASTER than I had previously thought.  Also, researching and commenting on the news is very time-consuming and is potentially very financially draining.  Thus, I am shifting directions toward providing you with links and information which I think you may need to prepare for the coming times.