Tiptoeing in Search of a National Security Strategy

I think the two videos below provide a striking --- if not frightening --- contrast between top-level thinking at the White House and the realities of the terrorist threat inside America's borders. At the first clip, John Brennan, President Obama's counterterrorism adviser, announced yesterday "that the term 'jihadists' should not be used to describe America's enemies." And below is a Fox News report on "a suspected member of the Somalia-based Al Shabaab terrorist group who might be attempting to travel to the U.S. through Mexico."

It just keeps coming, the news of increasing suspected terrorist activity in the U.S. And this is after the recent bombing attempts on Christmas Day and in Times Square. Something's going to happen, that's for sure. We've been lucky so far that no one's been killed during the recent attempts. Of course, it's not reassuring that as we see increasing signs of violent jihad at home, the administration continues to downgrade the threat and neuter our ability to respond. See Steve Schippert, "No Islamists, No Jihad: New Obama National Security Strategy 'Focuses' On Domestic Terror."

Plus at LAT, "U.S. Looks at Ways to Head Off Home-Grown Extremism":

After more than a dozen home-grown terrorist plots involving American Muslims since President Obama took office, the administration is moving to step up its scattershot efforts to counter domestic radicalism, prompting a debate over the proper role of government in addressing ideological threats.

Unlike Britain and other countries in Europe, the U.S. government does not have a national strategy to combat Islamic extremism, and no single agency in the vast American national security and intelligence bureaucracy is in charge of understanding and addressing the home-grown threat.

But since the Times Square bombing attempt this month, officials have begun to plan ways to ramp up.

On May 13, an advisory commission led by former FBI and CIA Director William Webster presented Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano with recommendations designed to boost her department's efforts against domestic violent extremism of all sorts. The recommendations are carefully worded and do not specify Muslims or Islam. They focus on community-based policing, under which the Homeland Security Department would step up training and information-sharing programs with local law enforcement.

Administration officials said other responses also were being discussed, including drawing lessons from Britain and other countries in Europe.

The National Security Council six months ago convened a policy committee to examine what some call "counter-radicalization" efforts. The council has met twice with the president on the issue, according to a senior administration official involved in the effort.

Still, the idea of the government playing a role in countering radicalization provokes uneasiness among both U.S. officials and civil liberties activists, who recall a legacy of abuses in the 1950s and '60s in the pursuit of communists and leftists.

Much of the government's counter-terrorism apparatus consists of law enforcement agencies that now see their mission as investigating threats, crimes and conspiracies — not radical ideas that, however loathsome, are protected by the Constitution.

Well, we wouldn't want to alienate our "moderate" Muslim citizens, you know, the ones who're constantly demonstrating in protest of creeping Islamization in the Western democracies. (Not!)

More at the link (FWIW).

Added: Linked at Astute Bloggers, "OBAMA'S NEW NATIONAL SECURITY DOCTRINE: RETREAT!"

California GOP Senate Primary Down to Final Stretch

The wide discrepancies in the CA Senate poll findings are problematic. Chuck DeVore released a poll Monday which has him at 19 percent and within the margin of error compared to Fiorina's support at 28 percent. That sounds more reasonable to me, although Fiorina's got an undeniable advantage in getting the message out in paid television media. Things will tighten up in the last week of campaigning, and my sense is that grassroots turnout's going to help DeVore much more than either Fiorina or Tom Cambell, the third candidate in the race (see video at bottom). In any case, folks might also take a look at this commentary as well: "Why Tom Campbell and Carly Fiorina Cannot Beat Barbara Boxer (Why Chuck DeVore Can)."

Oops! CNN Gives 'Shout Out' for 103 Year-Old Black Motorist with 'Nigga' Rap Song

Via I Hate the Media:

Public Reacts to Gulf Spill With Increased Support for Environmental Protection

It's hard to defend the free market when you have environmental degradation on this scale (click image to enlarge):

"A young heron sits dying amidst oil splattering underneath mangrove on an island impacted by oil from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in Barataria Bay, along the the coast of Louisiana on Sunday, May 23, 2010." (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)

And from NYT, "Estimates Suggest Spill Is Biggest in U.S. History."

Consequently, at Gallup, "Oil Spill Alters Views on Environmental Protection: Majority now favors protecting environment over developing energy supplies" (via Memeorandum):

The recent oil spill has spurred a significant shift in Americans' environmental attitudes. For the last few years, Americans' environmental concerns declined as the public placed a higher priority on pocketbook concerns like the economy and energy, likely due to the poor U.S. economy. However, in just two months' time, that trend has reversed, and the pro-environment position has regained the strength it showed for most of the last decade.

Gallup's data show Democrats and independents leaning much more heavily toward environmental protection, but, interestingly, the crisis is not shaping up as a political winner for President Obama. The administration's horrendous response to the disaster has to take the cake for bureaucratic ineptitude. The resignation of S. Elizabeth Birnbaum as Director of the Mineral Management Service should be the beginning of a clean-up operation at the White House. Why not fire both DHS Secretary Janet Incompetano and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar as well? Also noteworthy is the fact that once the crisis recedes from the headlines, we'll see support for increasing energy supplies domestically, and especially development of "on land" locations such as ANWR. Sarah Palin's been making the case, but it's clear by now that, without pushback and rebuttal, the left's anti-market totalitarianism will harm the economy, damage workers, and reduce American competitiveness and innovation. You can't blame conservatives for blind faith in markets over regulation, since even Rand Paul's libertarianism represents the far side of the ideological continuum. Tea partiers, for example, aren't reflexively anti-government. The issue has always been good government and smaller government, and the media's sick caricatures have done little to discredit the idea that massive spending and bailout mania under the Democrats represents the wave of the future. We'll have continuing support for regulation, just smarter and more innovative regulatory intervention in markets to safely unlock the potential of our natural resources. That's not to say this crisis doesn't represent a turning point. But in which direction will we turn? We're nowhere near energy independence (so the left has a lot of disaster-cheeering still to do in addition to developing a "green economy"). And we're already a nation where public employment is becoming more lucrative and widespread than that of the private sector. So yeah, it's a turning point --- and over time, hopefully, a turn for the better, cleaner, smarter and more productive --- since no nation can sustain such imbalances indefinitely. (But for a contrasting whacked nutroots example, see Jamelle Bouie at Matthew Yglesias' blog).

Blogger Pamela Geller Campaigns to Stop 'Islamization of America'

My friend Pamela Geller's in the news. Yesterday she gained some attention in the New York media for her "Leave Islam" advertising campaign running on city buses. The Daily News had a piece, "Pamela Geller, blogger with Tea Party ties, launches ad crusade against 'Islamization of America'."

Video below from the local news broadcast, and also at this morning's Los Angeles Times, "Leaving Islam? Bus ads in New York are offering help: Muslims are calling the ads — paid for by a conservative activist and the organizations she leads — a smoke screen for an anti-Muslim agenda."

'But Make No Mistake ..." – Obama Defends Handling of Oil Spill

That "but make no mistake" is the giveaway for President Obama's damage control mode. The New York Times has a report, "Obama Defends Handling of Oil Spill." Also, at Politico, "Obama: Critics 'don't know the facts'." (Via Memeorandum.)

The big question is whether this is Obama's Katrina, and there's no contest. Unlike 2005, the response was not federalized across the different levels of government. Obama gets the blame, and it's not conservatives who're talkin' the loudest, but top Democratic personalities. Obama. Is. BP. Fail.

Ardi Rizal, 2 Year-Old Smoker, Not Helping Libertarian Cause

As if Rand Paul wasn't enough!

Now we have plump Indonesian 2 year-old Ardi Rizal creating an international sensation with his pack-a-day cigarette habit!

Fearing for the health of the child, the Indonesian government offered to buy the family a car if they'd get the tot to quit. But Ardi's proud freedom-loving daddy Mohammed responded, "He looks pretty healthy to me. I don't see the problem."

Also, at London's Daily Mail, "Too unfit to run: Two-year-old who smokes 40 cigarettes a day puffs away on a toy truck."

'Top Kill' Plugs Gulf Oil Leak, Coast Guard Reports

At Los Angeles Times, "'Top kill' plugs gulf oil leak, official says: Drilling fluid has blocked oil and gas, U.S. Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen says. Engineers plan to begin pumping in cement and then will seal the well":

Engineers have stopped the flow of oil and gas into the Gulf of Mexico from a gushing BP well, the federal government's top oil-spill commander, U.S. Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, said Thursday morning.

The "top kill" effort, launched Wednesday afternoon by industry and government engineers, had pumped enough drilling fluid to block oil and gas spewing from the well, Allen said. The pressure from the well was very low, he said, but persisting.

Once engineers had reduced the well pressure to zero, they were to begin pumping cement into the hole to entomb the well. To help in that effort, he said, engineers also were pumping some debris into the blowout preventer at the top of the well.

Also at New York Times, "'Top Kill' Effort Seems to Be Working, U.S. Says Cautiously."

RELATED: At CNN, "Gulf of Mexico oil spill called worst in U.S. history":

DHS Worried About 'Coyotes' Smuggling al Qaeda Operatives Across U.S.-Mexican Border

Well, it's not like they'd have a hard time getting over. At Fox News, "Feds Issue Terror Watch for the Texas/Mexico Border" (via Memeorandum):

Anthony Joseph Tracy, of Virginia, who admitted to having ties to Al Shabaab, is currently being prosecuted for his alleged role in an international ring that illegally brought more than 200 Somalis across the Mexican border. Prosecutors say Tracy used his Kenya-based travel business as a cover to fraudulently obtain Cuban travel documents for the Somalis. The smuggled Somalis are believed to have spread out across the United States and remain mostly at large, court records show.

Somalis are classified by border and immigration officials as “special interest” — illegal immigrants who get caught trying to cross the Mexican border into the U.S. who come from countries that are considered a high threat to the U.S., Neuhaus Schaan explained.

DHS did not respond to multiple e-mail and phone requests for comment.

In addition to the Somali immigration issue, Mexican smugglers are coaching some Middle Eastern immigrants before they cross the border – schooling them on how to dress and giving them phrases to help them look and sound like Latinos, law enforcement sources told FoxNews.com.

“There have been a number of certain communities that have noticed this, villages in northern Mexico where Middle Easterners try to move into town and learn Spanish,” Neuhaus Schaan said. “People were changing there names from Middle Eastern names to Hispanic names.”
Security experts say the push by illegal immigrants to try to fit in also could be the realization of what officials have feared for years: Latin American drug cartels are helping jihadist groups bring terrorists across the Mexican border.

J. Peter Pham, senior fellow and director of the Africa Project at the National Committee on American Foreign Policy, said that for the past ten years there’s been suspicion by U.S. law enforcement that drug cartels could align with international terrorist organizations to bring would-be-jihadists into the U.S.

That kind of collaboration is already being seen in Africa, said Dr. Walid Phares, director of the Future Terrorism Project at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.

“Al Qaeda could easily say, “Ok, now we want your help getting these guys into the United States,” Phares said. “Eventually the federal government will pay more attention, but there is a window of time now where they can get anyone they want to get in already.”

Experts also say the DHS alert and recent court case highlights the threat of terrorists penetrating the Mexican/Texas border — and the growing threat of Somali recruitment efforts to bring Americans of Somali descent back to Somalia for jihadist training, creating homegrown terrorists.

Pham says the DHS alert comes too late. “They’re just covering themselves for the fact that DHS has been failing to date to deal effectively with this,” he said. “They’re already here.”

Also at YidWithLid, "Feds Issue Terror Watch For Illegals Crossing Texas/Mexico Border."

Live-Stream Video of ‘Top Kill’ Deep-Gusher Method: BP Reports Everything 'Going as Planned'

At Fox News, "BP Says Effort to Plug Oil Leak Going as Planned":

BP started pumping heavy mud into the leaking Gulf of Mexico well Wednesday and said everything was going as planned in the company's boldest attempt yet to plug the gusher that has spewed millions of gallons of oil over the last five weeks.

BP hoped the mud could overpower the steady stream of oil, but chief executive Tony Hayward said it would be at least 24 hours before officials know whether the attempt worked. The company wants to eventually inject cement into the well to seal it.

"I'm sure many of you have been watching the plume," Hayward said of the live video stream of the leak. "All I can say is it is unlikely to give us any real indication of what is going on. Either increases or decreases are not an indicator of either success or failure at this time."

A full backround report is here: "BP Streams Live Video of ‘Top Kill’ Procedure."

Also, at USA Today, "Poll: Majority give Obama, feds failing grade on oil spill response" (via Memeorandum).

Americans Support Arizona SB 1070, But Divisions Emerge

At the image, at right, is my friend of 30 years, and Wilshire Tea Party leader, Michael Fell.

Members of Los Angeles Tea Party, and Westside Republicans hold rally against the Los Angeles City Council's vote to boycott Arizona because of its illegal immigration law, outside the Los Angeles City Hall on Tuesday, May 25, 2010. The law requires that police conducting traffic stops or questioning people about possible legal violations ask them about their immigration status if there is "reasonable suspicion" that they're in the country illegally. (AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes)

And at MSNBC, "On immigration, racial divide runs deep: Poll: Only 22 percent of Latinos have favorable view of GOP":

White and Latino Americans are deeply divided over immigration, their allegiances to the nation’s political parties and their opinions about President Barack Obama, according to a new NBC/MSNBC/Telemundo poll.

And in the wake of Arizona’s controversial anti-illegal immigration law, the survey suggests that Republicans could get an immediate political boost, but may face a long-term problem among Latinos, the nation’s fastest-growing demographic group.

“Are there areas where the Republicans can make short-term gains? Yes,” says Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart, who conducted this poll with GOP pollster Bill McInturff.

Breaking down the white-Latino divide

In the poll, 61 percent say they favor Arizona’s new anti-illegal immigration law, which would require local and state law enforcement officers to question people about their immigration status if they have reason to suspect a person is in the country illegally. The law would also make it a crime to lack the proper registration documents.

But there’s a divide among white and Latino respondents: 70 percent of whites support the law, versus just 31 percent of Latinos. In fact, 58 percent of Latinos say they strongly oppose it.

That’s not the only chasm between White and Latino America. While 68 percent of Latinos believe that immigration strengthens the United States, just 43 percent of whites think that.

And they differ in their perceptions about Obama and the political parties. Although the president’s job-approval rating sits at 48 percent overall, down two points from an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll earlier this month, only 38 percent of whites approve of Obama’s job, versus 68 percent of Latinos who do.

What’s more, 37 percent of whites view the Republican Party favorably, while just 22 percent of Latinos have a favorable impression of the GOP.

And although only 34 percent of whites hold a favorable opinion of the Democratic Party, 54 percent of Latinos view the party in a positive light.

“The gap between whites and Hispanic American is substantial,” says McInturff, the Republican pollster.

More at the link.

Video c/o Doug Ross and Secure the Border Intelligence (and see, "Websites' raw video documents Arizona's border battle").

GOP Pressure Builds on Joe Sestak White House Job Offer

The GOP puts the pressue on, "Exclusive: All 7 Republicans on Senate Judiciary Committee Ask AG Holder to Appoint Special Prosecutor to Look Into Alleged Sestak Job Offer" (via Memeorandum).

Video Hat Tip: Michelle, "Look who’s behind the White House/Sestak stonewall."

'We're Going to Bring Your Racism Down' – Stand With Arizona, May 29th!

I will be in Arizona this weekend to report on the major anti-illegal immigration protest in Phoenix. Organizers are turning this into a nationwide movement to "bring your racism down," according to Arizona Daily Sun:

Pablo Alvarado, director of the National Day Labor Organizing Network, said there is a need to focus attention on Arizona.

"Arizona has become the testing ground for the most draconian antiimmigrant legislation in our country," he said.

"It is in Arizona and other similar states where the immigration debate has been polluted with hate and poisoned by bigotry," Alvarado continued. "It is in Arizona where politicians and law enforcement agents have become the folk heroes of white supremacist organizations and individuals."

Maricopa County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox said those who are not in the state cannot imagine the fear the new law has created.

"You have to come to Arizona, come to the march, talk to the people," she said. "You can feel the fear once you get off the airplane."

But the protest goes beyond the march and beyond the calls for individuals and groups to boycott Arizona. It now is targeting specific companies.

One is the Arizona Diamondbacks based on what he said is the "extraordinary hypocrisy" of owner Ken Kendrick who Gutierrez said has been involved with those opposed to immigrants. Kendrick has been a supporter of Republican candidates and recently help raise money for GOP congressional candidate Jonathan Paton.

Others being targeted include ...

RTWT at the link.

But also on Saturday is the big Stand With Arizona event in Tempe. Try to make it out to show your solidarity. Our good friends in Arizona are not just dealing with this:

But the open-borders fifth column as well, "We're Going to Bring Your Racism Down":

Martin Luther King Jr. National Memorial Project

I'm getting a lot of promotional materials. This stuff came last month:

From the website:

The Martin Luther King Jr., National Memorial is conceived as an engaging landscape experience tied to other landscapes and monuments, not as a single object or memorial dominating the site.

Location: National Mall in Washington, D.C.: Landscape: Natural elements – water, stone, trees – are used to underscore the themes of justice, democracy and hope, and love.

Composition and Space: This memorial is not designed to be experienced in a single way with one single message, but rather it is to have a broad accessibility, appealing to all of the senses with diverse, repetitive and overlapping themes.

**********

Why build a Memorial to Dr. King? More than a monument to a great humanitarian, the National Memorial honoring Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. will be a place for visitors from all over the world to be energized by its extraordinary power; the power that illuminated the faith of our founders and now impels us toward our destiny as a nation; the power flowing from the uniquely American spirit of brotherly love, freedom, justice, and the priceless blessing they endure...peace.

I love Washington, D.C.

This looks like a wonderful project. See the the homepage, Build the Dream.

RELATED: Check the Wikipedia entry for the background to the project, which is almost 100 percent privately-funded. Also, "King Center: MLK's Children Not Making Money on Memorial."

A Debate on the Constitution That Leftists Actually Won?

Actually, the left wins the Rand Paul CRA debate essentially by default. And if this Slowpoke cartoon is any indication, we've come to the point where for the left there's no meaningful distinction between liberty and equality in the United States today. But Dave Weigel, at the Bloggingheads clip, is right to indicate that it's not worth it for Rand Paul to appear on national TV to try to make the case for flaws in the contemporary civil rights regime. That's radioactive. But at the link Joan Walsh, who's been one of the left's biggest race baiters since Obambi came to office, concludes that if it's not Rand Paul's vision, what's the tea party all about? As noted previously, you'll be hearing this debate all the way through November, since racial recrimination is pretty much all the Democrats have:

Bill Cosby Jell-O Reunion

Stuff you find out when you follow Bill Cosby on Twitter: "Hello JELL-O! Bill Cosby and JELL-O Reunite to Bring about Smiles."

Does this post have a blogging niche? Pundit & Pundette? Jim Treacher? Sir Smitty?

Who knows? I just love Bill Cosby!

Angry James Carville Blasts Obama's Response to BP Oil Spill

Carville's always been a ballsy commentator, and he rips into Obama here, "'Political Stupidity': Democrat James Carville Slams Obama's Response to BP Oil Spill: Democratic Strategist Said White House Should've Acted Quickly, Taken Control of Situation":

GOP Senate Candidates Debate on John and Ken Show (May 25, 2010) – UPDATED!!

Attended the debate with Tom Campbell, Carly Fiorina and Chuck DeVore. John and Ken's announcement is here. And KFI AM 640's live media player is here.

Posting just a couple of snapshots for now. I've gotta run a quick errand and I'll update and revise into a full report later (lots of MSM outlets on hand, so I'm interested to see how they spin this):

UPDATE: Okay, back now. The top photo above shows Chuck DeVore and Tom Campbell waiting for the debate to begin. At the second Campbell chats with Carly Fiorina during one of the commercial breaks.

There's an AP report up at SF Chronicle, "GOP candidates for Senate debate for last time."

**********

I learned my lesson from John & Ken's Sheriff Arpaio show last month (small venue). I got over to the Ayers Hotel in Costa Mesa at about 12:30pm. Carly supporters had reserved the first half-dozen rows, but the cool John and Ken set-up guys told me to sit anywhere. Maeve Reston from the Los Angeles Times was seated near the front. I introduced myself. She was holding a seat for Robin Abcarian:

Ms. Reston has a surprising piece at today's LAT, by the way: "Conservatives Ramp Up Attacks on Campbell Over His Moderate Social Views."

I spoke with Ms. Abcarian when she arrived. I'm hoping it was off the record, since I didn't have too much supportive to say for Carly Fiorina (although I mentioned I'd support Fiorina if she wins the primary).

Here's Campbell just minutes before the debate began. All that you've heard about him --- amicable, contemplative, scholarly --- is true. Sitting in front, I quietly nodded hello and he nodded back:

John Kobylt opened the debate with a question on immigration for Carly Fiorina, seen here responding. She's got a standard line, "The federal government must do its job and secure the border." And there's not too much difference among the candidates on immigration and not too many sparks flew at this point.

DeVore's got rock-solid credentials on illegal immigration. He hammered Barbara Boxer and the Obama administration, charging the Democrats with the politics of amnesty. DeVore told the audience that in 2006 he "led the walkout" in the California Legislature against then-President Vicente Fox of Mexico.

That's John Kobylt below moderating the panel. Before wrapping up, he gave each candidate a minute to speak on their top issues. Earlier Carly Fiorina had come under fire from both Campbell and DeVore for her role in the 2008 financial bailout (she was 2008 GOP presidential nominee John McCain's top economic advisor). She spoke up vigorously in defense of active government action, arguing that the U.S. had to "get credit flowing." And she shifted to sloganeering when she suggested that "what we need in Washington is someone who understands how the economy works." She reiterated this point (with minor variations) for the remainder of her talk. And she concluded by rebutting DeVore's attack on her support in 2000 for California's Proposition 26, arguing that the measure would have made vital investments in state education modernization. [And see Robin Abcarian and Maeve Reston's surprisingly fair write-up below] Interestingly, Carly Fiorina reminds me of Hillary Clinton in 2008 --- like Clinton previously, Fiorina clearly adopts the (somewhat annoying and ultimately ruinous) stance of the putative frontrunner. Fiorina was cordial to those in the front rows, as well as John and Ken and the KFI crew, but again she's got that air of inevitability that's dangerous to have in electoral politics. That said, I came away impressed, despite Fiorina's long history as a gender-mongering RINO.

The room held at least 150 people not counting those standing at back. At the picture below, that's Diane DeVore leaning foward at right, in purple, talking to her daughters, "The DeVorettes." Also, right behind the DeVores is my good friend Frances Akhavi of Constitution and Country, a conservative interest group in Orange County.

Folks left pretty quickly, although the DeVores, O.C. locals, posed for pics with the platoon of conservative activists hoisting "Honk for Chuck" signs along Bristol Street :

See also Robin Abcarian and Maeve Reston, at LAT, "Republican candidates spar in U.S. Senate debate":

With two weeks to go until the June 8 primary, and more than one-third of Republican voters still undecided, the candidates were more willing to pull the gloves off than they were earlier this month when they met at the Museum of Tolerance for a more restrained debate.

This time, Campbell attacked Fiorina for her sparse voting record and questioned her party loyalty. DeVore pounded Fiorina for supporting a proposition that would have made it easier to pass school bonds. Fiorina chided Campbell for backing tax increases to help balance the state’s budget.

Campbell and DeVore also ganged up on Fiorina, whose spotty voting record has left her open to accusations of less-than-stellar citizenship. DeVore got in a two-fer when he noted that in 2000, while Fiorina was chief executive of Hewlett-Packard, she co-authored an op-ed with Silicon Valley venture capitalist John Doerr calling for voters to pass Proposition 26, which would have changed one of the tenets of Proposition 13 by lowering the constitutional requirement to pass school bonds from a two-thirds vote to a simple majority of the electorate. “And you didn’t even bother voting in the election in which it was defeated narrowly!” he exclaimed.

Be sure to RTWT.

Mining Water? Environmentalist Attack Nestlé Bottled Water Operations

Man, this is getting to be something else.

Remember my post from the the other day, "Nestlé Knuckles Under to Greenpeace? Well, Those Enviro-Nazis Ain't Seen Nothin' Yet!"?

Well, follow that up with this piece at WSJ, "Bottled Water Pits Nestlé vs. Greens":

CASCADE LOCKS, Oregon—In this idyllic town on the north slope of Mount Hood, an autopsy on three dead rainbow trout may play a role in Nestlé SA's efforts to reverse a deep slide in its bottled-water business.

Bottled water, which for years delivered double-digit growth for Nestlé, is under fire from environmentalists. They decry the energy used to transport it and the use of billions of plastic bottles, and oppose efforts to use new springs, citing concerns about water scarcity.

In Cascade Locks, Nestlé is trying to tap 100 million gallons of water annually for its Arrowhead water brand from a new spring—and keep the environmentalists happy, too. A key is proving that water drawn from the spring—which supplies a hatchery that raises Idaho Sockeye, an endangered species—can be replaced with municipal well water, with no harm to the fish.

Nestlé is running a one-year test here to raise 700 rainbow trout in a tank filled with well water. Worried that activists might sabotage the test, Nestlé put the 1,700-gallon tank under lock and added security cameras. Officials from the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife monitor the fish's progress and are now autopsying the three that have died so far.

"We are accused of mining water, which would suggest we are depleting a resource," says Kim Jeffrey, chief executive of Nestlé's North American water business. "But instead, we take water in a sustainable way. The notion that we just take what we want is simply not factual."

The project is testament to Nestlé's determination to fix its bottled-water business. Its North American water sales fell to 4.4 billion Swiss francs, or $4.2 billion, in 2009, down 13% from 2007.

"Water is a category that gave us so many years of joy," Nestlé Chief Executive Paul Bulcke said in an interview. "And all of a sudden, it changes. That is what hurts."

Until 2007, bottled water was a dream business for Nestlé, whose brands include Pure Life, Poland Springs and Perrier. Per-capita consumption of bottled water in the U.S. soared to 29 gallons in 2007 from 16 gallons in 2000. A bottle of Nestlé's San Pellegrino water became a trendy statement of health consciousness.

Annual growth rates of Nestlé's U.S. water business topped 15% in the mid-2000s. By last year, it had 38% of the $10 billion U.S. bottled-water market, more than rivals Coca-Cola Co. and PepsiCo Inc. combined.

But the gusher has slowed the past two years as environmentalists have tried making bottled water a new cause. Some tony restaurants in Los Angeles and New York have conspicuously stopped offering bottled water. A slate of documentaries claims that water producers mislead the public about the virtues of bottled water compared to tap.

Nestlé's water sales have been hit badly by the economic downturn, as shoppers began seeing bottled water as an unnecessary luxury, turning to cheaper tap water instead. Moreover, consumers who still wanted bottled water began buying some of the slew of cheaper new private-label brands that supermarkets have launched over the last couple of years. In response, Nestlé has been pushing Pure Life, a lower-priced water that comes from purified municipal sources.

Bottlers say bottled water represents a small share of water use and is typically tapped in a sustainable way, a view backed by independent hydrologists. But the attacks hurt.

In 2007, one group launched a campaign called "Lying in Advertising." One poster read: "Bottled Water Causes Blindness in Puppies," with a tagline reading, "If bottled-water companies can lie, we can too." And now, a Congressional bill that would slap a 4% tax on bottled water to pay for upgrades of municipal water systems is gaining fresh attention, after a rupture in a water main left two million Boston residents without drinkable water in May.

Nestlé has been a favorite target of activists since the 1970s, when it encountered tough criticism of how it marketed baby formula to poor mothers in underdeveloped countries. Its role as leader of the U.S. bottled-water market and the fact that it taps springs in often-pristine rural areas has exposed it to particular criticism from opponents of bottled water.

Some 80% of Nestlé's bottled water is from springs, while the rest is purified municipal water. Coke and Pepsi's bottled water brands largely come from purified municipal sources.

Last fall, Nestlé threw in the towel on plans to tap one glacier-fed spring in Northern California after a six-year battle. Nestlé waged a six-year court case to carry on using a spring in Michigan, reaching a settlement last summer. In October, it gained approval to tap a Colorado source, after agreeing to 44 conditions.

Now, in Cascade Locks, Nestlé is fighting environmentalists' opposition to its plan to draw water from a spring in this 1,100-person town.

Video: The introduction from "Flow: For the Love of Water."

RELATED: At OregonLive, "Campaign launched against Nestle Waters proposed Cascade Locks plant."

Twitter People Power: With a Price Tag – #Bloggers #WebDevelopers

Couple of related and significant news items:

At USA Today, "Twitter power: Learning from ourselves, in real time":

Once derided as a peddler of infantile missives ("My latte is cold!"), the service has revealed itself to be an accurate barometer of mass culture. Today, if something isn't tweeted, did it happen?

"Twitter has become the world's water cooler," says Adam Ostrow, editor of the social media blog Mashable. "It's a place where you can hear what millions are saying and feel, unbiased and in that moment."

Celebrities were among the first to recognize Twitter's connective power: Former American Idoljudge Paula Abdul abdicated her seat in a tweet to fans, and singer Erykah Badu tweeted right through her youngest daughter's birth.

Now devotees range from CEOs to average Joes, all chatting in a digital town square with the power to aid Haiti with an avalanche of donation pledges or make 16-year-old pop phenom Justin Bieber a global sensation.

And perhaps in the ultimate crowning of the medium, William Shatner will play the father in a CBS sitcom based on the real-life Twitter feed of Justin Halpern, who tweets out his dad's rants to 1.3 million followers. Shatner announced the news on Twitter, of course.

With this wacky soup of meaningful and mundane info, it's no wonder the Library of Congress plans to archive all the world's tweets. The transfer of data is about six months off as the library assembles a staff to curate and disseminate the information largely to scholars, library spokesman Matt Raymond says.

"It's about having a record of what both the first-person participants in history and its spectators were saying," Raymond says. "Wouldn't it be amazing to have the broad and immediate reaction of people to Pearl Harbor?"

No question. But for most people, Twitter's charm is the way it cuts to the social media chase.

More at the link.

But what's more interesting is the related news on Twitter's shift to monetization, which could affect big bloggers as well as tiny Internet advertisers. See, PC World, "Twitter Gets Serious About Getting Paid," and especially, All Things Digital, "Twitter’s Free Love Era Comes to an End: Time for Developers and Publishers to Pay Up":

So is Twitter only interested in really big publishers who use Twitter? Not necessarily. I asked Costolo about the Huffington Post, which has prominently embraced Twitter and uses it frequently to fill out its pages. Like this Twitter widget under a grisly story about a gored bullfighter (careful!).

That’s probably fine, Costolo said. But what about Huffpo’s “Twitter editions,” which are primarily made up of tweets? I’ve asked Costolo about those in a follow-up email, but haven’t heard back yet. My gut: He’s not sure yet. Which is going to make for lots of interesting conversations in the coming weeks and months.

For all it's fancy left-wing pedigree, HuffPo's still basically a blog – and big outfits like that will be paying percentages on the revenue they make off Twitter.

RELATED: Follow American Power on Twitter.

Nikki Haley Claims No 'Inappropriate Relationship' With Blogger, But Dials Up Sarah Palin in New 'Family Values' Campaign Spot Anyway

CNN's got the background to this Nikki Haley ad buy:

Nikki Haley: I am a woman who understands that through the grace of God all things are possible. Nikki Haley: It's no longer about electing Republicans, it's about electing conservatives. Nikki Haley: We need fresh faces, fresh voices, and fresh ideas working for the people of this state, not the power of the legislature. Announcer: Nikki Haley supporter, Governor Sarah Palin. Gov. Sarah Palin: A strong pro-family, pro-life, pro-Second Amendment, pro-development, conservative reformer, your next governor, Nikki Haley.

RELATED: At Fit News, "Cell, Email Records Could Solve 'Haley-gate'."

The False Religion of Mideast Peace

Aaron David Miller at Foreign Policy:

Like all religions, the peace process has developed a dogmatic creed, with immutable first principles. Over the last two decades, I wrote them hundreds of times to my bosses in the upper echelons of the State Department and the White House; they were a catechism we all could recite by heart. First, pursuit of a comprehensive peace was a core, if not the core, U.S. interest in the region, and achieving it offered the only sure way to protect U.S. interests; second, peace could be achieved, but only through a serious negotiating process based on trading land for peace; and third, only America could help the Arabs and Israelis bring that peace to fruition.

As befitting a religious doctrine, there was little nuance. And while not everyone became a convert (Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush willfully pursued other Middle East priorities, though each would succumb at one point, if only with initiatives that reflected, to their critics, varying degrees of too little, too late), the exceptions have mostly proved the rule. The iron triangle that drove Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and now Barack Obama to accord the Arab-Israeli issue such high priority has turned out to be both durable and bipartisan. Embraced by the high priests of the national security temple, including State Department veterans like myself, intelligence analysts, and most U.S. foreign-policy mandarins outside government, these tenets endured and prospered even while the realities on which they were based had begun to change. If this wasn't the definition of real faith, one wonders what was.

That Obama, burdened by two wars elsewhere and the most severe economic crisis since the Great Depression, came out louder, harder, and faster on the Arab-Israeli issue than any of his predecessors was a remarkable testament to just how enduring that faith had become -- a faith he very publicly proclaimed while personally presiding over the announcement of George Mitchell as his Middle East envoy in an orchestrated ceremony at the State Department two days after his swearing-in.

At first, it seemed that Obama, the poster president for America's engagement with the world, had found a cause uniquely suited to his view of diplomacy, one whose importance had been heightened by his predecessor's neglect of the issue and the Arab and Muslim attachment to it. Even before the Gaza war exploded three weeks prior to his inauguration, Obama had been bombarded by experts sagely urging a renewed focus on Middle East peace as a way to regain American prestige and credibility after the trauma of the Bush years. The new president soon hit the Arab media running as a kind of empathizer-in-chief, ratcheting up expectations even as Israelis increasingly found him tone-deaf to their needs.

Obama surrounded himself with key figures, such as chief of staff Rahm Emanuel and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who believed deeply in the peace religion. He named as his chief peacemaker Mitchell, a man with real stature and negotiating experience; and his national security advisor is James L. Jones, himself a former Middle East envoy who made the stunning pronouncement last year: "If there was one problem that I would recommend to the president" to solve, "this would be it."

All these veteran leaders were not only believers, but had extra reason to encourage a tougher line toward Israel; they had seen the Benjamin Netanyahu movie before and were determined not to let their chance at Middle East peace end the same way. In his first turn as prime minister in the 1990s, the brash hard-liner Netanyahu had driven Bill Clinton crazy. (I remember being briefed on their first meeting in 1996, after which the president growled: "Who's the fucking superpower here?") Confronted with Netanyahu again, Obama and his team needed no encouragement to talk tough on the growing Israeli settlements in the West Bank, an issue that experts inside and outside government were clamoring for Obama to raise as the first step in his renewed push for peace.

At the time, it looked to be a magical convergence of leader and moment: The Arab-Israeli issue seemed perfectly suited to Obama's transformational objectives and his transactional style. If Obama wanted to begin "remaking America," why not try to remake the troubled politics of peace, too? After all, this was the engagement president, who believed deeply in the power of negotiations.

A great piece.

But what are the prospect? Well, be sure to RTWT, at the link.

(And here's a hint: "In the spring of 2010 we're nowhere near a breakthough, and yet we're in the middle of a major rift with the Israelis. Unless we achieve a big concession, we will be perceived to have backed down again.")

But never to give up, see Barbara Slavin, "U.S. to set deadline for Middle East peace."

Chuck DeVore Running Strong in GOP Senate Primary

From Chuck DeVore on Twitter:

Just saw our Tom McClintock endorsement commercial on Sacramento's Fox affiliate. #CASen #tcot #sgp

Plus, DeVore on 24:

Ask yourself this question, Jack Bauer fans: which person would Jack want as his U.S. Senator? Barbara Boxer, a Guantanamo-closing, tax-raising, big-government-growing ultra-liberal who reads Miranda rights to foreign terrorists? Or Chuck DeVore, a U.S. Army Reserve intelligence officer who likes Guantanamo Bay as it is, thinks foreign terrorists should have an interrogator - not a lawyer, and supports lower taxes and smaller government?

He also mows his own lawn and can throw a mean hand grenade.
We know the answer to that question.

Vote for Chuck DeVore and give California a U.S. Senator that Jack Bauer can be proud of.

And at Desert Conservative:

Dear Fellow Patriot,

The latest PPIC poll is out and shows Carly Fiorina with 25%, Tom Campbell with 23%, and Chuck DeVore with 16%. The margin of error is +/-5%.

The previous PPIC poll showed Fiorina with 24%, Campbell with 23%, and DeVore with 8%.

Here’s what you need to know:

• Chuck DeVore has doubled his support from the last PPIC poll — and he’s within the margin of error of the front-runner.
• The distance from the first to third is narrowed into the single digits — ground easily covered by Election Day.
• As in every poll of this year, Campbell’s numbers are static.
• This poll was taken after Fiorina’s big endorsements, and after the launch of her massive media blitz. All that got her a single point.

Erick Erickson from RedState.com has the best analysis out there! We provide the entire post below.

It is Not Chuck DeVore Who Must Drop Out. Carly Fiorina Must Go.
read online here

The myth in the California Senate race is that Tom Campbell has corralled the moderate/left votes, and Carly Fiorina and Chuck DeVore are splitting the conservative vote between them. In this myth, DeVore, as the lower-polling candidate, functions as a “spoiler” for Fiorina — who would otherwise win with a united conservative base behind her.

As with all myths, this one is wholly false.

Of the major polls taken on CA-Sen in the past 90 days, only five of them explicitly polled on ideological identification: Rasmussen, two SurveyUSA polls, LAT/USC, and Field. A survey of those five polls reveals the following:

1) The ideological breakdowns among the CA-Sen candidates broadly follow the overall polling breakdowns.

2) Tom Campbell, contrary to myth, has his base in self-identified conservatives, and leads among them — even in categories in which he is antagonistic toward the ideological position, such as pro-lifers and gun owners.

3) There is little evidence of movement from one candidate to another, and hence of any “spoiler” role. The only such evidence is found in the SurveyUSA polls, in which Fiorina losses are almost exactly matched by DeVore gains; if sustained in other data sets, this arguably makes Fiorina a “spoiler” for DeVore, but not vice-versa.

The bottom line is that the DeVore-as-spoiler myth is a falsehood perpetrated by an increasingly worried and anxious Fiorina campaign that is already seeking to cast blame for its failures on third parties. There is no data to support it.

You can help Chuck's campaign here.

RELATED: At News10 Sacramento, "Senate candidate Chuck DeVore defends expansion of offshore drilling."

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Black Firefighter Applicants

Los Angeles Times has a report, "Supreme Court backs black applicants in firefighter discrimination suit." And from New York Times, "Black Firefighters’ Claim Was Timely, Justices Say":

In a case that carried echoes of two of its most divisive decisions in recent years, the Supreme Court on Monday unanimously ruled that black firefighters in Chicago did not miss a deadline to argue that the city used an employment test in a way that disproportionately hurt their chances.

The decision was reminiscent of one decided last year by a 5-to-4 vote, Ricci v. DeStefano. There, the court ruled in favor of white firefighters in New Haven claiming race discrimination.

Monday’s decision also touched on issues at the core of a 5-to-4 decision from 2007, Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company. In that case, the court ruled against Lilly M. Ledbetter, saying she had not filed her pay discrimination suit soon enough. (Congress effectively reversed that ruling, though not in a way that affected the Chicago case.)

This time, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for a unanimous court. The facts of the case, a concession by Chicago and the text of the law at issue compelled a ruling in favor of the black firefighters, Justice Scalia wrote.

Further details at the link.

Judge Orders Drug Testing and Alcohol Monitoring for Lindsay Lohan

At Los Angeles Times, "Alcohol monitor placed on Lindsay Lohan at Beverly Hills courthouse":

A Los Angeles County judge Monday imposed a strict regime of drug testing and alcohol monitoring on actress Lindsay Lohan and said she will have to delay filming a movie in Texas because the checks must be done locally.

Judge Marsha N. Revel, at a hearing in Beverly Hills conducted because Lohan missed a mandatory court appearance last week, immediately forbade the actress from consuming alcohol, and ordered that she submit to random drug testing, attend alcohol-treatment classes weekly and wear an alcohol-testing device.

The 10-ounce ankle device, known as a secure continuous remote alcohol monitor, was put on Lohan at the courthouse.

Lohan missed an appearance in her probation hearing for driving under the influence because she said her passport had been stolen at the Cannes Film Festival in France.

At Monday's hearing, Lohan's lawyer, Shawn Chapman Holley, told Revel the actress needed to travel to Texas to shoot a movie and wanted to submit to random alcohol testing there instead.

"She is going to have to delay that for now," Revel said. "The drug testing is going to be here."

Also at TMZ, "Judge to Lindsay Lohan - No Alcohol, No Drugs."

Rand Paul Interview at WHAS11 Louisville: Plus, Dems Turn Midterms Into 'Referendum on Rand Paul'

Here's the local media interview from the weekend, "Rand Paul Sits Down With Joe Arnold to Address Recent Controversial Statements" (via Memeorandum and HuffPo):

In the wake of the controversy that followed Paul's Wednesday night appearance on MSNBC's The Rachel Maddow Show, and subsequent interviews with other national networks, the Paul campaign has suspended interviews with national reporters, including canceling a planned appearance on NBC's Meet the Press. Referring to a live interview on ABC's Good Morning America on Friday morning, Paul said he "held my own against (George) Stephanapolous."

Paul said one lesson learned from the MSNBC experience is "I need to be very careful about going on certain networks that seem to have a bias. Because it really wasn't the interview so much that was unfair. The interview I think was very fair. But then they went on a whole day repeating something over and over again. It makes me less inclined to go on a network."

More at the link.

Paul's naivety is cringe worthy, although his decision to hold off a bit on national media interviews is a winner. It's time to get that campaign organization up to world class standards, you think?

Meanwhile, the netroots radicals are turning the November midterms into "a referendum on Rand Paul" (and that's a real quotation). See Daily Kos, "SCANDAL! Rand Paul MUST return Neo-Nazi funds NOW and DENOUNCE Stormfront ..."

Sure, the post's from a Kos diarist, but the entire conservative movement is a dog-whistle for the KKK as far as the Democratic Media Industrial Complex is concerned. It's all they've got, frankly. For example, at the pedestrian Political Carnival blog, "White Supremacist Watch: Stormfront Funding Rand Paul."

See also Dan Gainor at Newsbusters, "Gainor on Fox & Friends – Rand Paul Attacks All About (2010) Race":

And Dan Gainor's analysis at Fox News, "The Media's New Villain -- Rand Paul."