Why?

Because now we're in the follow-through period.  Has Obama ever been around anything long enough to successfully navigate the follow-through period?

I'll wait a minute or two for that to sink in...

Yeah, this is the time when ideas have to become reality, people have to make the whole thing work, and they have to do it in the midst of extreme hysteria over deficits and revenue, not to mention that they have to figure out what to do about the parts that butt up against other interests, rules and policies: what - and who - gives?

As if it wasn't already enough of a mish-mash, it's going to get worse, and the open question is whether, by the time we get to 2014, will whatever the health-whatever situation is be an improvement on what existed when the process was started, or will it be much, much worse?

I think there's a half a chance that in a few states, single-payer experiments will be undertaken, but I think there's a better than even chance that in most of the states, things will be much worse: more expensive and less comprehensive.

"In 1988 the average income for the American taxpayer was $33,400, adjusted for inflation. Fast forward 20 years, and not much had changed: The average income was still just $33,000 in 2008, according to IRS data.
Meanwhile, the richest 1% of Americans -- those making $380,000 or more -- have seen their incomes grow 33% over the last 20 years, leaving average Americans in the dust."

Okay, now I know.

The carbon from permanently frozen ground--known as permafrost --will make its impact, not only on the climate, but also on international strategies to reduce climate change Schaefer said. "If we want to hit a target carbon concentration, then we have to reduce fossil fuel emissions that much lower than previously calculated to account for this additional carbon from the permafrost," Schaefer said. "Otherwise we will end up with a warmer Earth than we want."

The carbon comes from plant material frozen in soil during the ice age of the Pleistocene: the icy soil trapped and preserved the biomass for thousands of years.  Schaefer equates the mechanism to storing broccoli in the home freezer: "As long as it stays frozen, it stays stable for many years," he said. "But you take it out of the freezer and it will thaw out and decay."

Now, permafrost is thawing in a warming climate and--just like the broccoli--the biomass will thaw and decay, releasing carbon into the atmosphere like any other decomposing plant material, Schaefer said.  To predict how much carbon will enter the atmosphere and when, Schaefer and coauthors modeled the thaw and decay of organic matter currently frozen in permafrost under potential future warming conditions as predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

They found that between 29-59 percent of the permafrost will disappear by 2200. That permafrost took tens of thousands of years to form, but will melt in less than 200, Schaefer said.

The scientists used a model to predict how much carbon the thawing will release.  They estimate an extra 190 plus or minus 64 gigatons of carbon will enter the atmosphere by 2200--about one-fifth the total amount of carbon currently in the atmosphere today.  Carbon emissions from thawing permafrost will require greater reductions in fossil fuel emissions, to limit the atmospheric carbon dioxide to some maximum value associated with a target climate, Schaefer said. "It means the problem is getting more and more difficult all the time," he said. "It is hard enough to reduce the emissions in any case, but now we saying that we have to reduce it even more."

Scientists have recorded a massive spike in the amount of a powerful greenhouse gas seeping from Arctic permafrost, in a discovery that highlights the risks of a dangerous climate tipping point.

Experts say methane emissions from the Arctic have risen by almost one-third in just five years, and that sharply rising temperatures are to blame.

The discovery follows a string of reports from the region in recent years that previously frozen boggy soils are melting and releasing methane in greater quantities. Such Arctic soils currently lock away billions of tonnes of methane, a far more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, leading some scientists to describe melting permafrost as a ticking time bomb that could overwhelm efforts to tackle climate change.

They fear the warming caused by increased methane emissions will itself release yet more methane and lock the region into a destructive cycle that forces temperatures to rise faster than predicted.Scientists have recorded a massive spike in the amount of a powerful greenhouse gas seeping from Arctic permafrost, in a discovery that highlights the risks of a dangerous climate tipping point.

Click or Guardian Me

Snopes.com on Muslim demographics:

In the Netherlands, 50% of all newborns are Muslim.

As of 2004, Muslims comprised about 5.8% of the population of the Netherlands. In order for this small percentage of the population to account for "50% of all newborns," Muslim women in the Netherlands would have to be giving birth, on average, to about 14 to 16 times as many babies each as non-Muslim women.

# Currently in Belgium, 25% of the population and 50% of all newborns are Muslim.

Muslims are the second-largest religious group in Belgium, but they still only account for about 4%-5% of the population. And, as noted above, for that small a segment of the population to be accounting for "50% of all newborns" in the country, Muslim women would have to be giving birth to incredibly large numbers of children each.

# The German government, the first to talk about this publicly, recently released a statement saying: "The fall in the German population can no longer be stopped. Its downward spiral is no longer reversible. It will be a Muslim state by the year 2050."

The quoted statement was made by Walter Radermacher, the vice-president of the Germany's Federal Statistical Office. However, he was speaking only of German population trends in general; the final sentence (about Germany's becoming a "Muslim state") is someone else's words, as he affirmed to the BBC:
The quotation which reads as if the German government believed that Germany will become a Muslim state is simply not true. There is no source which can be quoted that the German government has published such an expression or opinion.

# "There are currently 52 million Muslims in Europe. The German government said that number is expected to double in the next 20 years.

The 52 million figure is a reasonable estimate for the number of Muslims in Europe. However, as the last part (about the Muslim population's doubling in the next two decades), Walter Radermacher said:
That is not true. The German government does not believe that the Muslim population will double in [even] the next 40 or 50 years. There are no reliable sources that give a proof for that assumption.

kdog, if unions, as a whole are so great, why have they let the situation become as bad as everyone says??

I mean, it looks like the union leaders have become totally controlled by management.

In the majority of U.S. states, employees who are working in a unionized shop may be required to contribute towards the cost of representation (such as at disciplinary hearings) if their fellow employees have negotiated a union security clause in their contract with management. Dues usually vary, but are generally 1-2% of pay. Some states, especially in the south-central and south-eastern region of the U.S., have outlawed union security clauses; this can cause controversy, as it allows individuals who benefit from the protection of union contracts to avoid paying their portion of the costs of contract negotiation, however these law pay more respect to an individual who wishes to exercise their right of free political association by preventing their union dues from being used to fund political causes that may be diametrically opposed to the individuals personal politics. Though certain business interests - attempting to weaken the power of unions - often advocate this sort of ban on union security clauses, the tactic can easily backfire, as the mandatory open shop, as such arrangements are called, may result in higher rates of unionization as workers no longer may be required to pay dues to be unionized, removing one obstacle to union success in elections. Note too that unions in states with the open shop have an incentive to build strong rank-and-file democracy among their memberships in order to sustain a high number of dues-paying members, rather than relying on the contract to bring dues in. This system thus favors a more active and responsive union, rather than a complacent one.