Fox News's Glenn Beck lashed out at Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol on his radio show this morning, accusing Kristol of betraying conservatism and missing the significance of what Beck sees as an alliance between Islamism and socialism.

"I don't even know if you understand what conservatives are anymore, Billy," Beck said in his extended, sarcastic attack on Kristol. "People like Bill Kristol, I don't think they stand for anything any more. All they stand for is power. They'll do anything to keep their little fiefdom together, and they'll do anything to keep the Republican power entrenched."

and Kristol on Beck?

When Glenn Beck rants about the caliphate taking over the Middle East from Morocco to the Philippines, and lists (invents?) the connections between caliphate-promoters and the American left, he brings to mind no one so much as Robert Welch and the John Birch Society. He's marginalizing himself, just as his predecessors did back in the early 1960s.

Only 27 percent of likely voters favor raising the nation's $14.3 trillion debt ceiling, while 62 percent oppose it, according to an exclusive poll for The Hill.

With Egypt in revolt and the country's future uncertain, concern is growing over whether a new government in the Arab world's most militarily and industrially advanced country could accelerate an arms race in one of the world's most volatile regions.

Wait...why did she wait until THREE WEEKS AFTER the new Congressional session started to leave? Why did she opt to run again at all? Wouldn't the more prudent thing be to make way for another candidate (like say, oh....Marcy Winograd or our very own John Amato)??? Now what is the state of California--teetering on the precipice of bankruptcy--supposed to do?

Not to put too fine a point on it, but the additional expense of putting on a special election to replace Harman is one the state cannot really afford. Maybe Harman, who is among the wealthiest congresspeople, should be asked to cough up at least some of the money to cover expenses since it was her own short-sightedness that put us in this spot.

The biggest gap, by far, is political. The government has successfully prevented political parties from forming, with limited exceptions like the Muslim Brotherhood. Party-building is the country's screaming need and should be the top priority for outside assistance.

Egypt is in much better shape than Iraq was under Saddam Hussein or Gaza was before Hamas took over. It's a 40 percent nation, mediocre in the world rankings, but not a basket case. Surveys showed that until about a week ago, Egyptians had extraordinarily low expectations for the future, among the lowest in the world.

But now things seem to be changing. And while you wouldn't say that Egypt possesses the sort of human, social and institutional capital that will enable it to achieve miracles over the next few years, you'd have to say it has some decent underlying structures. And, if led wisely, it has a reasonable shot at joining the normal, democratic world.

Daniel Kurtzer, former U.S. ambassador to Egypt and Israel

If the entire Egyptian system collapses, it would likely pave the way for the Muslim Brotherhood to rise to prominence and transform the country to an Islamist state. Some have argued that this would not be so terrible -- that the Brotherhood is a relatively benign Islamist movement that is focused on social issues and religious piety. Nothing could be further from the truth. Since its founding in 1928, the Brotherhood has had the single goal of establishing an Islamist state and society in Egypt and throughout the Muslim world. It has been flexible tactically, but that should not be confused with the idea that the Brotherhood has abandoned its ultimate goal.  

Fortunately, this is an unlikely scenario. The Egyptian army, which is still the ultimate arbiter of power in Egypt, is largely committed to ideals of the 1952 revolution, which would not support a totally Islamist state. Having spent the years since the 1981 assassination of Anwar Sadat -- who was killed by Muslim extremists from inside the army -- rooting out extremists from its ranks, the military would likely counter the installment of a Muslim Brotherhood regime.

A more likely -- and desirable -- scenario is a mildly reformist government that operates within somewhat flexible parameters established by the military. But the military needs to make concessions if it is to maintain its power and do so peacefully. The current unrest in Egypt should teach the military that business as usual will not work. It will need to allow the next government to campaign against corruption, and in favor of expanded freedoms, increased political participation, and a more transparent political system. To be sure, the military will ensure that any liberalization proceeds cautiously so that events do not spiral out of control. But that doesn't mean it has to oppose these reforms.

And Thomas Pickering, former Ambassador to the United Nations, Russia, India, Israel, and Jordan

In the immediate term, the biggest question is who will lead in Egypt, and here, there are several possibilities: the Army, the Muslim Brotherhood, and the young people demonstrating together with the many organized and disorganized opposition parties who are now out on the streets. None of these possible leaders can move forward without taking into account the others; none can succeed on its own. For the United States, there is always an identification of the person with the politics, and we have yet to see any individuals emerge who could give us confidence about the future political order. The ideal for now would look something like a transitional authority, in which Mubarak would go and leave the government in the hands of someone or something. Vice President Omar Suleiman is the most frequently mentioned someone here. He is not known as a reformer and is still closely associated in the minds of the public with Mubarak and the intelligence establishment in Egypt.

The second priority after leadership is to think about firm and forthright political change -- in the electoral process and in Egypt's constitution. As progress moves forward, the government will need to deal with the long-term grievances of those in the streets. There is a danger that the Muslim Brotherhood, presenting itself as benign force, might move into a position of power, and over time, adopt something of a more Islamic position. But I don't think that needs to be a barrier to what we're talking about, given the changes that are already underway. Egypt has a large and strong middle class as well as a lot of young people who are secular and who are tied together by technology. That can make a serious difference in the outcome.

The impact of all this on American foreign policy will be striking. We have moved away from the notion that the dictatorships out there that are our friends are real moderates, seriously seeking to implement change. Instead, change is now coming up from the inside -- something we have long wished for. And we must support it. That is the challenge, and our policy is moving in that direction in my own view. We need to be careful, however; we tend to always assume the mantle that our role is to teleguide these changes. And yet now in Egypt, we are in a situation in which we have lost considerable influence and authority. We should think foremost about the first principle of medicine, and now diplomacy: First, do no harm.

Rep. Heath Schuler, D-N.C. is one of the 20 Blue Dog Democats who plan to meet with businessman Donald Trump today in New York City. The meeting with Trump, who has expressed interest in running for president in 2012, is set to last an hour. Sources say they will talk about the economy and ideas Trump has for improving it.

And I have another..."I came here looking for a job, and I'll leave here looking for a job."

Thousands of immigrants from India have crossed into the United States illegally at the southern tip of Texas in the last year, part of a mysterious and rapidly growing human-smuggling pipeline that is backing up court dockets, filling detention centers and triggering investigations.

The immigrants, mostly young men from poor villages, say they are fleeing religious and political persecution. More than 1,600 Indians have been caught since the influx began here early last year, while an undetermined number, perhaps thousands, are believed to have sneaked through undetected, according to U.S. border authorities.

SNIP

But analysts and human rights monitors say political conditions in India don't explain the migration. There is no evidence of the kind of persecution that would prompt a mass exodus, they say, and Sikhs haven't been targets since the 1980s. The prime minister of India, Manmohan Singh, is a Sikh.

"There is no reason to believe these claims have any truth to them," said Sumit Ganguly, a political science professor and director of the India Studies Program at Indiana University.

Some authorities think the immigrants are simply seeking economic opportunities and are willing to pay $12,000 to $20,000 to groups that smuggle them to staging grounds in northern Mexico. Kibble said smugglers may have shifted to the Southwest after ICE dismantled visa fraud rings that brought Indians to the Northeast.