A woman clones her dog, the feds ask illegal immigrants to deport themselves, fish and global warming, Obama accepts contributions from Palestinians, bin Laden's driver is sentenced to prison, a contractor is sent to prison for keeping his streambed clear per law, climate-change bill is tabled, an increase in the minimum wage is considered in MD, and Paris Hilton's campaign ad.

This week's lead item is a dog's tale http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7542338.stm (or is that a tail waging the dog). Bernann McKinney, a former California beauty queen (Hollywood brain-trust), has paid a Korean firm $50,000 to clone 5 carbon-copies of her deceased pit-bull. This story has ramifications that go beyond reuniting the delighted Ms McKinney with her pit-pals. Perhaps I should start banking a couple of clones for replacement parts, bypassing inheritance laws, or as substitutes with which to play hooky from work. Since they'd be legally mine to dispose of, it shouldn't cost more than it does to minimally feed, clothe and shelter them. On the down-side, I suppose this means fatherhood can finally and formally be relegated to the dustbin of history (expect radical-feminists dancing in the street); but think also of the godsend this represents to magicians, who can now own identical stand-ins to instantly reappear across the stage from whence they vanish. Ms McKinney expects her pups to have their original's personality as well as physical makeup; which, according to McKinney, was exceptionally sweet and loving as pit-bulls go. This may be expecting too much of pit-clones; and, at $10,000 per pup, wouldn't it make better sense giving a good home to one of the gentler breeds found in most animal-shelters? The accidentally rich and their money – Oy! At least she's putting some of it back in circulation.

Fox News reports our government has asked illegal-aliens to depart the country voluntarily http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,398261,00.html. Clearly, they entered the country voluntarily and at no expense to us (cough!), so they should leave by the same means. Why mightn't a bunch of folks with little respect for borders, laws, or sovereignty stay when they've got that kind of offer? Let's see, go back to slaving under an inept, corrupt regime and subjected to cartelized gangs with few prospects, or risk another few months raking in dollars to be funneled home before being evicted anyway. Tough choice! They've been given 90-days to vacate or else. Or else … what? That hasn't been clearly spelled out http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=9e258fa29935f010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=b328194d3e88d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCRD, though it sounds ominously like they might be deported again … and again … and again. Meanwhile, illegal-alien friendly sites have published instructions on how to circumvent (some reading between the lines required). Let's see, Uncle Sam says I must leave and obtain proof from the American consulate back home certifying I am where I say I am. This, then, keeps ICE off my back a few more years while I qualify for semi-permanent residence. The average illegal-alien is an already savvy avoidance-artist or knows those who are. Given the booming false-document industry and many activist-lawyers ready, willing and able to lend assistance http://www.cis.org/articles/1997/IR29/boehm.html (at taxpayer expense), is there really much doubt how this one plays out?

A couple of Spanish scientists (no doubt observing fish in a tank) http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1827881,00.html?cnn=yes have concluded global-warming will have a devastating effect on the reproductive habits and population of certain fish. Ignoring for the moment the unsubstantiated predictions of continued temperature rise and recent cooling despite hysterical predictions and dire warnings, why would we assume fish, with an entire ocean to swim around in, won't simply migrate to cooler waters. Yes, I know fish are creatures of habit, but they are not so hide bound at least some of them will leap through this insubstantial if instinctual barrier. Is it location that dictates their survival or temperature? If the latter, why would they hang around where it's so warm their male progeny will shrivel? The shift in male-female ratio is a mechanism to get them over a hurdle, but is not their only avenue of survival. Can't we then assume these fish will, after a generation of declining numbers, shift to a more favorable habitat. These fish have survived millions of years of natural thermal extremes without becoming extinct. Yet, one of the two scientists opined to this Times reporter a human triggered climate variation no worse than they've survived in the past is sufficient to cause their extinction. I realize scientists need to get out of the lab more often and learn something of how adaptable and robust we (and the rest of the animal kingdom) truly are, but should we have to explain everything?

It has been observed the Obama campaign is accepting contributions from just anyone http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=prnw.20080804.DC29621&show_article=1&catnum=3. Two Palestinian brothers donated nearly $30,000 to Obama's war-chest, and conservative critics are making (what seems to liberals) an inexplicable fuss that it's not exactly kosher. I mean, like, everyone does it – right? Apparently, the campaign finance reform that Democrats and Republicans, alike, committed to http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepoliticalsystem/a/obamamccain.htm as necessary to fair elections is considered political window-dressing in the Obama camp (maybe he needs to take his collection-goons outback and slap them around until they understand he means it – wink, wink). In June, Obama turned down taxpayer ‘contributions' after calculating his private assets are more than adequate. Did he imagine that freed him from limits and restrictions other than matched funds? Other criticisms include a lax online donation system that makes it far too easy for contributors to break the law (perhaps giving Obama and his operation deniability?). Unfortunately, the FEC may not be buying that excuse. Will Obama have to refund all donations that violate size and source limits; and, if so, how much of his finances does this represent and what might it do to his campaign? Well, not to worry Obama. You can always do to the Bill-&-Hillary hide-the-money-tango http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Abdul_Rehman_Jinnah, a dance they practically invented http://blog.thevanguard.org/391/hillarygate-mother-of-all-scandals/.

If you had any thoughts on Monday our court system had begun seeing the light, today you must be feeling mighty foolish. The Guantanamo court that tried bin Laden's driver, body-guard, and unfulfilled terrorist Salim Hamdan handed down a sentence more appropriate to an inept mugger http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/world/bal-laden0807,0,5274898.story. While hawkish liberals may be celebrating this as a victory for both justice and balance, reason has taken flight. Now you may be saying to yourself, this guy is just some slob who drove bin Laden around; so what. Remember, though, this is someone who willingly left his home with a band of brothers in pursuit of mayhem and misadventure, sought out al Qaeda when turned away by the Afghan mujihaddin, swore an oath to a terrorist organization, trained in weaponry, insurrection, and murder, and materially supported terrorists efforts against U.S. citizens, property, sovereignty and our forces in the field http://www.defenselink.mil/news/d2007Hamdan%20-%20Notification%20of%20Sworn%20Charges.pdf. That makes him, at minimum, an illegal-combatant subject to the Articles of War. Imagine for a moment we are in the middle of the Vietnam War and have captured Ho Chi Minh's bodyguard/driver who is a hardboiled communist sworn to kill Americans and bring-down South Vietnam's government. Can you imagine we'd have tried him in an American court and made him eligible for parole in a measly 6-months and a shortened his term to time served? Heck, no. Could you even conceive of our Supreme Court interfering in the prosecution of war outside our borders? Unthinkable! We understood, then, the stupidity of turning even un-blooded combatants loose to fight again because liberals were not (then) that stupid! He'd have been held as a POW until a) the war ended formally, b) traded for one of ours, or c) died of natural causes. That's how war prisoners were treated and must always be treated because to do otherwise prolongs conflict and costs lives. Humane treatment of prisoners is another matter, but releasing combatants before a fight is over is nuts. Strange times that we live in, though, the rationale and persecution of war are in the hands of a subset of society to whom propriety is more important than survival. No doubt we will sort it all out in heaven to everyone's satisfaction.

On the flip-side, a 9th Federal District activist judge and the EPA have joined forces to crush a law-abiding citizen in a case so bizarre it should shock and anger even liberals. In this instance http://stiffrightjab.com/2008/08/04/fischer-outrage-in-idaho-feds-send-man-to-prison-for-protecting-town-from-flooding/, Idaho contractor Lynn Moses was locked up because, for 20-years, he complied with a county requirement he maintain a streambed adjoining a community he helped build, keeping it clear of debris as part of a flood control plan for the town. Sounds like a pretty dangerous character so far, right? Judge Winmill apparently sees things ‘differently', and views Moses' due diligence as deliberate environmental destruction. Moses' crime: polluting a waterway. The prosecution argued Moses' action destroyed a fish spawning area where none exists. Never mind this particular stream sees water only 2 out of every 12 months for the past 150-years, and is bone dry the other 10. Forget he has only removed branches, gravel, and trash that would pollute or cause flooding, not put something in the streambed that pollutes or alters it structurally. But it gets even stranger. Judge Winmill instructed the jury to ignore all testimony relating to the case prior to 2002 as though irrelevant, evidence that exonerates Moses and without which the jury was compelled to convict. Moses family has suffered so much it may have accelerated the death of his ill wife and his 18-year old daughter is left to fend for herself. Moses has spent over $400,000 defending himself and has been imprisoned since August 6th. This reads more like an abuse expected of despotic governments than of a republic. If we are damned for doing as told and follow every rule, what safety can we expect from such a capricious power?

The ASHRAE Journal reports Senate Bill S.3036 http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-s3036/show has been effectively tabled, making it unlikely we'll see a climate-change bill pass this year. S.3036 is a cap and auction proposal sponsored by Barbara Boxer this May, and is the same proposal http://www.heritage.org/Research/Economy/wm1723.cfm S.2191 floated by Lieberman and Warner last year. Junk Science gives us good analysis http://www.junkscience.com/Cap_and_Trade_Economic_Analysis_September_2007.pdf of cap & trade/auction proposals generally, revealing how much they harm the economy, stifle competition and startups, and how little they mitigate warming at a mind-boggling cost. Senator Inofe similarly blasted Lieberman-Warner S.2191, calling it the "largest pork bill ever considered by Congress." Herman Cain of the NorthStar Writers Group http://www.northstarwriters.com/hc115.htm calls Lieberman-Warner "a cap-and-tax energy scheme, a carbon-emissions rationing program, a new tax on businesses and consumers, a new big government central agency and new career opportunities for thousands of new lobbyists specializing in greenhouse gas regulations."

The Baltimore Sun is once again demanding an increase in the state minimum wage rate http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/editorial/bal-ed.wage04aug04,0,4768334.story. It never seems to matter how often or well we explain to the BS editors minimum wage is a scam that only harms those it intends to help and does exactly nothing to reduce poverty; they refuse to listen. Even so, George Mason University Chairman of Economics, Donald Boudreaux, has gamely undertaken the task http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/letters/bal-ed.le.letters07a6aug07,0,4511933.story of explaining the obvious to unapologetically clueless liberal-journalists steeped in long discredited economics. Good luck with that!

If you haven't heard it yet, Paris Hilton is taking a stab at the White House http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080805232252.21yclu4j&show_article=1 and plans to paint it pink when she wins. She took such offense at McCain equating her with Obama she figured she'd humiliate him tit-for-tat. Apparently, she's miffed she's the one unfairly compared to a fool. Her announcement takes pot-shots at both candidates, but is mainly aimed at McCain. However farcical her announcement, she could just conceivably draw off the blow-dry write-in vote from Obama (most of whom vote leeward), so I'm not entirely sure how this punishes McCain. Her other potential reprisal would be to make an Obama endorsement. But, would Obama welcome an endorsement from a Hollywood airhead or throw her under the bus with all the other inconvenient reminders of both his politics and blow-dry remedies? Stay tuned.

That's the news from Absurdistan. I hope the news, where you are, is all good.