Your Virtual Front Page, Thursday, April 11, 2013

Our top stories tonight:

  1. N. Korea may have nuclear missile, U.S. says (WashPost) — So “never mind” on all the dismissive stuff said earlier. The DIA says the missiles will likely be so inaccurate that they’ll have “low reliability.” But hey, aren’t nukes kind of like horseshoes — as in, “close” counts?
  2. G8 states condemn NK nuclear moves (BBC) — Yeah, but I don’t know how much words are going to move the boy dictator.
  3. SC House to fast-track Boeing incentives after Senate OK ( — This is after the Senate gave final approval today.
  4. Senate votes yes to gun debate with GOP support (The Guardian) — English news sources are playing this up more than American ones. Our gun fixation fascinates and appalls the Brits.
  5. Notes On A Sex Scandal: Rebounding From Disgrace (NPR) — Guess which South Carolinian gets top billing in this national trend story, which also features the unfortunately named Anthony Weiner planning to run for mayor of NYC?
  6. Creature Combined Human, Ape Traits (WSJ) — For all you missing link fans out there.

14 thoughts on “Your Virtual Front Page, Thursday, April 11, 2013

  1. Mark Stewart

    The U.N. ought to pass a resolution permitting China to take unilateral action to secure North Korea, including occupation and annexation – with the caveat that if they do not remove the North Korean government and annex the state within 24 months, then China shall have surrendered it’s Security Council vote on the penninsula.

    Otherwise, we are just walking into a great wall if we continue to fret over the North Korean situation. We only care if South Korea or Japan is threatened; and anything would be better than what they have now for the North Korean people.

    Real Politik maybe, but more sensible than elevating NK by responding…

    1. die deutsche Flußgabelung

      Why would China want to invade and annex North Korea? That would be more of a burden than a benefit to China. The whole reason they prop up the DPRK is to prevent China from being overrun with refugees. They really don’t want to be in charge of feeding 24 million North Korea and rebuilding a country with an economy and infrastructure straight out of the 1950s.

      Also its kinda of impossible to pass a resolution forcing a permanent member of the UN Security Council to do something against their will seeing as they have a veto.

  2. Steven Davis II

    1. Lil’ Kim is going to have to $#!t or get off the pot. He’s trying what his father and grandfather did to get food and assistance from the world. Too bad the world is tired of them and the US has enough FSA member to currently deal with.

    4. Since when did we care what the British think about our laws? It wasn’t all that long ago we told them to get bent and beat them in their sissy looking uniforms all the way back to England.

    6. So we have to get a subscription to read that one.

  3. Mark Stewart

    China has two options: control NK, or let someone else do it.

    The Chinese are less concerned with refugees, then they are with the geographic distance between Beijing and NK.

    Last, I said give them a choice to control the geopolitical situation in their backyard. Now, we are playing their game. We needn’t. We can punt this.

    1. die deutsche Flußgabelung

      China is very concerned about refugees. Remember the Chinese Communist Party likes stability above all else. Having northeastern China flooded with North Korean refugees would cause chaos. Plus China still has large pockets of poor peasants in its own country, it would probably anger many Chinese to see their government spending large sums of money on North Korean refugees and rebuilding the North’s economy.

      Why would China want to annex North Korea just to preserve a buffer between them and an US ally, when the status quo already does this? Also you do know there are major differences between Koreans and Chinese culturally? And if China tried to invade North Korea, South Korea would probably come to the defense of the DPRK, due to Korean nationalism.

      China has already made a choice, which is to prop up the Kim dynasty to prevent an unified Korea. They don’t need to annex the North to preserve the status quo.

      1. Mark Stewart

        Herr whomever,

        I believe you answered your question.

        Either Korea will be reunited by Seoul, or China will have to occupy the north. The status quo is untenable, especially if we blow it up (the status quo, not the north).

        A reunified Korea is the second to last desirable outcome for China; right before a full war with the US.

  4. bud

    3. Where are all the Tea Partiers when you need them. $125 million for a gigantic corporation that has already agreed to increase it’s workforce by 2,000? The Plutocrats win another round.

    1. Steven Davis II

      bud – I believe they’re waiting for the city to create the thousands of jobs promised with the bus tax first.

      1. Kathryn Fenner

        I do not recall such a promise. The bus tax, as you put it, will help willing workers KEEP their jobs. I thought you’d approve of that.

  5. bud

    Doug, I was oppossed to the bus tax also, but now that it’s law let’s quit complaining and try to make it work. Perhaps at some future point we can revisit the horrible hospitality tax, but not now. This is sort of like all those Confederate flag zealots who can’t let that issue go. Sometimes it’s just time to move on.

    1. Doug Ross

      How do we “make it work”?

      The next time they need to raise taxes, the same lies disguised as statistics will be used.
      Somebody needs to hold the people who made the job claims and car repair savings claims
      accountable. Few people do which is why we get these types of scams again and again.

      The money spent on the Palmentto Compress building was easily found when bus money was

Comments are closed.