Seven Crazy Political Headlines of the Week

Here are some stories that caught me eye:

• Russians conquer North Pole -- The Russians sent a deep sea submersible to the bottom of the sea at the North Pole, planting a flag and claiming the land for Russia. The Russians are betting on some language about what defines a continental shelf. Using this same logic, the Canadians could claim half of Europe. In response, the Canadians are going to build a base close to the pole. The Americans are sending an expedition of icebreakers. No word on what the other countries with dibs on the pole plan on doing. I just hope the conflict isn't too polarizing.
• Democratic candidate promises to attack nuclear-armed ally -- Senator Obama promised to take military action against Pakistan, without their approval, if intelligence showed there were terrorists of value in the mountains in that country. No word on whether he plans on using the same intelligence agencies that promised WMD in Iraq (every major nation's agencies thought they were there) or if he has his own intelligence operation. Note to Obama: likability wins elections. But there's a difference between likable like Reagan, and likable like a puppy. You're a smart guy: keep working on it.
• Venezuela's President Decries "Dictator" American President, Wants to be President for Life -- Hugo Chavez could have his own comedy network -- he's the gift that keeps giving. Upset about imaginary American invasion forces, his neighbors, his citizens, his nation's military forces, and his masculinity, Chavez is shutting down TV stations, bullying his opposition, and now it looks like he wants his job for life. While I feel for the people of his country, I just hope he doesn't start having designs on the North Pole.
• Non-running Republican Leads the Field -- While the Democratic Presidential race looks like a lock, the Republicans are awash in atrophy. Fred Thompson, a candidate who isn't even running, is leading in some polls. In Iowa, they had a straw poll where none of the front runners competed, which meant that the winners were really the best of the losers. Perhaps there will be playoff between the best of the losers and the worst of the winners, or perhaps the Republicans just don't know what they're doing. My money is on the latter.
• Screaming man on cable knocks market around -- CNBC's Jim Cramer had a nice little tizzy last week about subprime loans and the fragility of the housing market. The stock market bounced all over the place, leading some to believe that Jimbo was manipulating the market. He took credit for it -- then he denied it. The Fed even injected billions into the market to help stabilize it. Rumor has it that Cramer's next job will be "Rapping with Cramer" where viewers can vote on the internet to have Cramer trash various market sectors. Should be a big hit for investors who like selling short.
• NASA Loses Moon, Gets Cool New Slogans -- On the heels that NASA's Ares I program is already overweight for going to the moon (which means it's arguably the walking dead for the moon, they're now just building to go to the ISS), comes this headline that, in response, they're developing new slogans and marketing materials. Some of their discoveries?

  a small fraction of the public believes that NASA is relevant to their lives. However, a far larger percentage of respondents believed the agency was relevant after being told about technologies (from smoke detectors to weather satellites) that the agency had a hand in developing.

  Those NASA guys are on the ball. I know I can't wait to read the new brochures and watch the TV spots. Maybe they'll even have a contest!
• Newsweek Declares Global Climate Debate "Settled" -- Newsweek ran a cover story last week announcing that GCC was decided and that there was a "well-funded machine" of deniers that opposed it. I'm a little confused on this one, as this is the fifteenth or sixteenth time I've heard that Global Climate Change is settled science. If it's so settled, then why do folks have to keep announcing it? It's not like Time is running a story titled "Apples: Still Falling From Trees". Why continue research on something so well understood and agreed to?

  I guess it must be that whole evil conspiracy thing they're dealing with. Unknown is Newsweek's view on gravity wave research and the theory of gravity, or how discussions about the standard model obfuscate clearly understood physics. Perhaps string theory skeptics are being paid off by the yarn industry?