engineeringisawesome:

Russia wants Europe and the U.S. to go in on a moon base
After six Apollo missions that delivered astronauts to the surface of the moon, the people of Earth have pretty much left the thing alone. Now, Russia’s national space agency, Roscosmos is talking with NASA and Europe’s ESA about establishing a permanent manned presence on the moon.  
Not only is Russia planning to put boots on the moon, the country is looking to do so with international cooperation — something that harkens back to the Cold War, where it was “talked about by some Soviet and U.S. scientists since the late 1950s,” according to Russian news site RIA Novosti.

DVICE

engineeringisawesome:

Russia wants Europe and the U.S. to go in on a moon base

After six Apollo missions that delivered astronauts to the surface of the moon, the people of Earth have pretty much left the thing alone. Now, Russia’s national space agency, Roscosmos is talking with NASA and Europe’s ESA about establishing a permanent manned presence on the moon.  

Not only is Russia planning to put boots on the moon, the country is looking to do so with international cooperation — something that harkens back to the Cold War, where it was “talked about by some Soviet and U.S. scientists since the late 1950s,” according to Russian news site RIA Novosti.

DVICE

Why is it that when Republicans and Democrats need to solve the budget and the deficit, there’s deadlock, but when Hollywood lobbyists pay them $94 million dollars to write legislation, people from both sides of the aisle line up to co-sponsor it?
Reddit Founder Alexis Ohanian on CNBC. (via wilwheaton)
Bird’s eye view of of the Mill District of Minneapolis, MN in 1891 (by Mill City Times)

Bird’s eye view of of the Mill District of Minneapolis, MN in 1891 (by Mill City Times)

handsomecraftworks:

My new floor-to-wall cat scratching post made from reclaimed wood shipping pallets from a local Human Society shelter. More images and details at Handsome Craftworks.

shortformblog:

apoplecticskeptic:

joshsternberg:

Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow, has released its first ad to air in South Carolina - narrated by Jon Lithgow, the ad goes after Mitt “The Ripper” Romney. And of course, there’s a press release:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

The Definitely Not Coordinated With Stephen Colbert Super PAC Releases First Ad, Begins To Regret Length Of Name

AMERICA – The Definitely Not Coordinated With Stephen Colbert Super PAC released its first TV ad today, in advance of South Carolina’s upcoming unnamed GOP Primary. The ad, which takes an objective look at Mitt Romney’s private sector experience, is entitled “Attack In B Minor For Strings.”

“Mitt Romney claims to be pro-corporations,” said Jon Stewart, President of The Definitely Not Coordinated With Stephen Colbert Super PAC. “But would you let him date your daughter’s corporation? Americans have been clamoring for a comprehensive study of this crucial issue, so we splurged for the full sixty-second commercial. We think South Carolinians will agree – they deserve a leader who shares their state’s values, and perhaps even their state’s initials.”

The new spot begins airing today in a major ad buy that will blanket South Carolina from Charleston all the way to North Charleston. Those of you with some free AOL hours left can view the ad here.

The Definitely Not Coordinated With Stephen Colbert Super PAC, officially known as Americans For A Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow, is an independent, expenditure-only committee that’s been proudly serving the community since late Thursday.

Click through to Colbert’s Super PAC site for more information, including a note from Jon Stewart.

It seems everything Colbert does is pure unadulterated genius.

Nothing like a video that openly suggests Mitt Romney is a serial killer.

Puerto Rico (by dmd.hashw)

Puerto Rico (by dmd.hashw)

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Boring

I wanted to enjoy it, I really did. I just couldn’t get over how boring it was.

thedailywhat:

This Is Important, You Should Know About It of the Day: President Obama today quietly signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, which contains controversial provisions requiring military custody for any non-citizen suspected of terrorism and affirming the president’s authority to indefinitely detain any supporter of al-Qaeda “or associated forces, irrespective of citizenship.
In a signing statement, the President said he had “serious reservations” about the bill, and criticised lawmakers for interfering with the work of counterterrorism professionals.
“Moving forward, my administration will interpret and implement the provisions described below in a manner that best preserves the flexibility on which our safety depends and upholds the values on which this country was founded,” the statement said.
The Obama administration was successful in striking down a provision that would have removed the ability of the executive branch to override the military custody requirement. Additionally, US citizens and legal immigrants may not be subjected to military custody under the revised bill.
However, an amendment to explicitly exclude American citizens and lawful residents from indefinite detention was rejected by Congress.
“My administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens,” Obama said. “Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a nation.”
The President’s personal stance aside, in addition to creating myriad difficulties for counterterrorism agents working with suspected terrorists to gain information, the NDAA provisions leave the door wide open for future presidents to indefinitely detain American citizens without trial.
[ap / think / aclu.]

Then why didn’t you veto it, fool? 

thedailywhat:

This Is Important, You Should Know About It of the Day: President Obama today quietly signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, which contains controversial provisions requiring military custody for any non-citizen suspected of terrorism and affirming the president’s authority to indefinitely detain any supporter of al-Qaeda “or associated forces, irrespective of citizenship.

In a signing statement, the President said he had “serious reservations” about the bill, and criticised lawmakers for interfering with the work of counterterrorism professionals.

“Moving forward, my administration will interpret and implement the provisions described below in a manner that best preserves the flexibility on which our safety depends and upholds the values on which this country was founded,” the statement said.

The Obama administration was successful in striking down a provision that would have removed the ability of the executive branch to override the military custody requirement. Additionally, US citizens and legal immigrants may not be subjected to military custody under the revised bill.

However, an amendment to explicitly exclude American citizens and lawful residents from indefinite detention was rejected by Congress.

“My administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens,” Obama said. “Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a nation.”

The President’s personal stance aside, in addition to creating myriad difficulties for counterterrorism agents working with suspected terrorists to gain information, the NDAA provisions leave the door wide open for future presidents to indefinitely detain American citizens without trial.

[ap / think / aclu.]

Then why didn’t you veto it, fool? 

carpr0n:

I’ll deal with you later
Starring: ‘64 Alfa Romeo Giulia Sprint GT
(by rookdave)

carpr0n:

I’ll deal with you later

Starring: ‘64 Alfa Romeo Giulia Sprint GT

(by rookdave)

Guantánamo Forever? | NYTimes

IN his inaugural address, President Obama called on us to “reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals.” We agree. Now, to protect both, he must veto the National Defense Authorization Act that Congress is expected to pass this week.

This budget bill — which can be vetoed without cutting financing for our troops — is both misguided and unnecessary: the president already has the power and flexibility to effectively fight terrorism.

One provision would authorize the military to indefinitely detain without charge people suspected of involvement with terrorism, including United States citizens apprehended on American soil. Due process would be a thing of the past. Some claim that this provision would merely codify existing practice. Current law empowers the military to detain people caught on the battlefield, but this provision would expand the battlefield to include the United States — and hand Osama bin Laden an unearned victory long after his well-earned demise.

A second provision would mandate military custody for most terrorism suspects. It would force on the military responsibilities it hasn’t sought. This would violate not only the spirit of the post-Reconstruction act limiting the use of the armed forces for domestic law enforcement but also our trust with service members, who enlist believing that they will never be asked to turn their weapons on fellow Americans. It would sideline the work of the F.B.I. and local law enforcement agencies in domestic counterterrorism. These agencies have collected invaluable intelligence because the criminal justice system — unlike indefinite military detention — gives suspects incentives to cooperate.

Mandatory military custody would reduce, if not eliminate, the role of federal courts in terrorism cases. Since 9/11, the shaky, untested military commissions have convicted only six people on terror-related charges, compared with more than 400 in the civilian courts.

A third provision would further extend a ban on transfers from Guantánamo, ensuring that this morally and financially expensive symbol of detainee abuse will remain open well into the future. Not only would this bolster Al Qaeda’s recruiting efforts, it also would make it nearly impossible to transfer 88 men (of the 171 held there) who have been cleared for release. We should be moving to shut Guantánamo, not extend it.

Having served various administrations, we know that politicians of both parties love this country and want to keep it safe. But right now some in Congress are all too willing to undermine our ideals in the name of fighting terrorism. They should remember that American ideals are assets, not liabilities.

Here's a list of 79 of the Sears/K-Mart stores the company plans to close.

shortformblog:

This may not be all of them: They were talking about closing as many as 120 stores. Each store employs 40-80 people. So, at minimum, we’re talking 3,160 layoffs. Are any of these stores near you?

Such a shame that the Nicollet Avenue K-Mart is not on this list. 

tatumrose:

I didn’t expect it to snow. (Taken with Instagram at Breezy Point, MN)

*looks at location this was taken at and laughs*

tatumrose:

I didn’t expect it to snow. (Taken with Instagram at Breezy Point, MN)

*looks at location this was taken at and laughs*

Be a HERO and Help STOP SOPA Now!! I’ll tell you How! This Video that Must Be SHARED! (by JeepersMedia)

This is interesting.

Interesting testimony regarding the second amendment.