The reason: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/concern-as-china-clamps-down-on-rare-earth-exports-1855387.html

China holds 97% of worlds Rare Earth Material (REM) much needed by the US. You will not be told relaxation of export of high technology is because the US is being held hostage for these materials, in exchange for REM.

I am just shocked at how blind us peons are. I just don’t understand how we can think that things will ‘just work out’ and that what happens at the federal level won’t impact us in a significant way over time.

Thanks for the thoughtful post.

It is so much more fun when you can just make it up as you go.

You’re right, uh, I mean, correct. Many of us DO get it. Many of us understand the fundamental principle of limited government and the blessing of liberty that it bestows upon its citizens.

I believe that what is most often overlooked in the debates between left and right is the distinction between Federal and State governments. In my opinion, the individual States have conceded far too much of their autonomy and sovereignty to the Federal Government.

To use the health insurance debate as an example, if our neighbors in Massachusetts vote for a single-payer health care system in their state, that is their prerogative. Good for them – voting their own pocketbooks, as it should be. The States should be incubators for their own respective experiments in governance and taxation.

But it does not necessarily follow for one State, or even a majority of States, to then create a mandate via the Federal Government to impose upon its neighbors such a system. This presumes authority far beyond what is permitted by our Constitution or foreseen by its authors.

Maybe if the folks who were union proved themselves consistently as valuable resources and ‘going beyond the call’ type of folks, they might be more valuable to the city.

But I highly doubt it.

Ugly.

Trying to focus attention on Bachmann is a classic debating tactic, deflecting attention from widespread ACORN fraud. Bachmann’s legislation against taxpayer funds for CRA is protection for the American taxpayer, not disregard for the unfortunate circumstances of the foreclosures in her district. King’s article is a clear example of the inherent political bias of ACORN at taxpayer expense. The American taxpayer is tired of political hacks not interested in right and wrong but funding their own political greed.

Frankly, I wouldn’t trust the State Department, either, with such solemn responsibility. As I stated earlier, there is an inherent conflict of interest at Commerce, and State as well. Commerce wants to facilitate trade. That is their primary charter. State wants diplomacy, and wants to “just get along” with friends and enemies alike. While either Department should always work within the confines of national security concerns, should either be burdened with the responsibility of keeping safe our nation’s secrets from her enemies? No they should not, in my opinion.

So, let the President, elected by the People, be responsible for these decisions, not the Commerce Secretary. If the President wants to delegate this solemn obligation, I suggest he delegate to a department whose primary responsibility is national security. The Department of Defense comes to mind.

Remember, we’re discussing missile technology, not coal plant scrubbers.