THE OTHER SHOE DROPS: Turning back the tide of information overload with a digest of the latest developments in news conservatives need to pay attention to:

† Inside out candidate Newt Gingrich has turned the race upside down: Partly through the churn of attrition and partly through his staying power, it looks like Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is the Anybody But Romney candidate. But, as The Wall Street Journal's Peggy Noonan cautions, "this is a walk on the wild side":

Ethically dubious? True. Intelligent and accomplished? True. Has he known breathtaking success and contributed to real reforms in government? Yes. Presided over disasters? Absolutely. Can he lead? Yes. Is he erratic and unreliable as a leader? Yes. Egomaniacal? True. Original and focused, harebrained and impulsive – all true.

Do you want evidence he's a Burkean conservative? Start with welfare reform in 1996. A sober, standard Republican? Go to the balanced budgets of the Clinton era. Is he a tea partier? Sure, he speaks the slashing lingo with relish. Is he moderate? Yes, that can be proved. Michele Bachmann this week called him a "frugal socialist," and there's plenty of evidence of that, too.

One way to view this is that he is so rich and varied as a character, as geniuses often are, that he contains worlds, multitudes. One senses that would be his way of looking at it. Another way to look at it: In a long career, one will shift views, adapt to circumstances, tack this way and that. Another way: He's philosophically unanchored, an unstable element. There are too many storms within him, and he seeks out external storms in order to equalize his own atmosphere. He's a trouble magnet, a starter of fights that need not be fought. He is the first modern potential president about whom there is too much information.

And yet, Noonan acknowledges, there is one existential thing neither the establishment or Tea Partiers cannot know until it’s too late: Whether “he will show just enough discipline … to win the nomination [and] once party leaders have come around and the GOP is fully behind him, he will begin baying at the moon.”

† A To Z Approach On Illegal Immigration In AZ: Much to the Obama administration’s dismay, The Supreme Court has decided to adjudicate the dispute between AZ, which has asserted state’s rights in passing an immigration law meant to protect its sovereignty and borders, and the Obama Justice Department, which has asserted federal supremacy in setting and enforcing (or more to the point, declining to enforce) immigration law (related article, third item on the page). USA Today reports:

"This is going to be huge," says Temple University law professor Peter Spiro, an expert in immigration law. "This will probably be the most important decision on immigration and federalism in the last half century. I think they're going to have to have to put down some big markers on the question. The justices are all aware of the problems with comprehensive immigration reform" on the federal level. …

The National Conference of State Legislatures reported Monday that a record number of immigration-related measures were introduced in the nation's statehouses in 2011, and a majority of states adopted new laws. Five states – Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina and Utah – passed especially tough statutes patterned on Arizona's. All five are now being challenged in lower federal courts. …

Praising the court for taking the state's appeal, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer said, "This case is not just about Arizona. It's about every state grappling with the costs of illegal immigration. … Our state spends hundreds of millions of dollars each year incarcerating criminal aliens and providing education and healthcare to individuals who entered and reside in this country in violation of our laws." …

The case of Arizona v. United States is likely to be scheduled for arguments in April. A decision is likely by late June when the justices typically recess for the summer.

† Restorative Capital Punishment: After five days of deliberation, a CT jury condemned Joshua Komisarjevsky to death for a horrific home invasion committed with his accomplice, Steven Hayes – who is already on death row – in which Jennifer Hawke-Petit and her daughters, 17-year-old Hayley and 11-year-old Michaela, were tortured and murdered (related article, fourth item on the page). The Associated Press reports:

The only survivor, Dr. William Petit, was beaten with a baseball bat and tied up but escapes. He appeared calm as the verdict was pronounced, his eyes blinking rapidly and his hand clenched in a fist on the seat in front of him. He later bowed his head and closed his eyes.

Petit said outside the courthouse that he found some peace with the verdict, but "there is never complete closure when you lose your wife and your family."

"We think that society will be a little bit safer with he and his co-defendant locked up and facing the death penalty," Petit said. "We certainly have been criticized over the years that this is vengeance and blood lust, but this is really about justice." ...

The 2007 attack led to the defeat of a bill to outlaw the death penalty in Connecticut, sparked tougher state laws for repeat offenders and home invasions and drew comparisons the crime described in "In Cold Blood," which documented the brutal murders of a Kansas farmer and his family.

† US Courts: Multiculturalism Has Its Limits: Canadian courts are now faced with an issue that surfaced in the U.S. in 2008: Whether a face-covering veil denies the right of a defendant to face his or her accuser (related article, last item on the page). The Wall Street Journal reports:

[T]he country’s highest court heard arguments over whether a woman who accused her cousin and uncle of repeatedly sexually abusing her as a child should have had to remove her veil to testify.

The Ontario Court of Appeal ruled in 2009 that witnesses who wear the face-covering veil must remove it on the stand, but only if wearing it truly jeopardizes an accused’s right to a fair trial.

A small claims court case in MI involving a Muslim woman who refused to remove her veil while on the witness stand wended its way to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals before the plaintiff withdrew. However, the brouhaha led to the state’s Supreme Court issuing a rule giving judges discretion to determine the appearance of witnesses – meaning that they are permitted to ask a Muslim woman to uncover her face.

† The Little Red Hen occupies Wall Street: On the two-month anniversary of Occupy Wall Street protesters commandeering NYC’s Zuccotti Park brothers Derek and John Tabacco, two local business owners fed up with the noise, mess and the decline in receipts launched a counter protest. The self-styled “Wall Street Freedom Fighters” held up signs that said “Occupy A Desk” and “Get a Job.” As the Occupy movement ostensibly was triggered by highly educated, highly indebted college grads who could not find jobs, the brothers decided to hold a job fair on Monday, December 12^th from noon until 4 p.m. to do their bit to get these crazy kids off the street and into productive employment. About a dozen companies with more than 400 job openings committed to have HR representatives at the job fair. So what happened? Mediaite reports the initiative, though well-meant, went over like a lead balloon:

“Occupiers were getting ornery,” John [told Neil Cavuto], noting that they had to shut the job fair down early because protesters were swearing at them, yelling in their faces, and spitting on them. “They got kind of pissed off about it,” he said. …

Although the brothers said they got a positive response from people who had come by, hearing about the job fair, none of the occupiers in Zuccotti Park wanted to hear about the job opportunities. …

“We’re out there trying to do something positive, and not one occupier came over to us and handed in a resume,” John explained, “It kind of shows that their argument is disingenuous.”

This is not the first time Occupiers have disdained gainful employment.

† Living In These Mad, Mad, Madoff Times: A recession is when you do your holiday shopping at Kohl's. A depression is when you do your holiday shopping at the pawn shop. CBSDetroit.com reports:

Tom Blaine owns the Garden City Exchange and says his business though [sic] October is already up 49 percent over December of last year. The bad economy means he’s getting people selling new and high-end electronics like iPads and he says the popularity of reality shows mean people aren’t as embarrassed to shop there.

“Sometimes I’m sure they are. They might want to try and make it look as new as possible,” said Blaine. “But, you know, times are tough. People don’t mind as much. They’re looking for a deal more than anything.”

Shopper Jason Miller has no problem buying gifts there.

“Yeah, it’s a good place to shop. You know, you get a good deal on everything,” he said. “My daughter plays video games and everything for like the (Nintendo) Wii. So, if I found some good deals on Wii games I’d come up here and pick ‘em up.”

† Oh, How Times Have Changed: Time was when people were so proud they would rather go hungry rather than accept government charity (related article, sixth item on the page). Now, kiddie shows are socializing youngsters to “seek out nutritious food and to eat on the taxpayers’ tab,” CNSNews.com reports:

At the National Press Club on Thursday, Lily the Muppet – who worries about her family not having enough money to feed her properly – pitched free food at school:

"Sometimes we can't always afford to buy all the food that we need,” Lily said. “I mean, but we've been finding lots of ways that we can get help ... Yeah, for example, at school I get a free breakfast and a lunch ... part of the meal plan."

And if Lilly’s parents are really resourceful, they can probably find a school that will serve their children a free dinner too.

† A Fish Story That’s Unbelievable: The federal government contends that so few cod have spawned in the Gulf of Maine that targets set by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in 2004 to rebuild the species by 2014 cannot be met, necessitating severe restrictions – or an outright ban – on cod fishing from north of Cape Cod to Canada. Fisherman contend that their nets, which are bulging with cod, put the lie to the government’s assertions, The New York Times reports:

Fishermen insist that there are plenty of cod and that the real problem is fuzzy science. They say the data are grossly inconsistent, pointing to a 2008 federal report that concluded that Gulf of Maine cod, though historically overfished, were well on the way to recovery. …

From May 2010 to April 2011, commercial fishermen caught about nine million pounds of Gulf of Maine cod, according to the New England Fishery Management Council, earning more than $2 per pound on average. …

Some fishermen say they are seeing more cod in the Gulf of Maine than they have in years. Many in Gloucester have already reached their quota for the fishing year that started in May and are looking to buy the rights to catch more from others who have not yet reached their federal limit. Recreational fishermen, who land more than 30 percent of the total Gulf of Maine cod catch, are reporting similar observations. …

Shutting down the fishery, or even sharply curtailing the allowable catch, “would be devastating,” said Joe Orlando, a fourth-generation Gloucester fisherman who landed 160,000 pounds of cod last year, about 80 percent of his total catch. “It would cut the legs right off of us.”

Such restrictions would make it hard to fish for other species, Mr. Orlando and others said, because it is nearly impossible to trawl for any other groundfish – those that live near the sea bottom, like flounder and haddock – without bringing up cod.