How to Write over 2000 Words and Say Nothing

Andrew Sullivan links to this article, by Ronald Brownstein, talking about "beer track" and "wine track" voters, and Andrew seems to think it useful. I'm not sure why. I was waiting for Brownstein to talk about how Hillarah wins with Haitian lesbians in the furniture business by 59%, but Obama wins with left-handed Tongan welders by 57%. In the end, Brownstein says nothing.

It's because the approach Brownstein takes is *exactly* what is wrong with American politics and even American political science. The most awful class I had to take in college was a mandatory 301 class that taught the magic of polls. Not only did the professor have to wear a necktie to keep the foreskin from going up over his head, he and the curriculum treated people as if we are static elements that can be near-perfectly counted if you did so in just such a way. It is exactly the wrong approach.

To guide one's politics by polls is to take a "tail-wagging-the-dog" approach wherein politicians are always reacting to the presumed past in a narrowly focused way. "Voters are concerned about the economy/environment/terrorism threat/etc., ergo, we should talk about X." No....you, the politician, need to talk about the economy and get the voters to talk about it. You need to talk about the environment and get voters to think about it. You need to talk about torture and civil liberties and get voters to respond to it. If they don't want to come along with your ideas, fine, that's the way it works. But this continued focus-group/polling approach is what creates small-minded, wonky, pedantic drivel instead of substantive legislation.

Obama doesn't win votes based on his 1,036,723-point plans. He wins on ideas and, yes, outstanding oratory skills. And just what is wrong with that? Why should we be afraid of ideas? What is wrong with inspired oratory? Of course it doesn't translate into action, but it sure as hell can inspire action and no president--no matter the skill or industry--can do anything alone. The absolute quickest way Obama can hand the nomination to Hillarah is to try to out-wonk her. Instead, all he has to do is say, to the effect, "All of my plans and ideas are up on my website, freely available, and if you don't want to download them off the net, we will be happy to mail them to you." Then continue to talk about his ideas, and inspire, and lead. Yes, lead.

I am certainly not saying that Obama doesn't need to avoid dirtying himself in details. When asked about his views and plans regarding the economy, answer--and do it directly. But don't pull a Hillarah and put forth a wonky plan as a panacea. And I'm not saying polls have no use--they can be very useful tools at times. But Bill Clinton's largest accomplishments--welfare reform, free-trade, and a budget surplus--happened despite opposition to the ideas in the country and/or his party. On those issues, for better or worse, he led. And that's what we need; not salami-slicing the population and calculating one's statements to win over the majority of those "groups."

Paging Dr. Paul

Remember the embassy Ron Paul mentioned--the one bigger than the Vatican? Well, apparently, it's a firetrap. It's already $200 million dollars over budget, almost 6 months behind schedule, and, of course, never should have been built in the first place.

Can we do nothing right anymore? Can anyone even begin to imagine building the Panama Canal or Hoover Dam today? What happened to us?

[Hat Tip: Huffington Post]

Snoop Dog and Bill O'Reily

Not a lot of love lost, apparently. (Not work safe if not wearing headphones).

Snoop Dogg says F*ck Bill Oreilly

Grapelli

I miss him.

Sadly, I never got to see him perform live. But the man who did everything from playing with Django Reinhart to teaching Mark O'Connor is still on youtube, so check him out--and get a couple of his albums if you want to play music.

And a Peek into Common French Intelligence

Not the same format, but wow!

Voter Turnout

Maybe it's good that most don't vote [sigh]. But if Americans are worried about their jobs being outsourced...seems like EDUCATION might be called for.



And, not to be out-done, the UK has a few dim bulbs as well:

The TSA is *Still* a Farse

Bruce Schneier posts an article about a 5 year old boy being searched as a potential terrorist because his name matches someone on the no-fly list. The name? Michael Gardner. Whitepages.com has over 300 Michael Gardners in their records and has 42 Michael Gardners just in the state of Washington (where the little jihadist lives). Plus, HE'S 5 YEARS OLD! Schneier said it best:

"...[T]o the TSA, following procedure is more important than common sense."

I Miss Joe

For the life of me, I don't know why he didn't do better. In 2000--sure, different times. But now? Particularly when Hillarah is the only one doing well that can really be called an establishment candidate, it seems like perfect timing for him. Maybe his long time in the Senate made him look like one of the Washington regulars...I don't know. But how does this guy (below) lose for the Ds? I can't see him losing to anyone the GOP has up there, personally. And I think he had the best outlook on the Iraqi war, the Middle East problems, and Terrorism--by far.

Huckster and Colbert

Say what you want about Huckabee, but he has a sense of humor (and doesn't laugh like an inbred shit-shoveler with asthma). We could have worse candidates for damn sure.

I'm in the Big Leagues Now

Andrew Sullivan published a letter of mine! I am now being read around the world!!!! (And yes, I know no one really cares ;-).

Meghan McCain

Whoever went on that date with her has cajones. I would be terrified to be within 20 feet of John McCain's daughter. Her blog is here and, somehow, I don't see her running for office later.

Richardson Calls it Quits

I'm not sure why he even went on to NH, truthfully, though it was only another 5 days away so--what the hell, I guess. I was a little harsh on him here, though I don't think I was too far off. My suspicion (and hope) is that he is a little better of a politician than he is a campaigner, but him as VP...? I don't see it. Who does he energize or excite? I don't see him delivering Western states either. Maybe New Mexico, but who cares about that? I would trade NM for Tijuana tomorrow.

People in AZ, CO, NV, and UT couldn't give two shits about the governor of NM--and why should they? People in NM don't give a damn about our governors either. The Mountain states are largely conservative and don't have much of an electoral count, and the Left Coast (with 72 electoral votes between the three states) is as removed from Western States as it is from the Midwest, politically.

I don't know if he wants the job or not, but Biden would be a much better choice. As a Westerner myself, Biden seems more Western than Richardson in temperament and delivery. You have to swagger as a Westerner--Richardson bobbles and sways. And you have to get to the point when asked a question--preferably quickly--not talk about energy independence and refuge for unicorns in the Gumdrop Forest when asked a question about Iraq.

This Hyper-Sensative Country of Ours

So disappointing. Andrew Cuomo makes an innocent remark and people think he might be giving a semi-racist back-handed slap at Obama. Relax people. There are more important things going on. Like, say, the gum wrapper I saw on the sidewalk this morning, or the dimples on my butt. This is part of the reason we could use Obama in the White House.

Kerry endorses Obama

Ready? 1, 2, 3, yawn. Nice touch of class though in not supporting your former running mate. Should have just stayed out of it, Senator. At a minimum, wait until super Tuesday is over to see if Edwards is still a distant third.

Revulsion of Cliches

Most all of us are already sick of it, I should imagine. Shortly, we may have no choice but to either go numb to it or turn away from it. Of course, I speak of "Change." Obama started it with the "Change We Can Believe In" slogan and--with his popularity--now has every other candidate talking about it as if it were their campaign slogan from the beginning. Even Romney, the pre-packaged, GOP machine candidate-with-handlebars-in-a-handsome-carrying-case is calling himself an agent of change. Blech.

I'm not so sure any of us want change so much as better. Candidates are rapidly making the term of "change" meaningless anyhow by talking about it as if it's synonymous with "cool" or "the best." It reminds me of an executive in my former company that had us read a ridiculous self-help book that made the mind-bending suggestion that one needs to "think outside the box" [GASP] and offered a system in how to do so. Naturally, the same executive didn't see the obvious irony of following a system that keeps one from following a system. Similarly, Romney, Clinton, and Edwards don't see how following the leader shows their lack of leadership (note how McCain has largely stayed away from this, btw).

Interestingly, however, with candidates in both parties trying to wave the Change banner, it reveals what may well be Ws greatest legacy--a complete dismantling of the two party's power structures and a re-writing of their platforms. For his administration has been so awful, odious, and destructive--and the Ds have been so pusillanimous, disarrayed, and impotent in their opposition--that millions of Americans are saying give me anything better than this. Anything. I'm hopeful we will get it.

A Better Summary of the Elections

Not shocking that George Will could do it better than me. I've been reading him since I was a teenager and, 20-something years later, still enjoy it. My favorite part:

"Led Zeppelin's recent reunion concert in London exemplified a tiresome phenomenon -- geezer rock groups catering to baby boomer nostalgia. Speaking of the boomers' inexhaustible fascination with themselves, Bill Clinton has transformed his wife's campaign into his narcissism tour. As The New York Times dryly described a New Hampshire appearance the day after her Iowa rejection: "He talked about his administration, his foundation work and some about his wife."

Election 2008 - NH

Suppose I could lend opinion 2 billion and 14 on the subject, but it will hardly stand out. I don't really know what to say about it overall except the one obvious point: no one knows where this is going. We can follow the polls, make our predictions, go with our gut feelings, etc., but this is far too big for any one pundit or group to really define or understand. Even the most able pollsters have to be almost completely baffled right now--which suits me fine. The less relevant the polls, the better, IMHO.

What cannot be denied, however, is that there is definitely a change in the zeitgeist here in the US. Political parties are being redrawn right now. A generation is losing power while the younger generations are still trying to define themselves, politically. The candidates winning over America are the anti-candidates: a young, ethnically mixed man raised by a single mother, an affable Baptist preacher that started out polling below the margin of error, and an old, maverick war hero that is sometimes more unpopular in his own party than in the opposition's.

I see Hillarah's win in NH as an aberration--I really do. I don't dismiss the chance that she could win the D nomination, but it will be the last gasp of a generation if she does. Both parties are being rebuilt now, as we speak. The Ds have been trying to repair themselves for decades now, so I suspect they will get there quicker than the GOP, but I don't know that and neither does anyone right now.

And actually, another thing that I don't think can be denied: this is, by far, the most exciting election in my adult life (now 37). I suspect that it may well be the most interesting election since at least 1968. It seems that, for the first time in decades, the majority of voters are choosing a candidate they can really be for vs. a candidate that is the lessor of two evils. And for a political junkie like me, it will be something to remember for a looooooooong time.

Leave it to Clive

Clive Davis always finds the best clips if you're into music beyond what is on the radio. (He mostly writes about things other than music, however--you should check him out). Charlie Parker with Coleman Hawkins, Buddy Rich, Ray Brown, and Hank Jones? There has to be a couple hundred or so albums between those guys.

I found this while I was perusing as well. Dizzy Gillespie with Louis Armstrong on the Jackie Gleason Show. I was born way too late, alas.

Obama and Keyes

From the 2004 Senatorial debate in Illinois (below). Perhaps I was a little hard on Gov. Richardson. For he is nowhere near Keyes. If any of you have never had the impulse to kick a man in the face, perhaps it will come to you for a brief moment today:




[Hat Tip: Andrew Sullivan]

It's Gotta Hurt

Hillarah is having a hard time keeping her supporters in NH from leaving the building.

Richardson, sadly, is a Douche

But it's not all his fault--more on that later. Go to about the 1:00 mark of the youtube clip and then wait for the doozy: he's going to work out an agreement with the Soviet Union. Of course they haven't existed for about 20 years, but we know what he meant. When I read about Richardson early last year, I liked him for the most part. But the more he talked, the more he sounded like a douche nozzle.

In debate after debate, the question would be something like "What should we do about Darfur, Governor?" And the answer would be some sort of glancing blow about a no fly zone and diplomacy and then, chasing the yellow light, he would go through a laundry list of items like energy independence, higher teacher salaries, better education, free blow jobs for Iraqi war veterans, and unicorns and rainbows and butterflies flitting about the evergreen lea. He could never be taken seriously.

I will standby what I've said for many years. New Mexico is the most awful state in the union. Pick a state and I would rather live there. Pick a ring of Hell and I will consider it. New Mexico sucks the life out of a person and, apparently, their intellect as well. I should have known better.

Whoa there, Huckster!

I have given Huckabee the benefit of the doubt and I still like the fact that he's beating the Plastic One, but this is a bridge too far. Save it for the pulpit, Governor.

[Hat tip: Andrew Sullivan]

I HAVE A NEW READER!

No idea how he found me, but I actually got a reader from someone I don't know or owe money to. And...he actually gave me a nice comment on the meager post. Here is his site. Here is the post. And here is an awesome pic he has on his blog (a pretty good blog too--extra bonus).

ObamaRama

Video of the NH Democratic Party Dinner can be found here. Best part is you can fast forward through the first half (just drag the bar to a different spot to get to where you want). Most notable parts are Hillarah getting semi (or mostly) booed twice. It wasn't all that audible in the video, but according to first hand accounts, it was quite noticeable.

Rather notable as well, Obama leads in NH by 10 points over Hillarah in the latest Rassmussen poll. They had Hillarah up by 3 just two weeks ago. This thing is over. Once Obama wins NH, he will walk through SC and super Tuesday on February 5th, I should think, will just be a coronation.

Ending the 60's dorm room fights Redux

Rush is aghast that anyone could or would support McCain or Huckabee since they aren't "real" Conservatives. It reminded me of an article George Will wrote some time back and, with all the GOP fixation on Reagan, seems all to apropos right now. From the article:

"Suppose someone seeking the presidential nomination had, as a governor, signed the largest tax increase in his state's history and the nation's most permissive abortion law. And by signing a law institutionalizing no-fault divorce, he had unwittingly but substantially advanced an idea central to the campaign for same-sex marriages -- the minimalist understanding of marriage as merely a contract between consenting adults to be entered into or dissolved as it suits their happiness.

Question: Is it not likely that such a presidential aspirant would be derided by some of today's fastidious conservatives? A sobering thought, that, because the attributes just described were those of Ronald Reagan."

Rush, Ronny Reagan is not coming back, sorry. Go take a pill (actually, don't), and face the reality that is now: you will only continue to be less and less relevant.

The Pettiness of Edwards

Sorry, but this can be called nothing but. Not only did he not congratulate Obama last night, he didn't even mention him! Now his campaign manager is calling Obama a corporate sellout?

First, this seems to be dumb, dumb, and more dumb. If Obama goes on to win the nomination and, particularly the Presidency, he could write himself out of the national scene for years--if not forever. Perhaps he sincerely believes it's worth the cost. Who knows?

But what Edwards doesn't seem to understand is, to my view, the following:

1) His populist message about fighting for the working man comes across as patronizing and bullying to a lot of us. Uncle Saint John will fight the big bad guy for us dirty people too weak to fight. I don't doubt his sincerity, but damn. We don't need to fight union busters anymore, do we? And...I can take care of myself pretty well--thanks though.

2) Most of the people in this country work for major corporations. I just left the last company I worked for (a Fortune 100 Company) because I was dissatisfied with it, not because of inherent evil. They gave me a good salary, good benefits, good working environment, etc. I realize that there are many not so fortunate, but a more reasonable approach and softer touch (such as Obama saying American corporations can't hide in the Caribbean for tax purposes) seems a better way to go. Edwards sounds like he wants to storm the Bastille and I'm not so sure that is what is necessary.

3) Class warfare is the stuff of decades past. General Motors isn't sending henchman to bust up picket lines any longer. Bill Gates doesn't make his billions by raping the earth and employing 12 year olds. Obama's approach is so much saner. Transparency in government, fair tax laws, and an expanded safety net in the way of health care. That tackles lobbyists, tax relief, and public welfare without a call to arms. If a corporation is a good citizen and obeys the laws, what's wrong with them making money? I'm *glad* Google makes a lot of money. I'm glad New Belgium Brewers make a lot of money. And I'm sure as hell glad that the company that writes my paycheck makes a lot of money. Just convince me you're not a corporate whore like so many in politics--that's all I need.

4) Edwards' rubric sounds like the New Deal and The Great Society reheated. Neither are looked upon with much fondness any longer--particularly the latter.

I do believe that Edwards is a good man with some good ideas, and this loss in Iowa has to be like a blow to the gut. He's been campaigning there, effectively, for years now and built a very solid organization. But I hope he takes a deep breath and rethinks his tactics and delivery a bit. The Ds (and the country) could use him. But they won't want him if he's viewed as a divisive, arrogant prick.

Ending "the dorm fights of the '60s"

Joe Klein is happy to see his generation's politics begin to die off and give rise to something new--and better.

Obama and Blogspot

Parenthetically, it's rather funny that "Obama" gets tagged for a spelling error by Blogger's software. One of a few things that will likely change over the next few months.

Obama and youtube

Twice I've linked to youtube for the acceptance speech in Iowa Obama gave and twice it has become unavailable. So I searched on Obama for videos uploaded today--nothing. Then uploaded this week--nothing. What the hell is going on? It's the number one story in the world right now...

Rudy's Spin Whores

As our president would say, "Denial ain't just a river in Pakistan."

American History

Wow. Just wow. Obama wins Iowa. Convincingly. This is so encouraging and exciting. Just this alone! But to imagine him in the White House...what a testament to America if it happens. Know hope.

[Update: original video unavailable. Trying this one below]
[Update number 2: Giving DailyMotion a try. Viva L'France, I guess]

Obama Winning Speech in Iowa
Uploaded by TECHNOLOGOS

$100 a barrel

The day is here. As in now.

Biden in Iowa

Now this would be news. The article isn't talking about Biden winning Iowa, but getting to that 15% number that could keep him alive. I would love to see it, personally. Sometimes he is a bit of a toolbelt, I'll admit. But (however many years ago it was), after getting past the "aren't I handsome" smiles and quips he likes to dish out on the Sunday morning talk shows, I learned to generally like him and appreciate his views. He seems quite moderate and grounded, with sincere convictions. Most attractively, he isn't embarrassed about being a Democrat nor is he embarrassed to call some Republicans friends and some...well...ignorant or unfit for office (see below).



Though I really have no idea, I think many on the left in the D party see him as a poser of some sort--not a "true" Democrat because he's chummy with some in the GOP and talks about foreign policy all the time. Doesn't want to fight...whatever. Like I said, I don't know. But can anyone see him losing bad to anyone on the GOP side? I can't see him losing at all. He has accomplished a lot, he's well respected, he's the only one with a plan for a middle-way in Iraq, has never been accused of being a flip-flopper or a liar (to my knowledge), and is very quick on his feet in a debate and in answering questions. I can't really see why he would be a bad choice and, in fact, a pretty damn good one.

The Onion Feels it

The unseen stories about the election are what the Onion brings to all of us--patriots that they are. Not sure if this helps Obama, but maybe it wins him a bit of the "aren't I as cute as my daughter?" vote. Thompson makes an unorthodox plea here. Hillary Clinton makes a brilliant move, and Duane Bickels speaks for the mulletards.

One More Day in Iowa III

Isn't all of it at least a bit exciting for you non-political junkies? This election has the potential of re-drawing party lines, changing national discourse, even redefining what America is in the ongoing self-identification process of this country. Can you imagine a debate between McCain and Obama for the Presidency? How much more elevated and decent would that be? Two American Gentleman--with sincere, honest differences--offering two decent paths to follow. It would be the first time in the 6 general elections I've been able to participate in where the choice would truly be "which is better?" vs. "which is the least odious?" Here's hoping.

One More Day in Iowa II

And let us not forget the GOP candidates either. Romney and Huckabee are running neck and neck in Iowa and McCain is surging in New Hampshire. Giuliani seems to be going into a tail-spin, Brownback endorsed McCain, and Thompson is expected to do the same when he gets out of the race. Michigan could be critical if McCain surges since Romney was born there...hell, they are all critical. I guess we'll have to sit back and watch.

One More Day in Iowa

The candidates and their staff have to be on pins and needles. It's a three way dead heat, though Obama appears to have a slight edge as of late. Still, where will the support of Kusinich, Biden, and Richardson go to if they can't get their 15%--which appears all but certain they won't do? And, of course, if Clinton and Edwards loose by slim margins, they can spin the loss as still being in the thick of things and keep going on to New Hampshire and South Carolina. Obama could do the same if he loses Iowa as well, of course. Whatever happens, this is the most interesting race, by far, I've seen in my adult life.

Coltrane's beloved nightmare

SRV is playing third stone from the sun. It sucks--and yet it's beautiful. It's music and noise. Coltrane needed electric music to get where he was trying to get and SRV and Hendrix had it in spades. Or maybe Coltrane needed to try to break in vs. try to break out. No matter--I can't begin to keep up with all the aforementioned. If you like:

Ah, Schadenfreude

Christian love on display again. Happy Holidays.

Huckabee's other message

Maybe this is why he's in the lead. I thought it was pretty funny but, withal, about right politically.

I miss these guys

No idea what this dude worked on, but this great--better than most shows on TV. Purportedly, late night TV (to include the Comedy Central shows) are coming back in January with or without writers, with Letterman and the Late Late Show possibly working out an agreement. We'll see, but with everything going on in the elections, we could use them.



Hat Tip: Mickey Kaus.

The Ron Paul Fascination

It's hard not to route for him reading stuff like this. As much as I disagree with him on so many things, mark my words, Ron Paul has hit a nerve that American politics will have to deal with for a long, long time. Americans are more and more becoming islands unto themselves and would love nothing more than to have government leave them the hell alone. It's cross-party, cross-lifestyle, cross-religious identity, cross-everything, and the party that can capture it will capture national politics for the next 20 years. And how does one capture it? Easy. Do what Dr. Paul does and read the Constitution--a very carefully and economically worded document that espouses the same principles. Then, have the conviction to follow it.

Ron Paul's historical assessment is actually quite right. Tyranny is old, and an easy choice. Liberty, i.e. self-reliance, individual rights, personal freedom--*that* is new in the world of political ideas. And it is the only idea that can unite prostitutes, academics, pot-heads, ranchers, rednecks, urbanites, and whatever other stripe of American is out there (read the article linked above for that to make any sense).

Go Ron Paul!

Stairway to Heaven

Never heard it quite like this, I'll bet you. An album was released about 10 years ago with covers of the famous Led Zeppelin tune and now, with the magic of youtube, we have accompanying videos to go with it, though the Beatles one is the best, I think:



The Doors version is here. The video kinda sux, but it's very musically true--a lot of fun.

And so it begins

Already wrote about it, but here it comes. China begins its aerospace industry and it may be the beginning of the end of the US and European aerospace industry. I anticipate the talk of "how could they have come so far so fast?" and "how ingenious they are" when none of it is true. We all but gave it to them.

For all those CIOs out there in the US aerospace industry that know exactly what I'm talking about, drink this in. You are fat, dumb, and happy multi-millionaires that seem to have no other quality than being both untouchable *and* incompetent at the same time--so congratulations. But you helped destroy a multi-billion dollar industry in your country through your stupidity, sloth, cowardice, and inaction. Sleep well.

Anger Issues

No graphic imagery, but still not for the squeamish. OJ and Manson were gentile compared to this cat. Can't imagine what that woman could have done to deserve that.

When Galaxies Collide

Holy shmokes! Check this out:















From the article:

"This composite image shows the jet from a black hole at the center of a galaxy striking the edge of another galaxy, the first time such an interaction has been found. In the image, data from several wavelengths have been combined. X-rays from Chandra (colored purple), optical and ultraviolet (UV) data from Hubble (red and orange), and radio emission from the Very Large Array (VLA) and MERLIN (blue) show how the jet from the main galaxy on the lower left is striking its companion galaxy to the upper right. The jet impacts the companion galaxy at its edge and is then disrupted and deflected, much like how a stream of water from a hose will splay out after hitting a wall at an angle."

One question though. If not even light can escape a black hole, how can a "jet" shoot out of it?

Sadly familiar

Maybe I really should get married to avoid stuff like this.

What a Whore

Thank Goodness the Onion is on the case.

Not Very Nice, Hitch

Christopher Hitchens is his normal pugilistic self here, and I enjoyed it immensely, but if Huckabee is an irretrievably idiotic Jesus freak, what does that make his Man, W? That president dude that likes to play cowboy and fighter pilot...remember him, Hitch?

I've wondered for years now how Hitchens can continue to hold his nose and still support that disaster of man because of a war that he grotesquely mismanaged. I understand how important the war is and how much Hitch wants to fight it, but one would think that would make him more angry--like supporting an orphanage just to find out that it's being run by child abusers.

I just don't understand how Hitchens--a guy who has utter contempt for religion and who has always been a fierce civil libertarian--can continue to support W. And I think it a bit hypocritical of him to publicly skewer Huckabee with that kind of nastiness when W has largely received a pass from him for years now. About the only major differences between Huckabee and W, from what I can see is (1) Huckabee is not morally lazy and (2) he can out-think W with half his brain tied behind his back.

The Softer Side of Hillarah

Get your Kleenex ready. When Oprah pitches for the competition, I suppose you have to think of something like this instead (though I could very comfortably live without either).

Chinese "Cyber Militia"

Or, "Reason Number 286 or so to Drop Microsoft."

This is old news to anyone in IT security (and Time first wrote about the subject years ago), but the article might be interesting to those who don't work in the field.

What is interesting to me--apart from the article--are all the Fortune 1000 companies that are all too eager to do business with, and in, China when China's government all but openly sponsors intellectual property theft. Believe me, it was just not the US government that was hit by Titan Rain and other coordinated attacks from China. In fact, the running gag amongst some of us IT security weenies is something akin to "why don't we just give them all of our intellectual property and save everyone a lot of time and money?"

Then again, I suppose I would be out of a job if they did. So...I guess we will just have to get used to blatant, state-sponsored, multi-billion dollar theft and hope it doesn't hurt us too badly. The US government is so beholden to Chinese loans that nothing substantial will be done about it for years, if within our lifetimes. I would love to be wrong about that--but I don't think I will be.

Cruella DeVille

Except this one is real life. Take a look at this broad:















She and her husband are accused of, basically, enslaving two Indonesian women and could face 40 years in prison.

From the article:

"They described how the two Indonesian women had been punished for misbehaviour such as sleeping late and stealing food from the dustbin to supplement their meagre meals.

The women said they had been beaten with brooms and umbrellas, slashed with knives, made to take freezing showers and climb stairs repeatedly.

One said she had been forced to eat several hot chillies and then her own vomit."

Hot Chicks for Ron Paul

Two of the best candidates getting some free (and cheap) publicity. The US is an interesting place--particularly around election time:



Obama Girl Nightmare - video powered by Metacafe

Putin the Sweetheart

Awwwwwwww. Putin will agree to become the Prime Minister if Medvedev becomes President. How sweet.

Coronation in Jeopardy?

Billy is unhappy. And ummmm, sorry. That's just too damn bad, Bubba--interesting as you might be.

Getting Interesting

Lieberman endorses McCain as McCain continues to raise his numbers in New Hampshire and the Portsmouth Herald gives a strong endorsement of McCain. Ron Paul breaks his own record of raising over four million dollars by raising over *six* million in 24 hours. He will likely raise more than any other candidate in the GOP and is getting close to double-digit numbers in the NH polls.

Obama is still leading in Iowa, but not much (if at all) outside the margin of error and Edwards may receive a large endorsement in Iowa. And all of this has the big asterisk next to it in that many of Iowa's caucus goers still claim to be undecided. Bumpy ride ahead for the D's--making NH hyper-critical for Hillarah and SC hyper-critical for both Obama and Edwards. And, perhaps sentimentally, I wouldn't count out Biden too terribly much just yet. If Edwards or Hillarah slip, he could have some big numbers swing his way as he is commonly called the "second choice" candidate for many in both Iowa and NH, if we are to believe the reports. I wouldn't put a lot of money down on the prospect, but who knows what can/will happen in a democracy and a race like this?

Mental Health Break

There is that certain level of "suckiness" that just can't be put into words--very intangible. One has to be good enough to resemble sincere effort, but still be irretrievably awful. These guys suck at levels hitherto unknown.

Psycho in Chief

No, this isn't about W, but Nixon. W isn't clever enough to be a psycho. To call W retarded begs forgiveness of the reader, as it should, since he is ferociously morally lazy more than anything and retarded people are often far from that. But Nixon was clever--even brilliant at times. Only now has his GOP coalition showed signs of cracking. But enough of that. Have a listen. (And, I would be remiss not to mention three words as a summary: Koo ka-phukin Koo).

Whatever Dude

Whenever Ratzinger (aka, the Pope) wants to publicly state that raping children is a bad idea--and, in fact, a crime--*and* actually does something about it, maybe then I'll start to think his moral views are worth listening to. Actually, he will then have to state that AIDS is worse than condoms and that he would actually like to see his sub-Sahara African parishioners live instead of dying at the rate of 600-1000 a day.

Gay marriage is an 'obstacle' to world peace? WTF? Well, with respect to his Holiness, what better moral leaders can one have on the teachings of the family than the Vatican? After all, they are largely old, celibate, men that gather wisdom from millenia-old stories/nightmares about turning women into salt, slaughtering neighboring villagers and enslaving their virgins, and stoning disobedient children that were written by other old (and probably also sexually frustrated, if not celibate) men chasing goats around a rock. Not sure they were pederasts, but who knows? After all, who doesn't want to rape a child? It's just the way God made us, right?

Or.......we can choose to ignore this guy who is, by all appearances, gayer than a maypole. He criticizes gay marriage as an obstacle to peace in the world?! What, as opposed to Vatican bath house adorned in supple young boys? Phuk you, Ratzinger. Phuk you and the ground you walk on (and kneel supplicantly upon--and no, not talking about prayer).

More 'MS is Lame' fun

A nice parodied voice over of an MS ad.

MS on the cutting edge

Oh goody, ads on mobile devices brought to you by Microsoft. Just what we've always wanted. From the article:

"Going forward, people will be able to see mini banner ads optimized for their browser type and screen size on their mobile devices when they visit the MSN Mobile portal..."

And--hope you are sitting down--"MSN Mobile will also now enable users to buy movie tickets over the phone with a credit card and download background images and ringtones." Wow! That technology has only been around for about 5 years or so! How do they do it?

Whatever. (cough) douchebags (cough).

SwiftKids

I love these little youtube vids. I hope we get more comedy vids like this and just simply laugh at the idiocy of it all.

The one on Edwards here:


And check out the ones for Hillarah, Obama, and Giuliani as well.

More Obama Propoganda

Andrew Sullivan states it more articulately than I can here. To underscore the article a bit, Sullivan is a conservative who regularly pseudo-worships Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher--as any conservative English immigrant to the US should, I suppose.

I really like the article, but the parts that get me most are:

"At its best, the Obama candidacy is about ending a war—not so much the war in Iraq, which now has a mo­mentum that will propel the occupation into the next decade—but the war within America that has prevailed since Vietnam and that shows dangerous signs of intensifying, a nonviolent civil war that has crippled America at the very time the world needs it most. It is a war about war—and about culture and about religion and about race. And in that war, Obama—and Obama alone—offers the possibility of a truce."

And, in speaking of Obama vs. Hillarah:

"The paradox is that Hillary makes far more sense if you believe that times are actually pretty good. If you believe that America’s current crisis is not a deep one, if you think that pragmatism alone will be enough to navigate a world on the verge of even more religious warfare, if you believe that today’s ideological polarization is not dangerous, and that what appears dark today is an illusion fostered by the lingering trauma of the Bush presidency, then the argument for Obama is not that strong. Clinton will do. And a Clinton-Giuliani race could be as invigorating as it is utterly predictable.

But if you sense, as I do, that greater danger lies ahead, and that our divisions and recent history have combined to make the American polity and constitutional order increasingly vulnerable, then the calculus of risk changes. Sometimes, when the world is changing rapidly, the greater risk is caution. Close-up in this election campaign, Obama is unlikely. From a distance, he is necessary. At a time when America’s estrangement from the world risks tipping into dangerous imbalance, when a country at war with lethal enemies is also increasingly at war with itself, when humankind’s spiritual yearnings veer between an excess of certainty and an inability to believe anything at all, and when sectarian and racial divides seem as intractable as ever, a man who is a bridge between these worlds may be indispensable.

We may in fact have finally found that bridge to the 21st century that Bill Clinton told us about. Its name is Obama."

It's not that Hillarah might be "fine" as a president, it's because--at best--she will be "fine" as president. Predictable, practical, triangulating, safe, and, in the end, potentially dangerous for us by being all the latter. Politics as a board game is not what is needed *if* you agree that we are in uniquely challenged times, as I believe we are.

I don't think Obama is anything close to a panacea and, if I read him right, neither does he. But he represents an entirely new chapter for the US in policy, party, foreign relations, race relations, and--perhaps most importantly--what the American Dream and what America really is today. 50 years ago the US was arguing about whether or not a man like Obama should be allowed to stay at a hotel, eat in a restaurant, walk down the sidewalk, or go to school with white people. Now he may become president of this same nation despite not having the support of much of Black Congressional and Civil Rights leaders. What a country. What a country, indeed.

Shweeeet

Making beer beautiful and heartfelt in time for the holidays. And, from the story, another reason to drink Fat Tire beer.

Another Look at McCain

The Economist argues the pro-McCain case. I would love to have an Obama-McCain debate for the presidency, personally. Don't know if it can happen, but a boy can dream.

Gitmo and Habeus Corpus

Let us hope W and the US Congress get their frightening legislation overturned. SCOTUS agrees to hear the case afterall.

The parts I especially liked:

"The final argument of the day was the rebuttal from former Solicitor General Waxman. The writ of habeas corpus, he contended, has always allowed prisoners to challenge their detention if they claim they are not warriors and are being wrongly held. The current system, he argued, does not allow for such an argument.

To illustrate his point, Waxman pointed to a case in which he said a detainee was finally released after four years in detention because the detainee, a German man, had "what other detainees have not had — a lawyer." And when the lawyer filed a habeas petition in the federal courts, and the government filed a reply with its evidence, the lawyer saw that the government claimed the detainee had associated with a named terrorist who had blown himself up.

"Within 24 hours, his counsel had affidavits not only from the German prosecuter, but from the supposedly deceased Mr. Bilgen, who is a resident of Dresden, never involved in terrorism, and fully getting on with his life," Waxman said."

FOUR YEARS we held an innocent man and he is only free because he is German...!?! Not exactly winning hearts and minds or demonstrating the US as a shining beacon of democracy, is it?

Then there is there is Scalia, proving himself ever the blowhard, pedantic douchebag:

"Do you have a single case in the 220 years of our country, or for that matter, in the five centuries of the English empire, in which habeas was granted to an alien in a territory that was not under the sovereign control of either the United States or England?" Scalia asked.

"The answer to that is a resounding yes," Waxman said."

Listen to the full exchange on C-SPAN, if fully interested, but Waxman had a hard time convincing Scalia. Waxman is obviously extremely capable, but I wish it was just a bit more of a barroom argument.

One should think that it is astonishingly palpable that the US controls the Guantanamo Bay Marine Base since we've been there for decades. If the Constitution and US law is inapplicable to detainees there in our custody because we don't include Guantanamo Bay within the borders of the United States, is it fully legal to take people out of their homes--to include US citizens--from anywhere in the world, take them out on a boat and slit their throats? Could we put them on a raft in international waters, but guarded by US military personnel, and forget about Habeus Corpus? As Waxman finally stated later, the British Parliament suspended the writ of Habeus Corpus on the High Seas for US Seamen in 1777. If it wasn't applicable, why did it have to be lifted?

Besides which, and what should seem most obvious most of all is, just how in the fuck does someone being denied the writ of Habeus Corpus, held against their will, in strict confinement, appeal to the court system?!?! Especially a seaman in shackles and the bottom of a boat. Just how in the hell is he supposed to pick up his cell phone and call his attorney? OF COURSE there aren't going to be numerous examples of Habeus extended! How are the prisoners supposed to appeal to the court system to get it extended? It's plain phuking bizarre. We're going to forgo 700 years of legal history because of a particular part of a particular war because of a, very arguably, lack of a particular precedent. I hope Kennedy does get in line and help overturn this. What a humiliation otherwise.

sXe Phil

Not bad. In fact pretty good this time. Sometimes he falls a little flat with the 20-something "aren't-I-cute-and-funny?" style, but I'm sure I did that in my 20s. Anyway, should you want to give him 3 minutes of your time (price is right and, no, there is no nudity).

US Pres Primary watch

Looks like Obama's lead in Iowa might be growing a bit more. Hillarah is still holding in New Hampshire and South Carolina, but if Obama takes Iowa, things could get interesting--particularly if Edwards drops out as he said he would.

Even more interesting is the rise of Huckabee. He was single digits as late as September and is now in the lead for the GOP. Don't know how well he will sell in NH (and, so far, the answer is "not well"), but an Iowa win could change his fortunes quite a bit and SC is wide open right now. Guess there is something funny in the water of Arkansas. And, perhaps most encouraging, is that the constant bickering of Giuliani and Romney may have been a waste of time. Huckabee seems to have slid in behind their sniping by like...talking about issues. That seems like a good thing.

Reason 287 or so to support Obama

Bahbrah wants Hillarah. Can't wait for the endorsement of Hillarah from Yanni, Celine, and Joan Baez. I need to wash.

The UK's Privacy Katrina

W has to feel somewhat of a schadenfreude boost from this. Almost half of Britain's population falls subject to potential identity theft with one screw-up from a junior level administrator. This incident happened as Britain is debating whether or not to establish the issuance of national identity cards which, as you might imagine, is making the debate a trifle more lively.

The questions raised over this are near-limitless, but chief amongst them should be:

1) How on earth can a junior admin have that kind of access? If *1* person without a lot of clout can access that kind of data, couldn't *1* person be bought off rather easily for such information? Multi-person integrity is rule number one through number 2973 or so with such information--force a conspiracy for it to be illegitimately obtained.

2) Disk encryption...ever heard of it? Much of it is free--the rest of it is cheap.

3) Doesn't this prove that a central repository for this kind of information is, generally speaking, a Bad Idea (TM)?

When talk of a national ID card here in the US is raised, I don't fear an evil genius in the basement of a secret mansion sending my information to the Russian mafia, I fear a lazy/uninformed/flawed admin/software product (or a combination of any and all the latter) finding a way to screw up. What if the admin is two mortgage payments behind on his house? What if he likes to gamble a bit too much? What if an organization plants someone on the inside? (Don't think it can happen? Look here). What if...you get the idea.

It's not conspiracy I fear, it's incompetence. And we need look no further than our own White House to fear that. It's not that I don't give out potentially sensitive information to my bank, my frequent flier program, even iTunes, but they need my information and they have an enormous imperative--in the way of massive cost and bad publicity--to keep it from leaking out. If they do, the government is there to hear my grievance and, hopefully, redress it. If the federal government lets it leak out, where do I go?

I feel bad for people in the UK that might get hurt from this, but I hope it shows a few here in the US how the idea of national ID cards (and the need for data security), should be looked at very, very carefully and seriously.

Kasporov in Jail

And so it begins--Kasparov is in Russian custody. He is simply trying to run and trying to form an opposition, not trying to overthrow anyone. If you don't think of Russia as an enormous potential problem, think again. And if you haven't heard Kasparov speak, please have a listen. A very impressive man:

Post 101

So I've had 100 posts thus far. I realize it's not exactly a landmark occasion, but I'm glad I've had the semi-discipline to get this far. With any luck, I'll get a few readers!

I'm averaging about 20 posts or so a month, which puts me on the lower end of decent bloggers, but I have a full time job and other shizzie going on, so I don't feel too terrible about it. This was supposed to be more of a journal effort anyway.

I've added blogspot's new slideshow feature which grabs images off of my public picassa album. Look for links on the right hand side. I don't guarantee satisfaction, but it might be interesting to you. Happy Thanksgiving to all, and may Phoenix have but one day that could reasonably be called "cold" before March 1 of next year.

Obama in Iowa

C'mon Iowa. No more Hillarah. Besides, you owe us for Kerry last time around.

Another Obama perk

Barron Young Smith states it well, Obama is going past the normal baby-boomer crap related to drug use. Instead, he has the most compelling contra argument a kid can hear: they are a waste of time. I always thought so as a teenager and as a college kid too.

It's not that smoking some weed will make you homeless and destitute, but have you ever seen a hard-core stoner? They're pathetic. And heroin, crack, meth...no thanks. That stuff really could make you homeless and destitute (happened to a friend of mine, actually). And the hard stuff doesn't help you get laid so, what's the point?

Worst President Ever Watch

"So, yeah....that money we gave you for joining the military....we're gonna need some of that back now that you're a cripple." Don't believe he can be that idiotic AND grotesque? Well, read it for yourself. If the D candidates can't capitalize on this one, *I'm* running for President in four years.

The Promised Land

For me, it's Central and Northern California. I've been lucky to see much of the world (though there is still much more to see, to be certain), and I have yet to see a place quite as perfect.

A buddy of mine now works for Apple computer, so I have a place to crash if I head up that way. He lives in Los Gatos, near San Jose, and is very close to the base of the Santa Cruz Mountains. So, for the first day, the matter of order was a trip to my beloved Monterey.

Went to the aquarium for the first time in about 10 years and was pleasantly surprised. It's still basically the same, of course, but now they have a young Great White and a couple sunfish in the big tank. It's the only place in the world with a Great White in captivity, and they know it can't last, but they are taking care of him for a little while until he gets a little bigger (he was caught in a fishing net). The sunfish they have there are gi-frickin-normous. The big one weighs about 1000 pounds and looks like a cross between a flounder, a flying saucer, and James Edward Almos. Just take a look at a picture of him here--I can't explain it. The pics of the jellyfish came out much better though.

After that, we did the 17 mile drive thing and had a couple whiskies out on the patio of the Spanish Bay resort listening to the Piper serenade the sunset that wasn't really there--pretty foggy. But listening to a Piper out on the tee box of one of the world's most beautiful and pristine golf courses...the fog just makes it better. Whatever sins Tom Watson may have been guilty of, forgive him. Spanish Bay absolves all.

The next day we went hiking in Big Basin Redwoods State Park. Incredible place--though the hike we took damn near killed me. I agreed to do the 10-mile-and-change hike vs. the 5-mile-and-change hike. Then I was talked into doing an 11-miles-and-change trail because the route looked fairly flat and there was more to see that way. Then, after starting out on it and, conspicuously, not being told about a detour, we were presented with a sign telling us about a controlled burn and an alternate route that added not just another mile or so, but a drastic elevation change for flavor.

Sunny point number 8 or 9, when they talk of an elevation change ranging in 1600 feet, they don't mean it in the same way as a mountain--as in go up 1600 feet and then down, but a continuous range in elevation of 1600 feet--up and down, and up and down....forever. Or so it seemed, anyway. *Then*, sunny point number 14 or so, the route ended up being uphill for the last 3 out of 4 miles. I could feel my legs starting to fail (as in, trembling and stinging quads fail) but, painfully, and thankfully, made it out of there. Enough of my sob story though.

The place is amazing. I've seen the films, the pictures, the documentaries, etc., but one is never quite prepared to really grasp how amazingly huge those trees really are until one actually sees them. And a few of those trees are older than Jesus--some maybe even older than Socrates or Julius Caesar. Most all of them over 200 feet (of which there are quite a few) are older than gunpowder, the Crusades, the discovery of the New World, Azteca, the Ming Dynasty, Islam, the Enlightenment, and the printing press. And these are trees. It's a great place to feel small and temporal. Pictures can be found here.

But before you think I've gone all hippie, know that my friend enjoyed driving his new V-8 Audi on the roads in and out of the place. I was jealous, but glad that he got more out of it than me since I was the one crashing at his place. What made me more jealous was the fact that he lives an hour or less from this place--and a shade over an hour from my beloved Monterey--whereas I live an hour away from......Casa Grande.

I had salmon with a Singapore curry sauce served in a banana leaf for dinner later that night! And it was under 20 bucks! The weather was beautiful. The women were beautiful. The scenery was beautiful. The gas stations sucked, but they are gas stations--they are supposed to suck. People there don't dine on hot dogs and taquitos with a half-gallon of orange Fanta to cleanse their palate, so they don't need nice gas stations. Instead, they eat things like salmon with a Singapore curry sauce served in a banana leaf and cleanse their palate with fine wine or gourmet coffee or ginger lemonade or, perhaps, just plain frickin' water, but it's good. godDAMMit is it good.

If that makes them snobs, fine, let me be a snob with them. But I would submit that they just know a shitload more about living well than most. No wonder they have all the money, talent, and innovation. If you were a gifted person sitting on a multi-million dollar idea, where would you want to live?

OOPS!

Er, uh....OOPS! Big phukin, uhhh...OOPS! What can you say about this other than, well, you know?

As Schneier quotes from the article:

[H]ow did an illegal alien from Lebanon who was working as a waitress at a shish kabob restaurant in Detroit manage to slip through extensive security background checks, including polygraphs, to land highly sensitive positions with the nation's top law enforcement and intelligence agencies?

How indeed? Though, as a person who has worked in US Intelligence, it's not *that* hard to believe. Still very improbable, yes, but some of the cliche jokes about US Intelligence aren't that far off.

My favorite part (and why we in Military MI called the FBI stooges), is this:

Prouty, according to court documents, first entered the United States from Lebanon in 1989 on a one-year nonimmigrant student visa. After her visa expired she illegally remained in the country, residing in Taylor, Mich., with her sister and another individual. In order to stay in the country and evade immigration laws, she offered money to an unemployed U.S. citizen to marry her in the summer of 1990. But according to her indictment Prouty "never lived as husband and wife with her fraudulent 'husband' and the marriage was never consummated sexually."

A shish kabob waitress with ties to Hizbullah gets into the FBI and CIA with one of the most common ploys done in ANY country to get citizenship and what is considered noteworthy for the report is whether or not she slept with the guy. *That* is hard to believe. I would have had my ass shredded about 5 seconds after my superiors read that if I submitted it in a report. And I would have deserved it.

Shallow End of the Gene Pool Watch

This chick sounds fun to party with. This guy, not so much--has some anger issues, apparently.

One huge step closer to Creeeeeeepy

A cloned primate embryo is reported to have been successfully done.

Obama

First, I have been negligent in my posts--my apologies, just wrapped up in personal crap. Enough of that though.

I find myself still supporting Obama, but I am still far from enamored with him. I think that is a good thing though. Were I enamored of a candidate, there would have to be something wrong with me, the candidate, or both.

Obama is normally cool and calm in his demeanor. He is normally very gracious and courteous in his remarks. Somewhat sophisticated (though I think he holds back quite a bit in the campaign), forgivably cliched in his responses at times, but always rational and decent.

He doesn't throw his hands in the air or give a thumbs-up when meeting a crowd, he politely waves and bows--or just bows. He doesn't talk in the patronizing Clinton/Gore/Hillarah style of veeeeery sloooow woooooords as if we're retarded chimps that have to be taught about the dangers of fire. He doesn't prattle on about bumper sticker slogans or pickup trucks or butterflies or bears in the woods. And he seems so....honest. One gets the impression that he has a hypersensitive bullshit meter that he has worked very, very hard to temper (I really like that part--if I'm right--because it shows much more discipline than I have).

He is a politician, so he has to round the corners of some political stances, yes, but he is very honest about his childhood and early adulthood (notice how no one brings it up now that he's been honest, btw), he tells Black church leaders that there is a problem with homophobia in the Black community, he tells an anti-war Democratic base that there will likely be a bump in his defense budget the first year or two he is in office, he tells teachers unions that--though he would dismantle the No Child Left Behind Act--accountability is still a good aspect of it and that he will maintain that part of it.

He tells us that there is a terrorist threat, but we're fighting it the wrong way. That there are threats to us, but none unmanageable. And consistently tries to remind us that we really are a great nation capable of so much more than we want to give ourselves credit for. I truly, truly believe he sees the potential of America in the same spirit Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, TR, Truman, and JFK did. Not in the Hollywood way Reagan did, but in the true, rational, tempered, and beautifully sensible way of this:

"Look at us. We are the most powerful nation in the annals of History. We have a better way. We are the only country on earth founded by the Enlightenment. We can do more, with less, and better, than any country on earth not because we are that innately brilliant or capable, but because we are so much better equipped to do it. We are the lucky ones, but we must not only realize our luck--we must act upon our luck. The only demise foreseeable for us can come from within."

And with all the above that I like so much, it worries me a little. I don't know if it will sell well to the majority. And, even if he wins the nomination, I don't think he would win a large majority in a general election--though I do think he would win. He is just too much for so many. Like, love, hate, or dislike him, I doubt any would say that he doesn't represent a substantial change for the US. And people are often, and understandably, wary of that very thing. But what a change it could be.

An end to the baby-boomer psycho drama that has been going on since the Vietnam War, an entirely new bent on foreign policy not born of realpolitik or the Messiah, a reformation of American Liberalism that is not built upon the Great Society (Noam Chompsky be GONE!)... Ahhhh, a boy can dream.

More Bireli

I'm not even sure what this is. A critic once said that Bireli plays like he's hearing aliens speak to him while he's playing. This is a definite example of it. I've just never heard or seen anything quite like him before.

(UPDATE: Original source was unavailable--trying to fix that now, 11 November).

And so it Ends

Rug, a dog that went from my dad to me, then to me and my brother, then to my brother, was finally put down. My brother has a good post on it here. Before my dad got her in 1992 or '93 (not sure), she was in an abusive home and my dad semi-voluntarily rescued her (the woman he was dating at the time worked in a home for abused mothers and the dog had to go someplace, so...).

Anyway, I never liked that dog--sometimes hated her guts--and wanted to, literally, kill her on more than one occasion. Freak weirdo of a mammal that cost me more money than I even want to think about (in the thousands). And, as you might imagine, she wasn't overly fond of me either. But, strangely, she was never really afraid of me or timid around me unless she knew I was mad. More strangely still, until her death she would always come up to me with a doggy smile and say hey. It was never overly affectionate, but more of a "Hey dude, what's up?" without really being too terribly interested in the answer.

I guess we just understood each other. And, if we were ever alike in anything, we realized that we can be annoying pains in the ass and that we deserve to get put in our place for it sometimes. It doesn't mean we have to hate each other afterwards. There's just not enough time for that.

JR Don't Love Me

No reply from JR Dunn as yet. Perhaps he's dismissed me as a hippie-freak-Lefty or, prolly more like it, he just doesn't want to spend the time or effort necessary to reply to just one person via email who might be a hippie-freak-Lefty. Whatever the case, I promise to give him an audience should he choose to respond further. But until then, I'm gonna keep on preaching that hippie-freak-Lefty blather that torture is wrong. Torture is stupid. Torture is un-American. Torture is repulsive to many conservatives as well (and I am no goddammed hippie), and that America is, indeed, guilty of torturing people--some even to death.

I'm sure that latter part gives JR pause as well, but I guess we will have to wait and see.

A Conversation about Torture II

As I mentioned in the post below, J.R. Dunn took immediate care to respond to my "Letter to the Editor" regarding his article. I won't post his response verbatim because I don't have his permission and, at this point is not public--even to all three of my readers (ok, all two). But, in essence, he asked me how the likes of Khalid Sheik Muhammed are covered by the Geneva Conventions. Fair question. My response, in full and overlong though it might be, is below:

"Wow! I wasn't expecting a response at all, much less this prompt of
one. In all honesty, thank you for your attention to this.


The short answer is that Khalid Sheik Mohammed, technically, is not
(or at least should not be) covered by the Geneva Conventions--you are right. Ideally, he should be tried by U.S. Federal law and New York State law for mass murder and a number of other charges. I still don't think torture should be condoned under those circumstances either and, as an investigator who has performed a number of interrogations, realize that if you simply scare the hell out of guy long enough he will tell you that it was him and Liberace that really stabbed Julius Caesar on the steps of the Roman Senate if that's what you want him to say. It doesn't make it necessarily so.


That aside, I wasn't talking about just him. I was talking about enemy combatants met on the the field of battle by our Armed Forces. If this is a war on terror, and I believe it is, then we should abide by the laws of war and we should abide by the Army field manual. Further, as a moral, rational, and traditional imperative, we should abide by the standard set down by George Washington during our Revolutionary War and treat enemy combatants humanely.


Which brings us back to the Sheik. If he was being held in custody by our military, (1) how was he not, at that time, considered an enemy combatant, and (2) if he was, why would our military not be subject to the same rules it has observed since George Washington, much less the Geneva Conventions?


Then General Washington wrote, after we had captured 1000 Hessians in the Battle of Trenton in 1776, "Treat them with humanity, and let them have no reason to Complain of our Copying the brutal example of the British Army in their treatment of our unfortunate brethren..."


And, yes, piling on, John Adams wrote to his wife in a letter in 1777 about the subject "I know of no policy, God is my witness, but this — Piety, Humanity and Honesty are the best Policy. Blasphemy, Cruelty and Villainy have prevailed and may again. But they won't prevail against America, in this Contest, because I find the more of them are employed, the less they succeed."


President Lincoln Lincoln instituted the first formal code of conduct for the humane treatment of prisoners of war in 1863. Lincoln's order forbade any form of torture or cruelty, and it became the model for the 1929 Geneva Convention. Dwight Eisenhower made a point to guarantee exemplary treatment to German POWs in World War II, and Gen. Douglas MacArthur ordered application of the 1949 Geneva Convention during the Korean War, even though the U.S. was not yet a signatory. In the Vietnam War, the United States extended the convention's protection to Viet Cong prisoners even though the law did not technically require it.


To stray from this tradition and this law is, in my view, not only harmful to the war effort and unintelligent, but a betrayal of our traditions and the beginning of becoming like our enemy.


Thanks again for your attention to this.

Regards,

Travis"

A Conversation about Torture

I was pleasantly surprised to find that, much to his credit, J.R. Dunn is attentive not just to his readers, but to obnoxious ones like me as well. A recent article of his is titled "The 'Torture' Fraud of the Left." I found disagreement with it and sent a letter to the editor. He responded within minutes. Truthfully, I didn't even think he would have the ability to see it that quickly if he wanted to, but obviously he did and he challenged my letter.

I won't give his response in full unless he agrees to allow me (and I haven't asked as yet since I have no idea if this will continue), but I appreciate him taking the time to respond. So please read his article in full and I will post my letter to him below--grammatical errors and all.

"Sir,

Actually, torture has already been defined by the United Nations as:
"any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or
mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as
obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession,
punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is
suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a
third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind,
when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of
or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other
person acting in an official capacity."


Article3 of the Geneva Conventions prohibits "[v]iolence to life and
person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment
and torture; …outrages upon personal dignity, in particular
humiliating and degrading treatment."


Article 75 prohibits murder, "torture of all kinds, whether physical
or mental," "corporal punishment," and "outrages upon personal
dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, … and any
form of indecent assault."


The United States is a signatory to all the above. Further, after
WWII, the United States prosecuted Nazis that claimed they only
participated in vershaerfte Vernehmung--what translates, roughly, as
"sharp questioning" or "enhanced Interrogation"--using these
definitions of torture and articles in the Geneva Conventions. Why
not deal with the matter of law and torture as it exists on the books
now? If your argument is that we should withdraw from the Geneva
Conventions, fine, say so. But to say we are not in violation of them
is palpably wrong.


Lastly, if water boarding is not torture, why did the Khmer Rouge find it so useful? If prolonged sleep deprivation is not torture, why was it the preferred method of Stalin? Does it not give you pause to be defending them as well? Does being stripped naked and shackled to a metal bed in a stress position while in a chilled room and having water poured over one's head until shaking violently from hypothermia and then having to be immediately treated by a physician so one doesn't die not qualify as torture? Would you simply dismiss such things as "not commendable" if they happened to US citizens? And as for the "threat of death" being a necessary component of torture in your view, does the death of detainees while in our captivity not prove to you that sometimes the threat of death was, indeed, quite real?"

More theft from Andrew

I need to start reading more blogs, but Andrew Sullivan got a hold of another interesting one here:

Dig that Ron Paul

The cat raises well over $3 million in one day. He's now passed the one day record of Mitt Romney and is well on his way to the $12 million goal by Dec 31st. Expect a blitz of advertising in New Hampshire and, possibly, a serious dent in the polls/primaries. If he can come away with double digits in the NH primary, the GOP will have to take him quite seriously, in my opinion. It could be the beginning of a true erosion of the religious "cultural conservatives" in the GOP and force the GOP to address what have been traditional conservative principles and their betrayal of them.

I should say that I am no sort of conservative and I disagree with much of Ron Paul's platform--in fact, a very large amount of it. But I would much, much, rather have Goldwater conservatives push the GOP platform than self-righteous evangelicals. More importantly, Ron Paul shows that one can be a conservative and anti-war, conservative and a civil libertarian, and conservative and tolerant. It has always been that way, but the last 10 years or so of American conservativism would lead one to believe otherwise.

Though rather sad to think of now, believing in civil liberties (to include Habeus Corpus, of course), a non-aggressive foreign policy, and a deep reverence for the Constitution used to be things American liberals and American conservatives didn't have to negotiate on--they were just a given. The Cold War did challenge that common ground--particularly the Vietnam War--but it seems to be eroding at a terrible, and frightening, rate now. Here's hoping we will move closer to those days of common ground again. And, paradoxically, perhaps Paul will help the Democrats grow at least a few vertebra in a new defense of civil liberties vs. capitulating to the Decider every time they have to show a spine.

The Humiliation of W

For all the attacks on President Bush's intelligence or competence--normally emphasis on the former--I would submit that the more appropriate attacks are on competence. To attack his intelligence (or lack thereof) is an easy attack and, well, not very intelligent in my view. I doubt very much that any of us can imagine Reagan or Eisenhower or FDR reading Plutarch in their den for inspiration in their forthcoming memoirs yet, regardless of your view of them, they were quite effective presidents. They were competent, they were not morally lazy, and they took their jobs seriously.

Now we see something like this. A tragicomic retelling of what has been known for some time--our CIA knew *nothing* of any accuracy regarding Saddam's WMD capacity. And the most powerful nation on earth being played the fool by a shit-can engineer looking for a green card. Is it all Bush's fault? Of course not. Is it all, ultimately, his responsibility? Of course it is. And that's the point.

Our current President has left behind nothing in the way of legacy. Nothing--except for failure. Nixon was, quite fairly, reviled by many and left the Presidency in shame. But he left behind an all-volunteer Army, took us off the antiquated gold standard, started the Environmental Protection Agency, normalized relations with China and initiated detente. Clinton was actually, legally, impeached but left behind a budgetary surplus, stopped the genocide in the former Yugoslavia, lifted millions out of poverty, pushed through the crime bill that was Giuliani's real platform for success, founded NAFTA, and reformed welfare (Giuliani's second platform of success, btw). One can have many disagreements with the former two presidents mentioned, and I have my share--even with the latter legacies they left behind. But it cannot be denied that they left something lasting.

W has left nothing of value. Nothing. He is, as Bill Maher has said, a disaster that walks like a man. His legacy is of suspending Habeus Corpus, of authorizing torture, of making America not a symbol of freedom and democracy, but a symbol of bungling neo-colonialism. A nation that spies on its citizenry, treats its great Constitution as an obstacle, the antithesis of the Enlightenment, the nightmare of Thomas Paine and George Orwell. We have become a lugubrious joke. We have played into the hands of the short-sighted, and dishonest, cynics that claim America is a collection of superstitious dimwits that worship only money in the end and care very little for anything beyond our own borders unless it makes us richer in the short term.

The aforementioned cynics saw only our potential weaknesses. And this President is the manifestation of all them. A morally lazy, elitist, superstitious plutocrat with no sophistication, no vision--a man-child that was not disciplined appropriately as a child or as an adult.

But much more than the humiliation that W may or may not feel, W is our humiliation as a nation. And we will long be apologizing for him. Or at least I hope so.

Why I could never be a programmer

This thing is awesome (at least to me), but it took three months to create. I just don't have that kind of patience.


Animator vs. Animation by *alanbecker on deviantART

Iraq's New Fighting Force

I can only hope this is staged: