Sunday, April 27, 2008

Dancing Pigs!

Isn't it amazing! Somehow, in the state of California, more than a million (that's 1,000,000) people, mostly voters, mostly registered, have been talked into agreeing with the proposition that it's somehow important to prevent Those People from getting married. I really don't understand the need for this, but I've heard that, mostly, the people who unabashedly admit they think this is important, say that if they can get married, then my marriage becomes somehow worthless. Of course, it's entirely up to you to set a value on your marriage. I have a problem though with the idea that it's therefore incumbent upon you, dear voter, to determine the value of other people's marriage. Of course, given that "Marriage Is A Sacrament"; I think it's probably unconstitutional to make any laws "regarding the establishment of religion" (Article 1, U.S. Constitution; the "Establishment Clause"). If on the other hand marriage is a civil act (subject to state regulation), then anti-discrimination laws must apply. Of course, anti-discrimination is generally taken to mean "Thou Shalt Not Discriminate Against Me Or My Friends"; you are free to discriminate against any despised minorities you choose.
Now, what I'm really wondering is just how it is that so many people are brought to the idea that it's a good thing to pass a law (in this case a Constitutional Amendment for gossake!) to regulate not me (of course), but others. Am I mistaken in the belief that there are violent and deadly events going on around the world? At a time when your sons and daughters are being shipped out to places where they'll be shot at and bombed, should you really be spending your time making sure that your gay sons and daughters can't marry their lovers?
Well, there is a reason why H.L.Mencken called it the Boobocracy. It seems they really don't pay any attention toThe Man Behind The Curtain
Of course, Passing A Law is certain to work. Sort of reminds me, though, of the old admonition: Don't teach a pig to dance - it wastes your time - and it annoys the pig.

Friday, April 25, 2008

Naughty!

A Question: How long have there been people on Planet Earth? Some would say since that hypothetical "mitochondrial Eve", some 200,000 years ago. Others would say since the Biblical Adam (oh, and Eve, too).
In either case, or maybe some other case altogether, one thing seems certain. To me, at least. I am willing to bet large sums of money that, ever since there have been humans, humans have been having sex! If you'll grant my premise, then you'll not be too surprised to discover that the governments attempts to tell people NOT to have sex haven't ahh, had the impact the Pious Frauds of the Religious Right (right in the sense of political orientation, NOT in the sense of Being Correct) have claimed the Abstinence Only school programs would have. Yes; in spite of all those wise things we are telling them, ...teens are still having sex!
Just imagine! In My Day, teenagers didn't have sex until mom & dad said it would be okay. You remember those days, right?

Thursday, April 24, 2008

Ready For Combat

Have you noticed how all the Generals and Colonels and assorted purveyors of the military propaganda line are seemingly always dressed up and prepared to do combat?

Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno

Here's the redoubtable deputy military commander in Iraq ready for combat! Standing tall, in an air conditioned room, next to a computer desk. Complete with flak jacket (something that seems to be hard to find among the privates and corporals who actually patrol among the explosive devices and rocket fire in Bagdhad. I've noticed that the generals who appear on the TeeVee, in briefing rooms, and on cable teevee news shows, wear the same sort of uniform. Showing their manliness in the face of the deadly questions fired at them by the inquisitors at Fox "News" (Motto: We Report; You Decide - always delivered with a straight face). With such a focus on the public image of the warrior/defender, the image rather than the substance, it's no wonder the current military adventuring is managing to lose not one, but two wars - simultaneously!

Monday, April 21, 2008

Pray...

For Peace
'"God of peace, bring your peace to our violent world," the pope prayed...', during his visit to Ground Zero Does anybody still think that's going to work? Popes (among others) have been praying for peace as long as there's been a pope in Rome. That is to say, ever since 1376. Or perhaps 1417. Before that, for some time, the pope, being a creature of the French King, was bunkered up in Avignon. This interregnum includes some historical (or mythological) events like the Knights of the Temple, the Holy Grail and, of course, Friday the 13th.
At any rate, here's the current pope praying for peace. I guess he's heavily invested in the proposition that he can persuade God to do what seems to be pretty much the impossible. Seeing as how there has been as near to no peace in the years since 1376 (or 1417), in spite of a helluva lot of prayers, why does anybody think this is going to work now?

Friday, April 18, 2008

Once upon a time

there was a dear little chicken named

Chicken Little


One morning as she was scratching in her garden, a pebble fell off the roof and hit her on the head.
"Oh, dear me!" she cried, "the sky is falling. I must go and tell the King," and away she ran down the road.
Well, as we all know, the sky wasn't falling!
But last year, Chicken Little was hit again. This time she was hit by a huge rise in energy prices.
"Oh, dear me!" she cried, "we're out of energy. I must go and tell the President," and away she ran down the road.
Well, as we will soon find out, we're not out of energy. We're just running a little short of energy to waste.
Now this year, Chicken Little is being hit again. This time she is being hit by a huge rise in food prices.
"Oh, dear me!" she cries, "we're out of food. I must go and tell the President," and away she ran down the road.
Well, as we will soon find out (again), we're not out of food. We just turned a little too much food into energy.
But next year, Chicken Little will be hit again. This time she will be hit by a huge worldwide drought.
"Oh, dear me!" she'll cry, "we're out of water. I must go and tell the President," and away she ran down the road.
Well, as we will soon find out, this time Chicken Little is right! We squandered the water from our rivers, our lakes, our fossil water supplies. Came to rely on "normal precipitation", rain coming at the right time in the right amount. Just where and when we wanted it. So we could grow more grains to feed out cattle, our pigs, and our cars. Now, we aren't really running out of water; in fact we're going to be bailing out our cities for all we're worth. We'll be up to our asses in water - salt water. Just as the Ancient Mariner said: Water, water, everywhere, nor any drop to drink.
There's a great irony here - but I'm not at all sure what it is.

Wednesday, April 16, 2008

Like Changing Deckchairs...

On The Titanic.
As the UK Daily Telegraph and the New York Times, among others, have been reporting, it's getting a lot more expensive to eat! Also, more expensive to drive. The people with money, of course, have options. Choices. The people who live on, or below, the margin, the ones who never had to worry about the cost of gasoline, because they had no gas tank to put it in, the people who mostly just worried about where the next meal was coming from; they have no choice to make.
After a remarkably short period of blind denial, some among us are seeing that the idea of replacing one source of hydrocarbons (petroleum) with another (grain crops) is, as Professor John Beddington, Britain's chief science adviser, says:
"Deeply Stupid".
Just a guess here, but given the desire of people to have the world work the way they want it to, the professor is likely soon to be the Former Chief Science Adviser. Consider, for instance the opinion of Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, called the recent criticism of ethanol by foreign officials “a big joke.” The Senator from Corn pretends to believe that we should place the blame for the increasing cost of food squarely where it belongs: on God (drought in Australia), or the Chinese (eating too much meat!). I think the original pronouncement of Professor Beddington probably applies here. It seems quite obvious to me that the reasonable thing to do, just as in the case of Global Warming, is to change the things that are within your power to change. Blaming God is not generally an effective measure. But, as the first President Bush put it years ago now, "We Want People To Conserve Energy, But We Don't Want Them To Change Their Lifestyle." Well. Yes. Of course. That's sure to work.
In sum; changing the source of your hydrocarbon supply is about as effective as changing deck chairs on the Titanic. It won't change the outcome of the Iceberg-Titanic Interaction.

Saturday, April 12, 2008

So Intent!

Have you wondered lately...
Why the administration is so intent on forcing Iraq to remain a single undivided entity - while seeming to encourage the Balkan States to continuously fragment into smaller and smaller states; to the point almost of becoming a series of tribal areas?
Two possibilites suggest themselves: a.) Oil, which Iraq has, and the former Yugoslavia has not, or, b.) the singleminded intention of George W. Bush to get his way, regardless of how many dead Iraqis it takes.
Possibly, the President is intent on having it His Way, while his cronies are focused more on the oil, and the fattening effect of controlling oil on the pocketbooks of their friends. After all, we don't all have to have the same reason for the incredibly moronic actions we are pursuing overseas...

CLOSED!

Salmon fishing closed... As reported in the San Francisco Chronicle this morning;
Our redoubtable Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is proposing to spend the sum of "about $5.3 million" for salmon restoration projects. Gee! Thats about the same amount the state of California spends yearly filling the bay waters with the fish that prey on juvenile salmon as they (try) to make their way from the remnants of the Sacramento River system to the Pacific. Perhaps the millions of salmon eaten yearly by the intrusive Striped Bass might better be allowed to return to the ocean, to grow and mature and perhaps return to spawn. Growing more

salmon


only to feed them to the

Bass

seems to be an exercise in futility. But then, no more futile than to try to get the state to leave enough water in the rivers to support the native fish populations.

This after two decades of "management" of the Salmon Fishery by PFMC (Pacific Fisheries Management Council); a conglomerate of federal/state/local government entities and a fairly incredibly large number of groups known collectively as "stakeholders", there are no salmon left to catch. The council is tasked with a lot of decisions, among them setting of season, quota, and fishtaking methods for various fisheries. It's a somewhat contentious process, since what I manage to get allocated for my group is fish that you don't get allocated for your group. I consider the PFMC to be at fault for a lot of the problems, while acknowledging that there's a lot of factors they are forbidden to touch. Like the farmers who break into the pumps and take water that was allocated to fish (yes, fish do need water to survive). Like the Southern California water interests whose importance is conditional on their ability to guarantee plush green lawns throughout the arid southland. And face it: there are more people in Los Angeles who want a green lawn than there are who want a Salmon Steak for dinner.
At any rate, here's what PFMC said. Closed:

1. Sacramento Basin recreational fishery allocation: Closed to retention of adult salmon.
2. Klamath River recreational fishery allocation: 22,500.
3. Klamath tribal allocation: 27,000.
Cape Falcon to Humbug Mt.
Closed in 2008 (C.9).
In 2009, the season will open March 15 for all salmon except coho. This opening could be modified following Council review at
its March 2009 meeting.
Humbug Mt. to OR/CA Border (Oregon KMZ)
Closed in 2008 (C.9).
In 2009, the season will open March 15 for all salmon except coho. This opening could be modified following Council review at
its March 2009 meeting.
OR/CA Border to U.S./Mexico Border
Closed.

Remember when they used to say:
"Give a man a fish - feed him for a day; Teach a man to fish - feed him for a lifetime."
How soon the endless bounty runs out.

Wednesday, April 02, 2008

They Just Won't Leave Us Alone

Soon, we won't be able to avoid the annoying sound of people talking - either to their Mobile Phone, or (as I tend to do) to their Invisible Friend. I like this commentary: Keep planes free from mobile phones, from Timesonline. My response was (other than thinking "Right On!") -
For those who remember when the BIG QUESTION was: "Smoking Or Non?"; it's time for the ticket people to start asking "Talking Or Non?". For just a while, when the subway here in Bangkok was new, mobile phones worked (sort of) in the stations, but blinked out when the train entered the tunnel. It was loads of fun to watch people confusedly saying "helloah... helloah" and peering at their handsets, wondering what had happened. The ever-helpful MRT has since added service throughout. Bummer!

Another reason to be Afraid - be Very Afraid!: Go "Sniff" Yourself. Apparently, Useful Networks - truly a name for the Newspeak Dictionary - can now let your "friends" (and employer) keep track of your location. One Brian Levin, truly a creepy guy, says this is a "fun way" to stalk people. He also says, "Privacy is paramount" (another one for the Ninteen Eighty-Four Newspeak Dictionary; and if you want, you can "You can ‘sniff’ yourself"!
This wonderful tool for stalkers is, of course, brought to you courtesy of

Liberty Media

Tuesday, April 01, 2008

As Long As...

More is the be-all and end-all of existence; there will be no effective steps taken to alleviate human impact on climate.
"Cloth bags instead of plastic, lights out for one hour... What else can be done to help cool down global temperatures?...", writes the Bangkok Post. Now, there are a lot of things that can be done to reduce the impact of human activity on the environment, but turning off a few lights for a miniscule (0.0115% of the time) part of the year is definitely not one of them. Not turning the lights on in the first place would be somewhat better. However, considering that almost all lighting is intended not to aid people in finding their way in the dark, but rather is intended to showcase products for sale, it's just not in the cards that marketers will consider giving up their profits, nor consumers their shopping opportunities.
The latest dog-and-pony show for the display of concern for the environment is now going on in Bangkok. Those who have and those who wish to have are arguing about fake alternatives in means and methods of dealing with the disaster (always set for Sometime In The Future) that is the looming Climate Change train wreck. A prominent proposal, favored not only by the have-not nations, but by the have-nations who still have forested land, is for other governments to pay them an allowance (read: bribe) for continuing to have forests. Reading between the lines, it appears that the idea is actually to give more to those who cut down the trees and then plant new trees. Somehow, each time the "forest" is replanted, plantation-like, it aids in Greenhouse Effect mitigation. It doesn't, actually, but remember, we're working on symbol here, never substance. As part of the consumerist-capitalist combines effort to obfuscate and confuse, consider that the very real difference between reduction and reduction of rate of increase is no longer discernable in media news reporting. Too many examples to list here. I leave it as an Exercise For The Student to find such examples. Hint: Consider the IATA report headlined "US slump takes toll on passenger traffic". In which it sounds as if there are fewer people flying; reading further, we find that the "fewer flyers" in fact means that the increase in passenger traffic is only 4% or 5%, rather than the 7.4% the airlines hoped for. Indeed; a reduction of some 35%(!) (of the year-on-year increase in traffic).
As an aside; it's becoming pretty clear, I think, that the real interest in educating children today is to make sure they remain innumerate, just as their parents appear to be. Only this way can such obvious examples of the old saying "Figures don't lie; but liars figure" continue to appear to have the necessary Quality Of Truthiness. (Thank you Stephen Colbert)