The Frist For President Option

Well now we're getting to witness a bigtime dispute in the Senate. I think this is something we see more often in the junior side of the congress, but it's always nice to know that the Hon. Sen's can mix it up too.
The stuff I'm seeing in the news tells me, unsurprisingly, that there's little interest in considering the difference (a major one, to me) between when the president nominates someone to serve in the administration and when he nominates someone to serve in the judiciary. These are, or used to be, two separate-but-equal branches of the U.S. Govt. I think there are some among our leaders who don't get that. Or, there are some among our leaders who like to make noise and light and smoke and hope we don't look behind the curtain. But then, the Hon. Tom DeLay is probably not yet evolved as far as most of us. He's certainly no argument for Intelligent Design. There, I finally got a chance to use that one.
So, I have to agree with those who say that the president has the right to appoint his own "employees". They're really our employees, but he's the manager, after a fashion, of our executive branch. I have come to the point where I pretty much assume that anyone the current president nominates is probably unfit for the position, but then that's my opinion of the manager of the executive branch as well. As a sort of philosophical/social/governing principle, the presidents direct employees should be his to choose unless they're well on the road to being certifiable (in the bad sense). Case in point: John Bolton. Not yet certifiable, as far as I can tell. I suspect he's just a few quarts of Kentucky Mash away from rehab, but 'til then, let the president inflict the guy on the UN. His prerogative.
About the judicial branch. The independent judiciary that causes Fox "News" people and others of that ilk to foam at the mouth: the appointees ought not to be the president's to appoint in the same sense as the executive appointees. I even considered advocating getting the judges to appoint the judges. That, I suspect would be replacing like with like pretty much forever. Eventually the judicial branch would be pretty much a fossil. Instead of being populated with, it sometimes seems, fossils. So, let us not tinker with the original modus. Let the president and the senate do the appointing. I think though, that the two other branches, executive and legislative, should be co-equal in staffing the judicial branch.
As to how the senate should rule itself in vetting presidential nominees, I confess I have no clue whatsoever. My preference would be that everybody is always approved by consensus. Actually, by consensus among us all: president, congress, court, and even us day laborers. That won't happen, so let's admit that we need to have a representative system of governance. Let the representatives represent. Wish they'd do a quieter job of it.
A little less posturing, and a little more governing, guys!

Happy Birthday To Me!

This blog is one year old!

Some numbers in the news indicate that there are some seven million bloggers (thus, some seven million blogs) in what has cleverly been called "Blogspace". Maybe 7.1 million since I started writing this. Given the nature of folk, especially of geeks, that probably means there are some millions of orphan blogs - weblogs that got started, then abandoned. All in all, this is probably a good thing. Since I started posting here, I find myself embroiled in isssues of coherence. I am prone to interrupt my plain old ordinary thinking and begin trying to structure my thoughts in blogspeak. I think this is not a good thing. This morning, as I was beginning the day, I realized I'd been posting here for a year, and immediately thought about how I could say something about how I'd been posting for a year. Talking about talking. Thinking about thinking. Much in the way that, when holding a camera, one changes from being a viewer of scenes to being in a sense a servant of one's camera, looking for photographic capturability (or words to that effect).
I have a funny feeling that bloggers (not necessarily writers, but bloggers at least) end up somehow feeling impelled to go global with their thoughts. Say something cosmic. At least for me, I wind up adding more and more sidebars to whatever original topic I started with. Mixing my metaphors, so to speak.

And I'm not alone. Check out this site:

Mickey Kaus' commentary

Micky Kaus is probably Blogger One in blogspace. He even has his URL on Drudge Report. Though, if Matt Drudge considers himself to be a blogger, perhaps he is Blogger1. Or, perhaps we have already progressed to metaBlogging. I don't know. Here, you see, I've fallen into my own mixed metaphor.
So, while my blog has not yet become an orphan - Happy Birthday To Me!

The Ministry of Disinformation

According to an article posted by the Associated Press in todays paper, the US is warning that the increase in bombings and killings in Iraq is a "desperate attempt ... to discredit the newly formed Iraqi government." Also some words about "mostly directed against innocent Iraqi civilians", and "failing attempts". According to the body count (We Don't Do Body Counts: Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, U.S. Army, 2004), the numbers show fifteen Iraqi soldiers and 5 civilians. The American army spokesman can't count, apparently. Or else he's in the grip of the governments disinformation campaign.
The campaign that makes claims like, for instance: "Democracy Is On The Move."
Claims like: The Iraqi government is a democratic institution, where in reality every job in the government is allocated based on the religious or ethnic identity of the aspirant. That kind of government used to be called a theocracy. But then, the theocracy in Washington, D.C. thinks it's a democracy.
Claims like: The Iraqis have a right to choose their own destiny." As opposed to the destiny being dictated by Halliburton, et. al.
Claims like: "It was a tough decision, but I had to take it." (Tony Blair, British PM, 2005). Where tough, in this case means Really Stupid". PM Blair proudly announces that he made the wrong decision, but it was all right, because it was very hard on his brain.
Claims like: "The Iraqi people are beginning to see the benefits of a free society." (George W. Bush, United States President, 2005). Nobody asked George what, in his opinion, those benefits were.
It's really too bad that Paul Wolfowitz found new employment at the World Bank. He could have made better use of his talents as the Minister of Disinformation. The government needs a higher class of disinformation, and Wolfowitz is full of it. So is the president, but he already has a job in the government.

What Am I Missing?

I heard this morning that President Bush, not a deep thinker, I am beginning to think, is proposing a modification to his storied Energy Plan.. In order to "reduce dependence on foreign energy sources", the addition to the old plan is as follows:

A.

Build oil refineries on empty military bases.

B.

Import more oil for the refineries to process.

With thinking like this, it is no wonder that the administration has been fighting the courts for years (courts full of unchristian activist judges, no doubt) to keep the identity of the contributors to the original "Plan" secret.

As a way to reduce dependence on foreign oil suppliers, this kind of proposal ranks right up there with Richard Nixon's "Secret Plan To End The War".

Giant Turkey: First Flight.

Yesterday was First Flight for the Airbus A-380,

also known as the Giant Turkey. Prelude to a year or more of test flights. It's big enough, but probably not ugly enough, to qualify for legendary status. As I remarked a while ago ( ), I don't think there's any airport in the world that can get 800-plus people, all wanting to go to the same place, through security in less than forty eight hours. With the turkey forced to wait at the gate for that long, profits are likely to be a lot less fat than the aircraft.


Its competition, the Boeing 787

(Boeing is almost out of X's for their 7X7 series; what will they do then?) Dreamliner, is much prettier, but is it big enough? It appears that the tag "fuel efficient" will be a pretty good thing for the plane.
I have to confess a personal preference for large planes, but with few passengers. Also, nonstop flights. The idea of flying from hub to hub to hub, because it's more convenient for the airline and who-gives-a-rat-about-the-convenience-of-the-passengers, upsets me deeply. I vote for the nonstop flight aboard a quiet uncrowded plane.
Here's hoping!

Now the Spanish have gone and done it!

Spain!
First, they opted out of George W. Bush's Iraqi war. Now, they are allowing gays to marry!
I guess they have decided to adopt the motto Make Love Not War, an American saying from the Vietnam war period. During George's drinking years. Perhaps that's why he doesn't recall it.

I think George prefers the motto Oh! What A Lovely War. Actually, it's the title of a stage play, made into a movie in 1969. Also during the president's drinking years. He probably doesn't remember it either. The title is a just the littlest bit ironic, since it shows the generals of WW I having a great time, savoring the power, the prestige, the fame, the fortune. All the while the troops are fulfilling their designation of Cannon Fodder, dying by(literally) the millions at the western front. It's difficult to follow of course, since it's a British film, but it may still have instructive value today, more's the pity.

A more recent movie with some thrilling (well, chilling) war scenes, seeming almost to be more about the Iraq war than about WW I, A Very Long Engagement is well worth viewing. It's French, naturally.

Can't seem to find an American war movie that isn't just a John Wayne movie at heart. Well, except for Saving Private Ryan, which has been banned from viewing as being too violent! Don't want to have violence on our flatscreen teevee now, do we! OhNo! Keep it confined to the countries we invade and occupy.


I see I've wandered from the initial topic a bit.
Originally I just wanted to inquire if President Bush is worried that the Spanish are going to destroy his marriage just the way he claims allowing an American citizen to marry his boyfriend (or, to marry her girlfriend) will.
Personally, I think divorce destroys more marriages than marriages do.
But then, I'm not married.

Crappy Engineering...

Your Mobile Phone - the ultimate in technology gone mad!

To begin: The physical handset is totally wrong! Look at handset A. It's upside down! Try to use this device as it is currently designed. Try to key in a number. Better yet - try keying in a text message. Remember, the cool people all key SMS (Short Message Service) text one-handed. For a rightie like me w-x-y-z-9, or worse yet, {all-the-shift-number-key-special-characters-plus-0}, create a huge risk of dropping the device. Causing portential breakage or worse yet complete and utter humiliation

Now look at handset B. The keys are much much easier to reach. Additionally, the display is now in the palm of the hand, shaded from the blinding tropical sun.

So, why has the original handset been engineered in such a crappy fashion?


Now as to the functionality:

Things you can do!

1. Audio (Sound): You can make or recieve a phone call. Yes, you can still do this, though you'll probably get a message just as you do when calling from a fixed phone. Still, this is a desirable function in a mobile phone. In addition to using the mobile phone as a phone, you can: Download and use a crappy little "polyphonic ringtone" - typically a clip from a movie theme song, to replace the sound of a ringing phone. Download and use a crappy little "ringback tone". This is a sound that someone who calls your mobile will get to hear. It's not so that a caller can rejoice in hearing your musical selection; it's so that your caller can be impressed with what a hi-tech kinda guy you must be, to know how to pay money to get your phone to make a sound you personally will never get to hear. You can download crappy little music files you can listen to on your crappy little earbuds.
All in all - your phone can now a guarantee that neither you nor any innocent bystander will ever have to endure a quiet environment again.


2. Video (Pictures): With the wonderful new capabilities of todays handset you can: Snap a crappy little picture with your crappy little camera. You can display the crappy little snapshot on your crappy little LCD screen. You can record a crappy little video clip with your CL camera. Playback the CL video clips on your CL screen. Dowload movie shorts, either from your computer, or from your crappy little internet connection. Market research seems to indicate that the most popular movie dowloads are about eight minutes long, and are soft-porn lapdances and the like. Coming soon - a teevee reciever. Now you will be able to watch Fox News, or better still, Survivor-Somewhere-Or-Another (or any of the other crappy little virtual reality shows).
Imagine being able to watch Lord of the Rings on your CL screen - you should be able to get about one Orc-Per-Pixel.

3. Data (Data): You can store phone numbers. This is also a desirable function. Additionaly, you can send or recieve crappy little text (SMS )messages. Almost as soon as you can do this, you probably will begin getting spam messages (spaSMS). You cannot block these messages! Your handset has within its bowels (several layers down in the menu system) a crappy little 4-function calculator. You also have things like MS Office, so you can create crappy little spreadsheets using your crappy little keypad. Or you can create a crappy little Word document, laboriously keying in your text. You can store your credit card information, to allow you to use your handset as a crappy little automatic purchase device. It will also broadcast your personal credit information to Bluetooth snoopers in your vicinity. It may also make the information available to Pharmers browsing your crappy little un-firewalled always-on internet connection. Which you can also use to send those CL snapshots and CL video clips to your friends from anywhere in the world. Or you can surf the net, using the crappy little browser on your crappy little LCD screen.

All In ALL, the modern 3G, or even the 2 1/2 G mobile phone represents convergence with a vengeance (convengeance?). An ill-assorted set of functions plastered together in an ill-designed box. Not to sound like a Luddite, but for the moment, I still prefer to use a camera for pictures, a videocam for videos, an iPod for music, a computer to compute.
I'll keep the phone for phoning.

Thank You

Pope JP The Great ---

Pope JP II has been interred. Something from Shakespeare comes to mind, but I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader. PJP II will be a tough act to follow. Perhaps the next pope won't even try - but don't bet on it.
THeres a lot of talk now about the possibility of a pope from Latin America, or perhaps from Asia, or perhaps even from Africa. But don't bet on it. Before his death, JP II hand-picked his successor, PJP III. He tipped it off by having

Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone announce the banning of The DaVinci Code, the first book to gain such a distinction in many years. Like earlier books on the Vatican List, sales are bound to soar; except pretty much everybody has already read the book. For the few who haven't read it, it presents a competing myth regarding the life of Jesus. Don't want to spoil it, so I won't say any more.
I wish the Church didn't have such a tin ear, though. It seems to have been made a requirement for all the media interviewees recalling the pope's life to remark on how much he "loved the young people". The Vatican should know better: when a squeaky-voiced pop star talks like that he gets arrested. As were a huge number of the pope's former employees; in spite of his insistence that they were above secular law. The love of JP II's priests for "the young people" was so prevalent, and so scandalous, that JP II finally had to give up on the idea of priestly immunity, and allow them to face prosecution in the secular courts.
Note: I don't think JP II "loved the young people" in any inappropriate way; I just think the comments about his "love for the young people" demonstrates that the Church hierarchy is in denial as to the extent that their employment policies attract a disproportionate number of sexually deviant "lovers of the young people" to the priesthood.
Perhaps Pope JP III will revisit the issues of celibacy and ordination of women. But don't bet on it.

Conscription Time?

The military is now finding itself unable to meet its quota of new hires.

"The war-strained all-volunteer U.S. military has a growing manpower problem and a cross-section of Washington policymakers has proposed a solution -- increase the size of the regular military by 30,000, 40,000 or even 100,000 or more." (AP, April 7)

The Pentagon spinners have been instructed to say this is because of the great economy made possible by George W. Bush's tax cuts leading to too many better opportunities for - ahem - draft-age men and women. I don't buy it for a moment. I think it's more a matter of the pool of available soldiers feeling some resistance to the idea of getting their asses shot off in a foreign land.
Due to the shortage of troops available to occupy the restive provinces of the New American Century, there is renewed talk of a draft. Filling the ranks of the military with conscriptees. Ironically,

Charlie Rangel (Congressman from NYC) introduced a bill in the congress to reinstate the draft (see my post 10/8/2004), though with a few changes. His actual purpose was to start a debate about the inherent inequity of sending a preponderantly poor and minority military to defend the wealth and privilege of the rich. Thus the irony. The reinstated draft may well bear the name of "the Rangel Act".
In any case, I say No Draft! Why should more Americans have to go overseas to protect our puppet governments? We're spending plenty of money to set them up; they should have to provide their own cannon fodder! A significant part of the $200,000,000,000-and-counting we have spent on Iraq has gone to creating an internal army. I say Sign 'Em Up! Make 'em U.S. Army auxiliaries. Like the Gurkhas of the British Empire, we can instill a myth-based sense of loyalty and eliteness. Teach 'em to look down on the "locals". Send them to Afghanistan, Syria, Iran (though geez, a new Iraq-Iran war, I donno), wherever else we want to pre-empt the attempt by another country militarize the way we already have. It worked for the Roman Empire for centuries. It worked for the British Empire for quite a while. Maybe it can work for the American Empire, too.
So, Sign 'Em Up!
Let's try to get some value for the money we've spent on our military adventuring. Something better than a few presidential photo-ops.

Flying: The old and the new

102 years of flight

On December 17, 1903, in Kittyhawk N. Carolina, Orville Wright flew about 100 meters in this aircraft. No one else has ever been able to get it off the ground.

Steve Fossett flew his Global Flyer around the world single handed nonstop on March 5-6-7, 2005

Question Time

Once again, I see, We Aren't Asking Enough Questions.

These questions, appearing in no particular order, aren't the life/death kind of questions. Just inquiries.

Here goes:

Why does "Russian" always appear next to (tennis madonna) Maria Sharapova's name? Look at her. Listen to her speak. Check out her residence address. She not only doesn't live in Russia, she doesn't even live in Georgia! In fact, she lives in Florida, next door to the United States. Is she getting a promotional fee from Russia for name placement?

Which is more environmentally damaging: a golf course or a cruise ship? If you answer this one, I'd appreciate it if you'd list the criteria you use to define "environmental damage", as this is a tricky subject.

Why does the government think paying more money to people who work is bad (wage inflation), but paying more money to defense contractors for missiles that don't work (star wars) is good?

Why does the President think it's a bad idea for Russia to sell military rifles to a South American democracy (Venezuela) but it's a good idea for the United states to sell military planes to a South Asian dictatorship (Pakistan)? Especially considering that the dictatorship is arguably the world's greatest proliferator of nuclear weapons today?

After the Vatican explained extensively why Pope John Paul II wasn't kept alive by application of "heroic measures", have the parents of Terri Schiavo decided the Pope was a murder victim like their daughter?

Given the predictions of rising sea levels, how long do you think it will be before Florida consists entirely of "the Florida Keys"? How many billions in federal tax dollars will be spent building dikes around Florida to try to hold back the Atlantic Ocean? Should we contract out the job to King Chanute? How much do you think he would charge?

How many people believe Paul Wolfowitz has actually changed his thinking from believing that poor people should be invaded and occupied, exhorted to pump cheap oil for America; to believing that poor people should be assisted to improve their lives?

How inept is the United States government in its imperial ambitions if they can't even get their puppet government in Iraq to select a parliamentary leadership?

If the United States succeeded in destroying every vestige of cocaine production in the entire world: how many cocaine addicts would get clean, how many would find another drug to get stoned on? How much tax money should we spend to do this? Or to try and fail to do this?

In the United States it's an article of faith (well, among some anyway) that Ronald W. Reagan "destroyed communism". It seems there's competition though. In Europe (well, in Poland certainly) it's an article of faith that Pope John Paul II "destroyed communism". Whose mythical description in the history books of 2050 C.E. do you think will carry the description Destroyer of Communism?

Do you suppose the Chinese are feeling a little screwed? Just when they can afford a car, they can no longer afford the fuel! In the long run this will probably be a GOOD THING, as it will save them from the kind of traffic jams they enjoy in Southern California.

Everyone Wants To Go To Heaven...

But Nobody Wants To Die...

Terri Schiavo has died. I don't know if it happened yesterday, or if it happened years ago. Apparently the doctors who examined her thought she was dead long ago. Judges who looked at the evidence of the doctors agreed. Tom DeLay disagreed. But then, Rep. DeLay is a thoroughly disagreeable man, many would say. Bill Frist disagreed. He is (was) of course, a doctor. Sufficiently skilled it seems to diagnose a persons condition from a photograph. Sort of like the shamans of the Phillipine Islands who perform magical cures by passing amulets over a sick persons picture. We selected a true gem when we put Dr. Frist in the U. S. Senate! Also, George W. Bush disagreed. He believes we should always "err on the side of caution when it comes to the life of an American." Not an Iraqi life, or an Afghan life, or, indeed, any Evildoer's life. Americans, of course cannot be Evildoers. "That's not Us; That's not What We Do." Everyone NOT an American appears to be either an Evildoer in George's mind, or at least an Evildoer Suspect. Except of course for his good friends Tony Blair and Vladimir Putin. Also, the Catholic Church disagreed. More about the church later, perhaps.
In what should seem bizarre, but has rather come to be expected, some number among those who favor life-at-any-cost are threatening to kill Michael Schiavo. And his lawyer. And a judge or two as well. With Tom DeLay enabling them with what sounds a lot like a Warning From God, or from God's Enforcer, violence is likely. But then, this is Florida. Remember the to-do about the little Cuban boy, Elian Gonzalez, who was eventually returned to his father in Cuba? How awful it was to allow his father to Abduct Him And Take Him To A Communist Country! Some said at the time that it was a sign of the End Of It All. Probably the same people who are saying that the "murder of Terri Schiavo is The Beginning Of The End."

The Pope is dying. May already be dead by the time I post this.
Aside: A remarkable statement on the TeeVee read "Heart failure: a signal that the cardiac system is failing."
Despite being somewhat retro, Pope John Paul II did affirm church dogma saying that heroic measures to sustain life (see Terri Shiavo, above) are not required. To illustrate, the Pope himself elected not to return to hospital. Perhaps he feared suffering the fate of Terri Shiavo.
Rather than fearing death, though change, especially when one has not seen even a picture of the future (even supposing one has read the Divine Comedy, or any number of religious writings) is always a little fearsome, some would say death should not be feared, but embraced. Seeing it is inevitable, that's probably a reasonable attitude.
Herewith, a quote. No, not Thanatopsis. Also, perhaps not very accurate. Though, since it is from the Greek, perhaps I can just say it's my own translation. Or, it would be, if I could read Greek.
"Do you think I have less divination that the swan? For swans, when they know they are dying, sing then louder than ever, not from fear or in pain, but in joy, knowing that they go to the God (Apollo, I think) they serve." Don't think divining rod here, think Spark Of Divinity, or soul. Attributed to Socrates by Plato.
Now, along with a fear of death, or of any unknown, there is also the fear of loss. There are millions (at least) of catholics and other christians who are feeling considerable fear, or at least a deep sense of loss, at the imminent passing of their personal link to their God. The Pope is thought by some to be the representative of God On Earth. He is believed to somehow have a better connection to the Lord than you or I do. I must confess that I am completely unable to comprehend an Almighty God that exists more in some places less in others. Is more attentive to some of His creatures, less so toward others.
Of course, I Could Be Wrong. God may have long ago adopted a modern management style; delegating some fucntions of His Universe to the Pope, delegating others (killing evildoers, perhaps) to George W. Bush. Still other jobs have been outsourced, I suppose, to various Imams, or to Osama bin Laden. And, of course, much is required of whoever currently occupies Jerusalem, where God is more immediately present than elsewhere in His creation.
As I say, I am completely baffled by the idea that this Almighty God needs people to help him in his labors. Especially, if you look at the efforts of his aides, to make certain that other people do as they are told.
By God, or by those who claim to speak in His Name?
Okay, I'm finished now...

Upstairs - but no Downstairs...

Back in the 1970's, when the rest of us were watching "Upstairs, Downstairs"...

it appears that George W. Bush was only watching "Upstairs,"...

Now George is travelling the country, touting his "ownership society". After a few years of investing in high-class stocks and bonds, he says, we will all be part of the ownership society. We'll have a nest-egg to leave to our children, who will be even richer!
To date, none dare call it what it is - the biggest Ponzi scheme in history. When we sell off our nest-egg for money to buy our food, pay our rent, and, most of all, pay our medicare premiums(!), who is going to redeem our bonds, buy our stocks? Why, our children! How much will they pay for these things? The more you make from your "personal account", the more they will pay to buy from you. Except for the brokers who skim their take from all this activity, who is going to make anything from the whole transaction?

When all is said and done, wealth is still created by work. Work in the classic physical science sense of expenditure of energy over distance, and also in the economic sense of making (or growing, or raising, or providing) something that has value for another. In short - someone has to do the work!
Thus, if there is no ",Downstairs" to perform work for "Upstairs," there won't be any wealth for anyone...

Try telling that to George...
This is in line with the misperception that I see voiced (see ... voiced...? Oh, well...) by some in the news. You know, when they insist that "our schools should teach everyone computer science." Donno about you, but I don't want a computer scientist to repair my car. Or my roof. Or grow my food. And I am a computer scientist!

Very Interesting!

You may call me naive but...
Isn't raising interest rates to counter inflation a little bit like fighting for peace or, ummm, fornicating for chastity?
"I want to keep prices down, so I'm going to increase the price of the Ultimate Commodity - money!"
Huh?
I understand the stated underlying principle is that increasing the cost of money - the cost of borrowing, that is - will supposedly dampen demand for 'consumer goods'.
Good Idea; Too Bad It's Wrong!
Raising interest rates to reduce demand would do very nicely in that mythical market: You know, the one where the marketplace is always right; everything is bought and sold at a price agreeable to both participants; supply meets demand; stocks always reflect the true value of corporations, etc. The very definition of a capitalist economy.
We don't have a capitalist economy though. Haven't for a long time now. What we have today is a consumerist economy. In this economy consumption, therefore spending, is driven primarily by two factors; need, and desire. In this economy increasing the cost of borrowing has very little to do with driving consumption. Raising the price of food, for instance, does nothing to reduce peoples' need for food. Raising the price of a luxury SUV does very little to reduce peoples' desire for one. Cost is at most a secondary factor here. Demand is largely inelastic. Expectation trumps reality.
What raising interest rates - will - do is to keep people (and institutions, and governments) buying, not selling, bonds. Despite the vice president's saying that US government bonds "aren't worth the paper they're printed on", they do represent an island of predictability in a sea of uncertainty. So far.

At the moment, what Alan Greenspan is doing is walking a tightrope (and doing it very well, thank you) of increasing interest rates in step with inflation, so as to make it appear that he is countering inflation, while disguising the inflationary influence his rate increases have on the economy.
The President thanks you, Alan Greenspan.

Brain-Dead Congress

Good morning Dear Reader!
I was going to say something about our idiot-child congress and their obsessive infatuation with 'roid-riddled baseballers, but...
All it would have amounted to would have been a few hundred words best summed up as: Who Cares!
Instead, there's this...
The president, George W. Bush, talks big about The Sanctity Of Marriage.
But!
When it comes right down to it, George believes his judgement regarding Terri Schiavo (a woman whom he has never met, either before or after her brain death) is superior to that of her husband. Also superior to her doctor's judgement, and the judgement of the courts in his own brother's state (well, perhaps he has reason for that)...
Now, George has long since taken over the High and the Low Justice throughout the world; arresting and imprisoning people from various countries without allowing them recourse to courts of law. In some cases torturing and killing them. Not with his own hands, mind; rather using his employees in the CIA and the DOD as surrogates.
It's okay though - each and every such person is an evildoer, or at least a potential evildoer, and deserves his fate. Besides, George is following the instructions of his Father to destroy them all. Not his father; his Father.
Moving ahead; George is now assuming the Droit de Seigneur; the right to dispose of his subjects in any way he sees fit. Some might say this is all an attempt to divert attention from the deadly morass of Iraq. I favor the idea that it's an attempt to displace discussions of the brain-dead congress with discussions of the now (through no fault of her own) needlessly notorious brain-dead Terri Schiavo. In any event, let us hope George doesn't decide to exercise this droit in the more classical sense - it would make Lady Laura awfully angry.
It might make George's Dominatrix, Madam Condi, pretty happy, though.

Ready for a tin chapeau...

I'm starting to think I'm almost ready for a tinfoil chapeau.
I'm a "consumer of news" - I read newspapers, I listen to news radio, I watch news on teevee. I discuss the news, I write about the news; A news junkie, you might say.
But lately, the news just seems to leave me confused. I can't consume it at all. I can neither chew it nor swallow it. It's either a case of early senility or near-total cognitive dissonance. The latter, I hope. Though perhaps it's time to begin thinking of memory loss as my friend, rescuing me from too much toxic information.
Two weeks ago, I saw that supposedly mythical headline in the paper: Man Bites Dog. Yes. I checked. It wasn't April First. It was a Reuters byline; not a company known for extreme levity. And just today, a report, on page one, no less, about a Cambodian farmer who discovered he has a Holy Cow! (!) A witch saw the cow, fell down, and, upon recovering, told the farmer she saw the spirit of a Holy Cow from Thailand in his Holy Cow. However, and this is the really interesting part, the local governor said the farmer was wrong. "We had a Holy Cow around here just a few years ago - they don't show up again so soon."
What is one to think? Holy Dog, Man Bites Cow, Mad Cows... It's all too much for me.
Then, in what might seem a more normal kind of news, we see that South Korea is threatening action against Japan, because of some little rocky islets unfortunately situated between the two countries. Meanwhile, Japan is theatening action against --- North Korea! Apparently because North Korea is refusing to return the remains of Japanese citizens it abducted some decades ago. Not, mind you, because of the kidnapping; because Korea stubbornly refuses to return the right set of bones. Not wanting to be left out, North Korea is threatening to take action against, you guessed it, South Korea! Seemingly for holding war games. Which could not possibly be (and here I agree) to defend itself against anyone other than North Korea. Unless it's to "take action" against Japan.
A perfect triangle, though not in any sense a love triangle.
The United States, meanwhile, is threatening to take action against pretty much anybody and everybody. Mostly to stop them from doing things the United States already does better than they can do anyway. We hear concerns about China's massive military buildup. They've increased their military budget to thirty billion dollars. I suspect they're actually budgeting in renmimbi; but we'll use dollars for clarity. If clarity in such a thing is possible. At the same time, the US is increasing its military budget by thirty billion dollars.

Speaking of the US congress: What are they up to now? "Congress shall make the laws of the country." So I was taught in school. Just laws to govern a just society, one would presume. Though, historically, when the congress actually did create just laws it was pretty much an accidental confluence of parochial interest and the common welfare. But then I have become pretty cynical about the entire legislative process. Some would say I was born a cynic. Anyway: now the congress has decided it's terribly important to find out every least detail about the use of steroids by professional baseball players. Why? Who cares? What common good is served by this 'investigation'? If someone wants to trade his future health for a few years of enhanced physical performance, who am I to say he can't? Such tradeoffs have always taken place. In a classical simile - it's the choice of Achilles - who chose early death and eternal fame over a long and normal life. Not that I can think of any baseball player who is likely to win fame as eternal as Achilles. Except for the Babe. Ruthian is a word destined to remain in the language (I believe) as long as will Herculean. So why is congress investigating this miniscule issue? Because there is some significance to society? Because they are concerned about the health of baseball players? Because they want to preserve the purity of baseballers as role models? Because it's a tremendous photo opportunity? Gee; tough call.
Then there's the current topper: Tom DeLay talking about saving the 'life' of a brain dead woman. Now, I know some of you will say that Rep. DeLay knows more about brain death than most doctors, but I do not believe he has ever actually experienced it first hand, no matter how his actions seem to indicate that he has. Again, what is the national purpose served by congress butting into medical issues? Do you really trust your congressman more than you trust your doctor? Is that why when you feel sick you call your congressman? Or does your congressman make you feel sick?
Well, that's enough diatribe for one day.
Hope to be posting again soon.

I'm Shocked!

Shocked! To discover misfeasance in our government!

So now, it turns out, the government is going through a bunch of contortions (read: distortions) to make scientific studies/reports/opinions read the "right" way. I'm shocked! Shocked! To find out that such a thing would go on in this country!
We all like to think, I believe, that scientists and suchlike are selfless seekers after the truth. This definitely falls under the heading of "Good Idea; Too Bad It's Wrong"
Much as I'd like to attribute this to the current administration as yet-another-example of the perfidy of the president and his neo-con-neo-religio-cabinet-without-portfolio; this is not a new story.
Example: In or about 1994 (pretty sure it was '94, but I'm too lazy to look it up). National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) biologists were about to release a "Biological Opinion" regarding the impact of the Columbia River dams (18, count 'em 18!) on the river's salmon populations.




Long in the works, and containing the results of years of investigation and observation, the summary of the report concluded that yes, the dams did in fact have an impact on the salmon fisheries. Hardly a surprising result.

{A quote from a Pacific Northwest National Laboratory report:
"This is a fishery biologist's opportunity to provide specifications for use in turbine design," said Duane Neitzel, Pacific Northwest project manager. "Turbines are integral to the operation of hydroelectric dams, but they also can injure fish." Turbine passage can be considered one of the more fatal routes that fish take through hydroelectric dams. Mortality rates range from 4 to 20 percent, depending on factors such as type of turbine and type of fish.}

Also, not the result desired by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), or a number of other Columbia River Basin industries who faced some impacts of their own as a potential fallout from this report. Well. If you look at the report today, you will find the conclusion reads that the dams do not have an impact on the salmon fisheries; a conclusion so at odds with common sense, to say nothing of being in utter contradiction to the body of the report - some fifty years of observation and study that it beggars the imagination to understand how such a statement could be inserted.
Here's what happened.
The team of biologists studied the years of census data (salmon census, not people census), analyzed the data, built a model based on the data. Wrote the report, including the data and the analysis. Added a conclusion that said the dams did have an impact.
Sorry, not acceptable. Enter the political appointee. In this case, Western States Director of NMFS

Rollie Schmitten (The Honorable, as he liked to have himself referred to in many many many press releases). He returned the Opinion to the team of biologists. It ended up being a very simple fix, due to the wonders of modern word processing. No need to retype the document. Simply insert "not" between "do" and "have".
Now, this Rollie Schmitten (The Honorable) had previously been a lobbyist for Washington and Oregon lumber companies. He showed such promise in that job that he was hired by the government to represent the interest of the citizens, presumably all the citizens, not just the citizens who happened to own logging rights. The appointing authority?

Then-President Bill Clinton.
With the conclusion that the dams (18 dams!) had no impact on the salmon, the BPA was relieved of any need to further mitigate the effect of dam operations beyond the current operations. It also means that the area industries are, to a degree, inocculated from having to change the way they operate. The cities can continue to light their signs, the farmers can continue to take subsidized water, the aluminum refiners can continue to get cheap electricity. The salmon can continue to be ground into burger by the turbines.
Later that year, President Clinton promoted The Honorable Rollie Schmitten to National Director, National Marine Fisheries Service.
Well done, Rollie!
Oh: About the bioligists who wrote, and then changed the report. Why did they allow this to happen? Simple. They, like most of us, have a degree of economic self-interest. They like to eat pretty much on a regular basis. They have mortgages. They have children to school. They are subject to pressure applied by their employer (read blackmail).



Galileo caved; can you expect greater fortitude from a government employee, be he scientist or accountant or army general?

What About Justice?

Now that John Ashcroft has left the Department Formerly Known As Justice, Will new Attorney General Roberto (Burning Bamboo Sliver) Gonzalez free

Lady Justice from her winding sheet? Literally and figuratively? Did anyone on the Senate Judiciary Committee ask him this at his confirmation hearings? If so, who? If not, why?

Going Around

Well, the news is filled with stories and photos of Ellen MacArthur, who just completed a solo round-the-world sailing venture, in record time. Much less than 80 days.

This was not an easy thing to do. It takes a lot of determination, drive, whathaveyou, to be willing to go through the sleep deprivation, the sensory deprivation, the fear. I've been on the water for long periods, and it really isn't a good place to be alone.

Acknowledging all that, I have to say that I have always had a difficult time believing that operating machinery (a hi-tech speed-sailing-yacht, a Formula 1 or Indy car, hydrocarbon-belching dirt bike, etc.) can be classed as a sport. Seems more like a chore to me ---

As well, going in a circle seems non-productive to me. A Formula 1 race consists of cars made up to look like cigarette cartons starting at Point A, proceeding past Point A some number of times, and ending at ... Point A! The idea is to do this faster than the other cigarette cartons. I strongly believe that if I never left Point A to begin with, I would arrive there in very nearly zero elapsed time, thus easily winning the race. And saving a lot of energy in the bargain.

Ellen began some 70-odd days ago in Falmouth, and is today back in Falmouth. What has changed is, of course, that she is now a celebrity. This in spite of her horribly choreographed "spontaneous" victory dance. I can imagine her blushing when she views it on the to-be-often-repeated-on-BBC film clips. A celebrity! Is it at all possible that celebrity, rather than accomplishment, was her goal from the getgo? You think? There is today (probably always has been) a considerable human wish to be famous. Rich, too. Today, we are able to pursue celebrity far more easily than before. Wierd and wonderful TeeVee shows enable us to become famous overnight, in return merely for spending a few days in a box filled with scorpions, or somesuch heroic stupid endeavor. I guess, thinking about it, I'd really rather sail in a circle around the world than sit in a box full of scorpions. Or appear on a TeeVee show that encouraged such kinds of activity.

So, congratulations Dame Ellen! Hope the aftermath isn't too much of a letdown.

Governments Have Strange Rules (Part One of Many)

Last week I found I needed to fill out a few (well, quite a few) federal bureaucracy forms. The very best way to get such forms, here in Bangkok, is to go to the U.S. embassy. About 1/2 hour before it opens is a good time to queue up. So I got to the waiting room, the one for U.S. citizens, in good time. While I was waiting, a Buddhist monk came in.

This seemed a bit unusual. So, having not a lot else to do, I asked him if his appearance in the line to get into the citizens queue, instead of the Thai queue, caused any confusion at the front gate. A little, he agreed. He was at the embassy to renew his passport. This led to the question of just why a Thai Buddhist monk has a United States passport to begin with. Well, here's an interesting set of factoids. For those who believe that the U.S. has a lock on Strange Rules, you need to hear this. Once upon a time, this man went to the U.S.; Los Angeles in fact, to study at a monastery there. At completion of his studies (well, the study of a Buddhist monk is never complete, really) he was ordained in the order of that particular monastery. He stayed there, learning and teaching, for twenty-one years. All the while as a citizen of Thailand, with a Thai passport and a U.S. resident visa (the famous and treasured "Green Card"). When his order called him back to Thailand (watch carefully now), the Thai government swung into action. An interesting law in Thailand is that if you are a Buddhist monk, and you were ordained in a foreign monastery, you cannot be a Thai citizen! So, this monk was forced, by this peculiar circumstance, to become a U.S. citizen. Ahah! I love this symmetry. While the monk was once teaching in America as a Thai citizen with a U.S. visa, he is now teaching in Thailand as an American citizen with a Thai visa!
The reason for this particular law is clearly not easy to articulate. Logic clearly has nothing whatever to do with it. (likewise, logic has nothing to do whatsoever with the reason I had to be at the embassy, either). At a guess, this law is just a subparagraph of a rather byzantine set of laws that taken together form the Thai Citizenship Act. Under this act, there are a lot of people living in the Kingdom, some being members of groups that have lived in the land for many generations, who cannot become Thai citizens because they are not sufficiently 'Thai'. When some group is sufficiently persistent, they may get their status reviewed. One of the methods by which a member of one of these tribes may gain Thai citizenship is by passing a DNA test. I suppose if one has a Thai gene, it's pretty certain one deserves to be a citizen.
In any event, its quite clear that Thailand is completely up to date, and yields nothing in the way of bureaucratic tomfoolery to the United States.

The Clever President:

I was relaxing with a cup of tea the other day. Thinking that in these tumultuous times we need to look for help from any place we can find it, I decided to consult the leaves at the bottom of my cup.

Here is what they said (approximately):
George W. Bush (The President) is, contrary to common belief, really a very clever man. So clever that he has, in fact, created a new thing in American politics.
Since the office of Vice President became an elected office, rather than being awarded to the second-place finisher in the presidential sweepstakes, the candidates running for president have typically selected V.P running mates they hoped would help their own election chances. Afterwards, toward the end of their term of office, the presidents would try, in one way or another, to help their veeps advance to the top position. This requires a kind of makeover whereby someone who has spent years carrying out the presidential garbage is magically transformed into someone who looks presidential himself. This is a difficult thing to do - particularly if the president dislikes his v.p., or vice versa, as is usually the case.
President Bush has completely changed this paradigm (I apologize, but this much-abused word is sometimes the appropriate one). He (Bush) chose for his v.p. running mate a place-holder. Someone who is not going to be running in his turn for president, whether Dick Cheney realizes it or not. The v.p. is an excellent attack dog it is true, and much loved by a bellicose, perhaps even apocalyptic, segment of the population, but he really has not brought any voters to President Bush that Bush would not otherwise have had. He is thus, as I (or rather, my tea leaves) have said, a place-holder. A cypher. Nil. Nada. Nothing. {I loved writing that}
Here comes the cleverness.
When some member of the neo-con class emerges from that morass and assumes a presidential appearance, expect Dick Cheney to experience "A Cardiac Incident". This will cause him to decide to "Wish To Spend More Time With My Family And Loved Ones." He will, regretfully, offer his resignation. President Bush will, also regretfully, accept the tendered resignation. The President will, after a diligent search, turn up his already-determined successor.
The new Vice President will be:
1. Already presidential in appearance;
2. Unencubered by the negative baggage the office of Vice President always accumulates;
3. Able to avail himself of the opportunities the office affords in the awarding of patronage and consequent accumulation of political IOUs.
Thus, the V.P. will begin his presidential campaign against Candidate Hillary already looking presidential, and the GOP won't have to attempt a makeover.
Brilliant!
The one hitch, which of course the attentive reader will have already spotted, is finding that presidential-looking far-right Republican Stalwart. Looking back, it's pretty clear that President Bush has been previewing potential candidates right along. Unfortunately (or otherwise, depending on your viewpoint), they have all flopped.
The first, certainly, was Colin Powell. The man looks and sounds presidential all right, but his long and heretofore honored record shows him to be a reliable follower, but no leader. Fotrunately he knows this about himself and declines to pursue an office beyond his competence.
The next offering was, I think, Tom Ridge. President Bush made use of the otherwise useless office of Homeland Security forced upon him by Joseph Lieberman to present his friend Tom Ridge to the public. However, Gov. Ridge always appeard in public looking as if he was waiting for a Drop Drill to begin. He won the award for Most Uncomfortable Looking Personality On TV two years running and has now, blessedly, retired.
Senator Bill Frist was next, elevated before his time to Senate Majority Leader. A telegenic man, with truly wonderful credentials. A man of demonstrated intelligence, skill, humanity. The Senate, in no mood to be trifled with by a relative rookie, routinely savaged him until he retreated into the background. They may be trying to rehabilitate Sen. Frist by bringing him out once again to talk to us about the Indian Ocean Tsunami Disaster.
Arnold Schwarzenegger is today the obvious choice (you knew this was coming, didn't you?). There are some problems of course. The obvious one is that he can't legally be president. There is a comma in Section v. of Article II of the Constitution of the United States of America, put there by his enemies to prevent Alexander Hamilton from becoming president, that keeps Gov. Schwarzenegger ineligible. A Constitutional Amendment to make it legal for native Americans AND Austrian-born bodybuilders to be president would likely take too long in the tortuous pathways of Constitutional-Amendment-Passing to qualify him for 2008. He's also too easygoing on those un-American homosexuals and abortionists, as far as the hard-right-moral-rectitude-above-all GOP shadow leadership is concerned.
Porter Goss has just been trotted forth, and in Father Bush's old job, even! However, Spook-in-Chief Goss has almost immediately fallen into the -umm-... manure of the Augean stables that the national intelligence services have shown themselves to be. For a worse performance by an administrator, you'd have to look at the current resident of the White House himself.
The man Pres. Bush really would like for a successor is probably Brother Jeb Bush. And he certainly owes B.J. big-time. But he (Jeb) also fails the public appearance test. And besides, the dynastic appearance of candidate Jeb would just be too much - I think we'll have to wait for 2016 and George Prescott Bush for the next Bush presidency. By which time the Bush-Iraq war will have cost America, or rather the "Coalition of the Willing", more lives than Vietnam, possibly finally making Yet-Another-President-Bush problematic.
So, who is it to be?
Who will step up to the plate?
Who will take on Senator Hilary Clinton in 2008?
It's going to have to be someone who is abjectly sycophantic to the present administration, yet one who doesn't appear to be so. Who? Condoleeza Rice? Tommy Franks? Paul Wolfowitz? Don Rumsfeld? Anybody Else?
The field is wide open!
The tea leaves have spoken.

Happy 2005!

It's the first day of 2548 B.E. (that's 2005 C.E.). Sunshiny but cool (around 17 C) here in Bangkok.

A time to watch a surfeit of football, if you're in America. A time to reflect on the fragility of life, if you're in Southeast Asia. A time to make, or break, resolutions, anywhere at all. In the past I've made some pretty good resolutions. Resolutions that improved the quality of my life. Here are a few I feel safe in recommending:

Resolve to Greet the first person I meet each day with something like "Its a beautiful morning.", or "Its going to be a great day!" If you say this with conviction, its a definite possibility that it will be so. On the other hand, if you begin by saying something like "Today is really going to be hard.", or "Looks like bad weather today.", your day is absolutely certain to turn out as predicted. An odd sort of metaphysical effect. If you predict joy, you might be right. If you predict sorrow, you're certain to be right. Its as if you have a lot more negative power than positive power. Sort of like the situation with the current president. I've found doing this has improved my life greatly.

Resolve to stop having opinions about things I don't know anything about. This saved me huge amounts of time, both in not having to think up answers to questions I don't understand, and not having to defend my point of view in useless arguments. This is defintely the most effective and useful resolution I've ever made.

As you can readily see, I have long since lapsed in the application of both these resolutions.

Its a beautiful morning!
Have a happy new year.

Disasters!

The tsunami that hit nearby last week seems likely to end up causing more deaths even than the United States, or perhaps I should say the Coalition Forces, will manage in Iraq before they finally throw in the towel and depart. Hopefully sometime before the arrival of the next century.
In times of such large disasters (the tsunami, not the invasion of Iraq) a lot of people ask why. "Why is God doing this to me?" asks a Hindu woman in Tamil Nadu. "Its because of all the evil in the world" says a priest in England. "God likes to remind people of His power" replies a rabbi from the safety of his schul in Scandinavia. A much more intelligent rabbi (in my opinion), in Oregon, says God doesn't do things like this - go with the scientific explanation instead.
For the most part its easy to predict what some of our more prominent leaders will say. Here goes.
Pat Robertson: It's because of all the homosexuals and abortionists.
Osama bin Laden: It's because of all the Christians and Jews.
President Bush: It's because of Saddam Hussein.
Tony Blair: It's because people aren't listening to President Bush.
Colin Powell and Crown Prince (Jeb) Bush, the two special experts on disasters who are visiting the stricken area, will doubtlessly return a verdict of... WMD. It was WMD that caused the Indian Ocean Tsunami.

WMD - a term so bandied about that it is almost certain to become the punch line for an entire generation of bad jokes.
"Timmy is sick today; he has a fever and diharrea." "He probably ate too many WMD last night."
"The US economy unexpectedly shrank last month." "Economists blame it on an 18 per cent drop in consumer purchase of WMD."
"I lost my job, and can't find a new one." "That's probably because the WMD manufacturers are moving production overseas, to India, China and, of course, Iraq."

Merry Christmas

Writer's Block

End 'o year blues...

Well, once again I seem to have made myself too busy. I plead time'0'year. Also work stuff is occupying a lot of my time. Still, there are lots of interesting things going on in the world out there. Some need commenting on; most really don't. Here's one that doesn't, but I am going to comment anyway ---
Once again it appears that form is more important than substance, at least to the American public (sometimes referred to as the Boobocracy for obvious reasons). There is a loud public outcry over the discovery that Secdef Don Rumsfeld failed to actually, personally, in his own hand, sign the letters of condolence he has been sending to families of the soldiers who are dying in Iraq. No outcry over the fact that he sent them there to die! Just anguish over his lack of sufficient sincerity in condoling over the deaths he has caused! "Oh My Oh My", he might exclaim; "these liberals are getting awfully shirty for a group that can't even win an election." "You should just shut up", he might well further exclaim.
Am I to infer from this hullaballoo that it's okay for one to send people out to die for a pointless purposeless demonstration of raw military power, as long as one apologises sufficiently abjectly for doing so?
So it would seem; so it would seem.
Merry Christmas!

Voting For Moral Values

I've been seeing a lot of mention in the news that a huge number of people (20%?; 22%?; 25%?; 40%?) voted for Candidate Bush based on "moral values". Not sure what that means, but hey, polling questions are notoriously opaque.
Stunned Democrats everywhere, checking the sheep's innards, are calling this a sure sign of The End Of Civilization. This is nonsense. If you want a sign that Civilization As We Know It has ended, I ask you to note that at the same time the votes were being counted a music CD was being released under the title "Britney Spear's Greatest Hits". If this little manufact of MTV-meets-pedophilia can emit a product called greatest hits, we are certainly at the End Time.
In any event, having myself stared at the sheep's entrails, I've seen something quite different than the conventional wisdom. First, understand that someone's motive for an action, and the proclaimed motive, may be quite different. In this case (the election I mean, not BS's greatest hits), it seems likely to me that for many voters who cited moral considerations as the basis for their vote, the actual reason was simply that they didn't like John Kerry. Sory John - you're just not cuddly and lovable.
The encouraging thing about all this is that the voters who chose to disguise a bad motive with a good one were at least not so badly misguided as to claim that they voted for the incumbent based on his record on: the war on terror, the war on Iraq, taxes, the economy, the environment, education. They didn't claim to vote for Bush based on his intellectual reach.
On the down side, the number of voters who profess to believe that recognition of same-sex marriage will be more destructive of their own, personal, marriages than will divorce, which is far far more common than gay relationships, is a little disheartening. The boobocracy, as my favorite cynic labelled it, is alive and well, as ever.
But, Be Of Good Cheer, as my parents used to say. Democracy Is On The Move, the President has told us. I believe that when we have exported it all to the Middle East, and none is left for us here, the Middle East will generously return it to us - largely untouched.
Autocracy appears to be the governing principle of the moment. I'm hopeful that the autocrats, being fundamentally flawed, and destuctive in nature, will run out their welcome and be duly swapped out for a more progressive set of governors.
Hopefully in my lifetime.

Lets Appoint a Committee to Study It.

There's an old saying in rural America: You don't fatten a calf by weighing it. Similarly, you don't halt a species decline by counting its numbers. There is a ntable mania, worldwide it seems, among scientists to document the numbers and range of various species of animals. In 2000 for example, in San Francisco, the keynote speaker at the State of the (San Francisco) Bay conference noted that ninety per cent of the fish and other aquatic species in the bay were either in steep decline, or had disappeared entirely. Her proposal - "We need to get funding for projects to study this problem." Revealing, I believe, her principal aim. Money, to wit. If the good doctor (PhD; not a real doctor) gave a hoot about the problem, she would probably have suggested something else; like not diverting all the freshwater flows from the bay, or stemming the flow of industrial waste into the bay. These seem to me to be relatively modest and fairly obvious steps to take. We are hearing similar calls now at the meeting of the World Conservation Union, being held this week in Bangkok. At the same time that ministers in the Thai government are decrying the "waste" of water being allowed to flow into the sea instead of being diverted to dry areas (most of the nation at the moment) to grow rice for export. Exported at a price that makes middlemen rich while increasing the debt of the farmers who sell at a loss. Sorry, I digress again. To resume: However, it is well understood among scientists as well as politicians that a solved problem receives no funding. A study in the hand is far preferable to remediating action.
Thus we find, not to our surprose, that legions of "concerned scientists", possessed of mortgages, credit card debt, and an addiction to regular meals, display a marked tendency to wish to weigh the calf rather than to actually do the necessary things to fatten it.
Just to establish that I'm not totally cynical, I do acknowledge two things. One, that it is indeed important to study these isssues, which are not simple at all, and two, that there are a lot of people who are calling for action, and even some people who are simply acting.
Good for them!

Not the Great Satan After All...

I have thought for a while that the United States has been, not the Great Satan, but rather the Great Hypocrite. How has it come to make sense that the U.S.A., with its thousands of nuclear (pronounced nookyoular) weapons, and its huge stockpiles of chemical and biological agents, can tell North Korea such weaponry is forbidden to it? Especially considering the United States has used its weaponry (Hiroshima, Nagasaki), and sold it to others to use (Saddam Hussein, e.g., against Iran). If North Korea does this, its called "proliferation"; as in "Non-Proliferation Treaty". I guess when the U.S. does it, it's called self-defense or something.
But I've begun to see all this in a somewhat different light.
Consider: North Korea last invaded a foreign country (well, South Korea isn't really so foreign, really) in 1949. Since the armistice North Korea (henceforward to be referred to as DPRK) has devoted most of its efforts to oppressing its own citizens. And face it, a nuclear bomb is not really suited to that sort of thing. Too much collateral damage, to say nothing of the public relations nightmare! So, why then does DPRK believe it needs all this fancy hardware? Are they afraid the United States might attack them?
In that span of fifty five years, come to think of it, the United States has attacked approximately a dozen foreign countries, some of them more than once. I say approximately because I may have overlooked a banana republic or two. We invade those countries so frequently it's hard to remember if this invasion is new or merely a continuation of a previous attack. I also omit to mention the various coups instigated by the CIA. Overthrowing a foreign government we don't approve of and replacing it with a government we end up also not liking. Like Manuel Noriega, or Shah Reza Pahlavi.
With all this military activity, it's pretty easy to see the United States really does need more lethal weaponry than DPRK, or Iran, or, well, than anybody. Good thing we have all that stuff. Although President Eisenhower warned against it, his successor presidents fearlessly increased the "defense" budget 'til the United States now posesses more megatonnage than the rest of humanity combined. And as we have seen, the current president isn't afraid to use his military. In fact, in the new, 1984-ish, all-war-all-the-time environment it seems likely we will need to at least brandish our WMD, to make sure everybody understands our commitment to freedom and democracy. Demonsrated by frequent mouthing of the now-empty shibboleth "free and open elections".
In a sidebar, I really do feel obligated to note the self-referential irony of George W. Bush lecturing Vladimir Putin on the dangers of attempting to concentrate too much power in the presidency.
I sometimes wish I could just do cartoons, because words fail me; but I can visualize some wonderful pictures. Fortunately we are blessed with some puckish genius political cartoonists. Some of them have links here, over on the left side.

Tony Blair...

Is such a sniveler!
He is now complaining that "thousands of men are entering Iraq illegally to fight." Well, yes, Mr. Blair! You should know that very well. You sent thousands of them there yourself. Not a single one of those British soldiers has a valid Iraqi visa, I'll wager. The United Nations says they're in Iraq illegally. So now you're complaining that the people you sent your fellow countrymen to Iraq to fight --- are going to Iraq to fight your soldiers! Shouldn't you rejoice? Saves you the transportation costs to send your troops to the next country you're planning to bring democracy and freeedom to.

Or is it that you actually believed your Commander in Chief George W. Bush when he told you that Ahmad Chalabi's mythical friendly Iraqis would smile and bestrew your path with flowers? I notice you only began to complain when your troops were ordered away from their sinecure in the south and into the actual battle zone. Perhaps it's time to reflect on the down side of being America's Best Friend.

I haven't been posting for a few days...

because The People Have Spoken... And pretty much left me speechless. Not unlike many others I know. You know, it's kind of odd, but when the local citizens make comments regarding the mental (or emotional) characteristics of the Average American Voter - comments not unlike the ones I make - I get resentful. Why this should be, when I agree with them, is strange. Perhaps it's because I worry that they are including me in their evaluation of that Average American Voter. I wish to state here that while I may look like an Average American Voter, I am not, in fact, an Average American Voter. You'll just have to take my word for this.

Tomorrow is Veterans Day in the United States. Formerly Armistice Day. Memorializing the end of the Great War in 1918. An odd phrase, but I suppose politicians everywhere are in search of a great war to fight. Helps the resume, you know.
We celebrate Vets Day by listening to politicians extoll the excessive virtues of "those who served their country so nobly and so willingly". And not so willingly, if you remember the time when we still had a conscript army. I myself have not been able to discover any special nobility among those who served in the military. Like those who didn't spend time in uniform, the ex-military (and those now in the military) number among them saints and sinners, virtuous and, ummm, less-than-virtuous. Some of the worst people I've ever met I met while in the Navy. And some of the best, I suppose. I really wasn't paying much attention at the time. I just wanted out.
Except for November 11 one's veteranhood or lack of same is pretty much ignored by everyone. The only other occasion for singling out our wonderfully virtuous veterans is when the congress gets itself into a bidding war for their votes. Then various GI Bills and VA Bills get passed. After a while the funding for whatever program gets cut, and the veterans are returned to the pool of ornery citizens.
But on November 11, just for that one day, I, and millions like me, are extolled as being significantly better than the rest of you. Those who served are catered to by those who ducked out. I wonder if tomorrow George Bush and Dick Cheney will pay tribute to John Kerry?
On November 12 we can all go back to whatever passes for normal these days.

Some People Don't Like The President...

Some last minute thoughts before Big Tuesday:
In 2000, candidate Bush campaigned as "a uniter, not a divider." Since then, he has governed pretty much as a divider, not a uniter. Is this a flipflop? Or was candidate Bush lying? In either case, I think some of us kind of expected it to work out like this.
A lot of potential voters (as opposed to those who actually bother to vote) are distinctly anti-Bush. They're likely to vote more against the incumbent than for his opponent. Some hate the president for his policies. Some for his principles. Some for his disregard of their principles. For most though I think it's more that they're embarrassed that the president of their country is a putz, and they think it reflects badly on them personally. Kind of like being embarrassed to be seen in public with your wierd cousin (and, let's admit it, we all have one). You really should only be embarrassed if the wierd cousin is you.
In a try at lightening things up a little before D-Day, here's a copy of an online ad seeking a native English speaker for a school in north Thailand. Unfortunately, it ran sometime last year. Still, there may be an opening, so you might want to note the email address.
In case the wierd cousin gets re-elected...

Native English Speaker Needed
Info: Okay. Due to unreliable teachers leaving us in the lurch somewhat(they got better deals elsewhere) ,we desperately need two new teachers to fill positions for our outside primary school contracts.
Before I give you the all important details about the job, I need to get a few things straight. Firstly, the positions are at schools where the classes are large. One of the positions you will be dealing with around 25 semi-catholic rich fat kids, the other school has nearer 40 thin middle class Buddhist kids per class. Therefore, if you are not used to teaching this type of class then it might not be the job for you. For those who know what they are doing it's a breeze. Although we do have a short training program for people who are enthusiastic but dont have the experience. We have all the gear, flashcards and songs and activities and suchforth. For those used to teaching a hanful of kids in a small air con room these classes can be quite daunting. Right then, with that out of the way I will get down to some details. We need you to work from the 1st November until at least march. And if all is ship shape and Bristol fashion and you are happy then you will be offered a new contract for next year. Guaranteed. Our contracts include free medical insurance, work visa, end of year bonus, an extrememly friendly and informal atmosphere, a bloody nice boss by the name of khun lek, and a salary of 26,000 baht for 24 hours teaching a week. Since there is only around 4 months left until the end of the school year we cant offer you all these things. But we can offer you 28,000per month and a reduced bonus if you stay with us until march. It would be a good way to get your foot in the Chiang Mai door actually. It's allright up here. Pleeeeze, only people who are willing to stay and work until march apply. Officially you should have a degree and a Tefl, but to be honest we tend to overlook these requirements. If you have half a brain then that is enough. You can write to me and I will get back to you ASAP.
Date Added : 11th October
Job: full time - young learners
School: Nava Chiang Mai
Tel: N/A
CEmail: navachiangmai@yahoo.com

How not to handle a demonstration...

A long time ago, thirty-something years ago now, in the now fabled "Vietnam Era", There was a lot of unrest in America. People were demonstrating across the length and breadth of the oucntry. ALso from North to South and East to West. College campuses were esepcial hotbeds of this activity. In some places special police units were mobilized. In Berkeley we had the Alameda County swat teams, known as the "Blue Meanies". They were all really big and really intimidating. There was lots of tear gas in the air. There were also lots of bruises, and some broken bones. We were outraged at this. Of course, we were demonstrating because we were outraged in the first place.
In some places the National Guard was called out. One such place was Kent State University.
The result was a shocker. Also, in hindsight, fairly predictable. On May 4 1970, 4 students were shot to death, nine were wounded by concentrated fire from a squad of guardsmen. "A group of seventy National Guard troops advanced on the protesters with fixed bayonets in an attempt to disperse the crowd. The National Guardsmen were wearing gas masks in the hot sun (obscuring their vision and causing heat exhaustion) and had little training in riot control." This was caught live on television. The film is sometimes replayed today.
The newspapers next day all showed a picture of an anguished young woman kneeling over a very dead young man. With bloody hands. Won a Pulitzer, I think. Since then, Kent State has been the name of the event, not the school. If you want to talk about the school you have to say "Kent State; you know, where Kent State happened."
Last week there was a demonstration in the south of Thailand. In Thailand, as at Kent State, troops were called. Here, as there, people died. Predictably. Needlessly.

It's easy to understand why this should be if you just ask yourself "What are these troops trained to do?" If they're being trained for their proper job, they're being trained to kill. To go into combat against an enemy force and to kill the enemy. There couldn't possibly be a worse force to send to police a group of demonstrating citizens. Using military troops for crowd control is a hopelessly bad idea. Bad, Bad, Bad! They have no skills for the job, no training. Kills the civilian protestors and destroys the troops as far as ever being an effective force is concerned. Ask yourself what life has been like for the guardsmen who were at Kent State that day, and what it's like when they see themselves again and again on that film clip.
Next time (and there will be a lot of next times), call in the specially trained crowd control police unit. If you don't have one, create one. Today wouldn't be too soon to make a start.

"It's Not At All Certain..."?????

Dick Cheney
seems to parse reality differently than most of us. When he hears what he wants to hear, like 'intelligence' from the well known fabulist Ahmad Chalabi, nothing in the world is more certain. When he is told something he doesn't want to hear, like news of another military bumble in Iraq, like the failure to sequester a large store of explosives (at the very location he claims Saddam Hussein was "reconstituting his nuclear program"), this information is "not at all certain". Thinking about it, I suppose most of us practice this sort of denial to some degree. When it reaches this level, and the practitioner is so happy to share his deeply felt skepticism (read:fantasies) with the world, well, any total sociopath would be proud. I guess the only certain knowledge he possesses is the data that fits his preconceptions. Sort of todays version of "All The News That Fits, We Print". Anything he doesn't want to believe, well, it's just "not at all certain".
And then the Vice president calls John Kerry an "Armchair General"? Come on! This is the man who had "other priorities" when it came his time to serve in the military. Some of us think his other priority was to nestle deep in his armchair, where he was much less likely to get his ass shot off. Or become a victim of the ever popular "friendly fire".


Besides, Mr. Vice-Commander-In-Chief, the phrase is Armchair Admiral! You're in Pensacola! Pensacola's been a Navy town for longer than you've been a crooked politician! And that's a long long time...

I Could Use a Little Help Here...

Right now, especially with all these elections under way (assuming that most of them, at least, will in fact happen), there are just too many things going on. I'm overcome with, as the late great


Steve Allen once put it:

Too many answers are going unquestioned.

Here are some of the things I am hearing said, with precious little evidence being put forth in support of the assertions:

We Need Tax Cuts To Increase Employment...

This is a subset of 'Trickle-Down Economics'. Bush-wa. If money trickled down, there'd be a cycle where the rich would become poor, and the poor become rich. In fact (observably so), money trickles up. Except where it rushes up. Give the poor some money and they'll waste it on things like food and shelter, giving the money to the rich in the process.

The Economy Is Strong And Getting Stronger...

The same source, with the same lack of supporting evidence. The President appears to be positively phobic about facts, since he certainly never employs any to back his assertions. It's really quite spooky. I've known lots of people who happily demonstrate their ignorance, but never seen a successful politician ('til now) who does so.

Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions Would Hurt The Economy...

What do you suppose the increased energy in global weather is going to do to the economy? Four hurricanes in Florida. Ten (Ten!) typhoons in Japan. No harm to the economy there by God. Why would developing new technologies to change the way we interact with the environment be harmful to the economy? New technologies have always increased economic activity, though often at the cost of the environment, not to its benefit. New technolgies do, however, have a negative impact on obsolete businesses. The automobile was, as many have noted, a disaster to the buggywhip industry. Similarly, solar power might be bad for the oil industry. Bad for Saud. Dangerous stuff.

Foetal Stem Cells Have Never Cured Anybody...

Well, geez; before it was used, Jonas Salk's polio vaccine never worked, either. Why would anybody bother to do research on something that hasn't been proven to work?

Not the President this time, it's the First Lady who's parading her willful ignorance. Though, I'm ready to admit it's probably just to give cover to the First Husband. It's really hard for me to believe that someone who can walk and talk (albeit in Texas-speak) at the same time could be so obtuse.

Democracy Is On The Move...

It seems to me that the word Democracy has been employed to such an extent, and in so many inappropriate contexts, that it has now become little more than a shibboleth. It has come to mean nothing more than a government President Bush approves of. It is defined by an open public election, won by a candidate favored by the United States.

We're Winning The War In Iraq...

(alternate claim: We're Winning The War On Terror)...
Again, we certainly don't want to crowd out the message by including anything even resembling a fact here. Those dismal reports from the congressional investigating committee, the CIA, the FBI, an assortment of other three letter acronyms? Well, those reports were written by beaurocrats, you know, so you can pretty much disregard them.

The Largest Coalition In The History Of The World...

This one by Donald Rumsfeld. Noted historian. How far back does his memory go anyway? I guess not even as far back as 1991, and the first Gulf War. That was a century ago, after all. On the other hand, maybe he's talking about the coalition of Rumsfeld-Cheney-Rice-Ashcroft. Now that's an axis to be proud of. Or frightened of.

I forgot: I should probably include the enforcer; Tom DeLay here.



These, and many other subjects need questioners. Many many questioners. You can help! Send me your suggestions, comments, whatever. Just click on the email me... link. Hint, if you're using the Firefox browser, things like the pics in the posts and the sidebar links might or might not show up. If I knew anything about HTML, XML, Javascript, and the like, I'd try to do something about it. Or not. I do have another life, after all. Hope to hear from you at:

Email Franksmaunderings