Crazy Politics

No no, not in the United States!
In Thailand, where former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra has an arrest warrant out for him as a fleeing felon, at the same time his brother-in-law Somchai Wongsawat is being put forward as the new PM. A part of the corruption charge against the former PM is that he evaded taxes by gifting the PM nominee with shares in Shin Corp., which became worth billions (of Baht) when the company was sold to Temasek Holdings a few years ago.
It goes like this in the Land of Smiles:
SHINAWATRA TRIAL
Ratchada verdicts likely today
The Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions may deliver its verdicts on the Ratchadapisek land deal today despite the absence of the defendants, former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his wife Khunying Potjaman. Lead prosecutor Nanthasak Poolsuk said the court is scheduled to hand down the verdict about 10am.
POLITICS
Somchai secures backing, set to be PM
Deputy leader of the People Power party (PPP) Somchai Wongsawat is poised to become prime minister after securing backing from a rebel faction and the five coalition partners yesterday. Boonchong Wongtrairat, a member of the rebel faction associated with Newin Chidchob, said all 73 MPs in the faction have agreed to comply with the party's resolution to nominate Mr Somchai for the post of prime minister. (Bangkok Post, 17 Sept.)
All this probably, as IHT says, makes little difference, as the next Thai Government is unlikely to be more than a placeholder.

Why

Bother?
To fiddle with Interest Rates, when there's NO MONEY to lend? This looks a lot like either fighting the wrong war (something this administration knows something about), or like bailing the boat with a sieve. The net effect? You're screwed (again)!
Go Fed!

Speaking of Pigs...

Why not go Whole Hog, so to speak. Here's a real doll! Yes, in Seattle they really know how to turn pigs into works of art. Maybe it's the weather. Maybe they think pigs are more fun than Bull - S. Ahead of its time, however; this particular pig was sighted in downtown way back in 2001.

Just For Fun

Here's a quick and diverting "numberology game". It's way more fun than trying to calculate the current value of your 401-K.

Test Your Numeric Intuition

Two Things

To Remember:
1.) Government is the problem; Business is the solution. Government bureaucrats are fumbling idiots and can't manage anything. They're totally inefficient. Private business is driven to efficiency by the Profit Motive and therefore always takes the correct course.
2.) Don't you wish the (fumbling idiots) in the Federal Government would Privatize Social Security, so that your hard-earned dollars could be invested in the Stock Market? Perhaps in Lehman Brothers? Or is the money you've lost recently in your 401K enough of a reminder why 1. (above) is pretty much a fairy tale?
Realistically speaking, most people aren't very smart; aren't very good at what they do. Most people are, in fact, average. That's what average means, after all. So, whether it's a government fumblebum or a private enterprise fumblebum, it's still a good idea to know enough Latin to understand Caveat Emptor.
3.) (OK, so i fibbed about how many things!) Don't forget to vote for the Party of Fiscal Responsibility this November. They've handled things So Well these last 8 years.

Is She Ready?

Let's put this question out to pasture. Or shoot it. Put us out of it's misery, at any rate. Is Sarah Palin or Joe Biden or John McCain or Barack Obama "ready" to be President of the United States? Who knows?!
I believe I can say this with great confidence: Any of the above is as ready for the job as George W. Bush was on January 21 2002. As ready as he is today, in fact, after seven and 1/2 years in the job! The likelihood that any individual, even if chosen at random, would muck up the government of the country as massively and consistently as the current occupant of the White House is so remote it would probably be a major indication that Armageddon is, in fact, fast approaching. As a considerable portion of the fans of the current president belive. Why they're his fans in fact.
So lets quit asking this (unanswerable) question, stop feeding the RNC their favorite straight line. Start asking Real Questions, like, umm, "CERN recently started up it's new high powered LHC, hoping to eventually recreate, in micro, the conditions of the Universe immediately following the Big Bang. What do you think of the possibility this holds for new discoveries in Cosmology?" I realize this is a pretty open ended question. It would sure invite more interesting replies than asking about those wonderful Tax Cuts that we all, of course, favor.

Article. .I, Section. 2.

of the United States Constitution states (regarding apportionment of representation, taxes, etc.): "...shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons..."

Clarence Thomas says:
Constitution forbids racial preference

Now, for those who missed the reference, "three fifths of all other Persons" refers to Slaves. In theory, I suppose, someone could be a slave and not be black, but practically speaking, "slave" at that time meant "negro slave". That sure sounds to me like Racial Preference was very much encoded in the Constitution! Perhaps Mr. Justice Thomas missed that part of the class on Constitutional Law. Of course, then there's the part about "Article. XV. [Proposed 1869; Ratified 1870] Section. 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude."
Here's a college course textbook on The History of African Americans in the West that really has nothing to do with any of this, but I think it's really cool information!
Mr. Justice Thomas also says he's "ashamed" to have been given a degree from Yale Law School! Apparently, he felt just too condescended to as an Equal Opportunity Admittee. I wonder if Yale is also ashamed to have given him his degree. If not, they oughtta be!

Mutually Contradictory (Part III)

Then there's the matter of Profit! As a former famous Governor of Minnesota put it recently; "With the economy collapsing, we can't afford to have a Democrat in the White House. We have to have someone from the party of fiscal responsibility." (Jesse "The Body" Ventura, Commenting on the Larry King Show)
The graphic, culled from the New York Times business section, only goes back to 1948. Thinking back a few more years, we can as well Compare/Contrast the Republicans Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover with their successor FDR. Thus, for the last eighty years, people at every income level saw greater income growth during Democrat administrations than under Republican administrations. Basically, this is within the living memory of almost all Americans. I haven't bothered to try to find a chart detailing the growth of the National Debt. We all know that the preponderance of the debt is thanks to the "fiscally responsible" policies of three icons of Republican Orthodoxy: Ronald Reagan, George Herbert Walker Bush, and son George W. Bush. Why, then, is there this persistent illusion that Republicans are the "Party of Fiscal Responsibility"?
I offer the following as a possible excuse: While people get richer faster under Democrats, their Tax Bills go down faster (if they're rich, that is) under Republicans. Or so it appears. As some have said, the ultimate goal appears to be to "Privatize the Profit - Socialize the Debt". Which has certainly been the case with the deft handling of the rolling crisis of the deflating housing bubble. Or, as here: On Capitol Hill, lawmakers were less focused on the implications of taking over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac than on casting blame for the rapidly rising deficit.

Disclosure:I lost my last house in the last (tech) bubble, so I no longer have a dog in this particular fight.
Thank God!

Mutually Contradictory (Part II)

Matters of Sex aside, there's also the article of faith (AHHH, Faith) that tells us that Government is a hopeless mope when it comes to efficient management (a belief the current administration has certainly done nothing to dispel), but Business (AHHH, Business) is always an efficient mechanism. That's why Socialized Medicine which, as we "know" is advocated by those eltitist Democrats is evil. Nationalizing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, on the other hand, and bailing out other failing financial businesses, is somehow, someway, something that the otherwise-useless-government can reasonably do.
Mutually Contradictory beliefs? Surely. But still, in the one case, the government wants to Tax Me! While, in the other case, the government is going to Pay Off My Debts! The Cost-To-Me makes all the difference, doesn't it?
I think this is what Candidate Palin was referring to when she mentioned helping the "Taxpayers Of Alaska". Actually, Alaska has no taxpayers. In Alaska, as I mentioned Here:, the state pays the residents. I think what the good Governor was saying is that she got the Legislature to impose a Windfall Profits Tax on the Oil Companies, and then added that money to the annual payoff to the residents. It helped no end that the Federal Government continued to send money to Alaska in the form of the soon-to-be-repudiated Earmarks

The Chiefest

Characteristic of the American Voter appears to be the ability (not an uncommon ability, I suppose) to reach mutually contradictory conclusions simultaneously.

Case In Point:

Levi Johnston and Bristol Palin

Had SEX outside of marriage! We're Proud Of Them

John Edwards and Reille Hunter

Had SEX outside of marriage! That's Disgusting!

Have to remember, however, that the Edwards/Hunter assignation didn't involve either a bastard or a proposed wedding. Very different circumstances, indeed!
I guess when you come right down to it, The Sin Of Fornication is only conditionally a mortal one.

The Spouses Of The...

Vice Presidential Candidates -

Jill Biden and Todd Palin

Appear to have become Critical Players in the Race For The White House. The idiocy of such an occurrence is obvious; but still, there are those who will give in to the need to get some ink: Ken Heineman - interviewed by Carolyn Lochhead Or, maybe it's just Carolyn desperately trying to find something to fill her allotted space in the Chron.
It's for certain now at any rate that any substantive reason for selecting a president, or a senator, or indeed any public servant has been replaced by the Absolutely Totally Nonsensical desire to know all about the nominee's Personal Story. This isn't really new: Julius Caesar got himself captured by Pirates to burnish his Curriculum Vitae as an aid to his future in politics. Heck, even before then, Pisistratus The Tyrant indulged in some high profile adventures. With a Goddess, no less!
So, this kind of thing has been going on for a while. But now, to this utterly reductio ad adsurdum of making a claim (possibly a valid one, dammit) that the husband of the assistant to the ... is a Player in the campaigning. See, now, this is why John Kerry isn't the president today. He mulishly continued to talk about governance and all that stuff. He let other people "define" him in terms of his Personal Story. If he'd spent as much time letting people know how he'd found his Personal Saviour in Vietnam as one of today's candidates is doing, perhaps he'd have attracted some of those unevolved voters who want a president (or a Vice-Presidential-Spouse) they can have over for a beer and mooseburger backyard barbecue.
For me; I await the Vice-Presidential-Spouses-Debate. Moderated by Martha Stewart if we have the usual luck in these matters.

I'm Sorry

But the conflating (is that a word?) of these headlines just Got My Attention:
White House: "Palin daughter pregnancy is 'private' matter..."
"Father to join Palin family at convention..." (Drudge Report, Sept. 4)
So, which is it to be? Leave 'em alone? Put 'em on display?
I notice nobody has considered even muttering anything about Gasp! Statutory Rape, which appears to have been the case here, depending on the state of the state of Alaska's legal system.
There's something else, and maybe it's the most interesting lesson to learn from this media frenzy. No, not about how the media dives into a frenzied state; we know how predictable that is.
No, what I'm talking about is this interesting dissonance between the support of Candidate Palin for her daughter (admirable) and her support of Abstinence Only programs in schools, knowing full well that they Do Not Work, as here we see. Apparently, abstinence only works if you are, in fact, abstinent! Not surprising, really. There are even sociologist's studies showing, statistically, that AO programs Do Not Work! Just like the storied Just Say No programs do not work. Not surprising, really; one wonders why people have to do a study to show that young people don't do what old people tell them to do! In all of recorded history (including the living memory of old people today), young people who have been told not to have sex; use drugs; smoke; drink... have immediately gone forth and ignored these prohibitions. It's pretty much a given, in fact, that this is what will happen. What I'm seeming to learn from all this, subject to arguments to the contrary, is that there are some who will deliver what to them seems pretty much like the be-all/end-all of moral injucntions without really caring what the result is. There are, in fact, two results. Hint: one of them is Not that the injunction will be followed. The visible results are these:
1: I, who issued the ukase, have Done My Part; if my order is ignored (a given), I am personally blameless - I reserve the right to say I-Told-You_so.
2: My friends (cronys, that is) will be given government funding to present these unfollowed unobeyed unremarked programs. This is, I believe, the Key Point to all this.
Somehow, what used to be known as "Laissez-Faire Capitalism" has been changed into a welfare program for business buddies. In a truly wierd transformation, society is now set up to regulate private behavior, but never, never, no never to regulate public (business) behavior. I can choose the business partner I want, no matter how corrupt or immoral, no matter that the choice has potentially Monstrous Impacts on others; but I cannot chose the personal partner I want, no matter that the choice has absolutely No Impact on others. This is all backwards, to my way of thinking.

Too Good

To Pass Up:

Rep. Peter King says: ...

"We" when the news is good. He says "Them" when the news is bad. (Referring here to the advent of Hurricane Gustav along the Gulf Coast). Absolutely to be expected; I'm not picking on Rep. King in particular. I often use the Politicospeak use of the Passive Voice as an example for my ESL students. "This is when you use the PV: when you don't want your fingerprints on the SNAFU", to paraphrase a bit.

Pay Grade

According to the New York Times (August 30), Candidate Obama's campaign won't be attacking "...Mr. McCain for his opposition to pay equity legislation and abortion rights — two issues of paramount concern to many women — as it tries to head off his effort to use Ms. Palin to draw Democratic and independent women who had supported Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton...."
Which raises the question: Would Vice President Sarah Palin, a woman,
be paid 40% less than would Vice President Joe Biden, a man?
See, in this Historic Campaign, which is code for <"Theres some candidates who aren't Old White Guys!", there are some really interessting sidebars to be bloviated upon. Because, of course, in the government, women do get equal pay. Therefore, why should the government give hurt to their (corporate) contributors by requiring their businesses to do the same? I would say because it would be good for business, but (as you will agree if you watch a little cable teevee business news) business leadership is still ensconced firmly in the nineteenth century.
Anyway, I'd like to hear Candidate Palin speak to this question. Be interesting to hear her answer. Perhaps along with asking if she agrees with the biblical injunction for her to defer to her Lord And Master (husband, that is) in all matters outside the home?
Just asking.

I'm Shocked...

Shocked! At Candidate McCain's selection of a runningmate (as they are called in politicospeak). Nothing wrong with the choice at all, really. I was pretty sure though, that it was going to be Mitt Romney, the man who looks like a clearcut choice for JayCee Man'O'The-Year. The GOP (as it is called in politicospeak) is definitely a highly heirarchical outfit, and generally selects next-in-line for the Next-In-Line.
I was a little puzzled at the selection of

Sarah Palin
Risky Business?

I remarked to a friend a little while ago that I hoped John McCain was smarter than to believe that the supporters of Hillary Clinton, AKA Femi-Nazis (You can Google Rush Limbaugh for the reference) would flock to his campaign. There are those who seem to believe that "Women are desperate to see a woman shatter the Glass Ceiling"; desperate enough to vote against their own self-interest though? Well, that remains to be seen. And is it really true that electing a woman to the Not-Worth-A-Bucket-Of-Warm-Spit office is the same as "shattering" a glass ceiling?
It took me a while to figure out what else might have prompted Candidate McCain to select now-Candidate Palin. Here it comes: the Conspiracy! Remember back in 1960 - a simpler and much less expensive time in politics. Old Joe Kennedy was reputed to have asked his son (yes, that would be JFK) how much it would cost to win the election. I heard it was around seven million. That seems like a lot to me, but these days, it wouldn't even pay the electric bill at one of the conventions, probably. Elections cost a lot. The reporting on contributions say that the Obama Campaign and the DNC are getting a bigger slice of the pie than the McCain Campaign and the RNC so far.
Not any more. With the Drill Here Drill Now Lady running for Vice, why, ExxonMobil alone will spend more than all the democrats in the universe.
If it's true, as Big Daddy Jess Unruh (anybody remember him?) said, Money is the mother's milk of politics", why then Candidate McCain has picked himself a winner. Or perhaps someone whispered in his ear. And he listened. He has money (as well as oil) to burn now. His campaign budget will probably be enough to fund the war in Iraq, except we're now "winning" that war, so the RNC can feel comfortable spending the oil money on a surge against Candidate Obama.
I hope people will take note that Alaska is a very different place from every other place. In fact Alaskans are known to refer to the rest of the United States as Outside, and (with the possible exception of Seattle) look at the whole country as being pretty exotic. Being an office holder in Alaska might not be very like being an office holder anywhere else, as well. In Alaska, the Income Tax is even different: the State pays the Citizens! Here's something from the Alaska Daily News telling about local reaction to the news.
Of course, when it comes to exotic places, people everywhere think of Washington, D.C. as pretty exotic, so perhaps it won't really be all that different from the rest of the country to Candidate Palin.

All In All

Today's acceptance speech by

Candidate Obama

Was, All in All, pretty good. Great, in fact, in some places. The problem was, predictably, that there were Too Many Places. In this sort of speech, and as we will also see in the State Of The Union, to be delivered by a President-To-Be-Named-Later, every topic that could possibly be spoken to is spoken to. Political writers, it seems, have a Bullet Chart pasted on their walls, listing major, sub-major, and minor-major subjects. All of which must be included in every major speech. Lest some Key Constituency, or some Vital Concern go unmentioned. Leaving the opponent with an opening to claim that the speaker was uncaring, or careless, or ignorant, or et. cetera with regard to the item that got scanted. Result? Everything gets stirred into the pot, and nothing really gets spoken of in any depth. Which is fine for the speaker. In these Modern Times, the point is really to get the Sound Bytes (yes, bytes!) out there in Cyberspace.
To sum up: Wonderful in parts: but too many parts.
Barack Hussein Obama has an amazing bio (as they are called these days); if there's any poetry in this world he will be elected President of the United States. As President, he will face huge challenges. By dint of his brilliance and his force of will, and his great inner humanity, he will overcome these challenges, and his presidency will come to be a national epiphany and be regarded as a millenial event.
Admitted; this is not the likliest outcome.
I decided to investigate.
I took a poll. The Question: "Do you belive there is poetry in the world today?"
The Results:
Yes, I do: 0
No, I do not: 2
What the hell are you talking about?: 1
Ok, it was a small sample. There might be a large margin of error. Also, one of the respondents might have been a little drunk.
Still, on the existence of poetry (and therefore, of poetic justice) in the world today question, things don't look too good. But hey, the guy has done amazing things.

November 4th. Mark the date on your calendar. Stay tuned.
Oh: I liked this guy's speech too. Good speech. Bulldog delivery, as always.

There's A Difference

In this world of Testomania, (SF Chronicle, July 10),
I wish people would understand that there's a World, Nay, A Universe of difference between learning Algebra and learning to Take An Algebra Test. Indeed, this is true for any subject. It's pretty clear, clear to anybody who's spent a largish part of their educational years being drilled to take high stakes tests (PSAT, SAT, LSAT, GRE, etc...) at any rate, that it's an entirely different kind of learning. Cramming short-term memory with testable data as opposed to learning concepts and methodology. For those who are natively good at test-taking, this doesn't make a lot of difference. But for those who need to study to learn, which at some level is ALL OF US, the looming Standardized Test Of Educational Achievement pretty much sucks the life out of learning.
As I've tried to say before, it's a pretty good generalization when talking about schools to say "That's not how people learn!"

Deeply Wierd

Is it just me, or does anybody else think it strange that the Republican Candidate for President is denigrating the Democrat Candidate for his inexperience? Eight years ago the Republican Candidate was championing his own inexperience as a panacea for the experience that could reasonably be claimed by the Democrat Candidate.
Some things, however, remain unchanged. In both cases the Democrat Candidate could demonstrate considerable knowledge and intelligence, while the Republican Candidate was/is happy to demonstrate ignorance of most aspects of governance. As retired General Wesley Clark pointed out; while flying a combat aircraft, and being shot down in same, and being imprisoned for years makes for a heroic bio - it really doesn't constitute "foreign policy experience". Nor does an expressed willingness to attack any foreign country that doesn't take orders from Washington. As Candidate McCain put it: "nations don't attack sovreign nations in the 21st Century". Unless you're the President of the USA, and the sovreign nation under consideration is one that, as stated above, fails to heed Washington.
Wierd, deeply wierd.

What's To Be Afraid Of?

Sometimes it just seems like people have a childlike need to be Afraid Of The Dark. (Nyctophobic) Or, in this example, Afraid Of The Stranger. (Xenophobic)

Dangerous Threat?

Sorry, but I find it quite impossible to believe that the "Desperadoes" in this video are a threat to your life, limb, or (most horrifying possibility) pocketbook. Nor are they likely to rape your women. Or you. It's probably about as reasonable for most men to believe they're attractive to homosexual men as it is for them to believe they're attractive to heterosexual women. Or, in other words: Don't You Wish!
Maybe it's a Christian thing. Here in the Land Of Smiles, a Buddhist country, they seem to take a more relaxed view on matters of personal freedom. More tolerant of other humans, perhaps?

Copycat

It's a bit puzzling, really.

Why is John McCain basing his campaign on the campaign of (failed) (Democrat) candidates Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Joe Biden? (now the Democrats Vice-Presidential candidate). Is Candiate McCain unable to find his own issues? Does he think that the failed Democratic candidates had a better message than any he could devise?

Here's a sample:

McClinton?

Not very illuminating is it? Of Course Candidate Clinton tried to diss Candidate Obama. That's what candidates do when they campaign. It didn't work, as we have seen. So, then, why is Candidate McCain repeating the failed attempts of his other potential opponents?
I personally think it's all the fault of Fox News; the news you can trust to demonize the Democrat and sanctify the Republican - based, apparently, entirely on party affiliation, regardless of any other attribute. The above mentioned "news" organ was citing Candidate Biden's response to the question of whether or not Winning Candidate Obama was "ready to be President". As though Joe Biden was the arbiter of such things.
So, John McCain has abandoned, albeit only temporarily, his winning sound-bite: "Drill Here - Drill Now". A position that will seduce millions of currently unhappy consumers of gasoline into believing (with that magical thinking we are all seemingly capable of) that we will shortly be able to pump all the Buck-A-Gallon gas we want into the tanks of our sport-utes. That's the thing he said that caused that poll-shift. Pay no attention to the fact that it's a will-o-the-wisp; we aren't going to "rid ourselves of expensive imported oil" by drilling in our own backyard. Or frontyard. Or offshore. Or onshore. Not soon (as most talking heads are willing to acknowledge), and also, alas!, not late, either. Sometimes there just aren't enough resources to go around, and NO, you don't get to go to the head of the line! Sorry. That's 20th Century thinking. Get over it.
Still... Perhaps if I vote for McHillary, I can have what I want.

Remember When

The Cold War was over?

It sure seems like a short intermission between CW I and CW II!
I guess even those who think the present president is a hopeless buffoon will have to admit he has done an admirable job of restoring the status-quo-ante, as the neocons of the "Project For The New American Century" wished him to do. Wars make profits after all. Even small wars like the pissing contest over S. Ossetia. Have you noticed? Shooting starts - stock market rises; shooting subsides - so does Dow Jones!
Seems Candidate McCain was just having a little fun with us when he proclaimed that "Countries don't invade countries in the 21st Century." That one is almost as good as Condoleeza Rice telling Russia that we will (probably) not like them for at least a little while.
I tell you, Will Rogers was wonderfully right when he claimed he only needed to read the newspapers to find his best jokes.

High Finance

Has Anybody But Me Noticed?

With all this bloviation about "adjusting interest rates", (the New Gold Standard of fiscal management), the net effect has been the following.
Interest the banks pay me - down about 30%.
Interest I pay the banks - up about 30%.
Therefore I (and you, and also you and you and you) end up financing the financial wizards that precipitated the housing disaster with the 21st century version of the The South Sea Bubble.
Which prompts me to re-iterate the premise on which history-according-to-Maunder is based: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana "Those who do remember the past are likewise condemned to repeat it." - Frank Maunder

It's Getting Pretty Deep

In Presidential-Election-Land!

I think What's happened is that the Candidate McCain campaign has found the "right" code words to convey the idea "uppity black man" (ahem). Telling the magical-wishful-thinking road warriors they can have cheap fuel if they vote for their candidate seems to be helping too. Best of all, they've managed to create a set of rationalizations for voting against the "uppity black man" (ahem), without reference to the fact that he doesn't look like all those presidents who preceeded him. As I said Here:(Finding a PC Way).
So, dropping his attempt to act like an intelligent man (risky for a presidential candidate, as I mentioned previously) Candidate Obama has begun to reply in kind. As shown in This video:
The pointlessness of this kind of thing is generally pretty apparent - but for most of the electorate, it's only apparent when the Other Candidate does it! I, as an equal opportunity sneerer, say "...See what a scourge is laid upon your hate, That heaven finds means to kill your joys with love. And I for winking at your discords, too ... All are punished." Nobody is enlightened by this kind of thing, that's certain!

Now, Here's an exercise for the reader. Try to figure out the whichness of the why: there's a segment of the electorate, somewhere in the range of 8% to 12%, that's going to use the Free Pass I mentioned above. In the "Sanctity Of The Voting Booth", these voters are going to vote on the basis of He-Who-Looks-Most-Like-Me. Of course, I could be wrong! One hopes. OH: the question at hand: Most of these non-racist McCain voters are going to be in the states where Candidate Obama has precious little chance of winning a majority anyway. But, even in the least red of the redneck states, there's going to be a umm ..., a ..., well..., let's call it a "white vote". Q: How many electoral votes will this cost Candidate Obama? Will he end up in second place?
Or: will he drop all that "elitist" intelligent approach to campaigning and just go for the soundbite politics that's been tested over time, and proved to be the way to get the ornery voter to pull the lever for you? Go ahead, take the Electoral Map out for a spin. See what's up.

I Leave It To You

Dear Reader...

To figure this out: “We want to bring out the pro-American energy people,” Rep. Virginia Fox (R-N.C.) said. “We are going to soon, we hope, separate the sheep from the goats here. Are you pro-American energy? Are you anti-American energy?”. The Hill (August 17)
With rhetoric like this, it's pretty clear, if nothing else is, that "No Child Left Behind" hasn't been of much worth in educating congresspersons. I know, I know, politicians have long since Divorced old barren Reason from my Bed...(Rubaiyat LV, Fitzgerald); but at least Omar had scansion (well, this is from the Fitzgerald translations). Here we see that "old barren Reason" has been replaced with... What? An appeal to old barren Mindless-Self-Destructiveness? I find myself feeling somewhat pro-anti American Energy myself, believing deep in my heart that there is no energy anywhere else in the world that can replace good old American energy. Nobody can burn energy like a good old American, either!

Tweedledum & Tweedledee

Vladimir Putin - emulating his soulmate George W. Bush:
"I looked the man in the eye. I was able to get a sense of his soul"

- By attacking a country whose president he dislikes. This of course was bound to upset Putin's ("a straightforward and trustworthy man") soulmate George W. Bush, who said, referring to the invasion (of Georgia): "...violence in Georgia is unacceptable" - (G. W. Bush August 12, 2008). This pronouncement would probably have more impact if it came from somebody less prone to attack "sovereign nations" (e.g. Afghansitan, Iraq) himself.
"I was very firm with Vladimir Putin", Said President Bush, speaking from Beijing China where he's watching various sporting events at the 2008 Olympics along with special guest George Herbert Walker Bush, who would be the current president's father except that he answers to A Higher Father.
GHW Bush (AKA Bush-41) avers that it's pretty smart of the president to have "pleasant relationships with people and that they trust him. I think he's developing that with [French President Nicolas] Sarkozy. I know it's there with Putin."

But This Will Only Mean

That we'll have twice as many Afghan soldiers shooting at us.

Now here's a spectacularly bad idea:

"Gates Pushing Plan to Double Afghan Army" (In the New York Times (August 7), Robert M. Gates (of George W. Bush administration fame; not Bill Gates of Microsoft fame), said that inasmuch as we're, ahem, not winning (as somehow distinct from losing) the war we began in such hopes in Afghanistan, we should throw good money after bad. We should arm, train, and pay the men who will shortly be taking aim at our soldiers. Employ Twice The Usual Suspects, in fact. Apparently, the will to believe can eclipse all evidence, gathered over, literally, millenia. And persuade some to believe that if we keep doing what hasn't yet worked, only do more of it, it's bound to start working soon. Much like the idea that if we punish people for being people, soon they'll stop being people. All that gambling and drinking and smoking and drug use and sexual activity will cease. It's magic, don't you know. As in Just Say No. That's certainly proved effective.
And so, the Afghans will lay down their arms, lie down with the lion, and (to quote a soon-to-be-recent-ex-vice-president) welcome us with open arms. Hell, Alexander the Great couldn't get these guys to stop fighting, and he was a heckuva lot better leader than anybody in the White House presently.

The Man Is Shameless!

(Or Is He Clueless?)

"BANGKOK, Thailand - President Bush praised the spread of freedom in Asia while training a harsh spotlight Thursday on the region's democratic laggards, sharply criticizing oppression and human rights abuses in China, Myanmar and North Korea."(AP August 7)
Considering his relentless all-out assault on the United States Constitution, the feckless president should perhaps look to his own house. "He that is void of wisdom despiseth his neighbour: but a man of understanding holdeth his peace." (Proverbs 11).
At least let him hold his peace until January 20 2009, at which point nobody except his closest toadies will be paying any attention.

And Now This From Paris

Always

Favor Form Over Substance.

After all - everything is just fine in the world today, so The Most Important Thing is to prove you're a True Patriot As here: Take The Pledge.
Is it important to actually Do anything? Absolutely not! It's much more the thing to profess virtue than to practice it. Less effort. Pretty much like making sure people can see you praying to God. What's the point, if nobody knows you're doing it?
Meantime, back at the Town Hall Meeting, we managed to divert attention from any possible discussion of substantive issues (which, admittedly, both candidates seem a little leery of approaching). Whew! Close Call!

Finding a PC Way

To Say "Uppity".

Pretty clear by now that the main effort of the McCain campaign (through, yes, surrogates, of course) is all about searching for the right way to convey the idea "uppity" without actually using that term. It's proving to be much more profitable than actually addressing any actual substantive issues. When Sen. McCain (And Friends) start talking about the economy, the environment, the government - basically anything regarding the physical or social infrastructure - it's pretty easy to see that they have NO IDEA what the problem is, much less what a solution might look like.
Lets see if "Elitist", "The Race Card", "Pop Star Celebrity", "Naive Idealist" will gain traction, at least with a "certain segment" of the electorate. The ones that are looking for a reason not to vote for someone who doesn't look like them.
I agree that Sen. Obama is somewhat of an idealist, which may not be such a good thing for a US president, but naive he certainly is not. I think the statement about not looking like previous presidents is exactly correct. And well phrased. Sen. Obama has shown a great deal of political agility in defusing the so far pretty clumsy attempts to label him as a "Black" candidate. Of course, it may be that labelling a black man as a black candidate was previously an easy thing to do. Jesse Jackson, as the most visible previous campaigners, really had no credibility except as a leader of a social movement largely aimed at a black constituency. Regardless of any other characteristic, it's really best, in the belief of most voters, to go with someone with previous experience in elective office. Someone who has submitted him(her)self as a candidate.
Still it worries me somewhat: When the curtain is pulled at the voting booth this November, there's going to be some level of ... Let's call it "Nostalgia" - people harking to a past that seems nicer than today. Deciding that they really would prefer a president who looks like all the previous presidents. It's an easy way to be a non-racist racist.
For my part, I think that the Old White Guys have had their turn (and I am one, or at least look like one), and they haven't really delivered for at least half a century. Let's go with the new guy. He couldn't do any worse than the present one!
I especially like that Sen. Obama's running from the intelligent end of the political spectrum, even though that's risky. Even the intelligent ones (Clinton comes to mind) generally prefer to reduce risk by running as a good ol' boy. Let's reward the innovative and eloquent Candidate Obama this November.
Although, perhaps, sticking him in the Oval Office, which by now looks pretty much like the Augean Stables may be no reward.

Too Good

To Pass Up...
“I think we have a very good constructive theory of that these days,” Dr. Wolynes said. “Many people tell me this is very contentious. I disagree violently with them.” He Says Here, speaking of glass, of all things!

Or, as we might say "I strongly contend that this is not contentious..."
I think the good professor is having a little fun with us here. It's certainly nice to see this sort of thing in the normally brittle scientific community.

Once

Upon A Time -

the Telephone was used to communicate with people. Then in the '60's the network began to be used by computers. Eventually, the people and the computers began conversing - in a sort of a way.
Today, however, is, as they say, a whole new ballgame. Or maybe it's a brave new world. Nothing seems certain to me anymore. Today's telephone is much much more!

A must-have, I bring you the iPhone! Here's what's happening in this new, okay, I feel like it's time to say it, paradigm: Trying To Connect.
Why do people flock to this painful experience? One is inclined to suspect that it is somehow related to "status". Buyer Number One gets to be Geek-For-A-Day. After which, he becomes a sucker, just like the rest of the herd. In the so very special case of the iPhone, however, the possessors seem to be pretty much like the owners of the iconic



Hummer - willing to spare no expense to put themselves to great inconvenience.
Then there's the great new feature, shared by newer model phones and cars, alike: the GPS. Also known as the "Please Stalk Me" device. Now your friends, your enemies, even your government, can find you wherever you are.
Brave New World, indeed!

Sometimes...

It's good to actually apply some actual facts...
Suicides accounted for 55 percent of the nation's nearly 31,000 firearm deaths in 2005, the most recent year for which statistics are available from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
There was nothing unique about that year — gun-related suicides have outnumbered firearm homicides and accidents for 20 of the last 25 years. In 2005, homicides accounted for 40 percent of gun deaths. Accidents accounted for 3 percent. The remaining 2 percent included legal killings, such as when police do the shooting, and cases that involve undetermined intent. (MIKE STOBBE, AP, 30 June)
Two per cent included legal killings!
That's good to know.

Hands Free?

What about Eyes Free? With respect to cell phones (called mobile phones everywhere in the world except the USA), as usual, the law are an ass: With all the wonderful convergence these devices have, merely addressing the talky part of the mobile handset is pathetic. When all those drivers are reading messages, watching film clips, looking at the GPS map...
Of course, you can do all this now with the newer cars touchscreen LCD, you no longer even need a mobile phone.
Fortunately, drivers will soon be too broke to be able to both own a car and buy gas for it, so this problem is about to become self-limiting.

Wine Wine Wine,

Red Wine, That sallow cheek o'hers t'incarnadine (Omar Khayyam)

There are so many reports these days in the health pages of newspapers about the wonders of drinking wine, (like this one: "Red Wine May Slow Aging";) one more cynical than I might well wonder if the headline writer can anticipate some reward from, oh, say, The Wine Institute. Especially given that the actual article doesn't indicate that wine is particularly good for you at all. The article is about resveratrol, and other sirtuins.
A simple Google Search gives us the following numbers (Note: your mileage may vary):
"Wine AND Health": 12,800,000 hits;
"Wine AND Alcoholism": 405,000 hits;
"Wine AND Wino": 732,000 hits.
The Results Are Clear!
Any competent statistician can conclude from these numbers that wine is more than ten times more healthy for you than it is unhealthy for you.
Since I used the word wine not once, but three times in my headline, I expectantly await my (probably modest) payola from the above mentioned Wine Institute. Actually, any payment from any grateful winemaker / winemarketer will be gratefully accepted.
Adding the terms alcoholism and wino probably blew my chances though.

No Pander Too Far

I Have the solution!
Get rid of the taxes on gasoline. That'll help the hard-working citizen to keep more of his hard-earned dollars. In this hard-nosed political campaign season, it's now come to this: " WASHINGTON - Get rid of the federal gas tax — at least for the summer. Tax Big Oil to help the rest of us out. Get drilling in that Alaska refuge. Soaring gasoline prices are suddenly the nation's No. 1 crisis, and all the presidential candidates are offering cures.
Never mind that economists and energy experts see little value in such measures, at least in the short run. Or that even some top congressional leaders are raising eyebrows. It's election season, and presidential contenders and other politicians are jumping on the bandwagon.
The slew of proposals includes: a summertime suspension of federal gas taxes, backed by John McCain and Hillary Rodham Clinton..." (AP, May 1).
I think this concept of cutting taxes and borrowing money from China to buy oil from Saudi Arabia requires more of a Suspension of Disbelief than anything else.
I've been pretty much of an agnostic with respect to the presidential candidates: I do not believe that the government of the United States is really salvageable any more. This current President has been so remarkably effective at dismantling the Constitution - and the public has been so idly complicit in the effort - that it seems to me the Republic has hit the wall, reached the end-time, fallen off the wall. Time to go directly to Empire America.
But when a candidate offers such an astoundlingly awful idea as this, I'm insulted to the point where I can't, just can't, vote for this particular scoundrel. Any of them, actually. I live in the hope that at least one of the candidates still standing will be able to resist that lemming-urge to suck up to the booberati by offering them a bribe in the form of a Molotov Coctail to fuel their land yacht.
Please: stop insulting my intelligence!

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.

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?

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!

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?

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.

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.

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.

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

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)

Madison Avenue Is Eating Your Brain

They Warned Us that allowing the pharmaceutical companies to advertise their products would end up like this.

The $ are just too tempting to turn away from.

So now, it turns out, the advertising for "Two widely prescribed cholesterol-lowering drugs" convinces people that a pill is the solution to their problems. When, in fact, an actual study of what happens to these drug users shows that Vytorin and Zetia might make things worse for them! A perfect example of my main thesis:
Good Idea; Too Bad It's Wrong.
The amazing thing one finds in the report Here: is that the "testing" for these drugs was woefully insufficient, even purposeless - mainly aimed at determining if they could alter the blood chemistry. I gotta say, so, big whoop! How about my health? If I'm gonna pay a fortune for fancy and heavily advertised drugs, I want to be sure they do something positive for me: like the drugs Rush Limbaugh got so many prescriptions for. I heard those are pretty spectacular. Now, before the current President started hiring his cronys to essentially dismantle the federal government, the basic requirement for FDA licensing of a drug was that it had to be "proven safe and efficacious". The testing as described in the New York Times article did no such thing. Nor did it even attempt to do anything of the sort. It was basically a smokescreen; some "testing" that could be cited with some obscure numbers regarding cholesterol levels in blood. Of course, I can't say for sure; this kind of rancid oversight of the drug industry might have been the Food & Drug Administration's standard of regulation for some time now. It kind of defeats the purpose of the whole thing though. If there's no real difference between an "FDA appoved" drug and Dr. Toad's Snake Oil, why bother? Toss 'em out, and go back to the old Caveat Emptor standard.
Come to think of it, that's pretty much the way things are now.
Just witness the way the Finance and Lending Industry has been looked after since George W. Bush was selected president.