In what is perhaps today's biggest story, bigger even than the Garner-Affleck marriage or the 600+ pound catfish, we learn that some of the Americans who were held hostage in Iran during the big-H Hostage Crisis are convinced that the newly-elected president of Iran was a key hostage-taker. (hostagizer? hostager?) Yes indeed, inspired by the models of democracy we've established in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Iranians have gone and elected a guy who may well have been one of the key captors in the 444-day Iranian Hostage Crisis.
Now, in the interest of fairness, not all of the hostages agree. But five of the 52 Americans who were held hostage seem thoroughly convinced that he's the guy. Just in case that situation was not enough to cause your ironic outrage senses to twitch, events developed later in the day to cause inflamed swelling and burning. You see, the idea that President-Elect Ahmadinejad was one of the hostage-takers was refuted by...some of the actual, admitted hostage-takers. Several of them were contacted, and flatly denied that the President-Elect was one of them. I don't know about you, but nothing in this situation screams credibility to me like the words of former militant, anti-American students responsible for holding Americans hostage for over a year. "Trust me when I tell you, Great Satan, this guy was not involved."
I never really gave much thought to what happened to the people responsible for the hostage situation, but if anyone had ever asked me, I would probably have assumed Reagan quietly dispatched some CIA goons to make sure they all suffered some freak acccidents. Somehow, the thought that decades later they'd be readily available for interviews by news organizations would not have been something I'd have considered.
Irony done wandered off and died somewhere, today, I think.
Thursday, June 30, 2005
Revisionist Army Recruiting Goals
Billmon has a beautifully elegant post today, regarding the revisionism of the Army's stated recruiting goals.
Now, if only the administration would take the whole "redefining the goals to meet the reality" process to the Iraqi occupation, we might actually get somewhere.
Now, if only the administration would take the whole "redefining the goals to meet the reality" process to the Iraqi occupation, we might actually get somewhere.
Wednesday, June 29, 2005
Kelo "Eminent Domain" Ruling Used Against Souter
This has been covered elsewhere, but it's just too funny to pass up...
Hot on the heels of the "Kelo v. City of New London", in which the Supreme Court ruled that local municipalities can use eminent domain to sieze private property for causes of economic development, a group of developers is petitioning to sieze Justice Souter's home in order to build a hotel. Choice quotes:
This ruling was noteworthy because it puts a big old kink in the basic idea of pesonal property rights, which has always been a linchpin of traditional conservative dogma. And frankly, whether a justified ruling on the basis of law and precedents, or not, it's a truly chilling testimony to the power of for-profit development over our lives.
Hot on the heels of the "Kelo v. City of New London", in which the Supreme Court ruled that local municipalities can use eminent domain to sieze private property for causes of economic development, a group of developers is petitioning to sieze Justice Souter's home in order to build a hotel. Choice quotes:
The proposed development, called "The Lost Liberty Hotel" will feature the "Just Desserts Café" and include a museum, open to the public, featuring a permanent exhibit on the loss of freedom in America. Instead of a Gideon's Bible each guest will receive a free copy of Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged."
This ruling was noteworthy because it puts a big old kink in the basic idea of pesonal property rights, which has always been a linchpin of traditional conservative dogma. And frankly, whether a justified ruling on the basis of law and precedents, or not, it's a truly chilling testimony to the power of for-profit development over our lives.
The Scotch Shortage
Though the Peak Oil issue is irreversible, the Peak Scotch issue may hit closer to home sooner. Apparently, the available supply of single-malt scotch is drying up due to an unforseen spike in demand recently.
Even with all the technological wonders of the current day, 30-year-old scotch still takes 30 years to make....
Even with all the technological wonders of the current day, 30-year-old scotch still takes 30 years to make....
Tuesday, June 28, 2005
Thinkprogress on Flip-Flopping, part deux.
Following up on our earlier post about Rumsfeld and credibility/transparency then and now, thinkprogess today has a great one about Bush and his feelings on timetables, as they relate to military excursions:
No further comments really necessary, I think.
George W. Bush, 6/5/99
“I think it’s also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn.”
...
George W. Bush, 6/24/05:
“It doesn’t make any sense to have a timetable. You know, if you give a timetable, you’re — you’re conceding too much to the enemy.”
No further comments really necessary, I think.
Silver Age Rumsfeld v. Modern Rumsfeld
This one bears posting as many places as possible.
Via thinkprogress, we are told of some choice Rumsfeld quotes from the 60s, when he was a fresh-faced Representative from Illinois, criticizing the Johnson administration on their handling of Vietnam. Choice selections are reprinted below, but it's worth following the link:
Funny how honest, open government seems to sound so much better when it's someone else's administration that's being criticized, n'est-ce pas?
Via thinkprogress, we are told of some choice Rumsfeld quotes from the 60s, when he was a fresh-faced Representative from Illinois, criticizing the Johnson administration on their handling of Vietnam. Choice selections are reprinted below, but it's worth following the link:
"Government has an obligation to present information to the public promptly and accurately so that the public’s evaluation of Government activities is not distorted."
"...the people of the United States must know not only how their country became involved but where we are heading"
"“The administration should clarify its intent in Viet Nam,’ he said. ‘People lack confidence in the credibility of our government.’ Even our allies are beginning to suspect what we say, he charged. ‘It’s a difficult thing today to be informed about our government even without all the secrecy,’"
Funny how honest, open government seems to sound so much better when it's someone else's administration that's being criticized, n'est-ce pas?
Monday, June 27, 2005
First Tigger, now Piglet?
Okay, hot on the heels of Friday's news that Paul Winchell, the voice of Tigger, had passed on, we learn today that:
John Fiedler, the voice of Piglet, has also passed on.
DAY-um! The voices of everyone's childhoods are dropping like flies, people.
John Fiedler, the voice of Piglet, has also passed on.
DAY-um! The voices of everyone's childhoods are dropping like flies, people.
Sunday, June 26, 2005
Blogdex Creator PhD Survey
Boingboing points us towards a blogger survey being performed by blogdex creator, Cameron Marlowe, as part of his PhD project.
If you're a blogger, take the survey. I've got the "I made some science" icon link to the survey over on my sidebar for later reference, for the busy and procrastinating among you.
I'm looking at the cluttered mess that my sidebar is now that I've put the "Previous Posts" section over there. I may need to clean that up.
If you're a blogger, take the survey. I've got the "I made some science" icon link to the survey over on my sidebar for later reference, for the busy and procrastinating among you.
I'm looking at the cluttered mess that my sidebar is now that I've put the "Previous Posts" section over there. I may need to clean that up.
Saturday, June 25, 2005
US in Talks with Iraqi Rebels?
The UK Sunday Times is reporting that talks between US forces and some of the major Iraqi insurgent groups occurred earlier this month. The information in the story is attributed to "two Iraqi sources whose groups were involved," and are said to have "proved reliable in the past," whereas the Pentagon has apparently refused comment. If true, this would prove to be one hell of a development inasmuch as it seems to signal that the tough-talking administration may be realizing the scope of what they've gotten us into.
The article does manage to throw a wet blanket on the prospects by pointing out that Zarqawi's group has not taken part in the negotiations. Even ignoring the lack of participation of one of the (seemingly) most significant insurgent groups, the article makes it sound like the discussions haven't exactly been a resounding success, so far. Their key demand: a timetable of American withdrawal from Iraq!
Yesindeed, the main thing they want is the one thing news articles all week told us the Administration firmly refuses to provide.
Furthermore, we are told that in the first of the two meetings, "the American team began to irritate the Iraqis with what some saw as a crude attempt to gather intelligence." Following up on that performance, they upped the ante on the second meeting:
So, the US delegation seems to be underestimating the insurgents and ham-handing the process so far, but that's hardly surprising, given what has gone before.
The bottom line of the story is that most of what the represented insurgents want are things the US is almost completely unlikely to give. A meaningful outcome of these meetings seem snowball-in-hell unlikely, but it's interesting to see that the administration appears to be acknowledging that maybe a solely military action isn't getting very far.
The article does manage to throw a wet blanket on the prospects by pointing out that Zarqawi's group has not taken part in the negotiations. Even ignoring the lack of participation of one of the (seemingly) most significant insurgent groups, the article makes it sound like the discussions haven't exactly been a resounding success, so far. Their key demand: a timetable of American withdrawal from Iraq!
Yesindeed, the main thing they want is the one thing news articles all week told us the Administration firmly refuses to provide.
Furthermore, we are told that in the first of the two meetings, "the American team began to irritate the Iraqis with what some saw as a crude attempt to gather intelligence." Following up on that performance, they upped the ante on the second meeting:
This meeting did not go well. “The tone of the Americans was different,” the Iraqi insider said. “They were talking with a tone of more superiority, arrogance and provocation.”
So, the US delegation seems to be underestimating the insurgents and ham-handing the process so far, but that's hardly surprising, given what has gone before.
The bottom line of the story is that most of what the represented insurgents want are things the US is almost completely unlikely to give. A meaningful outcome of these meetings seem snowball-in-hell unlikely, but it's interesting to see that the administration appears to be acknowledging that maybe a solely military action isn't getting very far.
Glastonbury Post
When I read yesterday about the rains that were pummelling the attendees at the Glastonbury Festival, for one brief minute I had a reason not to mind missing it.
But that moment is now passed.
We already had our seemingly-inevitable death of a festival-goer. Is it just me, or does it seem like at every major music festival, lately, there has to be one, and only one, person who dies?
The NME reports that the Kaiser Chiefs have already played their set, and dubbed the show "the greatest experience so far for their band." No doubt. Without bothering to check, it looks like they played every song on their debut album.
The White Stripes opened with "Dead Leaves..." and closed with "Seven Nation Army", in a set that was surprisingly light on tunes from the new album. Although, as the article points out, they did do "Passive Manipulation" three times, if that counts for something.
Looks like tomorrow, I get to miss Basement Jaxx, Primal Scream, Garbage and Brian Wilson....sigh.
Next year, for sure, dammit!
But that moment is now passed.
We already had our seemingly-inevitable death of a festival-goer. Is it just me, or does it seem like at every major music festival, lately, there has to be one, and only one, person who dies?
The NME reports that the Kaiser Chiefs have already played their set, and dubbed the show "the greatest experience so far for their band." No doubt. Without bothering to check, it looks like they played every song on their debut album.
The White Stripes opened with "Dead Leaves..." and closed with "Seven Nation Army", in a set that was surprisingly light on tunes from the new album. Although, as the article points out, they did do "Passive Manipulation" three times, if that counts for something.
Looks like tomorrow, I get to miss Basement Jaxx, Primal Scream, Garbage and Brian Wilson....sigh.
Next year, for sure, dammit!
Gorillaz
Goddammit! I hate to sound like a raving fanboy, but I'm listening to the new Gorillaz album right now, and I have to admit that I freaking love it.
As per my initial estimation, I like it more each time I listen to it. From a guy who's liked blur since "Liesure" came out in the US, this may not come as a shocking revelation, but I feel it needs to be said.
I just discovered that this past week, Damon announced that Gorillaz will be playing live this year (note I didn't say "touring"), but that it will be six shows in one venue; the Opera House in Manchester, UK. I think I may have to consider getting over to England for this one, assuming I can lay my hands on some tickets.
As per my initial estimation, I like it more each time I listen to it. From a guy who's liked blur since "Liesure" came out in the US, this may not come as a shocking revelation, but I feel it needs to be said.
I just discovered that this past week, Damon announced that Gorillaz will be playing live this year (note I didn't say "touring"), but that it will be six shows in one venue; the Opera House in Manchester, UK. I think I may have to consider getting over to England for this one, assuming I can lay my hands on some tickets.
Baddest Movie Laser Beams of All Time
VueWeekly, via slashdot, has the countdown I never realized I was waiting for:
The greatest "greatest beams, lasers, death rays and photon streams in movie history"
The big winner: The Death Star's planet-crushing destructo-ray, of course!
The greatest "greatest beams, lasers, death rays and photon streams in movie history"
The big winner: The Death Star's planet-crushing destructo-ray, of course!
Friday, June 24, 2005
Update#4 - Public Broadcasting Funding
Thanks to disgustedem for the heads-up on this one.
The House finalized the PBS funding situation today. From what this article says, it sounds like, for the most part, the story has a happy ending. Not a total happy ending, mind you, but the crisis appears to have been averted. They say the final bill should go before the full House sometime later today, then it's on to the Senate. Here are the details.
1. The House voted to restore the $100 million funding cut. (Yay!)
2. The Ready to Learn program remains unfunded.
3. $80 million dollars for digital broadcast upgrades was left out.
I'm not sure if the $80 million was the entire originally-expected amount, or a cut of the total, so it's hard to be sure how much of a big deal item #3 is. However, the urgent item, the $100 million funding cut, was addressed. PBS has funding for next year. People speaking out made a difference. WOOT!
Now, we just need to address these "Liberal Bias" allegations and the new partisan leadership for the CPB.
The House finalized the PBS funding situation today. From what this article says, it sounds like, for the most part, the story has a happy ending. Not a total happy ending, mind you, but the crisis appears to have been averted. They say the final bill should go before the full House sometime later today, then it's on to the Senate. Here are the details.
1. The House voted to restore the $100 million funding cut. (Yay!)
2. The Ready to Learn program remains unfunded.
3. $80 million dollars for digital broadcast upgrades was left out.
I'm not sure if the $80 million was the entire originally-expected amount, or a cut of the total, so it's hard to be sure how much of a big deal item #3 is. However, the urgent item, the $100 million funding cut, was addressed. PBS has funding for next year. People speaking out made a difference. WOOT!
Now, we just need to address these "Liberal Bias" allegations and the new partisan leadership for the CPB.
Thursday, June 23, 2005
Rove's Cheap Dig on "Liberals"
It's been commented on, so all I'll say is here's what I've sent to my representatives:
*******************
The New York Times today reports that last night, Wednesday, June 22nd, Karl Rove spoke before the Conservative Party of New York, and criticized "liberals" saying they had "placed American troops in greater danger by criticizing their actions." Besides being offensive and despicable, this statment is yet another symptom of the problems affecting political discourse in this country today. Discussion and criticism is a necessary part of a healthy democracy, and cheap personal attacks do nothing but hinder progress. I urge anyone with a conscience to condemn inflammatory and counterproductive remarks like these.
Knocking down the "weak on defense Liberal" strawman may be an effective cheap shot to gain points before a Conservative audience, but a wholesale questioning of the patriotism of all "Liberals" is reprehensible and does nothing but deflect attention away from the serious problems our troops are facing every day in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Bush Administration had broad bi-partisan support for it's military actions in Afghanistan, so Mr. Rove saying Liberals "wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers", (rather than go to war) is nothing more than dishonest mudslinging. The strength of our nation lies in open, honest discussion and criticism, not in personal attacks on one's critics.
In summary, Mr. Rove may have intended to gain points from his attack on "Liberals", but questioning the patriotism of an entire chunk of the population is insulting and further degrades the quality of political discussion in our country. I urge you to condemn such tactics by key political figures.
Thank you,
** UPDATE ** Painfully embarrasing typo corrected. Also, this was sent to my local paper and I was called back by an editor, and got the impression that this was going to print.
*******************
The New York Times today reports that last night, Wednesday, June 22nd, Karl Rove spoke before the Conservative Party of New York, and criticized "liberals" saying they had "placed American troops in greater danger by criticizing their actions." Besides being offensive and despicable, this statment is yet another symptom of the problems affecting political discourse in this country today. Discussion and criticism is a necessary part of a healthy democracy, and cheap personal attacks do nothing but hinder progress. I urge anyone with a conscience to condemn inflammatory and counterproductive remarks like these.
Knocking down the "weak on defense Liberal" strawman may be an effective cheap shot to gain points before a Conservative audience, but a wholesale questioning of the patriotism of all "Liberals" is reprehensible and does nothing but deflect attention away from the serious problems our troops are facing every day in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Bush Administration had broad bi-partisan support for it's military actions in Afghanistan, so Mr. Rove saying Liberals "wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers", (rather than go to war) is nothing more than dishonest mudslinging. The strength of our nation lies in open, honest discussion and criticism, not in personal attacks on one's critics.
In summary, Mr. Rove may have intended to gain points from his attack on "Liberals", but questioning the patriotism of an entire chunk of the population is insulting and further degrades the quality of political discussion in our country. I urge you to condemn such tactics by key political figures.
Thank you,
** UPDATE ** Painfully embarrasing typo corrected. Also, this was sent to my local paper and I was called back by an editor, and got the impression that this was going to print.
Wednesday, June 22, 2005
The End is Near! - A History of Armageddon
My father has been a freaky christian since I was a small child, if not earlier. I've been hearing him caution me in solemn tones that "we'll see the End Times in my lifetime" over and over, since I was young enough for the concept to scare the bejeezus out of me. Additionally, in high school and early college, I was friends with a number of pessimistic fundamentalist christians. Over time, the repitition of the paranoid predictions, as well as my inevitable apostasy, wore the weight of these predictions down to "advertisement-grade chicken little" in my mind.
But for those who were not raised in a paranoid fundamentalist household, or who never experienced such things first hand, I present to you: (via metafilter)
A History of End-of-the-World Predictions!
But for those who were not raised in a paranoid fundamentalist household, or who never experienced such things first hand, I present to you: (via metafilter)
A History of End-of-the-World Predictions!
Musicblogging - Wednesday Night Edition
I like these guys.
They have a sound that makes me think they spent a lot of time in their youth listening to The Jam and The Ramones.
Also, they're going to be appearing at Glastonbury on the Pyramid stage on Saturday. Tomorrow, I'll probably post at great length at my annoyance at not being able to attend Glastonbury this year, since it may possibly beat out last years' show as being the one I most wanted to see.
They have a sound that makes me think they spent a lot of time in their youth listening to The Jam and The Ramones.
Also, they're going to be appearing at Glastonbury on the Pyramid stage on Saturday. Tomorrow, I'll probably post at great length at my annoyance at not being able to attend Glastonbury this year, since it may possibly beat out last years' show as being the one I most wanted to see.
Space Launches and Failures
Today, I'm reminded of the Simpson's episode "Homer the Astronaut", in which NASA panics when they realize that the public has lost all interest in space launches. In an attempt to regain public interest, the decide they need to send up someone that will truly captivate the public's attention, and they realize that person is: The Common Slob.
I guess I'm somewhat typical of what the Simpson's writers thought the public to be: Without making any claims to be a rocket scientist, or considering space launches to be easy, I still find myself scratching my head over the fact that at this point in time, space launches should be a somewhat mature field of endeavor, and that getting a ship into space seems like it should be fairly routine. (Note: Let me stress, here, that I am speaking strictly of the act of getting a rocket off the planet and outside of the atmosphere. I still appreciate the complexities of going beyond that point.)
The reason I mention this has to do with two worrisome headlines from the last day or so, both pertaining to Russian space launches. These are:
1.) The highly-anticipated launch of the solar sail vehicle was confirmed to have failed. This was to have been the first test of a controlled flight via a solar sail-powered vehicle, and was quite an exciting venture. Solar Sails offer the possibility of high-speed, long-distance spaceflight without the requirements of carrying massive amounts of chemical propellant...a spacecraft that uses effectively free propulsion. After fretting for the better part of a day, it was definitively determined that "the Volna booster rocket failed 83 seconds after its launch." A high-profile and highly-disappointing failure.
2.) Hot on the heels of failure item number one above, we learn of a rocket which crashed while attempting to deliver a communications satellite into orbit. In this case, we are told that:"rocket launched properly, but experienced a malfunction as it switched between stages."
Now, unless something has changed in the last few weeks, if things keep on the same course we've been anticipating, we're going to be relying on the Russians for service to the International Space Station for a few years after the Space Shuttles are discontinued until the new replacement vehicle is ready for service. I'm not trying to slam the Russians specifically, but there are clearly some issues to be worked out in the reliability aspect of their launch capabilities.
It certainly seems like a wrong-headed idea to completely eliminate a working program, while counting on a program with its own obvious kinks, all in the hopes that some new as-yet-undetermined plan to pick up the slack several years later.
As a final word, in case it sounds like I'm singling out the Russian space program for criticism: I'm not. I'm trying to make a cautionary statement. I actually plan to write a post (or posts) about the planned Russian next-gen space platforms, which sound really freaking cool to me. I think a post about the seemingly yet-to-be-finalized US next-gen space launch platforms is in order, as well.
I guess I'm somewhat typical of what the Simpson's writers thought the public to be: Without making any claims to be a rocket scientist, or considering space launches to be easy, I still find myself scratching my head over the fact that at this point in time, space launches should be a somewhat mature field of endeavor, and that getting a ship into space seems like it should be fairly routine. (Note: Let me stress, here, that I am speaking strictly of the act of getting a rocket off the planet and outside of the atmosphere. I still appreciate the complexities of going beyond that point.)
The reason I mention this has to do with two worrisome headlines from the last day or so, both pertaining to Russian space launches. These are:
1.) The highly-anticipated launch of the solar sail vehicle was confirmed to have failed. This was to have been the first test of a controlled flight via a solar sail-powered vehicle, and was quite an exciting venture. Solar Sails offer the possibility of high-speed, long-distance spaceflight without the requirements of carrying massive amounts of chemical propellant...a spacecraft that uses effectively free propulsion. After fretting for the better part of a day, it was definitively determined that "the Volna booster rocket failed 83 seconds after its launch." A high-profile and highly-disappointing failure.
2.) Hot on the heels of failure item number one above, we learn of a rocket which crashed while attempting to deliver a communications satellite into orbit. In this case, we are told that:"rocket launched properly, but experienced a malfunction as it switched between stages."
Now, unless something has changed in the last few weeks, if things keep on the same course we've been anticipating, we're going to be relying on the Russians for service to the International Space Station for a few years after the Space Shuttles are discontinued until the new replacement vehicle is ready for service. I'm not trying to slam the Russians specifically, but there are clearly some issues to be worked out in the reliability aspect of their launch capabilities.
It certainly seems like a wrong-headed idea to completely eliminate a working program, while counting on a program with its own obvious kinks, all in the hopes that some new as-yet-undetermined plan to pick up the slack several years later.
As a final word, in case it sounds like I'm singling out the Russian space program for criticism: I'm not. I'm trying to make a cautionary statement. I actually plan to write a post (or posts) about the planned Russian next-gen space platforms, which sound really freaking cool to me. I think a post about the seemingly yet-to-be-finalized US next-gen space launch platforms is in order, as well.
This Week's Missing Person Story - Lost Cubscout Edition
I avoided talking about the missing Utah cub scout kid, and discussing the obvious angle of "Media attempting to correct its recent 'missing white women' fixation, by covering a missing white kid", since the whole topic has a "shooting fish in a barrel" kind of quality to it.
However, today, the headlines have made it too hard to pass up.
An MSNBC headline tells us:
"Scout's parents: 'Brennan continues to amaze us'"
Well, goddamn, Mr. and Mrs. Brennan, he amazes me, too. I mean...hell...I was a fairly shy, cautious kid, but I wasn't so brainwashed into the "don't talk to strangers" mindset that I'd allow myself to remain lost in the Utah wilderness for four days, ya know?
This article doesn't seem to talk about it, but earlier ones discussed how he stayed on the trail, but would hide whenever he heard someone coming. Props to the kid for surviving like that, but methinks he might benefit from some counselling to loosen up on the social interaction/paranoia front.
However, today, the headlines have made it too hard to pass up.
An MSNBC headline tells us:
"Scout's parents: 'Brennan continues to amaze us'"
Well, goddamn, Mr. and Mrs. Brennan, he amazes me, too. I mean...hell...I was a fairly shy, cautious kid, but I wasn't so brainwashed into the "don't talk to strangers" mindset that I'd allow myself to remain lost in the Utah wilderness for four days, ya know?
This article doesn't seem to talk about it, but earlier ones discussed how he stayed on the trail, but would hide whenever he heard someone coming. Props to the kid for surviving like that, but methinks he might benefit from some counselling to loosen up on the social interaction/paranoia front.
Update#3 - Public Broadcasting Funding
From Murshed Z's diary on dailykos, we are alerted to the following update on the CPB Funding issue:
"Tomorrow, [Thursday, June 23rd] Representatives David Obey (D-WI), James Leach (R-IA) and Nita Lowey (D-NY) will be putting forward an amendment to restore that $100 million to public broadcasting's budget for next year. The amendment will be offered as part of the Labor-Health and Human Services -Education Appropriations bill."
On the Common Cause blog, Murshed also points out that the House Appropriations has decidednot to cut off all funds by 2008, apparently as a result of the groundswell opposition to the move, but the $100 million budget gap is still in the works. This is what the above Leach-Lowey amendment is intended to address.
Once again, please call your Legislators and express your support for the Leach-Lowey amendment.
"Tomorrow, [Thursday, June 23rd] Representatives David Obey (D-WI), James Leach (R-IA) and Nita Lowey (D-NY) will be putting forward an amendment to restore that $100 million to public broadcasting's budget for next year. The amendment will be offered as part of the Labor-Health and Human Services -Education Appropriations bill."
On the Common Cause blog, Murshed also points out that the House Appropriations has decided
Once again, please call your Legislators and express your support for the Leach-Lowey amendment.
Tuesday, June 21, 2005
Summer Solstice and Brake Jobs
Well, as has been discussed by many others, today is the Summer Solstice; the longest day of the year. And let me tell you...it sure as shit felt like the longest day.
I had originally planned to go up my parents' house and do my brakes (my parents have a garage, I do not.) on all four corners. One thing led to another, and I did my front brakes, which was the critical bit I needed to do, and a few troubling suspension components, and before I knew it, I'd clocked in 6 hours of car repair. After hours of struggling with nuts that refused to break free, interspersed with hacksawing through bolts stuck to said nuts, I was beat.
In the end, I didn't accomplish everything I'd hoped to, but I'd gotten the critical stuff done, and a few extra things along the way. As such, I'm going to head out and have a few celebratory drinks, now....huttah!
I had originally planned to go up my parents' house and do my brakes (my parents have a garage, I do not.) on all four corners. One thing led to another, and I did my front brakes, which was the critical bit I needed to do, and a few troubling suspension components, and before I knew it, I'd clocked in 6 hours of car repair. After hours of struggling with nuts that refused to break free, interspersed with hacksawing through bolts stuck to said nuts, I was beat.
In the end, I didn't accomplish everything I'd hoped to, but I'd gotten the critical stuff done, and a few extra things along the way. As such, I'm going to head out and have a few celebratory drinks, now....huttah!
Update#2 - Public Broadcasting Petition
Once again, let me just say:"Holy crap!"
Since my most recent update, moveon bumped their signatures goal up from 500,000 to one million. Looks like, as of 11:30 today, they've exceeded that goal.
According to the announcement I heard on our local NPR station today, it sounds like the original funding cuts were amended to a more realistic funding cut, one that is not outrageous and crippling, but more in line with current budgetary reality. (While the tax cuts for the rich are still in effect, that is.) Haven't found any hard news sources on this one yet, but I'm keeping my eye out, and will update when info becomes available.
Since my most recent update, moveon bumped their signatures goal up from 500,000 to one million. Looks like, as of 11:30 today, they've exceeded that goal.
According to the announcement I heard on our local NPR station today, it sounds like the original funding cuts were amended to a more realistic funding cut, one that is not outrageous and crippling, but more in line with current budgetary reality. (While the tax cuts for the rich are still in effect, that is.) Haven't found any hard news sources on this one yet, but I'm keeping my eye out, and will update when info becomes available.
Action Alert - DTV Broadcast Flag is back
Apparently, the recent victory against the DTV broadcast flag was short-lived. From the EFF website, via slashdot, we learn that Hollywood has snuck an amendment into an appropriations bill in Senate subcommittee.
Of course, anyone who cares about fair use, and keeping Hollywood from controlling what you can do with broadcast programming should follow the link and sign the petition opposing the amendment. (Note: It looks like the form has an automatic "forward to your congressperson" function, but the especially motivated should, of course, contact their legislators directly.)
Of course, anyone who cares about fair use, and keeping Hollywood from controlling what you can do with broadcast programming should follow the link and sign the petition opposing the amendment. (Note: It looks like the form has an automatic "forward to your congressperson" function, but the especially motivated should, of course, contact their legislators directly.)
Monday, June 20, 2005
Stem Cell Research - News From Across the Pond
The British papers are as-ploding with stem cell research news today. (Okay, maybe not as-ploding, but there's two articles, which appears to be two more than I've seen on US -based news sources, mmmm-kay?)
The Guardian tells us that the varying levels of political and ethical opposition to stem cell research has not seemed to cripple it. Since 2000, over 3,000 patents pertaining to stem cell research have been filed worldwide. Interestingly, the US has filed the most patents, but the majority of the US patents are being driven by the University of California, which sort of tempers the surprise. As a percentage of the world-wide total patents, embryonic stem cell research, the most quarrelled-over, constituted a quarter.
Meanwhile, over at the Independent, they report that British scientists have grown both egg and sperm cells from stem cells. The article points out that some have suggested this technique may be too similar to human cloning for complete comfort, but the scientists responsible for the research have rejected such complaints. And they also raised the possibility that this might give rise to the oh-so-weird possibility of a single male being used to create both the egg and the sperm cell, thus making that person the resulting childs mother and father. Ook!
"Who's my daddy? My mommy, actually."
The Guardian tells us that the varying levels of political and ethical opposition to stem cell research has not seemed to cripple it. Since 2000, over 3,000 patents pertaining to stem cell research have been filed worldwide. Interestingly, the US has filed the most patents, but the majority of the US patents are being driven by the University of California, which sort of tempers the surprise. As a percentage of the world-wide total patents, embryonic stem cell research, the most quarrelled-over, constituted a quarter.
Meanwhile, over at the Independent, they report that British scientists have grown both egg and sperm cells from stem cells. The article points out that some have suggested this technique may be too similar to human cloning for complete comfort, but the scientists responsible for the research have rejected such complaints. And they also raised the possibility that this might give rise to the oh-so-weird possibility of a single male being used to create both the egg and the sperm cell, thus making that person the resulting childs mother and father. Ook!
"Who's my daddy? My mommy, actually."
Cool Toys - Rotary Dial Retro Cellphone
Saw this one via boingboing, Make: magazine profiles the new retro cellphone mod based on an old rotary deskphone from Spark Fun Electronics.
Given that my kitchen phone is the old Western Electric Bell System wall phone from my parents' house, our household's only phone during much of my childhood, I think I might need to get me one of these. It might even be cooler than the Pokia handset mods....
Given that my kitchen phone is the old Western Electric Bell System wall phone from my parents' house, our household's only phone during much of my childhood, I think I might need to get me one of these. It might even be cooler than the Pokia handset mods....
Phishing "Industry" Sophistication
WSJonline, via slashdot, reports on the increasingly sophisticated world of phishers.
They explain how various specialized job categories are working themselves out.
"Some might have access to computers around the world that have been hijacked, and can thus be used in connection with a phishing attack. Others might design realistic "scam pages," which are the actual emails that phishers send." Others, they say, act as "cashers" who take the stolen identity info and actually implement their techniques to turn the information into actual cash money, returning a cut to the person who provided them the stolen identity information.
Not surprisingly, a system of peer-review has been developed to help separate "trustworthy" cashers, from those who will take the money and run:
"Certain chat rooms are thus full of cashers looking for work. "I cash out," advertised "CCPower" last week on an IRC channel that had 80 other people logged onto it. "Msg me for deal. 65% your share."
The average nonphisher might wonder what would prevent a casher from simply taking the money and running. It turns out, says Mr. Abad, that phishers have a reputation-monitoring system much like eBay's. If you rip someone off, your rating goes down. Not only that, phishers post nasty notices about you on IRC. "Sox and Bagzy are rippers," warned a message posted last week."
Entrepreneurship and capitalism at it's finest....
They explain how various specialized job categories are working themselves out.
"Some might have access to computers around the world that have been hijacked, and can thus be used in connection with a phishing attack. Others might design realistic "scam pages," which are the actual emails that phishers send." Others, they say, act as "cashers" who take the stolen identity info and actually implement their techniques to turn the information into actual cash money, returning a cut to the person who provided them the stolen identity information.
Not surprisingly, a system of peer-review has been developed to help separate "trustworthy" cashers, from those who will take the money and run:
"Certain chat rooms are thus full of cashers looking for work. "I cash out," advertised "CCPower" last week on an IRC channel that had 80 other people logged onto it. "Msg me for deal. 65% your share."
The average nonphisher might wonder what would prevent a casher from simply taking the money and running. It turns out, says Mr. Abad, that phishers have a reputation-monitoring system much like eBay's. If you rip someone off, your rating goes down. Not only that, phishers post nasty notices about you on IRC. "Sox and Bagzy are rippers," warned a message posted last week."
Entrepreneurship and capitalism at it's finest....
Sunday, June 19, 2005
F-1 Clusterf*** at Indy
I missed the race today, but my brother told me about it.
Apparently, Michelin couldn't certify it's tires for safety on the Indy surface, so 14 drivers out of the qualified 20 pitted at the end of the green flag lap. Schumi won, his first for the season, by beating out five other drivers.
Not surprisingly, as MSNBC reports, it sounds like the fans were pissed:
"He was booed on the podium, the traditional champagne celebration was canceled, and the public address announcer implored the few remaining fans in attendance to stop throwing things." LOL!
My brother and I had kicked around the idea of going this year, and I suppose it goes without saying that we don't regret skipping it, now.
UPDATE: (june 20, 2:39pm) Let the blamefest and finger-pointing begin!
Apparently, Michelin couldn't certify it's tires for safety on the Indy surface, so 14 drivers out of the qualified 20 pitted at the end of the green flag lap. Schumi won, his first for the season, by beating out five other drivers.
Not surprisingly, as MSNBC reports, it sounds like the fans were pissed:
"He was booed on the podium, the traditional champagne celebration was canceled, and the public address announcer implored the few remaining fans in attendance to stop throwing things." LOL!
My brother and I had kicked around the idea of going this year, and I suppose it goes without saying that we don't regret skipping it, now.
UPDATE: (june 20, 2:39pm) Let the blamefest and finger-pointing begin!
UK Public Smoking Ban?
During the only trip to California in my adult life, in '96, I was shocked to find out that they prohibited smoking in bars and restaurants. At the time, I had no idea that the concept would gain the traction that it has. Given the similar move by New York, and more recently the entire freaking country of Ireland, it certainly seems like the trend is gaining some badass momentum.
Early this morning, while doing some work, I noticed the timesonline story. (title: Smoking ban 'inevitable') Today, the guardian carries a headline story explaining that Blair will be pushing for a "total ban" on smoking.
The guardian article indicates that a recent poll found that:
"72 per cent of Britons are against an outright ban on smoking in pubs, clubs and bars"
and the timesonline story suggests that a full ban wouldn't go into effect until 2007....so if my current plans to get over there early next year work out, I may still have an opportunity to enjoy a pint in a smoky English pub before they make that illegal.
I guess my biggest gripe with that whole thing is; I understand the arguments of non-smokers, and I support a bar/restaurant owner making the decision to make their establishment smoke-free...but I'm obviously tweaked by the idea of mandatory smoking bans. Whatever intellectual agreement I might have with the idea for health reasons, my addict's heart just don't like it.
Early this morning, while doing some work, I noticed the timesonline story. (title: Smoking ban 'inevitable') Today, the guardian carries a headline story explaining that Blair will be pushing for a "total ban" on smoking.
The guardian article indicates that a recent poll found that:
"72 per cent of Britons are against an outright ban on smoking in pubs, clubs and bars"
and the timesonline story suggests that a full ban wouldn't go into effect until 2007....so if my current plans to get over there early next year work out, I may still have an opportunity to enjoy a pint in a smoky English pub before they make that illegal.
I guess my biggest gripe with that whole thing is; I understand the arguments of non-smokers, and I support a bar/restaurant owner making the decision to make their establishment smoke-free...but I'm obviously tweaked by the idea of mandatory smoking bans. Whatever intellectual agreement I might have with the idea for health reasons, my addict's heart just don't like it.
Saturday, June 18, 2005
Wachowski Bros doing "V for Vendetta" movie
How could I not have known about this? I've apparently been too damned busy with work.
From the NY Times, I have just learned that The Wachowski Brothers are producing a film of "V for Vendetta", starring Natalie Portman as Evey and Hugo Weaving as V.
Understand that this may have been the book that sparked the peak of my comic book fanboy period. It was also, with "The Watchmen", the book that made me a massive Alan Moore fan. The man who, probably more than any other source, has shaped my view of Thatcherian England. The man who, along with Frank Miller, are among the top 5 writers to have elevated comic books from "funny books" to serious art.
The movie is apparently timed to open on Nov. 4th, the day before the 400th anniversary of Guy Fawkes day, which symbolism I'm guessing probably wont make a whole lot of difference in the US. Otherwise, however, the timing of a movie that examines a under fascist rule, and the fight to for freedom probably couldn't have come at a better time. A truly dark, troubling, thought-provoking story, if ever there was one.w00t!
Here's the list of resources I've compiled:
Classic Vendetta fansite
Vendetta movie blog
Official Movie Site (Not much as of June 19th)
IMDB entry
amazon listing for the collected graphic novel
From the NY Times, I have just learned that The Wachowski Brothers are producing a film of "V for Vendetta", starring Natalie Portman as Evey and Hugo Weaving as V.
Understand that this may have been the book that sparked the peak of my comic book fanboy period. It was also, with "The Watchmen", the book that made me a massive Alan Moore fan. The man who, probably more than any other source, has shaped my view of Thatcherian England. The man who, along with Frank Miller, are among the top 5 writers to have elevated comic books from "funny books" to serious art.
The movie is apparently timed to open on Nov. 4th, the day before the 400th anniversary of Guy Fawkes day, which symbolism I'm guessing probably wont make a whole lot of difference in the US. Otherwise, however, the timing of a movie that examines a under fascist rule, and the fight to for freedom probably couldn't have come at a better time. A truly dark, troubling, thought-provoking story, if ever there was one.w00t!
Here's the list of resources I've compiled:
Classic Vendetta fansite
Vendetta movie blog
Official Movie Site (Not much as of June 19th)
IMDB entry
amazon listing for the collected graphic novel
Time Travel Blogging
The BBC's website is one of the most valuable resource on the web, to my mind.
The reason I mention this today is, I noticed two time travel-related news items:
1. The "kill your own father" time travel paradox appears not to be possible, per the findings of a new model of time travel based on quantum mechanics. There's not much along the lines of an out-and-out proof of the conclusion, but they work backwards through the Infinite Alternate Realities theory to conclude somewhat convincingly that, no matter how motivated you may be, you wouldn't possibly manage to travel back and kill your own father.
2. Wormholes ruled unlikely as a method of time travel. This one is more rigorous, and they have basically calculated that the complexity of making a stable wormhole big enough to allow a proton through, never mind one large enough to allow a person through, is likely beyond the foreseeable means of human technology. Bah! So much for the best great hope for timetravel from my adolescence.
The reason I mention this today is, I noticed two time travel-related news items:
1. The "kill your own father" time travel paradox appears not to be possible, per the findings of a new model of time travel based on quantum mechanics. There's not much along the lines of an out-and-out proof of the conclusion, but they work backwards through the Infinite Alternate Realities theory to conclude somewhat convincingly that, no matter how motivated you may be, you wouldn't possibly manage to travel back and kill your own father.
2. Wormholes ruled unlikely as a method of time travel. This one is more rigorous, and they have basically calculated that the complexity of making a stable wormhole big enough to allow a proton through, never mind one large enough to allow a person through, is likely beyond the foreseeable means of human technology. Bah! So much for the best great hope for timetravel from my adolescence.
Google Taking On Paypal
MSNBC points to a WSJ article, which says Google is planning to start an online payment system to rival PayPal. Given PayPal's entrenchement within eBay, it made perfect sense when the online auction giant bought the payment system.
From my eBay buyer experience, there's a significant opposition to PayPal for a lot of eBay sellers. I'm assuming it's due to the fees, since it seems to be the most prevalent amongst sellers of relatively inexpensive items. If Google steps in with a rival payment system, I'm sure penetration would be quick, and it will be interesting to see how competition from a heavyweight impacts the pricing and remaining PayPal holdouts.
From my eBay buyer experience, there's a significant opposition to PayPal for a lot of eBay sellers. I'm assuming it's due to the fees, since it seems to be the most prevalent amongst sellers of relatively inexpensive items. If Google steps in with a rival payment system, I'm sure penetration would be quick, and it will be interesting to see how competition from a heavyweight impacts the pricing and remaining PayPal holdouts.
Alternative Energy Sources Back on the Front Pages
Given the recent runup in oil prices, hitting a record nominal price of $58 per barrel on Friday, it should come as little surprise that attention is turning back to alternatives to our old standby of Middle East crude. In today's news sources, we see a focus on alternative energy sources that's becoming reminiscent of the late 70s.
In the US, Petroleum is not a significant fuel source for our electricity, as we rely on coal for over half of our power generation. But recent advances in the solar-electric technology are making home solar power generation more and more common. Today's NY Times reports that home solar energy systems, though still not cheap, are becoming more affordable. They point out that standardization and economies of scale are driving the equipment costs down. "In moving toward the energy mainstream, solar expenses have dropped to around $8 a watt, from roughly $100 three decades ago." However, they also point out that a standard system is still going to whack your wallet to the tune of $20,000, so there's obviously still a way to go before things really catch on. A big piece of the overall equation is in State tax incentives that provide rebates and tax refunds and allow for the ability to sell excess electricity back to the utility companies. Clearly, it wont be too terribly soon that we all have our own home solar panel systems, but the stage is set to move in that direction.
Looking elsewhere in the world, msnbc.com tells us of how Brazil is positioning themselves as leaders in the production of biofuels. Utilizing their significant sugar resources, they are reducing their dependence on imported oil by refining sugar into ethanol. The government has stood behind it's ethanol policy since the 1970s, and they have a significant percentage of vehicles on the road that can run on either gasoline or ethanol.
The article points out the significant efficiencies of the sugar refining industry:
"Mills such as Sao Martinho are highly efficient. The pressed sugar-cane juice can either go to huge fermentation vats to make alcohol or be spun in centrifuges to produce sugar and molasses, depending on which product is priced more favorably on any given day. The plant supplies its own electrical power by burning the crushed outer stalk of the cane, known as bagasse ."
They point out that the US is at a significant disadvantage in this area. This is due in no small part to the limited land suitable for sugar growing, as well as because import quotas have kept domestic prices for refined sugar mostly insulated from global competition. In the US, they point out, corn is the primary source of ethanol, but the energy yield per acre is less than that of sugar cane.
They point out that legislation in the Senate energy bill will work to push the US in the direction of greater utilization of biofuels, but that these provisions are being opposed by the American Petroleum Institute. To me, this chafes for obvious reason. No matter what happens in the next 10-20 years, the US is still going to be highly dependent on petroleum, and the oil companies are assured healthy profits as far as the eye can see. Opposing this inevitable move towards renewable energy sources only hurts us all in the long run.
In the US, Petroleum is not a significant fuel source for our electricity, as we rely on coal for over half of our power generation. But recent advances in the solar-electric technology are making home solar power generation more and more common. Today's NY Times reports that home solar energy systems, though still not cheap, are becoming more affordable. They point out that standardization and economies of scale are driving the equipment costs down. "In moving toward the energy mainstream, solar expenses have dropped to around $8 a watt, from roughly $100 three decades ago." However, they also point out that a standard system is still going to whack your wallet to the tune of $20,000, so there's obviously still a way to go before things really catch on. A big piece of the overall equation is in State tax incentives that provide rebates and tax refunds and allow for the ability to sell excess electricity back to the utility companies. Clearly, it wont be too terribly soon that we all have our own home solar panel systems, but the stage is set to move in that direction.
Looking elsewhere in the world, msnbc.com tells us of how Brazil is positioning themselves as leaders in the production of biofuels. Utilizing their significant sugar resources, they are reducing their dependence on imported oil by refining sugar into ethanol. The government has stood behind it's ethanol policy since the 1970s, and they have a significant percentage of vehicles on the road that can run on either gasoline or ethanol.
The article points out the significant efficiencies of the sugar refining industry:
"Mills such as Sao Martinho are highly efficient. The pressed sugar-cane juice can either go to huge fermentation vats to make alcohol or be spun in centrifuges to produce sugar and molasses, depending on which product is priced more favorably on any given day. The plant supplies its own electrical power by burning the crushed outer stalk of the cane, known as bagasse ."
They point out that the US is at a significant disadvantage in this area. This is due in no small part to the limited land suitable for sugar growing, as well as because import quotas have kept domestic prices for refined sugar mostly insulated from global competition. In the US, they point out, corn is the primary source of ethanol, but the energy yield per acre is less than that of sugar cane.
They point out that legislation in the Senate energy bill will work to push the US in the direction of greater utilization of biofuels, but that these provisions are being opposed by the American Petroleum Institute. To me, this chafes for obvious reason. No matter what happens in the next 10-20 years, the US is still going to be highly dependent on petroleum, and the oil companies are assured healthy profits as far as the eye can see. Opposing this inevitable move towards renewable energy sources only hurts us all in the long run.
Thursday, June 16, 2005
Update - Public Broadcasting Petition
Holy Crap: almost three-quarters of a million signatures on the MoveOn Public Broadcasting petition as of 11:44 this evening. (My Original Post here)
From what I hear, Rep. Conyers petition demanding answers about the Downing Street memo only had 540,000 signers.
It's interesting that Public Broadcasting managed to garner a bigger outrage than the DSM. It's also interesting that my name isn't on Conyer's petition, because I swore I signed that one.
From what I hear, Rep. Conyers petition demanding answers about the Downing Street memo only had 540,000 signers.
It's interesting that Public Broadcasting managed to garner a bigger outrage than the DSM. It's also interesting that my name isn't on Conyer's petition, because I swore I signed that one.
The Economist on the Housing Bubble
Leave it to The Economist to pull no punches. They call the boom in housing prices "a bubble" with no apologies. Not just that, they point out that it's likely "the biggest bubble in history". Just to clarify what they're saying, that comparison includes the global stock market of the 90s, and the American stock market of the 20s.
This figure seems especially chilling:
"According to estimates by The Economist, the total value of residential property in developed economies rose by more than $30 trillion over the past five years, to over $70 trillion, an increase equivalent to 100% of those countries' combined GDPs."
100% of GDP, my homies. And that's just the increase.
The article also reveals that almost a quarter of all properties purchased in the US in 2004 were not primary residences, but rather investment properties. Additionally, a third of all home purchases this year were through adjustable rate mortgages. According to today's NY Times, we are alerted to the fact that in 2007, $1 Trillion (12% of the nation's mortgage debt) in ARM's will kick into adjustable rates. How many people are truly prepared for the upswing in their mortgage payments that will come due then? And the truly disturbing fact that 25% of all homebuyers in the US made no down payments - nada! zero! zilch! Seems to me that there was a time when, to purchase something, you at least had to come to the table with some percentage. If someone is unable to come up with ten or twenty percent of a purchase, what's the likelihood that when rates go up, they're not going to be able to pay?
Everything I'm reading here reminds me of the analyses of the 20's bull market. We've got easy money encouraging people to buy assets on margin for more than they could otherwise afford, all with the understanding that price appreciation will cover the shortfall. When the 90's stock market bubble popped, we had the housing market to prop things up, and keep things from getting too ugly. Let's hope that we don't emulate 1929 this time around.
This figure seems especially chilling:
"According to estimates by The Economist, the total value of residential property in developed economies rose by more than $30 trillion over the past five years, to over $70 trillion, an increase equivalent to 100% of those countries' combined GDPs."
100% of GDP, my homies. And that's just the increase.
The article also reveals that almost a quarter of all properties purchased in the US in 2004 were not primary residences, but rather investment properties. Additionally, a third of all home purchases this year were through adjustable rate mortgages. According to today's NY Times, we are alerted to the fact that in 2007, $1 Trillion (12% of the nation's mortgage debt) in ARM's will kick into adjustable rates. How many people are truly prepared for the upswing in their mortgage payments that will come due then? And the truly disturbing fact that 25% of all homebuyers in the US made no down payments - nada! zero! zilch! Seems to me that there was a time when, to purchase something, you at least had to come to the table with some percentage. If someone is unable to come up with ten or twenty percent of a purchase, what's the likelihood that when rates go up, they're not going to be able to pay?
Everything I'm reading here reminds me of the analyses of the 20's bull market. We've got easy money encouraging people to buy assets on margin for more than they could otherwise afford, all with the understanding that price appreciation will cover the shortfall. When the 90's stock market bubble popped, we had the housing market to prop things up, and keep things from getting too ugly. Let's hope that we don't emulate 1929 this time around.
Smoking in China
Canada's Globe&Mail informs me of a fact that does not get much coverage over here in the US of A.
In China, we are told, the Government has a monopoly cigarette industry. Their tobacco industry employs 60 million people and provides 10% of the nations tax revenue. And oddly enough, the end result is that the government doesn't exactly promote a non-smoking policy. The attitudes towards smoking are a tiny bit different than we have over here.
In China, we are told, the Government has a monopoly cigarette industry. Their tobacco industry employs 60 million people and provides 10% of the nations tax revenue. And oddly enough, the end result is that the government doesn't exactly promote a non-smoking policy. The attitudes towards smoking are a tiny bit different than we have over here.
Department of Duh!
A new AP/AOL poll report informs us:
Poll: Most Say Stars Make Poor Role Models
However obvious this fact may be, the interesting bit is that the author of the article seemed unable to come up with many fresh examples of Movie Star Poor Model-hood. They cite the obvious Russell Crowe concierge phone beatdown, and Christian Slater's ass-grab, then dredge up Winona Ryder's 2002 shoplifting conviction and Hugh Grant's prostitute thing from "the mid-1990s"
Is that really the best they can do? Couldn't they do a simple browse of the Smoking Gun archives for some slightly more recent examples? Will Hugh Grant ever live that one down?
Whatever. If you'll excuse me, I'm going to go emulate my role models and do some illegal steroids and then afterwards cheat on my wife with my teenaged mistress.
Movie stars as role models, indeed! What sort of an image is that to emulate?
Poll: Most Say Stars Make Poor Role Models
However obvious this fact may be, the interesting bit is that the author of the article seemed unable to come up with many fresh examples of Movie Star Poor Model-hood. They cite the obvious Russell Crowe concierge phone beatdown, and Christian Slater's ass-grab, then dredge up Winona Ryder's 2002 shoplifting conviction and Hugh Grant's prostitute thing from "the mid-1990s"
Is that really the best they can do? Couldn't they do a simple browse of the Smoking Gun archives for some slightly more recent examples? Will Hugh Grant ever live that one down?
Whatever. If you'll excuse me, I'm going to go emulate my role models and do some illegal steroids and then afterwards cheat on my wife with my teenaged mistress.
Movie stars as role models, indeed! What sort of an image is that to emulate?
Culture of Life
I'm trying to get my head around the way the "Culture of Life" people think.
Hot on the heels of the release of the Terry Schaivo autopsy report, we are told that Terry's parents position is unchanged. Furthermore, for whatever reason, the Bush administration chimed in and reiterated that their opinion is unchanged, as well. Per Press Secretary, Scottie McClellan:
"Americans should "stand on the side of defending ... life."
to which I have to say, "Well, sure." How could you not? I'm sure even if you include the opinions of sullen, disaffected teeenagers across the country, the "anti-life" contingent would still be a seriously small percentage of the total population.
But I guess the big dividing line is exactly where we draw the line between defending life and drawing out some painful, principled stand. It's certainly causing some serious cognitive dissonance for me to hear the administration that started an unprovoked war, killing thousands of Iraqis in the process, saying we should be concerned about defending life. Why are fetuses and braindead people worthy of an almost obsessive amount of concern, when so many others are not?
The whole situation reminds me of the anti-abortion crowd, of whom so many seem to simultaneously be holders of staunch conservative values. They will go to any lengths to protect the life of a fetus, but once he pops out of the womb, he's on his own. Self-reliance, don't ya know?
Hot on the heels of the release of the Terry Schaivo autopsy report, we are told that Terry's parents position is unchanged. Furthermore, for whatever reason, the Bush administration chimed in and reiterated that their opinion is unchanged, as well. Per Press Secretary, Scottie McClellan:
"Americans should "stand on the side of defending ... life."
to which I have to say, "Well, sure." How could you not? I'm sure even if you include the opinions of sullen, disaffected teeenagers across the country, the "anti-life" contingent would still be a seriously small percentage of the total population.
But I guess the big dividing line is exactly where we draw the line between defending life and drawing out some painful, principled stand. It's certainly causing some serious cognitive dissonance for me to hear the administration that started an unprovoked war, killing thousands of Iraqis in the process, saying we should be concerned about defending life. Why are fetuses and braindead people worthy of an almost obsessive amount of concern, when so many others are not?
The whole situation reminds me of the anti-abortion crowd, of whom so many seem to simultaneously be holders of staunch conservative values. They will go to any lengths to protect the life of a fetus, but once he pops out of the womb, he's on his own. Self-reliance, don't ya know?
Wednesday, June 15, 2005
$100,000 Pokerbot Tournament
Via boingboing, we learn from the LA Times that next week in Vegas, there will be a $100,000 money tournament for pokerbots. The article discusses the obvious parallels between the Kasparov-BigBlue matchup, and the article explains how the organizers of the event want to stage a matchup between the winner of this event against the winner of the human World Series.
I, for one, bow before our new poker-playing robot overlords.
I, for one, bow before our new poker-playing robot overlords.
This is How Liberty Dies - To Thunderous Applause
Seriously, now, my outrage muscles are getting very, very tired.
Conspiracy Planet alerts us that Rep. Sensenbrenner has sponsored legislation to repeal the 22nd Amendment. That's the one that limits presidents to two terms.
Lord only knows how many Congresspeople are going to be foolish enough to back this one, given Chimpy's plummeting poll numbers, but I'm just getting weary of signing petitions and writing my legislators.
Here's the text the of the bill from Thomas.
Conspiracy Planet alerts us that Rep. Sensenbrenner has sponsored legislation to repeal the 22nd Amendment. That's the one that limits presidents to two terms.
Lord only knows how many Congresspeople are going to be foolish enough to back this one, given Chimpy's plummeting poll numbers, but I'm just getting weary of signing petitions and writing my legislators.
Here's the text the of the bill from Thomas.
BT Introduces Hybrid Cell/Landline Phone
This is sweet.
BT is introducing a hybrid phone that works as a cellphone and a landline phone when you're in your own house. Inside your house, the phone uses bluetooth to connect to a basestation/hub which also acts as your wi-fi access point for your home computers.
Given the fact that I've perpetually got two bars whenever I'm inside my house, this would be sweet. When's Verizon going to license this for the US, dammit?
El Linko Grande
BT is introducing a hybrid phone that works as a cellphone and a landline phone when you're in your own house. Inside your house, the phone uses bluetooth to connect to a basestation/hub which also acts as your wi-fi access point for your home computers.
Given the fact that I've perpetually got two bars whenever I'm inside my house, this would be sweet. When's Verizon going to license this for the US, dammit?
El Linko Grande
Tuesday, June 14, 2005
Public Broadcasting Funding Cut
Apparently, a house subcommittee has voted to slash funding for Public Broadcasting by approximately 45%. As a sponsor of NPR throughout the years, and a person who spent much of my childhood watching WVIA, it should go without saying that I'm tweaked. The final measure is supposed to go before the full house for a vote next week.
Our local radio station has begun a campaign to mobilize it's sponsors to take action to oppose this. Perhaps more importantly, moveon.org has an online petition, as well as an optional "email your congressperson" option, which may simplify things. Further, Common Cause has the contact info for the Appropriations Committee leadership, if you're really motivated.
***(New! June 20th)*** Media Matters has a blog running currently (I wonder if anyone is co-ordinating these things?) on the subject, which can be found here.
I've just sent the following letter to my representative, and intend to call his office tomorrow morning, as well as the committee chairpersons.
Of course, I urge anyone who cares to do the same.
*****************************
June 14, 2005
Dear Congressman Sherwood,
Recently, the House Labor, Health and Human Services sub-committee voted to cut federal funds for Public Broadcasting by approximately 45%. As a constituent of your district as well as a sponsor of NPR, I want to stress my opposition to this move which would surely cripple many public broadcasting stations. I understand that this measure may go before the full house for a vote as early as next week, and if so, I urge you to vote against this measure.
In this age of corporate media ownership, Public Broadcasting is a valuable national resource preserving an objective viewpoint separated from the whims of corporate management and advertisers. The willingness of individuals across the country to pledge their own money to sponsor the programming should underscore the value and importance that Public Broadcasting provides to our citizens. The contribution provided by the federal government is a key part of the national partnership to produce Public Broadcasting programming.
In summary, Public Broadcasting is a valuable national resource, and one that I and many other citizens feel very strongly about. The dual partnership between the listening public and the federal government is critical to preserving the ongoing quality programming produced by PBS stations nationwide. I urge you to oppose the attempts to cut the funding for Public Broadcasting, and instead vote to restore the appropriate levels of funding.
Sincerely,
(personal information removed)
Our local radio station has begun a campaign to mobilize it's sponsors to take action to oppose this. Perhaps more importantly, moveon.org has an online petition, as well as an optional "email your congressperson" option, which may simplify things. Further, Common Cause has the contact info for the Appropriations Committee leadership, if you're really motivated.
***(New! June 20th)*** Media Matters has a blog running currently (I wonder if anyone is co-ordinating these things?) on the subject, which can be found here.
I've just sent the following letter to my representative, and intend to call his office tomorrow morning, as well as the committee chairpersons.
Of course, I urge anyone who cares to do the same.
*****************************
June 14, 2005
Dear Congressman Sherwood,
Recently, the House Labor, Health and Human Services sub-committee voted to cut federal funds for Public Broadcasting by approximately 45%. As a constituent of your district as well as a sponsor of NPR, I want to stress my opposition to this move which would surely cripple many public broadcasting stations. I understand that this measure may go before the full house for a vote as early as next week, and if so, I urge you to vote against this measure.
In this age of corporate media ownership, Public Broadcasting is a valuable national resource preserving an objective viewpoint separated from the whims of corporate management and advertisers. The willingness of individuals across the country to pledge their own money to sponsor the programming should underscore the value and importance that Public Broadcasting provides to our citizens. The contribution provided by the federal government is a key part of the national partnership to produce Public Broadcasting programming.
In summary, Public Broadcasting is a valuable national resource, and one that I and many other citizens feel very strongly about. The dual partnership between the listening public and the federal government is critical to preserving the ongoing quality programming produced by PBS stations nationwide. I urge you to oppose the attempts to cut the funding for Public Broadcasting, and instead vote to restore the appropriate levels of funding.
Sincerely,
(personal information removed)
Crude Oil Prices and Refining Capacity
I'm not sure who initially pointed this fact out to me, it may have been Kevin Drum at Washington Monthly since he's been covering the oil topic much of late, but this a point which bears repeating.
A great many of the recent news articles on the spiraling prices of crude cite the lack of refining capacity as primary cause. Here's one for instance, and in this one, the Saudi Oil Minister Ali Al-Naimi explicitly blames lack of refining capacity as the primary culprit.
Given how much talk has centered lately around lack of refining capacity as the source of the high prices of crude, I think most of us in the general public are left to simply shrug and wonder how long it's going to take the oil companies to reinvest some of their recent record profits into increased infrastructure. But the problem is, if you take a minute to think about the argument in detail, it makes no sense at all.
Think about it like this: Limited refining capacity would result in limited supply of pump gasoline (and other refined petroleum products), thus with a fixed demaned, we would expect higher prices at the gas station. From the perspective of a barrel of crude oil, all other things being equal, reduced refining capacity should drive *down* demand for crude, thus lowering the price of a barrel. If you're operating already at the capacity of your refinery, any additional oil you buy above and beyond the amount needed to keep the pipeline flowing, is going to have to be stored somewhere, at an unnecessary expense.
Thus, whatever the exact situation may be, limited refining capacity in and of itself would argue for higher prices at the pump and a stable or declining price of a barrel of crude. And for the average person on the street, the specifics of this argument may seem finicky and confusing.
But for someone like the Saudi Oil Minister, or an oil company executive or industry analyst, this would not be an understandable off-the-cuff mistake to mistake or overlook. This really ought to be Oil Industry 101 material, if you think about it. I hate to sound all tin-foil-hat-ish, but it really sounds like a lot of people are pushing the "refining capacity" argument to cover up the elephant-in-the-room "diminishing supply of crude" cause.
A great many of the recent news articles on the spiraling prices of crude cite the lack of refining capacity as primary cause. Here's one for instance, and in this one, the Saudi Oil Minister Ali Al-Naimi explicitly blames lack of refining capacity as the primary culprit.
Given how much talk has centered lately around lack of refining capacity as the source of the high prices of crude, I think most of us in the general public are left to simply shrug and wonder how long it's going to take the oil companies to reinvest some of their recent record profits into increased infrastructure. But the problem is, if you take a minute to think about the argument in detail, it makes no sense at all.
Think about it like this: Limited refining capacity would result in limited supply of pump gasoline (and other refined petroleum products), thus with a fixed demaned, we would expect higher prices at the gas station. From the perspective of a barrel of crude oil, all other things being equal, reduced refining capacity should drive *down* demand for crude, thus lowering the price of a barrel. If you're operating already at the capacity of your refinery, any additional oil you buy above and beyond the amount needed to keep the pipeline flowing, is going to have to be stored somewhere, at an unnecessary expense.
Thus, whatever the exact situation may be, limited refining capacity in and of itself would argue for higher prices at the pump and a stable or declining price of a barrel of crude. And for the average person on the street, the specifics of this argument may seem finicky and confusing.
But for someone like the Saudi Oil Minister, or an oil company executive or industry analyst, this would not be an understandable off-the-cuff mistake to mistake or overlook. This really ought to be Oil Industry 101 material, if you think about it. I hate to sound all tin-foil-hat-ish, but it really sounds like a lot of people are pushing the "refining capacity" argument to cover up the elephant-in-the-room "diminishing supply of crude" cause.
Brain Cells Grown in Laboratory
Sweet!
I can hardly wait until the day you can walk into a brain surgery center, and order a quarter-pound of fresh brain.
I can hardly wait until the day you can walk into a brain surgery center, and order a quarter-pound of fresh brain.
Monday, June 13, 2005
Sunday, June 12, 2005
Supply of Russian Mail-Order Brides to Dry Up?
I'm cracking up, here...
The Independent reports on how a Russian MP is introducing legislation to penalize Russian women who marry foreigners. I guess it's good to know that "hot chicks" do not factor into the otherwise worrisome US trade deficit.
The Independent reports on how a Russian MP is introducing legislation to penalize Russian women who marry foreigners. I guess it's good to know that "hot chicks" do not factor into the otherwise worrisome US trade deficit.
Bride of the Downing Street Memo
Okay, I know most of the blogs I regularly read have covered the newly-leaked Cabinet Office briefing papers, and the Washington Post's prominent discussion thereof.
I did feel that there was one point worth making, which I hadn't seen covered. In the Post article, the focus is largely on the impression of the Brits that the Bush Administration seemed to have completely neglected planning the post-fighting occupation.
But the focus of the article in the UK TimesOnline focuses more on the fact that it was not lost on many of the players that there were some serious questions about the legality of the whole undertaking. I think the first sentence of the article sums things up nicely:
"MINISTERS were warned in July 2002 that Britain was committed to taking part in an American-led invasion of Iraq and they had no choice but to find a way of making it legal. "
So, to summarize: By mid-2002, not only had the decision to invade Iraq been made, but the British were already locked into *some* degree of commitment and they were worrying about how to put some kind of legal fig-leaf on the operation, and they were also already noticing that the Administration seemed to be completely ignoring and underestimating the post-invasion occupation. Whomever leaked these documents really needs to work on their timing, methinks.
Regardless, I'm curious to see how the "find a way to make this thing legal" aspect of the story plays out on this side of the pond.
I did feel that there was one point worth making, which I hadn't seen covered. In the Post article, the focus is largely on the impression of the Brits that the Bush Administration seemed to have completely neglected planning the post-fighting occupation.
But the focus of the article in the UK TimesOnline focuses more on the fact that it was not lost on many of the players that there were some serious questions about the legality of the whole undertaking. I think the first sentence of the article sums things up nicely:
"MINISTERS were warned in July 2002 that Britain was committed to taking part in an American-led invasion of Iraq and they had no choice but to find a way of making it legal. "
So, to summarize: By mid-2002, not only had the decision to invade Iraq been made, but the British were already locked into *some* degree of commitment and they were worrying about how to put some kind of legal fig-leaf on the operation, and they were also already noticing that the Administration seemed to be completely ignoring and underestimating the post-invasion occupation. Whomever leaked these documents really needs to work on their timing, methinks.
Regardless, I'm curious to see how the "find a way to make this thing legal" aspect of the story plays out on this side of the pond.
WTF? NYC Federal 9/11 Compensation Fund Edition
I noticed this one via a Buzzflash headline.
Now, I'm hoping there's some kind of a typo happening here, because the article explains how the Feds are attempting to take back $169 Million in funds for the victims of the 9/11 Attacks. They article says the reasoning behind this is that some of the money was unspent, thus unneeded, and that some of it which was spent was used on improper expenses.
This brings us to the key WTF? part of the article:
"A Government Accountability Office report found that $44 million was improperly spent by New York bureaucrats who failed to follow guidelines, sources said.
The money was meant to be used for administrative costs, but much of it ended up compensating victims instead."
Ah. Yeah. As a taxpayer, I'm outraged that my hard earned dollars aren't being spent on beuracracy and red tape as they were intended, but instead are being frittered away on....compensating...victims and survivors of....the attacks on the World Trade Center.......yeah.
Can that possibly not be a typo? While I slept last night, did I somehow manage to slip into an even deeper level of Bizarro world?
Now, I'm hoping there's some kind of a typo happening here, because the article explains how the Feds are attempting to take back $169 Million in funds for the victims of the 9/11 Attacks. They article says the reasoning behind this is that some of the money was unspent, thus unneeded, and that some of it which was spent was used on improper expenses.
This brings us to the key WTF? part of the article:
"A Government Accountability Office report found that $44 million was improperly spent by New York bureaucrats who failed to follow guidelines, sources said.
The money was meant to be used for administrative costs, but much of it ended up compensating victims instead."
Ah. Yeah. As a taxpayer, I'm outraged that my hard earned dollars aren't being spent on beuracracy and red tape as they were intended, but instead are being frittered away on....compensating...victims and survivors of....the attacks on the World Trade Center.......yeah.
Can that possibly not be a typo? While I slept last night, did I somehow manage to slip into an even deeper level of Bizarro world?
Saturday, June 11, 2005
Summertime Mugginess
It's hot.
It's freaking disgusting hot. Hot and Humid. It feels like it does when you take a hot shower on a warm day without the fan on, and the towels are almost useless because they don't absorb the water, so much as smear it around.
Looking at the NWS data, it fails to convey the full effect. According to them it's 84F with 63% humidity, which frankly doesn't sound all that bad. But it's worse than that.
If a ripper of a thunderstorm came through and cooled things off, it might not be so bad. It was supposed to be quite the stormy day today, and for most of the day it looked as if a big baddie was minutes away from coming through, but it never did. The ominous dark clouds and distant rumbles of thunder that loomed all day never managed to get their act together and pull a T-storm off. Grrrr......
I think I'm an anti-lizard. That is to say, instead of sitting out during the heat of the day on top of a rock, I'd prefer to be under the rock in the shade. Actually, I'd *prefer* to be in a dimly-lit, air-conditioned room in my boxers with a cool drink in my hand.
Last summer, or as I like to call it:"The Best Summer, EVER!", was cool and rainy. Again, looking at the historical data from the NWS, that fact isn't really reflected in this case, either:
The rainfall "departure from normal" numbers all indicate more than usual, but not by any huge margin. But I was there, man...I experienced it firsthand, and I know how it was.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I've got to go refill my drink. Because it's so dark in here, I spilled some on my boxers.
**UPDATE***
No sooner did I publish this post, than I noticed the headline story on msnbc about Tropical Storm Arlene touching down on the Gulf Coast. There's just no happy medium when it comes to nature, is there?
It's freaking disgusting hot. Hot and Humid. It feels like it does when you take a hot shower on a warm day without the fan on, and the towels are almost useless because they don't absorb the water, so much as smear it around.
Looking at the NWS data, it fails to convey the full effect. According to them it's 84F with 63% humidity, which frankly doesn't sound all that bad. But it's worse than that.
If a ripper of a thunderstorm came through and cooled things off, it might not be so bad. It was supposed to be quite the stormy day today, and for most of the day it looked as if a big baddie was minutes away from coming through, but it never did. The ominous dark clouds and distant rumbles of thunder that loomed all day never managed to get their act together and pull a T-storm off. Grrrr......
I think I'm an anti-lizard. That is to say, instead of sitting out during the heat of the day on top of a rock, I'd prefer to be under the rock in the shade. Actually, I'd *prefer* to be in a dimly-lit, air-conditioned room in my boxers with a cool drink in my hand.
Last summer, or as I like to call it:"The Best Summer, EVER!", was cool and rainy. Again, looking at the historical data from the NWS, that fact isn't really reflected in this case, either:
| Month | Avg. Temp(F) | Temp Departure from Normal |
|---|---|---|
| aug 2004 | 68.8 | -1.5 |
| jul 2004 | 70.0 | -2.1 |
| jun 2004 | 65.1 | -2.4 |
The rainfall "departure from normal" numbers all indicate more than usual, but not by any huge margin. But I was there, man...I experienced it firsthand, and I know how it was.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I've got to go refill my drink. Because it's so dark in here, I spilled some on my boxers.
**UPDATE***
No sooner did I publish this post, than I noticed the headline story on msnbc about Tropical Storm Arlene touching down on the Gulf Coast. There's just no happy medium when it comes to nature, is there?
UK Drinking Culture
If you live in Northeastern PA, odds are you're a drinker. Further, if you're young and single living in NEPA, there's a pretty good chance you're a world-class heavyweight drinking champion. I've had my fair share of discussions with friends in which we marvel at the standard definitions of "binge drinking"...the standard numbers that constitute binge drinking are what, in my younger days, I would have done at home to pre-game before I went out to the bars/clubs for the evening.
Given this fact, the various drinking cultures of the world are always of interest to me. Of late, I've been reading much about the impending changes to the laws governing closing hours in the UK. To my eyes, it appears that much virtual ink has been spilled in the debate over the attempt to extend closing hours for UK pubs. The inevitable discussions of alcohol dependency and crime have both argued for and against a link between these things and the easy availability of alcohol.
Having said that, today's Independent reports that brewer InBev (the maker of Stella Artois) is pushing to sell beers in fast food restaurants. Hell, not just McDonald's, but also cinemas, gas stations and video rental stores. (Gas stations! "Hey, while I'm here filling up...")
Truly, I am amazed. If they can address that whole too-early closing time problem, it might be time to submit an immigration application.
Given this fact, the various drinking cultures of the world are always of interest to me. Of late, I've been reading much about the impending changes to the laws governing closing hours in the UK. To my eyes, it appears that much virtual ink has been spilled in the debate over the attempt to extend closing hours for UK pubs. The inevitable discussions of alcohol dependency and crime have both argued for and against a link between these things and the easy availability of alcohol.
Having said that, today's Independent reports that brewer InBev (the maker of Stella Artois) is pushing to sell beers in fast food restaurants. Hell, not just McDonald's, but also cinemas, gas stations and video rental stores. (Gas stations! "Hey, while I'm here filling up...")
Truly, I am amazed. If they can address that whole too-early closing time problem, it might be time to submit an immigration application.
Friday, June 10, 2005
The White Stripes Summer Tour
Yesterday, I finally remembered to check out the White Stripes website for upcoming tour dates. I was pretty tweaked to discover that they don't seem to have any shows planned in the Northeast, as of yet.
I'm assuming there's going to be *some* touring in this corner of the country. There has to be, doesn't there? Can any band really have a U.S. tour without hitting at least one venue in NYC?
I'm assuming there's going to be *some* touring in this corner of the country. There has to be, doesn't there? Can any band really have a U.S. tour without hitting at least one venue in NYC?
NEPA Blogging - Wilkes-Barre and "I Believe..."
Okay, so I read in today's Scranton Times about Wilkes-Barre Mayor Tom Leighton's "big announcement", yesterday (I believe). Per the Times, people came out to this mysterious public announcement expecting word of some new company coming into the area, perhaps, or some new infrastructure development.
Turns out, he was kicking off a new marketing slogan for the city (with logo, no less): "I believe..."
That was it. Really.
Per the Times: "Leighton wants people to reverse a negative perception by simply believing in Wilkes-Barre." And what better way to do that, than by building expectations with a secretive, mysterious public announcement? Perhaps the only way would be to come up with a really weak slogan, on top of that.
I've got to give the guy credit for trying, but...seriously, if that isn't one of the saddest "big ideas" I've ever heard, I don't know what is.
I guess it complements the city's "Yard of the Month" contest fairly seamlessly, if nothing else.
Turns out, he was kicking off a new marketing slogan for the city (with logo, no less): "I believe..."
That was it. Really.
Per the Times: "Leighton wants people to reverse a negative perception by simply believing in Wilkes-Barre." And what better way to do that, than by building expectations with a secretive, mysterious public announcement? Perhaps the only way would be to come up with a really weak slogan, on top of that.
I've got to give the guy credit for trying, but...seriously, if that isn't one of the saddest "big ideas" I've ever heard, I don't know what is.
I guess it complements the city's "Yard of the Month" contest fairly seamlessly, if nothing else.
Friday Afternoon Work Blogging
As luck would have it, today is both mind-numbingly slow at work, as well as on the news sites on the internets. Let's see if the mind-crushing boredom manages to somehow inspire some clever thoughts....
(Crumples face in outward show of extreme exertion, grunts)
Nope. Not gonna happen, apparently.
(Crumples face in outward show of extreme exertion, grunts)
Nope. Not gonna happen, apparently.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)