I've Had My Fill Of Patience!

The trope that Bush used to veto the funding bill (and deny our troops the armor and ammunition they need) was that to set a date certain would give our adversaries comfort, and allow them to withdraw until we leave. "All the terrorists would have to do is mark their calendars and gather their strength and begin plotting how to overthrow the government and take control of the country of Iraq," he said.

Possibly true, although they don't seem to care all that much. This war isn't about "us v. them" as much as it's about "them v. them" and we're just occupying space. But an article at Reuters today made me formulate something that has been bugging me for a while now:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Wearied by steady losses and few tangible signs of progress in the war in Iraq, the U.S. public is running out of one resource America's enemies appear to have in abundance -- patience.

Impatience with the war, now in its fifth year, was reflected in the elections that drove President George W. Bush's Republicans out of power in Congress in November. Since then, Bush named a new secretary of defense and new military commander in Iraq charged with implementing a new strategy.

But despite repeated appeals from Bush for patience while more troops arrive in Iraq to carry out the new strategy, opinion polls show that pessimism runs deep and most Americans favor a deadline for the withdrawal of troops.

Now, Bush has always said he doesn't govern by polls (despite the numerous flipflops that his administration has done based at least in part on, well, polling), and that might be an admirable trait for someone who has a grasp of reality.

But here's the truth: the insurgents, Al Qaeda, Iran, Syria, Sunnis and Kurds all DO read the newspapers, Mr. President, and believe it or not, they actually own calendars!

They know two things:

1) The American people stand three-quarters of the way out of the door of Iraq.

2) In 626 days, the next administration will take over. No one, despite what people are saying on the campaign trail to pander for right wing votes, will continue this war of yours much beyond that date, and that's assuming Congress hasn't figured out a way to take the widdle cap gun out of your hands and drag you home for supper, young man!

So they figure, "Eh! In 627 days, there will be another 3,000 American killed. No biggie. Then the fun begins anyway."

Judging from Islamic fundamentalist Web sites, there is no shortage of patience on the side of America's enemies. The insurgents appear confident they can draw on a seemingly endless supply of new recruits.

"Although ... we have killed some huge number of enemy combatants (perhaps 20,000+), without fail the armed insurgents, militia and Al Qaeda in Iraq apparently regenerate both leadership cadres and foot soldiers," retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey wrote in a memorandum to U.S. military leaders after a visit to Iraq in spring.

See where I'm going with this?

It doesn't matter if we set a date certain or not, the insurgents and the occupied are perfectly willing to wait us out. They know the American people won't allow you unlimited use of force, they know the army that's there already is exhausted, and worse, they know you're losing allies by the day.

My sense is that Bush is terrified. He's like the kid who got a failing grade in history, who doesn't want to show his dad the report card because he knows he'll be beaten (I should know the feeling; I was that kid...nevermind that I got the grade because some girl cheated off my test). So rather than own up to his mistakes and admit there has to be a better way, he's going to stubbornly stick to a path that can only lead to further death and destruction, hoping that some exit presents itself.

Praying the problem goes away, in other words.

There are plenty of plans on the table now that allow us to take some of the pressure off our troops, while protecting those precious few areas of Iraq that seem to be in pretty good shape, like the Kurdish north. For example, the Iraq Study Group, the Baker-Hamilton report, suggested perhaps partitioning the country into three autonomous regions, with equal shares of the national oil revenues going to all three. We could modify this to include American troops in the Kurdish north, allied troops in the Shi'a south, and the middle would effectively be labelled a "no-fight" zone, where we would enforce peace only when we had to, lightning fast strikes and back out. No more occupation.

Oops! I forgot. That was one of my "NotPresident" policies that I wasn't going to announce until I became NotPresident...

Friday Music Blogging

Herb Alpert - Rise

One of the sexiest songs ever written, in my opinion.

Friday Kitten Blogging

In ur tUb, cLoggging uR drainz

Some Good News On Global Warming

The latest UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report was released this morning and it contains some good news, for a change:

BANGKOK (Reuters) - Humans need to make sweeping cuts in greenhouse gas emissions over the next 50 years to keep global warming in check, but it need only cost a tiny fraction of world economic output, a major U.N. climate report said on Friday.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), in the third of a series of reports, said keeping the rise in temperatures to within 2 degrees Celsius would cost only 0.12 percent of annual gross domestic product.

"It's a low premium to pay to reduce the risk of major climate damage," Bill Hare, a Greenpeace adviser who co-authored the report, told Reuters at the end of marathon talks that ran over their four-day schedule to finalize the document.

So let's say you make $50,000. The cost, on that scale, would be $60.

Cheaper than a cup of coffee a week.

This places the responsibility for cleaning up global carbon emissions squarely in the lap of the developed world, to both clean up their acts as well as assist the developing world in leapfrogging fossil fuel technologies to more efficient energy production methods.

Naturally, as this report is the result of over 100 countries having their say in it, it's a barely legitimate assessment of the costs and benefits of these expenditures, but hell, it's a legitimate start and may help enough to avert devastation and tragedies worldwide.

Too, there will undoubtedly be some bleatings on the right, as this tactic will pretty much ensure that new technologies to replace antiquated ones will be introduced. Privatization of utilities, for example, means that it will be more difficult to exchange older coal-based power generation with cleaner technologies, since there will be enormous pressure from short-term investors to keep the status quo.

Hey, I'm sure that extra buck or two in their annual dividends can help them reduce greenhouse gases, right?

Nobody Asked Me, But...

1) I'm not a big fan of rap...I do have a couple of Run-DMC and Eminem tunes on my iPod, but I've always like Busta Rhymes as a personality, so it's sad to see him battling what looks like a very serious substance abuse problem, complicating what appears to be some anger management issues. Good luck, dude.

2) This looks like just the ticket for society today. It's funny how we revel in our shortcomings, but feel a need to cover them up.

3) Which leads me to today's thought: Truth is never profitable. Think about it (and yes, I'm brushing up on my Bokononism). The most profitable ventures in history have been about deceit and illusion.

4) This is a sea serpent found off the coast of Florida in shallow water. It's about seven feet long. The head appears to be just out of frame on the right hand side. I'll see if I can dig up the video for you. UPDATE:

5) Even the folks down in Texas don't want to wall off Mexico!

6) It's nice to see the New York Post being true to form as a homophobic sounding board. They even managed to side-slip the knife into the Catholic church pedophilia scandal, linking it to gay men.

7) Ten Little Indians.

8) Five dollar a gallon gas is just around the corner.

9) "Where In The World Is Matt Lauer?" is taking place this week on the Today Show. For once, it hasn't sucked. He's been to a Boeing plant in Seattle, Bhutan, Ireland, and today, Dubai, all newsworthy places, and has discussed real issues with people who know stuff. Tomorrow: South Africa. (prediction)

10) The weird winter we had --first we had a cold snap, then mild temperatures for nearly two months, followed by an extended cooling down-- has wreaked havoc in gardens all over the place. Tulips and lillies are blomming side by side, and the azaleas are not far behind. All this is happening as both cherry and apple blossoms begin to fade and fall to the ground. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

11) Needless to say, I think my allergies are hammering me, which is why I can't be bothered to think today and post some long screed about Condi Rice's Syria visit, and Bush's offhanding of any Iranian encounter. We really do have children in charge.

12) Martini Republic asks the burning question: which high school classmate has sodomized more people? It may take you a while to realize who the person on the right is, so let me give you some clues: add about a hundred pounds, mounds of body hair, and imagine a 14" dick. Let me know if you can't get it, still.

Hump Day Comedy Blogging

Monty Python explain the choices of the Bush Iraq plan

...Then Let's Break Him

While reading this article, please consider the concept of "karma" (the Wiccan Three-Fold Law, not the Hindu precept):

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - With his Iraq strategy mired in chaos, his inner circle besieged and a hostile Congress asserting itself, there is still one thing President George W. Bush can depend on -- his own refusal to bend.

Even with fellow Republicans increasingly questioning the wisdom of his policies, he shows little sign of wavering, reflecting a single-mindedness that has become a defining trait of his presidency.

Bush's supporters call it the mark of a principled leader, while critics see it as symptomatic of a reckless worldview that mistakes intransigence for resolve.

What it means in practical terms, however, is no end in sight to political gridlock in Washington.

It is at the very least feckless and reckless behavior. Presidents who have stood on principle without making some pass at compromise have found themselves on the very bottom of the food chain when the time comes to assess history.

This intransigence is not a signal of strength, but rather a fear of being wrong. That's fine for an umpire in a meaningless baseball game, whose authority must remain unquestioned in order to be effective, but for a President dragging 300 million of his countrymen down with him, it's not just suicidal, altho there are clear overtones of suicide in this thinking.

And suicide is borne out of fear: of pain, fear of loss, fear of suffering, fear of humiliation. Just ask Cho Seung-Hui. Fear becomes anger, anger becomes stubborness, and stubborness becomes an almost religious righteousness.

This is partly a calculated strategy on Bush's part: by engaging in gridlock, he hopes to effectively kill the Federal government. The problem is, the things that trouble America will still be there when he's gone and his successor, be she Republican or Democrat, will almost instantaneously transform the shabby, dark gray landscape Bush leaves in his wake into a vibrant world of laws and rules and nuance.

One hopes. It could go either way, now that Bush has opened the door of evil and allowed the US into the Garden of Gethsemane for his betrayal of our nation and its values, a place to prepare for our sacrifice. And what a sacrifice we face, if this evil is allowed to perpetuate, even until January 20, 2009, for his successor could just as easily exploit the weaponry Bush leaves in his wake (assuming he's adult enough to give up power that day) for her own purposes, and benign tyranny is tyranny still.

I am deeply troubled by this intransigence on his part. I believe it is time we broke him, if he will not bend.

I call on Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi to ignore his veto and his whining threats and to simply not offer up another appropriations bill for consideration: Make sure the blame is squarely on Bush's shoulders that he will not get to run out the clock, and thus lay blame for the tragedy that is the Iraq invasion onto the next President's shoulders.

Make sure the message gets out that Bush denied funding to his own troops fighting his own war, created within his own administration and lost on his watch.

Make sure that Republicans who seek to succeed him know that the Democrats will not roll over the way the 109th Congress did. This is a preventable catastrophe, unlike September 11 or Katrina. There will be no need for subpoenae and oversight after the fact if you apply the tourniquet now.

It is only in this way that President Bush, hat in hand, will come to the table and really talk. He may not, hell, he probably won't, do it, but at least the world will know that America now speaks with one voice and it is a voice of reason and sanity.

Women On Women

A very interesting study was released yesterday by the Associated Press:

An AP analysis of data from the 2006 American National Election Study Pilot Test found that when it came to selecting a candidate for president, gender matters more for women than for men. But it's a two-way street: Women are more likely to vote for a candidate because she is female, and also more likely to dismiss a candidate because of her gender, according to the analysis.

Meaning that while Hillary gets a first look by women because she's "one of us," women are also much faster to dismiss her as a candidate because she's a woman.

Interesting. Why, do you think, this would happen?

It's in part because some expect the first female president to be a reflection of them, only better, said Marie Wilson, president of the White House Project, a group that aims to encourage women to lead in business and politics.

"We look at them and we say 'We want them to be perfect. ...' We hold them to a higher standard because they do represent us," she said. "Most of the male candidates running wouldn't be running if they were women. A woman John McCain's age would have a hard time, a woman with Barack Obama's experience would have a hard time."

Very interesting.

Granted, there's an idealization factor at play here. Whenever an unusual candidate runs for wide-range offices like Senator or President, we expect them to be like Caesar's wife: above reproach. This may not be a reflection of reality, but who said perception was reality? Remember, this current administration ran as "adults," yet turned out to be petulant children who believed in magic and fairies and miraculous solutions.

When John Kennedy ran as an Irish Catholic candidate, he took great pains to reassure middle Americans that he wouldn't be beholden to the Pope. He won, barely, against a sitting Vice President who had been handicapped by a notorious scandal while Vice President.

It should have been a walk in the park, but for the Catholicism issue (among other smaller issues).

Too, just this year, as Barack Obama has mounted what many consider the first serious contention for the Democratic nomination, we've seen an idealization factor at work, as noted by Senator Joe Biden: "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy, ... I mean, that's a storybook, man."

Ahem.

This is a deeper issue than just a woman running for President. The newness factor is inherent in many aspects of our culture, and we tend to set up our idols so high on the pedestal, it's impossible for them not to fall.

But with each fall, it makes it easier for the next one to climb a little higher on the pile of debris.

May Day! May Day!

Here's an excerpt from Armed Madhouse, Greg Palast's Most Excellent Book, now out in paperback goodness Plus! it's updated and expanded!
(More great investigative journalism-the real kind-including articles, podcasts, BBC-TeeVee newscasts, etcetera here.)

May 1st - Mission Accomplished

THE FEAR: Including Marines in a tube, learning to speak Terrorist, Bush’s Khan job, National Security Document 199-I and Osama’s Mission Accomplished.

What are you afraid of? Our Fear Salesman-in-Chief has something for everyone.

So, Osama Walks into This Bar, See?

…and Bush says, “Whad’l’ya have, pardner?” and Osama says…

But wait a minute. I’d better shut my mouth. The sign here in the airport says, “Security is no joking matter.” But if security’s no joking matter, why does this guy dressed in a high-school marching band outfit tell me to take off my shoes? All I can say is, Thank God the “shoe bomber” didn’t carry Semtex in his underpants.

I’m a bit nervous. It’s an “ORANGE ALERT” day. That’s a “low threat” notice. According to the press release from the Department of Homeland Security, low-threat Orange means that there will be no special inspections of passengers or cargo today. Isn’t it nice of Mr. Bush to alert Osama when half our security forces are given the day off? Hmm. I asked an Israeli security expert why his nation doesn’t use these pretty color codes.

He asked me if, when I woke up, I checked the day’s terror color.

“I can’t say I ever have. I mean, who would?” He smiled. “The terrorists.” America is the only nation on the planet that kindly informs bombers, hijackers and berserkers the days on which they won’t be monitored. You’ve got to get up pretty early in the morning to get a jump on George Bush’s team.

There are three possible explanations for the Administration’s publishing a good-day-for-bombing color guidebook.

1. God is on Osama’s side.

2. George is on Osama’s side.

3. It’s about the oil.

A gold star if you picked #3.

Osama’s Mission Accomplished

On Thursday, May 1, 2003, President Bush landed on the deck of the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln. Forgetting to undo the parachute clips around his gonads, our President walked bowlegged on the ship’s deck in a green jumpsuit looking astonishingly like Ham, first chimp in space. The scene was so exciting that the media failed to notice that the War on Terror had ended on the previous Tuesday.

On that day, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld quietly acknowledged that he was withdrawing America’s armed forces from Saudi Arabia.

I’m always surprised at the debate over “What drives Osama? What does Al-Qaeda want?” There should be no confusion: Al-Qaeda states its mission, like most enterprises, on its Web site. Osama had it written out in English, in capital letters, so it wouldn’t be difficult to miss the point.

DECLARATION OF WAR AGAINST THE AMERICANS OCCUPYING THE LAND OF THE TWO HOLY PLACES—EXPEL THE INFIDELS FROM THE ARAB PENINSULA The “two holy places” are Mecca and Medina, and their “land” is Saudi Arabia. That’s what Osama wanted: U.S. troops out of Saudi Arabia.

Bin Laden issued his demand on August 23, 1996; and on April 29, 2003, the Tuesday before the President was chauffeured by fighter jet onto the deck of the Abe Lincoln, Mr. Bush gave bin Laden exactly what he wanted: U.S. troops sent packing from the Land of the Holy Places.

That’s astonishing. Until George W. Bush, the United States of America has never, ever, removed all our military bases from a foreign land no matter how much locals bitched or moaned. We even keep troops in Okinawa over the island’s strong objections, and World War II ended sixty years ago.

Am I accusing George Bush Jr. of being the first President of the United States to cravenly accede to the demands of terrorists? No, Reagan got there first, in 1984, when he gave in to Hizbollah’s demand and ordered our Marines to retreat from Lebanon.

No matter, President Bush was correct in announcing, “Mission Accomplished.” However, it was not America’s mission that was accomplished. It was Osama’s.

********

Greg Palast is author of Armed Madhouse: From Baghdad to New Orleans - Sordid Secrets and Strange Tales of a White House Gone Wild, released this week by Penguin.

(In)Action By Committee

So, I sees this headline, EU-U.S. Summit To Call For "Urgent" Climate Action, and says me to myself, "Hmmmm, maybe finally something is going to start happening.

Wrong:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The European Union and United States will agree at a summit on Monday that climate change is a central challenge that requires "urgent, sustained global action," according to a draft statement seen by Reuters.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, making her first trip to Washington since assuming the presidency of the EU, hopes the joint statement will lay the groundwork for a broader deal on combating global warming at a June G8 summit she will host in the Baltic resort of Heiligendamm.

OK, so it's not pulling the fire alarm, but let's face facts: no multilateral agreement ever happened overnight, did it?

So what's this "call" going to entail? Well...um......errrr.....not so much, it turns out. See, America and the E.U. have different regulatory standards, so the agreement to be announced this week will create:

A council led by EU Industry Commissioner Guenter Verheugen and White House economic adviser Allan Hubbard will be set up to monitor progress in aligning regulations and present annual reports to EU and U.S. leaders.

A COMMITTEE?!?!?!? ANNUAL REPORTS!?!?!?!?

Oh dear lord, save us from those who stand in our way! Or to put it in the words of Queen Amidala:

I was not elected to watch my people suffer and die while you discuss this invasion in a committee!

People will die. People are suffering.

Let's make this very simple: the E.U. environmental standards are barely more acceptable than America's, and do just slightly more than nothing to assist the environment and mitigate the damages of global warming.

New standards, tougher even than Kyoto's, are required now, thanks to the hands-sitting-on by the Bush administration and more important, the European Union, who should have pressured Dumbya much harder to accept Kyoto and get with the program.

global warming
global climate change
Bush

Gee....How Nice Of Him...

Three thousand Americans died on September 11, 2001. On September 14, President George W Bush vowed to get "the folks who did this"

I'm guessing Hamid Karzai missed that memo:

KABUL (Reuters) - The Taliban freed a French aid worker on Saturday as President Hamid Karzai marked the anniversary of the end of communist rule with a fresh offer of olive branch to the resurgent Islamic guerrillas.

WHA?????

Let's take a closer look at this:

At a colorful ceremony in Kabul for the 15th anniversary of the fall of the Soviet-backed communist regime, Karzai again pleaded with the Taliban to talk peace.

"Today, while celebrating the jihad victory, we once again invite those who have sided with aliens because of seduction against their nation, to give up sedition and evil and join peaceful life," he said.

And those three thousand dead Americans, the nation that put you, an Unocal puppet, back in charge, including the natural gas pipeline Unocal is building to Pakistan?

Wouldn't it be nice if the those men and women could join you at your festival of peace?

The real kicker was the Taliban response to this offer:

France's Foreign Ministry confirmed that one member of an aid group who had been kidnapped in Afghanistan early this month had been released.

Why are we fighting in Iraq again?

tags technorati :

Friday Kitten Blogging

Iiii hav mi eyzzzzzzzzzzzzzz on u!

Friday Music Blogging

Sheryl Crow - In honor of her bitchslap of Karl Rove - "Soak Up The Sun"

I'd so totally have her baby...

To No One's Great Surprise....

....except maybe the sheeple on the right...:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Weaker exports and a steady slide in spending on homebuilding helped slow U.S. economic growth to its softest pace in four years during the first quarter, the Commerce Department reported on Friday.

Gross domestic product or GDP, which measures total goods and services output within U.S. borders, increased at a weaker-than-expected 1.3 percent annual rate in the three months from January through March.

That was a little more than half the fourth quarter's 2.5 percent rate and well below the 1.8 percent rate that Wall Street analysts had forecast GDP would expand. The last quarter when growth was weaker was in the first three months of 2003, when GDP expanded at a 1.2 percent rate.

Growth has been slowing since late last year under the impact of a hard-hit housing sector where rising defaults are taking a toll on the subprime lending sector and causing builders to scale back until inventories of completed but unsold homes are reduced.

The situation is worse than you might imagine.

If you factor out export businesses and products, GDP actually dropped in the fourth quarter (exports grew 10.6%, meaning the domestic economy was off in the fourth quarter, reflected in consumer spending in December and the housing markets).

In the first quarter of 2007, export businesses actually had a real decline of 1.2%. Let's call it flat for jazz sake, but this was the first time exports hadn't increased since the second quarter of 2003.

So we're looking at two components of a "perfect storm" of weakness: flat domestic growth and flat export growth.

Consumer spending increased 3.8% in the first quarter which is a good sign, until you realize that much of this increase was caused by inflationary pricing, with energy prices rising as the extended winter remained cooler than expected.

It's safe to say the economy is on shaky ground right now. Consumer and governmental debts are at all time highs, and while consumer spending is still going on, one wonders how much longer that can be sustained. Wages are stagnant, net worths are slipping, and consumer "wealth" (a true illusionary misnomer), is rocky and unstable.

The rubber band is stretched very thin right now. And gas prices are already rising ahead of the summer driving season.

Shivving A Lame Duck

I have to give Vladimir Putin credit. He sure does have his finger on the pulse of the American attention span.

Amidst all the fuff and bluster of the scrutiny of our domestic agenda, knowing full well that now that Yeltsin's funeral has passed and the spotlight is off Russia again (with the added formal bit of nostalgia for those heady days of glasnost and perestroika), he's slipped a dagger into the lame duck:

OSLO (Reuters) - A row between the United States and Russia over U.S. plans to build a missile shield in eastern Europe escalated on Thursday when President Vladimir Putin declared a moratorium on a key European arms treaty.

Putin's announcement to the Russian parliament came hours before NATO and Russian officials were due to discuss a project U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said was no threat to Moscow, dismissing such suggestions as "purely ludicrous".

NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said he would ask Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov to explain Putin's decision to suspend the 1990 Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty (CFE) and rejected Putin's accusation that NATO was ignoring it.

And all this could have been a non-issue if Bush and his administration hadn't left themselves wide open for it. By running and hiding and not taking responsibility for its errors and mistakes in the past six years, Bush has forced a long, drawn out confrontation with a hostile Congress. Putin is merely taking advantage of the distraction.

The CFE Treaty was negotiated in the months after the Cold War among the then-22 member states of NATO and the Warsaw Pact countries with the goal of achieving verifiable reductions in conventional military equipment. It was adapted in 1999 (during the Clinton administration, again showing the enormous impact that great man had).

What triggered this move on Putin's part?

Again, either out of spite for all things Clinton, or in simply the stupidest strategic move since Troy took in a wooden horse, Bush announced plans to base missile interceptors in Poland and radar in the Czech Republic, effectively negating the treaty anyway, and forcing Putin's hand.

There is a quid pro quo here, as well. Both the Czechs and Poles have contributed forces to the Coalition of the Bribed Willing, and have not announced major troop withdrawal plans. Other former Warsaw Pact countries who are now part of NATO and some who are not, have withdrawn troops (Bulgaria and Slovakia being notable amongst these) and subsequently have not been favored with US military installations (and the dollars these bring to those economies, as well as some protection from any potential hegemony by a re-forming Soviet Union.)

Putin, seeing an increased NATO and specifically, American presence on his west, really had no choice but to walk away from this treaty, honored more in the breach than in the commitment.

I'm not liking what I'm seeing. Between this move and the inroads China has made in South Asia, the Middle East and Africa, we're sort of setting up this patchwork World War scenario: this country here favors that country there, while in between are two countries who are each supported by other nations.

Keep your eyes out for visits to unusual places by leaders of China and Russia. Already, Chinese premiere Hu has paid a call to South America, notably Brazil.

This is a chess game, and we're already in mid-game.

Bush
Vladimir Putin
NATO
Russia

Hump Day Comedy Blogging: UK Division

This was too funny not to share today

Hump Day Comedy Blogging

The Marx Brothers explain how Conservatives complain

Your Morning Cup Of Snark

I'm not going to comment much on this, because if my thinking is wrong, I may end up in some alien cookbook:

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - When the aliens finally invade Earth, you may wish you had listened to Travis Taylor and Bob Boan.

And if the invasion follows the plot of a typical Hollywood blockbuster, they might also be the guys called in at the last minute to save the day.

After all, they have written "An Introduction to Planetary Defense", a primer on how humanity can defend itself if little green men wielding death rays show up at our cosmic doorstep.

You read that correctly. Alien invasion.

*snorfle*

Taylor and Boan are hardly basement-dwelling paranoids obsessed with tinfoil hats and Area 51. Taylor holds advanced degrees in astronomy and physics, and is an associate at consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton. He and Boan have done consulting work for the Defense Department and the U.S. space agency NASA.

It turns out, however, that we may be living and learning the lessons that we can use against space aliens.

Failure to prepare may mean mankind will have to dig in and fight with improvised weapons and hit-and-run tactics, much the same way Islamic extremists have battled the U.S. military in Iraq, Taylor said.

"You'd have to create an insurgency, a mujahideen-type resistance," Taylor said. "The insurgents know how to win this war against us. It also tells us that if we were attacked by aliens, this is our best defense."

*biting lip*

Have your say...I, for one, welcome our ant overlords...

aliens
alien invasion

Gender Bender

The other day, I posted my thoughts regarding the exoneration of the Duke lacrosse players. I thought my longest exchange would be with radical feminists, but curiously, a reader stepped up and posted some very long and interesting posts regarding the myth of male dominance in America.

I thought I'd revisit this issue, on the heels of a new study released yesterday, that indicates that women's earning power is affected immediately and longitudinally by the mere fact they are not men.

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A dramatic pay gap emerges between women and men in America the year after they graduate from college and widens over the ensuing decade, according to research released on Monday.

One year out of college, women working full time earn 80 percent of what men earn, according to the study by the American Association of University Women Educational Foundation, based in Washington D.C.

Ten years later, women earn 69 percent as much as men earn, it said.

Even as the study accounted for such factors as the number of hours worked, occupations or parenthood, the gap persisted, researchers said.

I haven't seen the report, so it's hard for me to verify that the research truly did factor out pregnancy and occupations. The report presented on the Today Show was very misleading, in fact, as it compared an English major (woman) to an engineering graduate (man). The Reuters article, however, goes into a bit more depth regarding the study:

Among factors found to make a difference in pay, the choice of fields of concentration in college were significant, the study found. Female students tended to study areas with lower pay, such as education, health and psychology, while male students dominated higher-paying fields such as engineering, mathematics and physical sciences, it said.

Even so, one year after graduation, a pay gap turned up between women and men who studied the same fields.

In education, women earn 95 percent as much as their male colleagues earn, while in math, women earn 76 percent as much as men earn, the study showed.

Interesting that even in traditionally female professions, like teaching, there would remain an apparent gender-based difference in salaries. Here's the kicker:

While in college, the study showed, women outperformed men academically, and their grade point averages were higher in every college major.

Presumably, that would make women more qualified for better paying jobs.

Onto leaves of absence: clearly, if a man or woman takes a leave of absence, it should affect her or his earnings, when compared to someone who worked straight through the gap. An appropriate study, in my opinion, would be to pair up groups: men who took leaves, for education or parenting, with women who took similar leaves; men and women who worked straight through; and of course, pairing up equivalent earners in both groups.

This study attempts to delineate the general pay gap:

Specifically, about one-quarter of the pay gap is attributable to gender -- 5 percent one year after graduation and 12 percent 10 years after graduation, it said.

One year out of college, men and women should arguably be the least likely to show a gender pay gap, the study said, since neither tend to be parents yet and they enter the work force without significant experience.

Statistically, it seems to me that the initial pay should be equal, of course, but here again, it's not clear if the "five percent gap" is attributable to field of study, gender, or some other factor. A five percent gap is pretty significant as an initial set of conditions.

Too, the gender issue is fraught with complications: how much of this is inherent gender bias, and how much of it is individual psychology? Are men trained to negotiate tougher, to be more self-oriented? Are woman more respectful of authority, more willing to accept the first offer because they want to be perceived as team players? Are companies less likely to hire a woman because she might get pregnant and take time off, providing a built-in "discounting" of a woman's work because eventually, the firm will at the very least have to do without her for a period of time?

To be continued, I'm sure...in the meantime Happy Equal Pay Day!

gender gap

Meme Mr. Mustard

Argh. I was tagged by Miss Cellania because I'm a "thinker".

I'm really more of a 'Finder" altho there is this whole fantasy about being a knight on a big black horse that...well, nevermind.

OK, so on with the show:

1. If, and only if, you get tagged, write a post with links to 5 blogs that make you think.

Hmmmmm....OK....Martini Republic has to be one. The wit and snark factor of that blog intimidates even me, and at the very least, it forces my mixology considerations up a notch. I'm tempted to cheat and add Big Apple Martini, but that's such an integral part of MR that it would be like splitting the eleventh dimension from the 26th. I'd rather dye my hair.

Next up, Jesus's General, where my humour had better be sharp as a tack, or I'm toast. Those folks are big league. I take it as enormous praise when one of them actually deigns to acknowledge my posts.

Third, and along the same lines, Skippy The Bush Kangaroo. How sharp is this blog?

A) It's the only legitimate blog ever mentioned by Jon Stewart on The Daily Show.

B) They practically invented left wing blogging!

OK, Skippy invented the term "Blogtopia"....

Fourth, My Left Wing: I guess the best comparison is "Kos for the cognoscenti". They don't bullshit over there. They don't get all arrogant about being a vast source of information on dozens of topics.

Put it this way: it may be the first and only political blog where I feel like I have to ratchet up my knowledge just to keep up.

Finally, James Wolcott, where at least twice a week, I can spit water through my nose.

2) Link to this post so that people can easily find the exact origin of the meme.

3) Optional: Proudly display the 'Thinking Blogger Award’ with a link to the post that you wrote. OK, so...um...I'm not sure what post got me here, so....

Mitt Romney Endorses Hitler

"I'm afraid building a nuclear power plant in our country today would require us first to hire the French to show us how to do it because they've been building 'em and we haven't," Mr. Romney said in response to a question about energy policy during his talk, as captured on video by the Washington Post's politics Web log.

So far, so good. But he kept going. "Liquefied coal, gosh. Hitler during the Second World War — I guess because he was concerned about losing his oil — liquefied coal. That technology is still there."

I'll bet he even loved dogs and made the trains run on time, too...

Video here:

Homeland Security

Much has been made of the United States efforts to fight terrorists around the world, the theory being if we fought them there, we wouldn't have to fight them here.

A ludicrous theory on the face, as an organization that can pop up like a Whack-A-Mole is not likely to suddenly freeze in one place and be hammered over the head constantly.

We should expect them here and relatively soon. So how good are our domestic defenses? We do a fairly good job at airport security, even allowing for the massive holes in the screening processes (like airport employees and faulty and inadequate equipment). Our land borders are absolutely porous as evidenced by the great Mexican immigration debate (our Canadian border is even more porous).

Port screenings are still nearly non-existent, relying on the Coast Guard to interdict on the open seas any suspicious ship.

Well...not for very much longer, at this rate:

Although it is busy and obvious and well known, the coastguard has long been a poor sibling to the navy, army and air force. At the same time, its responsibilities have grown. In 2003 it became part of the Department of Homeland Security, with increased emphasis on protecting America's 361 ports and 95,000 miles (153,000km) of coastline from terrorists.

Yet the 40,000-member service has to scratch desperately for money from Congress. Its boats are often in poor shape; some patrol cutters are over 50 years old. In 2005 USA Today ran a story on life aboard a 210-foot (64-metre) cutter, where equipment regularly malfunctioned and raw sewage flooded the sleeping quarters.

In an attempt to remedy all this, and to win back prestige, the coastguard launched “Deepwater” in the 1990s. This was a $24 billion upgrade of its ships and aircraft. The goal was a modernised fleet and air arm with complementary communications and tracking equipment, lower maintenance and better conditions for the crew. Contracts to start building were signed in 2002.

Five years on, Deepwater is plagued by catastrophe. A plan to enlarge the coastguard's 110-foot cutters into more capable 123-foot boats was scrapped last autumn after the first eight refitted boats showed signs of cracking apart. The flagships of Deepwater—eight state-of-the-art 418-foot National Security Cutters, the first of which is nearing completion—have structural flaws that will probably shorten their projected 30-year service life and lead to costly repairs.

Right smack in the middle of the first battles that includes American soil since the Civil War, we're losing the ability to defend our shores. The story includes tales of corruption due to the privatization of the contracts and the hubris and arrogance of an admiralty that finally was garnering the attention it deserved in the 90s (when Bill Clinton was President, efforts to defend this nation from domestic terror attacks were not only in the works, they were being executed and were successful).

This does not bode well for the security of the US coastlines. Ships in dry dock for repairs are ships that are not out patrolling the coastal waters. Ships in danger of sinking or overweighted are ships that cannot keep up with faster, more manueverable ships and boats. It's a little like a fat cat chasing a pack of mice. Maybe he catches one or two, but the other dozen manage to steal all the cheese anyway.

This is a disgraceful situation, made more urgent by the ill-conceived "fight them there" strategy that shifts the focus of homeland security away from the homeland itself. Had Bush instead pursued a strategy of treating the September 11th attacks as a crime as well as an act of war, his focus could have been on fixing the major problems we have in protecting ourselves and not on inciting and inflaming more terrorists and more terror groups than ever before.

When a criminal breaks into a house and kills the family living there, two things occur: the police hunt down and capture the crook, and the remaining family beefs up their home security system.

Right now, we've got the cops out looking (and not very thoroughly), but we've left the doors and windows open.

Bush
Iraq
Al QaedaCoast Guard
Deepwater

Something You Probably Didn't Think Much About....

For me, reading this article was a "D'Oh!" moment. I had wondered why Reuters featured it, until I gave half a thought to it:

Of the nearly 24,000 wounded soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, about a third suffer from some degree of traumatic brain injury, or TBI, according to the General Accounting Office.

The government has been on the defensive about veterans' medical care after a probe found shoddy living conditions of recovering wounded at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, considered the jewel in the military's health care system.

A newly-appointed Commission on Care for America's Returning Wounded Warriors was formed by U.S. President George Bush in response. A major topic is whether the civilian sector could be used more in treating traumatic brain injury, one of the fastest growing injuries of the war.

Brain injuries.

Losing a limb is one thing. Having shrapnel pierce your skin is one thing (my dad has lived into his 90s after having shrapnel nick his heart). Having your brains turned to scrambled eggs because of the concussive force of IED after IED?

That's a completely different kettle of fish.

With a corporeal injury, you see the damage, you fix the damage. Even with a physical trauma to the brain, you see the damage, you fix the damage.

But when you're talking about the effects that shock waves have on that 20 pound (in Republicans' case, about half that) mass of tissue, and what precisely it effects, you've got real problems that are long term and will require a lifetime of monitoring.

So 8,000 men and women have suffered brain damage in five years, just so this is put into perspective.

And the Bush administration's response? Outsource the problem! Here we have a chance as a nation to do right by people who may be irreparably harmed beyond repair, serving their country, and the first thing Bush's cronies can think is to help enrich their friends in the AMA and insurance fields.

Even if you take the most cynical view of this situation, that it's a marvelous opportunity to do research on brain function and trauma, this should be handled by the government, nevermind that the government not only ought to be footing the bill for this, but the government ought to have direct oversight over the treatment of these injuries suffered for an illegal invasion of a sovereign people who did nothing to harm Americans.

Pretty disgusting and feckless, if you ask me.

tags technorati : Bush Iraq brain injuries

Administrative Note

I'm having trouble with my wireless network, and will be spending much of the day trying to sort that out, so I may or may not be around in comments (and to anyone who's email is gathering dust in my box, I apologize).

I'm thinking ThumbPer is getting back at me for lecturing him....teenagers...worse, a teenager who's a technophile and has more nimble fingers than I do...*sigh*

UPDATE: I bet I can even fix a rainy day. Sometimes I amaze even myself.

Great Article

I really should link to my Actor212 Media Network sources more often. I don't, but I should.

I found an interview at Internationalist Magazine yesterday that I wanted to share with you. Dr. Peter Phillips of Project Censored, a media watchdog and accountability group, said something that made me take a step back, because in a phrase, he summed up my anger at the mainstream media:

Q: When it comes to covering Anne Nicole Smith, Britney Spears, etc. would these mass media companies be remiss if they didn't constantly give the public what it supposedly wants?

We could set up cocaine sales booths on campuses and they would be very popular as well. But we have laws against that. Corporate media has abdicated their responsibility to the First Amendment to keep us informed about what the powerful are doing. We need public financed media to fill the role.

Now, Dr. Phillips and Project Censored make some pretty wild and inaccurate claims about what a "news story" is (as an example, Dr. Phillips cites Building 7 at the World Trade Center as a missed story, which it clearly was not), however, he has a point in that forests of paper were spent on Anna Nicole, but not few words were said about the Congolese genocide, which over the past ten years was as extensive as the slaughter in the Holocaust.

Read the rest here. Internationalist Mag should get the bulk of your eyeball time on this.

Friday Music Blogging

Yes - Roundabout

I originally had a Fleetwood Mac song up dedicated to Alberto Gonzalez, but I stepped outside at lunch, and ran smack dab into a concert by Jon Anderson and Paul Green's School Of Rock band, so in honor of seeing some great music...

Friday Kitten Blogging

In UR Boxezzzzz, STEeling UR Idenninty

Friday Comedy Blogging: Special Edition

As many of you know, I recently buzzcut my hair, and have been purchasing accessories to help me avoid paying $22 a pop for some barely-legal immigrant to take a razor to my scalp, and then expect a $5 tip for five minutes of plastic scalp massaging.

The only hitch in my regimen so far has been trying to shave the back of my neck, and I figure I'm going to need a shaving mirror that I can attach to the wall behind me.

In searching for this, I came across what has to be classified as a solution in search of a problem: Shav-N-Specs

Would that I could embed the video....

The New Math Of A False Economy

(graphic courtesy tengrain at mockpaperscissors.com)
As my long-time readers know, I'm a wonk for economic stuff. Hazard of my avocation, I suppose, needing to stay on top of the economy and make decisions based on my observations. So I stumbled across this story, and started reading it, when I found a paragraph that I think can help explain and tie together some loose threads that have been floating on the periphery of your field of perception lately:

"The negative housing wealth effects on consumer spending could be more pronounced than anticipated," Zandi warned, estimating that a third of U.S. households tapped a substantial amount of home equity in recent years to support spending.

But with stagnant or falling home values, and rising mortgage delinquencies, consumer spending's sole support looks to be wage and income growth, and this at a time when households are being heavily taxed with higher energy prices.

Energy costs rose only 2.9 percent in 2006. But in the first three months of this year, they shot up at an annual rate of 22.9 percent, accounting for about 41 percent of the increase in U.S. consumer prices.

The Consumer and Producer Price indices that are so heavily reported by the mainstream media purposely ignore energy and food prices, due to their volatility. Personally, I think that's a mistake: first, we have much better tools to measure these and to factor out volatility now, and second, these are two core purchases that consumers must make, so to say "inflation was only 3% last year," while food and energy prices were up together anywhere around ten percent is a lie designed to make the administration look good.

But I digress.

Take a closer look at the excerpt I posted: you'll note that the past several years' economic growth has been generated not by wage and income increases (which have remained stagnant to down. It wasn't until 2004 that the final leg irons of recession, consumer income, surpassed the levels at the end of the Clinton administration and even that's not factoring in inflation), but by borrowing against the equity in our homes.

An increase in debt, in other words. Debt can be defined as an advance against income you hope to receive in the future, and interest payments a hedge against the lender losing all that money if your gamble fails.

The optimistic presumption the average American lives on is things are going to get better: my company will make more money. They'll pay me a higher wage. I'll be able to pay off my debts.

Not so much, anymore. Wages have stagnated for nearly thirty years while the banking industry has gone to great lengths to fool consumers into believing they are worth more money than they truly are.

I suppose to a large extent, bankers can be blamed for this situation. Anyone with half a brain who spends a little time studying the overall economic state of this nation would have tightened their lending rules, not expanded them, in order to keep their balance sheets honest and their mortgages current. And banks are chock-a-block with MBAs from Ivy League schools who are trying desperately to learn the lessons I learned on the streets of Noo Yawk: don' lend someone money what can't pay youse back, unless youse is prepared to break deir bot' legs.

See, another side of this comes out in the quarterly earnings report that banks have to prepare for their shareholders. Obviously, if I'm Chase Manhattan, I have to keep my earnings higher than Citibank in order to keep my investors from moving their money there. New loans generate gobs of short term income. Old loans do not. The shell game is to keep those fees and surcharges rolling in (which is why the penalties on credit cards have also become so exorbitant: that's pure profit).

That "immediacy culture" pervades right down to the administrative level, as those Ivy League MBAs are thrown into competition with each other to come up with "the next insanely profitable cash cow." To the winner goes the spoils: make the bank the most money, and you get the corner office, the bigger bonus, the trips to Hawaii.

No one thinks long term, so no one looks long term, so in truth, no one saw this coming, but it is.

We're already in the soup on this, and there's not much to do to bail Americans out. The government could try but thanks to Bush and his tax cuts for the wealthy and his invasion of Iraq, the government has no money either and the money it has borrowed is not going to be allowed to go to its people who need it most.

In effect, we'll all be wage slaves to China. And we've seen what their standard of living is like.

After that, the future gets murky. Obviously, taxes on the wealthy will skyrocket. They have to, particularly as baby boomers retire in greater numbers each year and the pool of productive tax paying Americans dwindles. Taxes on all of us will go up, as well.

Suppose for a second, though, that they don't. Some political pressure keeps honest politicians from talking about tax increases. It becomes a political third rail.

We can't cut spending sufficiently to offset the loss in revenue. Aside from Social Security (which is funded separately anyway) and defense, there's not a whole lot the government spends money on that could scale up to free hundreds of billions of dollars for domestic spending programs that would now go from discretionary to mandatory, unless the sight of people dying in the streets is somehow magically made palatable to Americans. Events of the past week indicate Americans wouldn't want that on their TVs.

About the only places we could cut are defense. And defense. And homeland security.

I think we all know what that means.

So by destabilizing the American economy for decades if not centuries to come, Bush has created the single most dangerous breeding element for the domestic security of Americans: a weakened economy with not enough money to spend on protecting us all.

Thanks, Dumbya.

Bush
economy
mortgages
taxes

You SHOULD Be!

Sheesh!

"I read three histories on George Washington last year. The year 2006, I read three histories about our first President. My attitude is, if they're still writing about one, 43 doesn't need to worry about it," he said to laughter. Continued...

Idiot.

"History...Ah failed that an look whar Ah am t'day! Y'all don't need no hhistory....heh heh heh heh..."

Not So Good News...

As if it wasn't bad enough that we are on the precipice of the first hill of the biggest climate roller coaster in mankind's history, comes this story:

OSLO (Reuters) - The world will have to axe greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent by 2050, more deeply than planned, to have an even chance of curbing global warming in line with European Union goals, researchers said on Thursday.

Even tough long-term curbs foreseen by the EU or California fall short of reductions needed to avert a 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) temperature rise over pre-industrial times, seen by the EU as a threshold for "dangerous change", they said.

"If we are to have a 50 percent chance of meeting a 2 Celsius target we would have to cut global emissions by 80 percent by 2050," Nathan Rive of the Center for International Climate and Environmental Research in Oslo told Reuters.

"Any delay in implementing emissions reductions will make a 2 degree target practically unreachable," he and colleague Steffen Kallbekken wrote of findings to be published in the journal Climatic Change.

80%.

That's a fairly large percentage, you might agree. Now, there is certainly an alarmist theme, to be honest: 40 or 50% might be enough to slow things down enough that we could conceivably correct things to mitigate the damage.

But an 80% cut in carbon emissions is a hard goal to achieve, to be sure:

An 80 percent global cut would mean rich nations, responsible for most heat-trapping emissions from fossil fuels burnt by power plants, factories and cars, would have to axe emissions by about 95 percent below 2000 levels by 2050.

Meaning, no more combustion engines. No more coal fired power plants. No more....well, you name it. You're talking about a complete change in the economy of the world. And political implications that would boggle the mind: wars with China and India and other developing nations. Periodic famines and pandemics.

Truly, an apocalypse. Energy is more than a way to heat your home: it's the lifeblood of the planet.

global warming
global climate change

Hump Day Comedy Blogging

The Firesign Theatre - Sperm Bank Holdup

Lest We Forget

The Virginia Tech shooting was a terrible tragedy, and raises all sorts of questions about American society, when 32 of its youngest, brightest and best can be gunned down in a heartbeat.

But...:

85 Iraqis dead. At least 85 people were killed or found dead yesterday. Police in Ramadi uncovered 17 decomposing corpses buried in two schoolyards in an area that until recently was under al-Qaida fighters' control. One body had yet to be recovered as authorities feared it was booby-trapped with a bomb.

Hit squads. In a sign Shia death squads are on the move after more than two months lying low, 25 bodies, most tortured, were found dumped in Baghdad. The three-day total, after weeks of much smaller numbers, was 67.[...]

13th U.S. death in three days. The U.S. military announced the death of a Marine from a "non-hostile incident" while on combat patrol in Anbar province Monday. It was the 13th American service member fatality reported since Saturday.

And...:

KANO, Nigeria -- Security forces in northern Nigeria battled gunmen blamed for a deadly attack on a police station a day earlier, with gunfire erupting around dawn Wednesday and witnesses reporting casualties.

Hundreds of soldiers and police surrounded the area as entire families fled, with parents holding their children close as they rushed down Kano's dusty streets. Departing residents reported seeing numerous dead bodies, but said they made no firm count in their haste to leave.

And...:

MOGADISHU, Somalia -- Street battles in the Somali capital overnight left at least 11 people dead and dozens others injured, witnesses and health officials said Wednesday.

The fighting late Tuesday in northern and southern neighborhoods of Mogadishu between Ethiopian troops backing Somalia's fragile government and insurgents could be heard miles away. Some tank shells that Ethiopian troops fired in southern Mogadishu landed in the western part of the capital.

But mostly...:

BAGHDAD -- Four large bombs exploded across Baghdad on Wednesday, killing at least 127 people and wounding scores as violence climbed toward levels seen before the U.S.-Iraqi campaign to pacify the capital began two months ago.

In the deadliest of the attacks, a parked car bomb detonated in a crowd of workers at the Sadriyah market in a mostly Shiite area of central Baghdad, killing at least 82 people and wounding 94, said Raad Muhsin, an official at Al-Kindi Hospital where the victims were taken.

A police official confirmed the toll, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to release the information.

The attack was one of four bombings in Baghdad on Wednesday afternoon, which killed at least 127 people in total, officials said.

We live in a dangerous world. I don't know what motivated Cho Seung-Hui . It may be that he reacted to what was going on in the world around him. It may be that his demons became too great to stop.

He was, however, one man on one college campus, and there are more terrifying things going on that will eventually affect us as well. It's well to focus our attention back on those. These incidents all have the Al Qaeda earmark about them.

Iraq
Somalia
Nigeria
Al Qaeda

Balance Of Power

Sometimes, events happen that make you think there truly is some plan, be it divine or Bilderbergian, to the world. Disparate seeds of information that innocuously land nearly simultaneously, and you know that they came from the same fruit.

And sometimes, randomness prevails, and we struggle to form some basis of rationality out of it.

Ultimately, both of these scenarios collapse to a unifying theory of the world: control. There's an almost fracticality to our lives: the world sets limits to our achievements, and we set limits to a small part of the world's achievements. I can't fly on my own, but I can clear a forest and build a house.

In both instances, however, there's illusion at work. I can fly, if I get an assist from technology. Gravity still exerts influence, but it no longer controls me in this regard so long as I can keep my airplane up.

Likewise, I have to mow my lawn and weed & clear brush often, or my house will eventually be reclaimed by the forest. Not in my lifetime, of course, but the world operates on time scales that you and I cannot begin to imagine.

This is the ultimate fantasy for an intellectual being like a human, however, that there are controlling forces at work in some respect that have power over the entire world. We seek order where there is chaos, and we find it, because that chaos holds still for an infinitesimal moment on its scale, but for an entire lifetime or life of a civilization on ours. We build cities on multiple fractures in the earth's crust, complacent in the knowledge that it "can never happen here".

But it has. And it will. We just haven't witnessed it. Moreover, there's little we can do to prevent it. This is how life is: it is aggressive, violent to the point of catastrophic. The world responds in kind. Eventually, random events occur that prove the theory of evolution, and a dominant species falls and a subordinate species arises.

God blessed us with short attention spans (and cursed me with a slightly longer one). A man is arrogant enough to believe that history began twenty minutes before he was born, and then he learns (one hopes) about people, civilizations, and societies that preceded him. Man as a whole is arrogant enough to believe that history started twenty minutes before the first man-ape swung down out of the trees (or Adam was created, if you believe that). Man as a whole, including most major religions, arrogantly believes we have some special purpose on this planet, that God or nature put us here for a reason.

The most arrogant belief Man has is that God put him in charge of the entire planet. God may have the werewithal to control the planet (omniscience and omnipotence are advantageous here), but he did not invest Man with that power, and nor has he given us the keys to attaining it.

Yet, we act as if we had them already.

All this is a prelude to my thoughts on the horrible tragedy at Virginia Tech yesterday. Many have called for better control of guns. Many others still have said "if only guns were more widely available".

Both positions are wrong, of course, in the context of what I wrote above. There is no reason to believe that if the entire college campus was armed, that there wouldn't be 32 students dead this morning. Likewise, there's no reason to believe that, if every gun in Virginia was taken away Sunday, those kids wouldn't be dead anyway.

None. Any presumption otherwise is flawed by the fact that this played out the way it played out, but in a different world based on the additional rule that either side wants to impose on this scenario, it would have played out differently. If the entire campus was armed, for example, who's to say this gunman wouldn't simply have gathered a posse of friends and together, 32 people die? Similarly, in a world where guns were banned from campus...well, a bomb in a crowded gymnasium could easily kill 32 people. Same outcome, different initial conditions.

It's the illusion of control, and the obvious lack of it, that has people grasping for explanations to support their viewpoints.

A gun is the illusion of control. There's a great line in the movie Grand Canyon:

Simon: Look, I don't know nothing about you, you don't know nothing about me. I don't know if you're stupid, or some kind of genius. All I know is that I need to get out of here, and you got the gun. So I'm asking you for the second time, let me go my way here.

Gangbanger: I'm gonna grant you that favor, and I'm gonna expect you to remember it if we ever meet again. But tell me this, are you asking me as a sign of respect, or are you asking because I've got the gun?

Simon: Man, the world ain't supposed to work like this. I mean, maybe you don't know that yet. I'm supposed to be able to do my job without having to ask you if I can. That dude is supposed to be able to wait with his car without you ripping him off. Everything is supposed to be different than it is.

Gangbanger: So what's your answer?

Simon: You ain't got the gun, we ain't having this conversation.

Gangbanger: That's what I thought, no gun, no respect. That's why I always got the gun.

And yet, that gangbanger has no control, because he can just as easily lose the gun as get it, and even having it, there are bigger guns out there just waiting to be trained on him. And bigger guns on them, and so on up the scale. Eventually, you reach the biggest gun, but so? That gun, too, can be lost.

Or Simon could decide, "You know what? Fuck it, I got a job to do, you want to shoot me, shoot me." Now the gun isn't control. If anything, it's just randomized the situation (if this had been a real life situation, of course. In the movies, Simon likely would get shot to advance the plot).

Essentially, tho, I suspect this is what was going through the gunman's head yesterday: he felt in control, and yet his actions tell us he was desperately out of control, to the point where he shot himself dead (at least that's the current version of events).

Likewise, our attempts to make sense of a senseless act are an illusion of control. None of us will ever know what went on in the gunman's head, so none of us will ever fully understand this horror. What demons lurked there? What pain, real or perceived, had he suffered?

We'll try to understand, because we must, because all the gun control in the world or for that matter, all the guns in the world, will not prevent a tragedy like this from happening again. We probably ought to replace the Second Amendment with a Second Suggestion, for all the good those legal guns have done and will do for this country.

Life is aggressive and violent, and will find a way to destroy what it has to destroy in order to create new life. And man is life, just as life is man. The difference is, in life itself, chaos creates a rearranged order.

Only man can destroy for the perverse pleasure of destroying. And we're armed to do it on mass scales

Virginia Tech
guns
violence

Google Makes A Funny

Go to Google Maps, and click on "Get Directions"

This is what comes up when you enter "From New York City to London" (hat tip Skippy)

1. Head southwest on Broadway toward Warren St 0.2 mi
1 min

2. Turn left at Park Row 0.1 mi
1 min

3. Slight right at Frankfort St 0.3 mi
1 min

4. Turn left at Pearl St 56 ft

5. Turn right onto the F.D.R. Dr N ramp 0.4 mi
1 min

6. Merge onto FDR Dr N 7.7 mi
12 mins

7. Take exit 17 on the left for Triboro Bridge/Grand Central Pkwy toward I-278/Bruckner Expy 0.4 mi
2 mins

8. Merge onto Triborough Bridge
Partial toll road 0.4 mi
1 min

9. Merge onto I-278 E via the ramp to I-87 N/Bronx/Upstate N Y/New England 0.6 mi
1 min

10. Take exit 47 to merge onto Bruckner Expy/I-278 E toward New Haven 1.9 mi
2 mins

11. Take the I-278 E exit toward New Haven 0.3 mi

12. Merge onto Bruckner Expy 5.0 mi
6 mins

13. Continue on I-95 N
Partial toll road
Entering Connecticut 62.1 mi
1 hour 12 mins

...
14. Take exit 48 on the left to merge onto I-91 N toward Hartford 36.8 mi
37 mins

...
15. Take exit 29 for US-5 N/CT-15 toward I-84/E Hartford/Boston 0.4 mi

16. Merge onto CT-15 N 1.7 mi
2 mins

17. Merge onto I-84 E
Partial toll road
Entering Massachusetts 40.7 mi
38 mins

...
18. Take the exit onto I-90 E/Mass Pike/Massachusetts Turnpike toward N.H.-Maine/Boston
Partial toll road 56.0 mi
56 mins

...
19. Take exit 24 A-B-C on the left toward I-93 N/Concord NH/S Station/I-93 S/Quincy 0.4 mi
1 min

20. Merge onto Atlantic Ave 0.8 mi
3 mins

21. Turn right at Central St 0.1 mi

22. Turn right at Long Wharf 0.1 mi

23. Swim across the Atlantic Ocean 3,462 mi
29 days 0 hours
...
24. Slight right at E05 0.5 mi
2 mins

25. At the traffic circle, take the 2nd exit onto E05/Pont Vauban 0.1 mi

26. Turn right at E05 5.7 mi
10 mins

27. Take the exit onto A29/E44 toward Amiens
Toll road 27.8 mi
23 mins

...
28. Take the exit toward Dieppe/Amiens/Calais/A151/Rouen
Toll road 1.1 mi
1 min

29. Merge onto A29/E44
Toll road 22.6 mi
19 mins

...
30. Take the exit onto A28/E402 45.6 mi
37 mins

...
31. Take the exit onto A16/E402 toward Boulogne/Calais
Toll road 44.3 mi
38 mins

...
32. Take exit 29 toward Boulogne-Centre/Outreau/Le Portel 0.6 mi
1 min

33. Merge onto N416 1.1 mi
1 min

34. At the traffic circle, take the 1st exit onto N1 0.4 mi
1 min

35. At the traffic circle, take the 2nd exit and stay on N1 0.1 mi
1 min

36. At the traffic circle, take the 2nd exit and stay on N1 0.9 mi
2 mins

37. At the traffic circle, take the 1st exit 0.6 mi
1 min

38. Slight left at Rue Ferdinand Farjon 427 ft

39. At the traffic circle, take the 2nd exit 0.4 mi
1 min

40. Slight right at Dover - Boulougne-sur-Mer 30.1 mi
1 hour 50 mins

...
41. Continue on Dover - Boulogne-sur-Mer 0.2 mi

42. Continue on Eastern Service Rd 0.3 mi
2 mins

43. Turn right at E Ramp 0.4 mi
2 mins

44. Slight right at Dock Exit Rd 0.1 mi

45. At Eastern Docks Roundabout, take the 2nd exit onto A20 0.6 mi
2 mins

46. Slight left to stay on A20 0.3 mi

47. At Prince of Wales Roundabout, take the 2nd exit onto A20/Limekiln St 0.2 mi
1 min

48. At Limekiln Roundabout, take the 3rd exit onto A20 0.3 mi
1 min

49. At Western Heights Roundabout, take the 1st exit and stay on A20 7.0 mi
8 mins

50. Continue on M20 (signs for M20/London/Ashford) 49.7 mi
47 mins

...
51. Continue on A20 (signs for London (SE)/Lewisham) 9.7 mi
15 mins

52. At Clifton's Roundabout, take the 2nd exit and stay on A20 2.2 mi
6 mins

53. At the traffic circle, take the 2nd exit and stay on A20 1.3 mi
4 mins

54. Slight left at A2 0.7 mi
2 mins

55. Slight right at A2/Kender St 72 ft

56. Turn right at Kender St 0.3 mi
1 min

57. Turn left at A2 1.9 mi
5 mins

58. At Brick Layers Arms, take the 1st exit onto A201/New Kent Rd 0.6 mi
2 mins

59. At the traffic circle, take the 2nd exit onto A302/St George's Rd 0.4 mi
1 min

60. Turn left at A3203/Lambeth Rd 0.6 mi
3 mins

61. At the traffic circle, take the 2nd exit onto A3203 0.2 mi
1 min

62. At Horseferry Rd, take the 3rd exit onto A3212 0.4 mi
1 min

A Thought Experiment

Stories like this always remind me of just how hard it is going to get, and how quickly, on this planet in the next decade:

OSLO (Reuters) - Droughts, floods and rising seas linked to global warming could spur conflicts in coming decades, experts said on Monday, the eve of a first U.N. Security Council debate on climate change.

And the poor in tropical regions of Africa and Asia are likely to suffer most, perhaps creating tensions with rich nations in the temperate north which are likely to escape the worst effects of warming widely blamed on use of fossil fuels.

"Global warming increases the potential for conflict," said Janos Bogardi, head of the U.N. University's Institute for Environment and Human Security in Bonn.

"The most imminent effect is probably desertification and land degradation," he told Reuters. His group has projected that climate change might force hundreds of millions of people from their homes in the long term.

Estimates are that planet Earth can sustain roughly one-third to one-half the current population. The cynic in me says maybe this current attitude of "sustainable growth" is merely a way to commit planetary genocide.

Why do I say this? Here's a thought experiment (with apologies to David Suzuki):

Take a bacteria, one single cell, and put it in a vial that's filled to the brim with food. Let's say this cell divides every minute, creating an exponential growth: in one minute, there are two cells; after two minutes, four cells; after three, eight cells, and so on.

Now let's assume that this closed system (important point) is just big enough to support this kind of growth for one hour. When is the vial half full?

At 59 minutes, of course. At 58 minutes, it's one-fourth full. At 57 minutes, it's one-eighth full. At 56, one-sixteenth, and at 55 minutes, it's 1/32nd, or roughly three percent, full.

If one of the bacteria was prescient enough at 55 minutes to say, "Hey, in like five generations, we'll be out of food!" most of the Republican bacteria in the vial would say, "Why, you're nuts! 97% of the world is still full of food!" and go on driving their food-guzzling SUVs.

Notice something else, tho: in a closed system, no matter how efficiently you were to recycle food, you will eventually reach a limit where you can no longer sustain growth, and in fact, will kill the world.

Now, you could make the case that the bacteria should just build new worlds. OK, let's give them the technology to do just that. Let's say that by the 59th minute, they've built three new vials (quite the accomplishment), and so in minute sixty, just in the nick of time, they send half their people to one of the new "worlds".

In just two further minutes, all four of the vials will be full.

Resources are a zero-sum game. Yes, the universe is infinite, but there are constraints on what we can do, so effectively, the universe is not infinite, and certainly, certainly, our planet is not.

Given recent news about our oceans particularly our coral reefs, about our polar ice packs and caps, our honeybees and about fish, we are in the fifty-ninth minute.

But hey, let's be worried about gay marriage and the hateful words of an idiot, shall we?

global warming
global climate change

I Dig A Pony

The Beatles "I Dig A Pony", in honor of Sen. John McCain

McCain said arguably the dumbest thing a politician has said all year (don't click the link, I'll copy excerpts over...it's a link to the chief cheesehead of right wing bloggers, the self-inflatable Cap'n Ed Morrison):

I took part in a blogger conference on my lunchbreak today with Senator John McCain on the topic of Iraq. McCain, who gave a speech on Iraq at the Virginia Military Institute earlier today, wanted to reach out to New Media sources for his perspective on the progress of the war, the critical nature of our effort there, and the need to persevere until we succeed.[...]

I asked the Senator whether Moqtada al-Sadr's new orders for the Mahdi Army to attack American forces could cause a collapse of the Maliki government. McCain thinks Sadr is mostly bluffing; he waited too long and has not made a personal appearance for too long, and a defeat at the hands of the American and Iraqi forces would finish him. Joking that he was "digging for the pony here," he predicted that Sadr would back down as he has in the past rather than take that big of a gamble.

We will know within a few months whether the surge will succeed, McCain told us. By that time, we can see whether Maliki has the political strength and will to make the necessary adjustments. If the US cannot succeed in Iraq, McCain believes that David Petraeus has the strength of character to tell that to the President and then to the American people. Petraeus believes we can prevail, McCain told us, and that we must.

OK, a couple of observations here....

First, Cap'n Cheetos, when your "lunchbreak" lasts eight hours and includes mass quantities of alcohol, I think you really ought to reclassify it as a "job." And you might ponder applying to the NEA for a grant as performance artist.

Second, the most remarkable part of this amazing mess of a "briefing" is that the White Ring bloggers didn't point out a very glaring little piece of reality: April 12 was the day of this circle jerk-off. Here's what happened on April 11:

Najaf - Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi Shi'as burned and trampled on US flags in the holy city of Najaf on Monday at an anti-American rally called by firebrand cleric Moqtada al-Sadr on the fourth anniversary of the fall of Saddam Hussein.

Large crowds of men, women and children holding Iraqi flags and anti-US banners massed in Najaf and the nearby city of Kufa to protest against what they said was an American occupation of Iraq.

The rally is seen as a show of strength for the cleric who has not been seen for more than two months, since the launch of a security crackdown in Baghdad aimed largely at reining in his militiamen accused of killing Sunni Arabs.

Now, that doesn't sound like much of a "backing down." If anything, it sounds like a rally one might hold in advance of the return of one's leader, a saviour or messiah perhaps.

All that was missing were the palm fronds from the Shi'a.

It's true, al-Sadr left Baghdad in advance of the surge. After all, who's to know if President Dumbya really, really meant it this time? He's failed so many times before in his "progress in Iraq" attempts. Al Sadr probably figured, correctly, that like so many things in BizarroBushWorld, it would have the opposite effect: "Me send more troops in, help make fight bigger!"

Who wants to hang around a town where hundreds were already dying each week, and things looked like they could get worse? He might get hit with, you know, body parts, and unless you're a cast member of CSI, you sort of want to stay away from that sort of debacle.

And in truth, despite an initial adjustment period by the insurgents, things look to be getting worse in Baghdad. Already, some of the allegedly safest buildings in Iraq are being bombed again., and the insurgency seems to be spreading its terror to outlying cities like Karbala.

Ironically, making Bush's surge bigger. And I mean that in a totally nonsexual way, get your mind out of the gutter.

As with so many things this President has said, there's not only been a backlash that has played into his hands, but also a deepening anxiety across this country that, in fact, he's never intended for anything but a permanent military presence in that country (feel free to spout conspiracy theories long held in comments). And truthfully, many of his moves have been questionable for someone who's stated goal was to seek revenge on Al Qaeda, fight terorrism, destroy weapons of mass destruction, remove a dictator and bring democracy to a people long oppressed.

Moqtada Al Sadr, make no mistake about it, didn't run from the surge so much as run from the distinct possibility that he might get killed accidentally in the crossfire (or not so accidentally). My suspicion is that Al Sadr has been in talks with Ayatollah Al Sistani about getting religious cover for a renewed and up front assault on the coalitin forces occupying his country. Clearly the negotiations we heard about weeks ago between the US and insurgents has broken down.

It's going to get really ugly this summer.

Oh...the "dig for the pony" note...Apparently, that other "cut and run" Republican, Ronald Reagan, once joked that he had to shovel so much shit, he kept digging because there "must be a pony in there."

Yea. That ought to inform you of the kind of people we're dealing with here. They revel in their stupidities...and you'll note McCain's rather cynical view of his past denialist lunacies when it comes to supporting this war.

tags technorati : Bush snarky snarcasm snarkasm Moqtada al Sadr Iraq John McCain