Best joke of 2004

The best jokes have some truth in them somewhere. The best one of last year was especially cool because it was both a joke and a simple statement of fact. Ron Suskind reporting hearing this from a White House Aide:

The aide said that guys like me were ''in what we call the reality-based community,'' which he defined as people who ''believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.'' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ''That's not the way the world really works anymore,'' he continued. ''We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.''...

I laugh and laugh when I think of that. He's rattling Suskind's cage, but at the same time it's so TRUE. We just SAW it yesterday. The Amazing Bush goes sailing through the air at the top of the circus tent, while thousands of realists chant Doomed Doomed Doomed Doomed Doomed Doomed we're Doomed. And then the trapeze is caught at the last moment, and he swings lightly onto the platform while the crowd cheers.

Or that's how it looks to the poor reality-based guys. Actually, there was not so much of the circus-trick in the Iraq election; lots of us have long thought it was a pretty sure thing. Because we know that faith, and the the human spirit with its crazy dreams and schemes are what create "reality." But the realists are now reacting dazedly to the new reality, which us dreamers knew was latent there all the time.

I was thinking about this because I started fisking this piece by Fred Kaplan: 2020 Vision: A CIA Report Predicts That American Global Dominance Could End in 15 Years.

Fish, barrel, dynamite...

Just from the title you know it's too silly to waste any time on. But it actually became interesting (to me at least) when I started getting into the how-dya-do-it of becoming a superpower....

[Kaplan writes:] Who will be the first politician brave enough to declare publicly that the United States is a declining power and that America's leaders must urgently discuss what to do about it?..
Mr Kerry? Mrs Clinton? Any volunteers? Anyone gonna step forward?
...This prognosis of decline comes not (or not only) from leftist scribes rooting for imperialism's downfall, but from the National Intelligence Council—the "center of strategic thinking" inside the U.S. intelligence community.
"Leftist scribes" is actually a good description of the CIA. Have you ever heard of a Republican CIA person?
...The NIC's conclusions are starkly presented in a new 119-page document, "Mapping the Global Future: Report of the National Intelligence Council's 2020 Project." It is unclassified and available on the CIA's Web site. The report has received modest press attention the past couple weeks, mainly for its prediction that, in the year 2020, "political Islam" will still be "a potent force."
Ah Ha! Now I see how the CIA can predict the future. Just take the current situation and draw a straight line...Sheer wizardry.
...In this new world, a mere 15 years away, the United States will remain "an important shaper of the international order"—probably the single most powerful country—but its "relative power position" will have "eroded." The new "arriviste powers"—not only China and India, but also Brazil, Indonesia, and perhaps others—will accelerate this erosion by pursuing "strategies designed to exclude or isolate the United States" in order to "force or cajole" us into playing by their rules...
Funny thing is, we're forcing them to play by our rules, without even hardly trying. ALL the steps that these guys need to take to move into the big leagues involve becoming more like the USA. ALL of the tricky schemes nations use to avoid that fact FAIL. Invariably. (And those schemes always involve some reality-based crew making brilliant decisions.)
...America's current foreign policy is encouraging this trend, the NIC concluded. "U.S. preoccupation with the war on terrorism is largely irrelevant to the security concerns of most Asians," the report states...
Sure, sure. None of them need oil from the Persian Gulf, or Russia. None of them have restive Muslim groups..
The authors don't dismiss the importance of the terror war—far from it. But they do write that a "key question" for the future of America's power and influence is whether U.S. policy-makers "can offer Asian states an appealing vision of regional security and order that will rival and perhaps exceed that offered by China."
Of course. Asian countries will be eager to have China organize their whole region. So trustworthy, China is. Can protect them from Brazil.
...To the extent that these new powers seek others to emulate, they may look to the European Union, not the United States, as "a model of global and regional governance."
The EU! Vibrant! Bursting with youthful energy and creative juices. Its unity, its surging economic growth and cultural enthusiasm make it a coming global superstar. Make that GLOBAL superstar, to emphasize the resources it can project to distant parts of the earth.
...The trends should already be apparent to anyone who reads a newspaper. Not a day goes by without another story about how we're mortgaging our future to the central banks of China and Japan. The U.S. budget deficit, approaching a half-trillion dollars, is financed by their purchase of Treasury notes...
If it's in the newspapers it must be true. Right? But they never explain why, exactly, if China and Japan are coming global powers, they are investing in the US, rather than in...China and Japan? Oooops, I think I answered the question. Japan isn't on the Global-Power career-track any more. Remember how we used to hear that they were going to swamp us? Unless we got smart and emulated them?

Do you know WHY Japan became an economic superpower in the 70's and 80's? Because in the 40's and 50's the USA reorganized them, and at the same time they also enthusiastically embraced American managerial theories. And why did Japan fizzle out? Because they didn't take the whole package.

It's hard to follow the entire regimen. The first steps are the easiest, and lots of countries can get to the point of having factories cranking out cheap goods. But each step is more tricky, and more subtle. And more a matter of character, and the spirit.

What should we DO about the possibility of other countries eclipsing us? Encourage them. There is no dishonest way to do it, not in the long run. The only way to surpass us is to be better than us. Really better. Able to put on the spangled tights and sail effortlessly across the circus tent, like we just did. And a person who thinks China will be there in 15 years is called a "realist?" Now there's a joke.

My prediction of things to come...

UPDATE: It looks like this Telegraph story is not true. See here.

Pejman linked to this article in The Telegraph:

A 25-year-old waitress who turned down a job providing "sexual services'' at a brothel in Berlin faces possible cuts to her unemployment benefit under laws introduced this year.

Prostitution was legalised in Germany just over two years ago and brothel owners who must pay tax and employee health insurance were granted access to official databases of jobseekers...

..."There is now nothing in the law to stop women from being sent into the sex industry," said Merchthild Garweg, a lawyer from Hamburg who specialises in such cases. "The new regulations say that working in the sex industry is not immoral any more, and so jobs cannot be turned down without a risk to benefits."...

Let me guess. In fact, let me predict. The new trendy-lefty cause, from those wonderful folks who brought us gay marriage and hate-free-zones, will be a campaign, similar to the Civil Rights Movement and the Anti-Apartheid Movement, to fight the ugly elements in white-patriarchial-western-civilization that discriminate against "sex-workers."

Europe will lead the way, of course, charging anyone who refuses work in a brothel with a "hate crime." Condi Rice will be indicted in the ICC when the State Department fails to support these new norms of International Law. Europeans will preen themselves on their "tolerance," and the drooling American Left will struggle mightily to keep up with them. Expect the NEA to introduce elementary-school books with titles like "Mommy is a Sex-Worker." The Episcopal hierarchy will dash to the front of the parade by ordaining a sex-worker as a bishop. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor will urge that courts give cognizance to the laws of other countries when deciding prostitution cases

Then, when Muslims threaten to kill European legislators, a "Muslim exception" to the pro-sex-worker campaign will be hastily proffered. Then a new anti-hate campaign will be needed, to crush those intolerant racist bigots who criticize the Muslim Exception!

They can't get away with quite so many lies now...

From Polipundit:

Tet
Today is the anniversary of the Tet Offensive, when ultra-liberal CBS anchorman Walter Cronkite decided to openly side with the Vietnamese Communists.

Current ultra-liberal CBS anchorman Dan Rather, by contrast, has to grit his teeth and report the good news. Thanks to fact-checking by the New Media, if Rather lied like Cronkite did, he’d become even more of a laughingstock than he already is.

Cronkite is a true hero of the Left, having helped consign millions to communist tyranny or death. Dan Rather and the Gasping Media would like to emulate the master, but they have much less maneuvering room these days...The teeth-gritting is evident in Rather's article...

US forces its "democracy" on other cultures...

Iraqis are bewildered as their ancient ways are trampled by the alien culture of the imperialist American hegemony...

This picture is from Cigars In The Sand, the blog of Ryan Stiles, a security advisor in Iraq who has been ferrying Iraqis to the polls. (Thanks to Jeff Jarvis)

Charlene asks "Where are the women? (In these pictures we are seeing.) I'm guessing Iraq is still like things were when I was in grade school. When the boys start showing off and cutting capers the girls move to the sidelines...

Well, she found this one at FoxNews. Charlene thinks she looks smug enough to be worth a thousand words...

Simon says

It's late, and voting has been going on for several hours in Iraq. No bloodbath yet, and turnout seems good. I'll risk it and say the election is going to be a huge success. Roger Simon just put this well:

I know it sounds corny, but those of us in the blogosphere--readers, writers, commenters--who supported our government's actions in Iraq and suffered the opprobrium of friends and family, were called warmongers and chickenhawks, this is a time to celebrate. This is what we were fighting for in the war of opinion. It's not much, especially compared to our brave troops, but it's something.

So why am I a hawk? (As I've been asked?) Because I'm for peace! (And no, that's not Orwellian double-speak. Just the plain way things work.) Good night all.

Paging Mr George W Bush...Your country is under attack...Please call your office.

By Jerry Seper THE WASHINGTON TIMES [link]
Sixty-four Border Patrol agents have been assaulted in the past three months along a 260-mile stretch of the Arizona-Mexico border — the country's busiest illegal entry point — as the U.S. government continues its fight for "operational control" of the region.

As law-enforcement efforts have increased, so have the incidents of violence and the intensity of the attacks on the agents in the stretch known as the Tucson sector — which are averaging one assault every two days and are on pace to increase this year by 80 percent....

...The State Department this week issued a warning to Americans traveling into the northern border regions of Mexico, saying they should be "aware of the risk posed by the deteriorating security situation." The warning said violent criminal activity along the border, including killings and kidnappings, was on the rise...

Perhaps the best thing to do would be to dither for a few years and hope the problem goes away by itself... (Thanks to PowerLine)

good question...

A reader writes:

Shouldn't both the MSM and the blogosphere be burning up with discussions of how these three captured aides should be interrogated? This is perfect case in point for the "humane treatment" types to explain exactly how they would do it when they have the masterminds of everything from beheadings to placement of roadside bombs are sitting right in front of them. I haven't heard a peep.

Now that's a good question. I didn't even ask myself that. Maybe people are assuming the matter will be "taken care of" and don't want to bring it up, either because they approve, or because they don't approve but don't want a debate at this moment, which resembles those "ticking bomb" scenarios rather closely.

And probably the Gasping Media don't want to call attention to anything that looks like a victory for us. Or call attention to the awkward fact that a few terrorist monsters are attacking us, not a popular uprising "caused" by American blunders.

Anyway, most of the people who get into a shriek on the subject of torture are phonies. They only care about it when it can be used to hurt the Bush Administration. Their compassion is an utter lie.

How sweet it is...

What fun it is to be alive these days! According to this article, the billboard below and a similar one is going to be plastered around Hollywood next week! (I'd love a picture of one of the real signs if anybody spots one.)

Sweet. Sweet sweet sweet.

Is there any excrescence more loathsome than a Hollywood Lefty? Self-righteous pomposos pretending to protect the little people from greedy Capitalists? Campaigning to take guns away from ordinary people while they themselves are protected by armed guards? Stridently lecturing Democrat politicians who have to suck-up to them in hopes of contributions?

Somebody (Jonah?) once said that the best thing about attending Republican functions is that you don't meet any celebrities! Amen brother. Say it again.

Perhaps I'll go buy a lottery ticket. If we win, Charlene and I can give SF and Berkeley and Silicon Valley the same treatment...(Thanks to Betsy N)

Blogs on the ground...

We can be sure the Gasping Media will not INFORM us about the Iraqi elections. The will report the "news," which will look at lot like the "news" we are getting now--pictures of smoking rubble and ambulances... <pompous voice>You don't expect us to report that a plane took off and landed safely!</pompous voice>

But, blogs to the rescue! Friends of Democracy is a giving us ground-level coverage of what's going on. Keep you eye on them over the next few days...If this plane lands safely it will be big news an important historic event.

Picture is a detail of one found here, at Friends of Democracy...

One thing that continues to surprise me is the extant to which people in faraway places like Iraq or Ukraine or Indonesia "get" elections. Give 'em half a chance and parties, posters, debates, poll-watchers, and of course lots of politicians, emerge like mushrooms on a Spring morning.

Ready to vote...

From Friends of Democracy, a story about Iraqi-Americans voting in the Iraq election...

IRVINE – Some boarded buses in Modesto at midnight to get here. Others flew in from Seattle, or drove six hours in the family car.

Not Suad Aleshaiker of Irvine. All she did was persuade her doctor at Saddleback Memorial Medical Center to let her sneak out of bed about noon Saturday - three days after stomach surgery....

...There are only five polling places in the United States - Irvine is the only site west of the Mississippi.

All of which made for a celebratory scene outside the old Officers Club at the former [El Toro] Marine base. People carried Iraqi flags, wore pins and Iraqi caps; they cheered and whooped while some played Iraqi music from their cars. "I cannot even describe it. I had tears in my eyes when I saw all the people coming here," said Raghad Oueida, 37, of Irvine, who arrived with her husband and 19-day-old infant. "Compare it? Believe me, it's like when I had my baby."...(link to story in Orange County Register)

Letting the expats vote in the Iraq elections is a very good idea. They will be a valuable resource for the new Iraq, and participating in the elections will help involve them in the country.

Blank Slate watch...

George Will is in splendid form today, pouring well-deserved scorn on the fainting lady-professors, and the absurd truckling to PC idiocy of Harvard President Larry Summers..

Worth reading. But the essence of it all? The crux?

...The vehemence of the political left's recoil from this idea is explained by the investment political radicalism has had for several centuries in the notion that human beings are essentially blank slates. What predominates in determining individuals' trajectories -- nature or nurture? The left says nature is negligible, nurturing is sovereign. So a properly governed society can write what it wishes on the blank slate of humanity. This maximizes the stakes of politics and the grandeur of government's role. And the importance of governing elites, who are the "progressive'' vanguards of a perfected humanity...

Stalin would have nodded his head in agreement. This contretemps is something he and Professor Hopkins would have understood in just the same way. It wasn't just a whim on his part to send the geneticists to the Gulag...

A bit of SF history...

After the Earthquake and fire of 1906 left about 200,000 people homeless, the City of San Francisco built more than 5,000 of these simple cottages. Working class families in the refugee camps could haul a cottage to a vacant lot and live in it for $2 a month. The money went into a trust fund, and when the family leased or bought a lot, the money was returned to them.

There are just a handful of them left, usually encrusted with additions so the original cottage is invisible... A few are being restored to their original condition.

Good point to keep in mind...

From The Corner:

2002 VS. 2005 [Tim Graham]
As you watch the top TV news stars furrow their brows about the questionable nature of the Iraqi elections, please remember that many of the networks praised or simply passed on the "Saddam got 100 percent of the vote" malarkey in 2002...

Expect those TV scoundrels to hold the Iraqi elections to far far higher standards than they did the elections of Chavez, Arafat, Mugabe or any other "elected" thug dictator....

blogging the blues...

I've discovered an interesting new blog, interesting to me as a blue state conservative, that is. It's called Blue State Conservative. (Thanks to Betsy N)

I noticed some posts concerning California, including this item: ...Calling it the "the last criminal sanction that treats women differently than men," a California laywer is trying to get topless sunbathing made legal for women in the the state...

Bad idea. On aesthetic grounds....

A fine woman shows her charms to most advantage when she seems most to conceal them. The finest bosom in nature is not so fine as what imagination forms.
-- Dr Gregory

This initiative is Blue State thinking at its worst. It's the same logic that thinks poetry will improve if we dispense with rhyme and meter, or that art will flourish if artists don't waste their time learning how to draw. Or that putting pornography on TV will make people more interested in sex. Or that homework is bad for children.

that rare critter, a civil and agreeable Republican...

From Fraters Libertas:

Reader (and writer) Gary Larson points out this little nugget from a tribute to the late Sen. Everett McKinley Dirksen, that appeared in the Metro Section of Friday's Star Tribune:

Despite being a prominent and committed Republican, Dirksen believed in civility and compromise, pragmatism rather than ideology. He possessed "the rare but all-important ability to disagree without being disagreeable," as biographer Byron Hulsey put it.

a quote for today...'religion of secularism'

The First Amendment...does not say that in every respect there shall be a separation of Church and State. ... Otherwise the state and religion would be aliens to each other -- hostile, suspicious, and even unfriendly. ... The state may not establish a 'religion of secularism' in the sense of affirmatively opposing or showing hostility to religion, thus preferring those who believe in no religion over those who do believe.
--Justice William Douglas

Fools rush in (and get things done)

Mark Helprin has an essay in today's OpinionJournal that I find dubious. (Thanks to Alan Sullivan, who has his own thoughts)

Helprin writes: Our Blindness
We have ample forewarning. But will we ever act?

A hundred years ago, Republican presidential incumbent Theodore Roosevelt had just defeated the now obscure Judge Alton B. Parker, the army had long been fighting Muslim insurrectionists in the Philippines and was recasting itself to fight insurgencies, reformers were concerned with the environment and money politics, and the country's meat supply was viewed with suspicion.

Those absorbing passions would nonetheless prove completely irrelevant to the influenza pandemic that little more than a decade later would kill 50 million people, including half a million Americans; to the rise of Germany, Japan, and Russia; and to the century's three great wars....

We were not then preparing for the specific events Helprin mentions, but that would have taken a ludricous amount of foresight. No other countries were prepared for them either. BUT, America was doing a lot to prepare in a more general sense. Our preparations were NOT "irrelevent." We were creating prodigious national wealth that could be used for any need. Germany and Japan were "rising," but America was "rising" much faster (and none of those other countries were preparing for us!). We didn't foresee the pandemic, but public health and medical research were becoming increasingly important to us, and we were conquering other diseases. As for wars, were were building a world-class fleet, digging the canal, acquiring coaling stations around the globe, and vigorously preventing the encroachment of European empires in an entire hemisphere.

The real problem with Helprin's complaint is that these events were contingent. War with Germany, Japan and Russia were not inevitable, and any of these countries could have presented us with different problems, such as vigorous peaceful competition. Nor is it scientifically accepted that a flu pandemic was predictable—it is theorized that it may have arisen in the crowded hospitals of WWI, when the normal selective pressures that keep flu epidemics mild did not work.

...God help the army that must fight for an idea rather than an objective. After somehow failing to argue competently on behalf of a patently justifiable invasion, and as its more specious arguments were collapsing, the Bush administration then pivoted with breathtaking enthusiasm to nation building, something so Clinton-tinged that it had previously been held in contempt. The more that nation building in Iraq is in doubt, the more the mission creeps into a doubling of bets in hope of covering those that are lost. Now the goal is to reforge the politics, and perforce the culture, not merely of Iraq but of the billion-strong Islamic world from Morocco to the South Seas. That--evangelical democracy writ overwhelmingly large--is the manic idea for which the army must fight...

I think this is just wrong. Helprin is confusing the outward actions of the Administration with its actual plans. It was necessary to emphasize WMD's in order to get the UN on board, which was desirable for various reasons, such as giving Tony Blair cover. But neo-con types were discussing all along the possibility that ONE free and democratic Arab country could change the dynamics of the whole region. And also that hitting ONE terror-supporting nation could be a heads-up to the rest. And also that having an army in Iraq would put us a good position to pressure other Arab countries.

Also, we see every day that democracy is not some "manic" or "evangelical" ideal. It is a practical remedy for many ills, and can, in admittedly imperfect form, take root even in poor and backwards places. And there is a lot of evidence that it does have a big effect in preventing terrorism. How many Muslims are there in India? 100 million? So how many Indian Islamo-loony terrorists have we caught? I haven't heard of any. In India Muslims take their frustrations to the ballot-box. I think it is now incumbent on those like Helprin, who dismiss democracy with an airy wave of the hand, to make a case. The case FOR democracy has become self-evident.

But the main problem with Helprin's thinking throughout this essay is contingency. The occurrence of communist Russia or Nazi Germany were contingent on various happenings, any of which could have gone differently. Suppose Germany had not helped Lenin get to Russia? Suppose Hoover had vetoed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff? I can imagine a train of events where a more careful taping of a door latch by the Watergate burglars might have prevented the war we are in now...

Helprin is guilty of a kind of lazy thinking that assumes that what happened in the past presents us with a simple and obvious lesson that can be applied to the future. But a Helprin of 100 years ago would probably have looked at Japan or Germany and seen looming problems of industrial competition or imperialist expansion. (And so it could easily have turned out.)

...By taking intelligent advantage of the fertile relation between economic development and military capacity, China will be able to leverage its extraordinary growth into superpower parity with the United States. Without the destruction of Chinese social and political equilibrium, this is only a matter of time. And just as we had no policy for dealing with the rise of Germany, Japan, and (prior to the late 1940s) Russia, we have none here....

This too sounds wrong to me. China clearly has a LOT of problems ahead on the road to becoming a "superpower." And many of the problems are ones that the solving of will tend to make China less dangerous. For instance, its huge, expensive and poorly-equipped military is big drag on China's economy. One of the two has to give. So it is intellectually dubious to consider both a huge military and economic growth as signs of a dangerous China. Also, until recently large countries produced most of what they needed themselves. Italians drove Italian cars, and Japanese drove Japanese cars. and likewise with planes, tanks, ships, guns...Helprin's "fertile relation between economic development and military capacity" made much more sense back then. Now most of China's, and everybody's, wealth is based on trade. That wealth would mostly evaporate if trade contracted or ports were blockaded.

...We have not since the Korean War been able to face China on the mainland...

I think this is nonsense. We rebuilt our armed forces in the 1970's and 80's to be able to defeat the Warsaw Pact forces if they attacked the NATO nations. Most people are unaware of how successful we were, because that war was never fought. But we did destroy, in 1991, a large army that had been trained and equipped by the Soviets. We smashed the Iraqi army in 100 hours, with trivial casualties. If you want to know what would happen in a conflict with China's soviet-style military, I suggest reviewing the Battle of Medina Ridge. And while our army is presently smaller and much-burdened with nation-building, it is also becoming increasingly powerful in conventional warfare, with new weapons and, even more important, vastly more effective digital communications being added all the time. (And we should all give thanks to Donald Rumsfeld, who valiantly resists both those who are afraid to tackle messy problems like Iraq, and those who now panic and say we should should convert our whole military to Iraq-style pacification forces.)

Helprin's way of thinking takes whatever is happening now and projects a straight line into the future. But remember that a few years ago that kind of projection said that Japan was going to be a superpower . Now we are worried about Japanese stagnation! Europe has been touted as a coming superpower, but we are starting to worry seriously about European economic collapse. If Helprin had written this in the 1980's he would be castigating us for not preparing for the coming Japanese colossus. In fact we were preparing, by allowing our economy to DESTROY a lot of it's structures, clearing the way for stupendous growth. And we are doing the same thing now.

Almost everything that gets done in the world is done by optimists who wade into projects that turn out to be more difficult that they expected. Every public project has cost over-runs and mistakes. We need the Mark Helprins as voices of caution, but the Helprins never DO anything. They are too wise to try.

Our army SHOULD be fighting for ideas. Ideas are real and potent and solid, while the things and structures around us may melt away at any time.

Crazy. Who could live without search engines?

From a Pew study on Internet use:

...Internet users behave conservatively as searchers: They tend to settle quickly on a single search engine and then stick with it, rather than switching as search technology evolves or comparing results from different search systems. Some 44% of searchers regularly use just one engine, and another 48% use just two or three. Nearly half of searchers use a search engines no more than a few times a week, and two-thirds say they could walk away from search engines without upsetting their lives very much.

Internet users trust their favorite search engines, but few say they are aware of the financial incentives that affect how search engines perform and how they present their search results.

Only 38% of users are aware of the distinction between paid or “sponsored” results and unpaid results. And only one in six say they can always tell which results are paid or sponsored and which are not....

As usual, one is a bit disappointed in the "folk." two-thirds say they could walk away from search engines...! Hmmm. Make that very disappointed. I can't even imagine living without Google. I jump up from the dinner table to Google things that come up. I have thousands of questions in the back of my mind, little things I've wondered about over the years, but have had no inclination to research. Or no way to research. They are almost forgotten, but not completely, and when one pops into mind, I can usually answer it now. (via boing boing)

One such question came to mind yesterday. I once read that the great pianist Gary Graffman had contracted a mysterious ailment that had left him unable to play piano. I felt very bad because I had read Graffman's marvelous memoir, I Really Should Be Practicing, (which I recommend highly). I feel like I know him, and I wondered from time to time how his life had turned out.

So yesterday I googled and found out...

(Also, if you click on the book link, you will discover that the paperback of Graffman's book is selling for $35 and up! Ouch.)

California mess...

Here's one of the rock-slides that temporarily trapped Charlene and Betsy in Ojai two weeks ago. This is Highway 33, about 11 miles north of the town.

This is the sort of thing that can happen in many places of coastal California. The mountains and hills of our Coastal Range tend to resemble heaps of rubble. Majestic granite peaks they are not. With heavy rains hillsides often dissolve into catastrophic soups of rock and mud, which sometimes rush down canyons scouring away anything in their path.

More "they're on the other side"

I started to scribble a comment to this post last night, and then realized there were already a gazillion comments, so I'll just post here. The piece is a reply by a journalist, Derek Rose, to the letter of Lt. Col. Ryan about the poor coverage of the Iraq Campaign by journalists. (Via Chrenkoff) He makes many interesting points, though I am not persuaded by them. My comment:

You say you care about American deaths, not sewer plants. But the sewer plants are part of the mission of our soldiers. And sewers might seem un-newsworthy in America, but in places like Sadr City the streets often flow with raw sewage! Fixing the sewers there will have a tremendous effect on the people, which is why terrorists try to stop such projects, and we are fighting to push them through. The sewers of Sadr City are battle fronts just as much as police stations in Mosul. You remind me of those politicians who proclaim that they "support the troops," and then disparage every thing connected with them.

If American deaths were reported in the context of the mission, then the deaths have meaning. If the enthusiasm of many Iraqis for the election, or for just having new jobs and opportunities and freedoms was prominently reported, that would give meaning to our sacrifices. That's why those things get little news play, not because they are uninteresting. Most Americans don't even know that there have been many local elections in Iraq already, and moderates have won them all! Go on, tell us how that's not news-worthy, but car bombs are.

You say it's not your fault that car bombs are going off every day. In fact, it is your fault. Those attacks, especially those against Americans, are intended for press consumption. Think a minute: Do you really believe the "insurgents" are trying to defeat the US Army? They don't even pretend that. [Which in my mind makes them something closer to terrorists than "insurgents."] They are intended to discourage the American people, and guess who's been enlisted to help...

You people of the press are in mindless symbiosis with the terrorists. In your post you display oh-so-much skepticism for the information you get from American soldiers. But none for the information you are given daily by terrorists. You are blind to the way Americans and Iraqis are being killed for no other reason than to control YOUR headlines and broadcasts. The bombings and beheadings are just like press releases, but these press releases you accept with no skepticism at all.

They're on the other side #646

Bill Roggio scrutinizes a NYT article:

...Zarqawi is a declared member of al Qaeda, and has full terrorist credentials. He has operated al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan, beheaded civilians and recorded his handy work in snuff films on al Qaeda websites, attempted to conduct a poison gas attack in Jordan, ricin and other chemical attacks in Europe... The list goes on. And yet the New York Times, the paper of record, cannot, even once, refer to him as a terrorist. Instead, he is a “rebel leader”, “insurgent”, “militant” and “guerrilla”. They know his history, yet they choose to obscure his brutal nature in the romantic language of resistance fighters...

Sounds like another Che...There may be good money to be made selling Zarqawi t-shirts to the fashion-conscious!

Where was the outrage...

Lane Core has fascinating stuff on what FDR did on the day of the D-Day Invasion. Laughing and joking with reporters for one. Can you imagine how Bush would be excoriated if he even cracked a smile on such an occasion?

And FDR said a prayer on the radio. Here's a part of it:

Last night, when I spoke with you about the fall of Rome, I knew at that moment that troops of the United States and our Allies were crossing the Channel in another and greater operation. It has come to pass with success thus far.

And so, in this poignant hour, I ask you to join with me in prayer:

Almighty God: our sons, pride of our Nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion, and our civilization, and to set free a suffering humanity.

Lead them straight and true; give strength to their arms, stoutness to their hearts, steadfastness in their faith.

They will need Thy blessings. Their road will be long and hard. For the enemy is strong. He may hurl back our forces. Success may not come with rushing speed, but we shall return again and again; and we know that by Thy grace, and by the righteousness of our cause, our sons will triumph.

They will be sore tried, by night and by day without rest — until the victory is won....

Dems would HATE it if Bush said such things. "Preserve our religion?" "We shall return again and again?" Yow.

(Thanks to Betsy N)

'The gasping media." A good name for them...

Mohammed writes about the ridiculous Sarah Boxer, and invents a new locution:

One short look at the "article" shows how naïve the writer was and how old the methods used in writing this post are. This post has fixed another nail in the casket of the gasping media...

"The gasping media." I like it! I hope it catches on.

...From Boxer's point of view, an Iraqi who supports America's efforts in liberating his country from the worst tyrant in modern history and rebuilding his country after that is either a paid agent or a mentally confused person. As if clear thinking is an exclusive gift that only a journalist from the NYT could possess while anyone outside her office is simply confused...

Mohammed, it would astonish you to know the vast numbers of people who a NYT writer would consider "mentally confused."

"A great wind rushes under all of us"

       IN JANUARY
 
Only one cell in the frozen hive of night
is lit, or so it seems to us:
this Vietnamese café, with its oily light,
its odors whose colorful shapes are like flowers.
Laughter and talking, the tick of chopsticks.
Beyond the glass, the wintry city
creaks like an ancient wooden bridge.
A great wind rushes under all of us.
The bigger the window, the more it trembles.

       -- Ted Kooser

#174: Why Did Krugman Miss This Potential flaw?

KRUGMAN TRUTH SQUAD

In The Free Lunch Brunch (01/21/05) Paul Krugman almost gets it right. There is indeed a potential flaw in the President's transition plan to private accounts, but Krugman can't seem to find it. In this report we will first explain the potential flaw, then show where Krugman missed it (close, but no cigar!).

The Potential Flaw

As money enters the stock market from the funding of private accounts stock prices will be bid up. This is no problem as long as prospective earnings also rise so that the price-to-earnings ratios (P/Es) stay approximately the same during the funding. But unless the new money comes from increased savings there is nothing to drive earnings higher. In other words, if the private accounts are funded by borrowing rather than saving there is no diversion of national product away from consumption and into plant, equipment, technological research and all the things that promote economic growth. The result is that the private account holders end up owning stocks at inflated P/Es and will have years of lackluster returns to look forward to.

We have been careful to use the word "potential" to describe this flaw because some very smart people have thought long and hard about these issues and see them differently. For one thing, after the transition is complete further funding of private accounts would not require borrowing and would result in additional savings. One might also claim that even if stock returns are lower for the private accounts than the historical average they could still be substantially higher than the return associated with the current Social Security system. Finally, private account holders would at least own and control their accounts and that is worth a lot compared to the current system.

In a nutshell, we don't agree among ourselves on many of these issues, but we do think the borrowing vs. saving link to earnings and economic growth should be part of the debate.

So Why Did Krugman Miss It?

Probably because he is so intent on being mean and nasty that he can no longer think straight. He believes the Bush plan will fail because current stock holders are not stupid enough to swap their stocks for bonds, i.e., the bonds being issued to fund the transition.
Here's how he put it:

"So privatizers are in effect asserting that politicians are smart - they know that stocks are a much better investment than bonds - while private investors are stupid, and will swap their valuable stocks for much less valuable government bonds. Isn't such an assertion very peculiar coming from people who claim to trust markets?"

This gives Krugman a chance to take a swat at privatizers for hypocritically trusting politicians more than markets. But, in fact, the real problem is that Krugman doesn't understand markets. Of course current stockholders will give up their stocks for bonds if P/E ratios are bid up to unsustainable levels as we described above. Current stockholders will make out very well, thank you very much. It's the new private account holders with overvalued stocks backed by additional government debt rather than savings who will suffer. This is the point Krugman should have made, but apparently he doesn't even understand it.

Orwellian Double-Speak Pretzel-Twist

Susan Jacoby has an unintentionally funny article in the LAT, Hear 'Reform,' Think 'Destroy'.

In a 1946 essay titled "Politics and the English Language," George Orwell observed that all political language is designed "to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind."

As President Bush begins his second term, he has already demonstrated the truth of Orwell's dictum by persuading much of the windy news media to attach the word "reform" to his plan for fundamental change in the way Social Security is financed...
It's reform in any sane sense of the word--most of the program will remain the same...
...Each time television or radio newscasters use the phrase "Social Security reform," as they do every day, they send a message to the American public that Social Security is a broken system in need of fixing.
You Dems agreed on that point until a Republican actually tried to DO something. Remember Bill Clinton saying "Save Social Security First?"
The general definition of reform is always positive, conveying the notion of changes designed to improve an institution...
It's the connotation that is positive, not the definition. But in fact we do intend to improve the institution. So "reform" fits.
...In its specific political sense, reform is offered as a moderate alternative to radicalism and revolution. Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, for instance, has been judged by history as a set of reforms that saved capitalism from its own worst excesses...
Only if you define history as "only the writings of Leftists." Many historians have different opinions on this point. The judgement of history has not been made yet.
...Neither common nor political usage justifies the application of the reform brand to such a controversial proposal as the Republican plan to privatize Social Security.
So now being "controversial" means it's not reform? The New Deal, of course, was never controversial.
A minority of newspapers (the Los Angeles Times among them) appear to have made a conscientious effort to keep the reform label out of their headlines and use more neutral terms like "change" and "revision."...
A majority of newspapers appear to have made a conscientious effort to call people who shred women and children with bombs "militants" or "activists," avoiding the T-word.
But most of the media have capitulated to the administration's understandable desire to soothe the public with the R-word, thereby displaying as profound a bias as if the Bush plan were routinely described as "Social Security destruction."...
It's not neutral to deliberately eschew anything that sounds positive. It's biased...

What's especially loony about this article is that Social Security was radical and revolutionary when it was started. Nothing like it had ever been done in America. It could not possibly have been called "reform" then, because there was nothing similar to be improved or tinkered with.

It's almost pathetic how these people let themselves be manipulated by President Bush. First he maneuvers them into allying themselves with the Taliban, Saddam Hussein, Jacques Chirac and Kofi Annan. Now he has them ready to die at the barricades to defend the very Social Security system that they were recently saying needed to be fixed. (Thanks to Juddblog)

the full assault treatment...

I like this thought, by TM Lutas:

...I'm starting to suspect that Social Security reform is the domestic version of Iraq and Medicare is the domestic version of N. Korea as far as Bush policy goes. Social Security is going to get the full assault treatment because it's strategic, people understand it well, and it's about the biggest problem we can handle with that approach. Medicare is too tough, too confusing, and much more susceptible to a quiet "python" approach...

I think a lot of the opposition to SS reform comes from people who just don't understand the concept of striking at the most brittle problem first, so that success there can provide a template and an inspiration for solving the messier problems. If you've climbed a mountain that is two miles high, then it becomes much easier to organize an expedition to climb a three mile-high peak.

Of course, just as with Iraq, some of the opposition comes from people who DO understand how these things might work.....

You will have to read his post to find out what the "python approach" might be...

I think both are wrong...

PowerLine quotes in interesting article by Professor Andrew Busch, Rolling Realignment.

Will 2004 be for Republicans what 1964 was for Democrats, a moment of triumph followed by a season of loss? Or will 2004 be, as Karl Rove has argued, another 1900, a close but broad victory that lays the foundation for a generation of dominance? Everything will depend on the choices Republicans make, the choices Democrats make, and the events that both will have to confront. If history is any guide, for Republicans hubris will be a more dangerous adversary than Harry Reid.

Both are wrong, or so I would argue. The theory of 70-Year Cycles would say that both of these are just the ups and downs that happen within the broader cycle of realignments. What was the 60's? It was the time when the men of the New Deal generation were replaced by their children, who had never known real electoral defeat, and so were tempted into a classic example of over-reaching. It was a part of the larger realignment. 2004 is similar to the 1930's. We can expect our moment of hubris to come in the 2030's.

there's another interesting (to me, you are probably bored if you've even read this far) sentence:

...If there has been a Republican realignment, though, it is not like classic realignments of the past. Perhaps, as David Mayhew argued in his book Electoral Realignments (2002), 1860 and 1932 were such extreme cases—revolving around civil war and the worst economic conditions in the nation's history—that they cannot serve as a realistic model...

To the contray, I think it was the realignment that precipitated the Civil War. Realignments are driven by neglected problems. The party in power can't or won't deal with certain things, and so a sort of vacuum is created, that pulls the other party forward. And remember, there were a lot of things besides slavery the Dems wouldn't deal with in the 1850's. Think Homestead Act, Land-Grant Colleges, Transcontinental Railroad...

And while the 1930's realignment didn't precipitate the Great Depression, they were connected. The neglected problems concerned the regulation of a modern industrial economy, and one could say that realignment and crisis came to a head simultaneously. (A cynic might suggest that the neglected problem was how to turn an ordinary business contraction into a prolonged depression, the better to further quasi-socialist solutions and make the careers of quasi-socialist Democrats.)

Believe the evidence of your eyes

I caught part of the President's inaugural speech on the radio as I was driving around. Good speech. Strong, uncompromising stuff. Made me proud.

...All Americans have witnessed this idealism, and some for the first time. I ask our youngest citizens to believe the evidence of your eyes. You have seen duty and allegiance in the determined faces of our soldiers. You have seen that life is fragile, and evil is real, and courage triumphs. Make the choice to serve in a cause larger than your wants, larger than yourself - and in your days you will add not just to the wealth of our country, but to its character...

Just breaking this morning...

From WorldNetDaily. Guess who was pals with Samir Vincent? Jimmy Carter!

...Based upon an investigation by Move America Forward, it appears President Carter and his associates are among the former officials with whom Vincent collaborated.

"One of two things happened," suggests [Melanie] Morgan. "Either President Carter was totally duped, and allowed himself to be conned into working as an indirect agent of Saddam Hussein, or President Carter knowingly associated himself with a foreign agent who was seeking to undermine American foreign policy."...

Carter always tries to undermine our foreign policy—if it threatens the dictators that he always finds sympathetic and appealing.

He is the biggest phony ever to be President. As David Frum said, "the first anti-American president." And an enemy of ours in the War on Terror. He is on the other side.

I'm sending a little donation to Move America Forward. Thank you Melanie (a local gal, we listen to her on the KSFO Morning Show).

Sigh. Bush is too smart, and too much the gent to do it, but the thought of Alberto Gonzalez dragging the peanut into the witness box and having his toughest prosecutors grill him for days...then passing him on to a House Committee for some serious clock-cleaning... Stop! Stop day-dreaming, John! There's a war to be won, and pleasures must be deferred...

It is to barf...

Unbelievable: ABC is advertising for a military funeral to "balance" its coverage of President Bush's inauguration... And it has to be an Iraq death. If you died in Afghanistan, ABC doesn't want your crappy little funeral.

God how I hate those animals. They are on the other side. They give Saddam Hussein more respectful treatment than they give the President of the United States of America.

And to take the funeral of one of America's heroes and exploit it for their nasty little political trickses...Unforgivable.

Read, as they say, the whole thing...

An article in Arab News by Amir Taheri, Algerian Lessons for Iraq, is very pertinent right now. Algeria has (but is defeating) a terrorist movement even more nihilist and evil than the one in Iraq. They once cut the throats of 800 people, many of them women and children, in one night! (If President Bush offered our help fight them, I'm sure Michael Moore and the sludge-for-brains wing of the Democrat Party would start calling them "freedom fighters.")

...Visiting Algiers in March 1994 I was struck by the mood of doom and gloom at almost every level of government. European ambassadors confided their fear that the terrorists might seize power at any time. A segment of the elite was urging negotiations with the terrorists, which meant discussing terms of surrender.

After a long moment of tergiversation in which the Algerian leaders did not know quite how to deal with the threat, they stumbled on a strategy almost by instinct....

They soon realized that the terrorists lacked a significant popular base. But it was also clear that a majority of Algerians had adopted a wait-and-see attitude, hating the terrorists in secret but too frightened of them to make a clear stand against them in public. The key, therefore, was to mobilize the “silent majority” to demonstrate the isolation of the terrorists.

The most effective way to do that was to hold elections. Few people are prepared to die, and even fewer are willing to kill in support of their political opinions. But almost everyone is ready to vote. The task of a civilized society is to render the expression of political opinions easy. The terrorists made it difficult because they demanded of the people to kill and died. The Algerian leaders decided to make it easy by asking the people to vote.

The turning point came in 1995 when Algeria organized its first ever pluralist and direct presidential election. This is was not an ideal election. The candidates were little known figures that had appeared on the national political scene just a couple of years earlier. None presented a coherent political program. To make matters worse the terrorists did all they could to prevent the election. They burned down voter registration bureaus and murdered election officers. Masked men visited people in their homes and shops to warn that going to the polls would mean death.

And, yet, when polling day came it quickly became clear that the terrorists, in the forlorn attempt at stopping democracy, were, as in so many other instances in history, facing certain defeat. Never in my many years of journalism had I seen such enthusiasm for an electoral exercise anywhere in the world. The “silent majority” spoke by casting ballots, not because it particularly liked any of the candidates but because it wanted to send a message to the terrorists that they had no place in Algeria...(thanks to Powerline and Bill Roggio)

Quote 'O the day...

It is a good rule in life never to apologize.
The right sort of people do not want
apologies, and the wrong sort take a
mean advantage of them
    --P.G. Wodehouse

Sawicky v Kling

Here's an interesting debate in WSJOnline between bloggers Arnold Kling and Max Sawicky on SS reform. To my mind, Sawicky isn't very persuasive. Too much: "there isn't really a problem," plus too much: "there are other big problems, so how can you justify tackling this one and not them?" (Hmmm. Where have I heard that line before?) Arnold has a good response:

...OK, Max, let's get back to one of the points in your first post. You wrote that "the right-now budget crisis stems from tax cuts, military spending increases, and unsustainable, double-digit growth in Medicare and Medicaid."

The way I would put it is that politicians have three credit cards -- three ways of buying votes today and paying later. This involves making promises that will have to be redeemed by taxes collected in the future. Those three credit cards are the general budget, Social Security and Medicare.

Changing Social Security from a transfer scheme to one with personal accounts serves to take away the politicians' Social Security Credit Card. They no longer would have the authority to promise benefits out of future Social Security taxes...

Of course you can't solve every problem at once. Duh. But when you have several problems of a similar sort, then solving ONE of them can create the momentum and believability that make solving the others possible later. And it makes sense to pick the one that's the most brittle and hit it first. (Reason#2 on my List of Ten Reasons for Invading Iraq. That's where I've heard that line before. "We can't solve ALL the world's problems!")

To generalize: If a Republican tries to solve a problem, then 1. It's not a problem. 2. It's the wrong problem. 3. Our problems are too overwhelming, we dursn't do anything.

I do NOT, by the way, agree that there is a "right-now budget crisis." The deficit is decreasing right now, beause our economy is growing strongly and tax revenues are going up. All of which has, I suspect, some mysterious karmic connection with them tax cuts Max Sawicky doesn't like.

Also, part of our budget problems come from the need to buy necessities from Congress, which should decrease as the Republican majority grows with each election. The President bought HSA's by agreeing to the Prescription Drug benefit. I think it was a smart trade, an increase in the welfare state that was probably going to happen no matter what, balanced by a plan that will start teaching people a better approach to paying for health care. Our only hope is for people to become wiser--this is a democracy, and people are going to get what they want in the end. Of course the same point goes for SS private accounts. More important than the direct economic effect is that they will teach people to think like investors and owners, instead of like helpless clients of the state.

#174: We Need More Dan Rathers

KRUGMAN TRUTH SQUAD

Have you ever thought there might be a connection between the war in Iraq and the reform of Social Security? Well, neither did we. But that’s because our minds are just not as facile as Paul Krugman’s. In That Magic Moment (11/18/05) he zeros in the common denominator–the Bush administration’s deceitfulness. Just as they hyped the need for war, they are now hyping the extent of the crisis in Social Security. These are such predictable Krugman positions that one might wonder why he bothered to repeat them all again.

But to wonder that is to not understand Krugman. What’s really going on here, as we have pointed out on many similar occasions, is pretty simple. It’s another column on the cheap. If Krugman can find two subjects on which he has written before and can link them in some “original” manner, he can then write on them all over again and use the link–in this case, Bush’s deceit–as cover for his “self-plagiarism.” The mystery is why the NY Times puts up with such laziness.

There is one howler: Krugman attributes the re-election of Bush to confusion among the electorate due to Bush misrepresentations about Iraq. Likewise, he sees the political viability of Social Security reform as due mainly to more Bush misrepresentations and blames the media for not doing its job in uncovering them. Apparently, if we just had a half dozen more Dan Rathers all would be well.

Mini thoughts...

If anyone's interested, John Gruber has some interesting thoughts on the Mac Mini and the iPod Shuffle. (One detail I was pleased to learn; it's recommended that a technician install memory in the Mini, but apparently it's not hard to crack the case and install it yourself.)

....My mistake was not realizing that a low-cost iPod wouldn’t entail Apple joining the current market for low-end players, so much as Apple redefining the market for low-end players. Not because the iPod Shuffle has amazing new features (it doesn’t), but because Apple is going to sell so damned many of them, and everyone knows it.

I mean, does anyone doubt that the iPod Shuffle will soon be the best-selling sub-$200 music player in the world? If not by the end of this month, certainly by the end of this quarter. This means Apple is able to purchase components — specifically, flash-memory chipsets — in quantities that their competitors can’t. Which means Apple gets a lower price on components, which means Apple can afford to put 512 MB of memory into a $99 player, a price point where the competition only has 256.

This is worth restating: Megabyte-for-megabyte, the iPod Shuffle is cheaper than its competition. To my memory, this is the first product in Apple’s history where this is so. With the iPod, the tables have turned and Apple is on the right side of the volume discounts that come with majority market share....

The dangers with Apple introducing inexpensive products are both diluting the brand and, of course, not making any money. (Critics of Apple praise the makers of those cheap PC's but never mention how often they end up in or near bankruptcy.) The current pizzaz and trendiness of the iPod may have given Apple an opportunity to make mass-market products without becoming a "low-end" company.

Update: By the way, if you are thinking of buying peripherals for your Mini, here are some amazin' cheap prices...I had no idea. A GEM LCD for $169? Whoa. Gotta look into them.

Sadr City of all places...

Arthur Chrenkoff's latest round-up of good news from Iraq is up, and as always is a useful counterbalance to the pro-terrorist press. (And, as always, he emphasizes that he is not denying that there are problems and violence in Iraq. Just giving us the part of the news that you won't see on TV.

One tidbit really surprised me:

...Now a U.S. officer, Brig. Gen. Jeffery Hammond of the 1st Cavalry Division, says Sadr City is the safest place in or around Baghdad...[link].

Astonishing! Sadr City, violent and impoverished home of Al Sadr's rebellion.

...About 18,000 people have reconstruction jobs, he says, earning about $6 a day. "Sadr City is what the future of Iraq can look like," he says.Those who were once taking up arms are now talking democracy.

"Before, the men were buying black cloth for their (martyrs') banners. Now for the election, we are buying white cloths" for posters, says candidate Fatah al-Sheikh.

Al-Sheikh, 37, rounds up a camera crew and a couple of reporters and heads out for a bit of campaigning. He presses the flesh — both cheeks and hands — and points to the failings of the current, American-backed administration, including high fuel prices and frequent power outages. "This is what will bring the people to vote for us," he says, pointing to trash and sewage along al-Falah Street, a main drag. "This kind of collapse of the services will make the people vote for us and not for the government."...

I'd say that's an answer to the people who claim that democracy is a long-term project that will do nothing right now to combat terrorism. Iraqi democracy is likely to be very flawed in the short run, but will still be a powerfully transformative, drawing people's energy into lawful contests...

Embedded...

Do read this column, by John Leo. (Thank you Betsy N) He's a conservative "embedded" in Manhattan, and his insights I can, as a San Franciscan, assure you are dead on.

...Finally, I reluctantly report that liberal friends basically reject give-and-take political discussion. Their positions are typically posed in the language of feelings or the language of rights. Either way, there is nothing much to debate--feelings are personal and rights are beyond the reach of argument and majority decision making. My liberal friends are polite and tolerant, but their opinions reflect a body of remarkably settled thought that leaves little room for dissent or new ideas. To their token conservative friends (that’s me), they seem ever more isolated from the thoughts and concerns of their fellow Americans.

From what I've experienced at my humble blog-abode here, he's right. I hadn't thought about the frequent use of the "language of rights" as a way to close off the possibility of discussion, but that's just what it does. And there's a new item to raise your consciousness:

...Over the holidays, I discovered that a relatively new argument about terror is becoming popular: the next terrorist attack on America, if it comes, will likely be minor and tolerable. I was assured that a dirty bomb is the most likely weapon, and that it would probably do no more damage than an industrial accident. So not to worry. The real problems are fear, panic and violations of civil liberties--not terror...

Right. Gotcha. And you promise not to complain about a little extra background-radiation...

Wandering into thickets...

DrunkenBatMan has an interview with one of the college students who is getting sued by Apple for passing around developer builds of the next version of OS-X. It is interesting to me as an example of how easy it is to wander into a legal and ethical morass with hardly a thought. Among other things, the kid signed an NDA, but didn't read it because he treated it like all those licensing agreements that come with our software. Who reads the things?

There's way too much bogus "law" these days. For instance, all those things we all sign where we accept that the product is dangerous, so we can't sue if our toe gets chopped off? Truth is, you can still sue. Charlene could cut through any of those things easily, if she were on the Dark Side. (Actually, she says the one exception is ski resorts! Those agreements have always been upheld by the courts.)

This is a different case than that Apple suit against a "blogger." Actually I don't think ThinkSecret is a "blog." I've read it for years without ever thinking "this is a blog." (And I've been blogging since 2001. That's decades in Internet time—I should be considered an expert witness on what's a weblog!)

I don't presume to say who's right or wrong in these cases. But I think there's a of of double-standarding in the way Apple gets criticized by people who blandly stand by and watch Microsoft obliterate entire companies. As Brian Tieman said recently, it's sort of like the phonies who wax indignant about Abu Ghraib while winking at the murders of Hamas or the Taliban or Saddam....

I suspect his pessimism is unjustified...

Bill Palmer, a Mac writer I like, thinks the new Mac Mini is going to be a marketing disaster. People who think a cheap Mac an incentive to switch will end up disgusted...

...Well, wait until they get home with their Mac Mini, only to find that neither their keyboard nor their mouse will work with it, despite Apple's claims to the contrary. Remember that perceived notion of compatibility? Gone. Instantly. Long after that Mac Mini gets taken back for a refund, the disgusted customer is still going around telling everyone that Macs aren't "compatible" after all. Regardless of the fact that it's the PC companies' faults for (still, even here in 2005) shipping PS/2-based peripherals with their many of their low-end models in order to save fourteen cents, the public will still blame Apple. Techincal explanations about the virtues of USB aren't gonna cut it. And should we even address the fact that a Windows-based keyboard has a number of different keys, in different locations, than a Mac-based keyboard? Should we even think about how ugly that's going to get when the poor sap tries to follow directions or get Mac help from a book? Forget about it...

I hope it's not that bad. I rather think it's not. I wasn't even aware they still make non-USB keyboards. Surely even PC manufacturers couldn't be that tacky! Palmer must be exaggerating. Any USB peripherals like keyboards should work fine with any USB Mac, perhaps after downloading a driver. And I'm pretty sure any ordinary monitor will be OK. I use Windows-style keyboards without trouble.

And I for one can see an advantage in buying that cheap Mac Mini precisely so I could afford a fancy expensive monitor. I'm very a visual person, and lust painfully for those big luminous screens. And come to think of it, I've usually replaced our Mac keyboards and mice with Logitech ones. I'm the one who should complain, paying for a bunch of keyboards and mice I don't use.

The recent Mac keyboards are great, by the way, but the ones from a few years ago were too cramped. Mac one-button mice are just for beginners.

I don't know enough to comment, really, except to say that it's sure frustrating when you buy something and then discover you have to buy 3 other things to make it work. Charlene bought one of our boys World of Warcraft for Christmas. It was left to me to install a faster processor in his G-4 to play the game properly. And since it's one of those games where you interact with thousands of other Trolls and Wizards around the globe, you have to subscribe to the service. So the game itself was the cheap part....

But it's a very cool game. I don't play any these days, but I hugely admire the technology. Amazin'.

Crankiness...

Alan writes on the current craziness among a considerable proportion of Democrats...

...In this contempt for the electorate, we already see the first stage of a mass descent into madness. During close elections Democrats have taken to cheating on a scale beyond Nixon's dreams; and they do it with clear consciences, for the greater good, while making spurious claims about racial abuses by the opposition. But