Wednesday, March 08, 2006

Pro Choice, Male Edition


OK, controversy time. Before I post a blog on this issue, please share comments (click on "comments" at end of post below) on how you feel about this story (please read it completely first). I'll give a few days lead. What's your opinion, and what is the real issue here? Male and female comments are equally welcome.

Oh. And please don't sugar coat it, tell me how you really feel......

End of the Internet (as we know it)

Sporting its newly acquired AT&T brand (AT&T as we knew it after the 1984 divestiture no longer exists), SBC on Monday announced its $67 billion takeover of BellSouth, uniting for the first time in 22 years four of the original seven "Baby Bells". The usual bravado hit the headlines, "317,000 employees", "71 million local landline customers", "54 million cell customers", "largest merger in telecom history" and so on. Then the familiar drivel about benefits to customers, efficiencies, synergies, more and better services, discounts for bundled services, etc. (Forgive my cynicism but I've lived it from the inside). Finally the outcry from consumers' groups about the lack of competition, higher prices and so forth.

Everyone missed the real story, at least everyone until the New York Times caught it today in an editorial. The biggest impact this merger is likely to have is to bring about is their ability to use a quasi-monopoly position to change internet usage as we know it.

The internet has evolved into a service that we use much as we use local phone service: unlimited use. This plus the proliferation of broadband connections has spawned an explosion of ways we use the service, from shopping, to music and video downloading, to podcasting, to blogging, to VOIP (internet phone service). There is no usage barrier as with long distance telephone or cell minutes, so we surf at will with no self-imposed usage restraints. Because of this eCompanies have thrived and spawned new industries and commerce, such as amazon.com, Vonage, eBay, and iTunes. And companies have the ability to compete with each other for our business on a level playing field.

But if a single telecom concern could control a significant part of the infrastructure (not the end user ISP part, but the highway "pipes" that are the backbone of the internet) they could dictate what businesses get the express lanes to their sites, and what ones get the stop and go lanes, depending on how well the business pays for the access, called "tiered" access. Plus, ISPs could be forced to regulate volume even within a controlled bandwidth, forcing users to regulate their "online" time (as many sites "refresh" on a regular basis, causing a potential usage meter to advance, both business and consumer broadband customers would log off between needed sessions). This would be like charging shoppers for every minute they spent in a shopping mall, regardless of purchase. Get 'em addicted to the free drug, then start charging.

This isn't necessarily an evil thing, but could dramatically alter the future of the internet, and its long term success.

Tuesday, March 07, 2006

Pure Inspiration

The cynic in me wants to caveat this piece with a reminder that not all in the news, especially from Hollywood, is as real as it seems. But out of immense respect I will take that chance, that leap of faith. I choose to believe in this woman who has recently left us.

Like many in the world I have felt a great deal of respect, sympathy and empathy for Christopher Reeve since his resulting paralysis from a horseback riding incident in 1995 through his death in 2004, with all the courage, effort, painful struggles and inspiring, tireless work in between.

But my heart and mind were also greatly moved by the remarkable example set by his wife of only 3 years at the time of the accident, the former Dana Morosini, now Dana Reeve. Here was a beautiful, intelligent, talented and successful actress of 34 who chose love, compassion but also the realities of life (and had the wisdom at that tender age to recognize it) over the tempting lure of an easier and more convenient, understandable lifestyle. She did this surrounded by a culture which not only would have forgiven her for her choice, but which would have encouraged her to do so. One has to wonder how this Sturm und Drang may have hastened her untimely succumbing to disease at the tender age of 44.

She may have learned the peace few of us ever may, and most of us may never. I shall mourn and respect her passing. She undoubtedly made the final 9 years of Christopher's life a little easier to bear, perhaps to the detriment of her own. And I sincerely hope I can someday find what Christopher and Dana managed to.

Magical Design



A fascinating story about possible devolution.

The photo has the BBC copyright, so I trust its authenticity.

Sunday, February 26, 2006

School's In Session

It is said that when the student is ready, the teacher will appear. That is, it is only when we are truly mentally and spiritually ready to absorb and comprehend new information that we will recognize that information. Kind of an awakening. Or better, the removal of a block.

I don't think the Shrub Crowd is at that point yet with regard to their "liberation" of Iraq, but they have to be darned close. The latest developments there have to be turning the heads of all but the most goosestepping loyalists, making it very hard to blame the failures on a few "dead-end kids" (as the fearless hunter Cheney once did) and making it clear that the powers that be (for now) understood nothing about the culture and environmental complexities of the region. Pictures of purple fingers are not going to turn this around. W's dad, a man of world experience got it. W, a man of privileged playboy experience (with no life accomplishments), may be starting to.

Come on in W, school's in session!
WaPo's take
NYT's
SeaPI's cartoon

Saturday, February 25, 2006

Bode


I saw him on 60 Minutes a month or so ago, and I could not figure the reason he was singled out for feature (although the show has definately lowered its standards after Don Hewitt retired). This seems to confirm my reaction.

AWOL


Or am I a deserter? Oh, where have I been???!
(Maybe here?)
What does my expat reader in Dakar, Singapore think?

Friday, February 10, 2006

Does Porter Goss Have a Clue??


Anyone who has ever held political office or served as a business executive knows that some of the most effective assistants or advisors you can have are qualified people with whom you have had a long, trusting personal relationship. The key is that they are not just someone with whom you have close ties, they must also have the knowledge, aptitude, and skills to excel in the position with which they are to be entrusted. Anything less is simple cronyism.

Among the many failures in leadership by the Bush administration is the rampant cronyism at all levels of appointed government positions, from Bremer and the whole Heritage Foundation greenhorn types he dragged over to the Green Zone with him to "heckuva job" Brownie, now singing his heart out before a Senate committee today.

One of the lastest examples emerging of someone who might not have the horsepower to do the job for which he was appointed is the CIA's new chief, Porter Goss. Among the signs are his asinine statement last week to the Senate Intelligence Committee that public disclosure of the illegal domestic wiretapping program has caused "severe damage to our capabilities to carry out our mission". I can't imagine in what way. I'm picturing two bad guys in a cave in Pakistan, rubbing their hands together in glee because they now know that the U.S. is eavesdropping on its own citizens without getting warrants. Should make their job much easier. Now in its NPR-like attempt to appear "less liberal" the New York Times today printed an editorial by Mr. Goss regarding the "leak epidemic" he sees. The article is one of the most poorly written I've ever seen, it sounds childish. I thought the editors gave those the once-over, but apparently that was not the case here. And his logic is so classic Bush its starting to sound tired: We have to keep everything secret to protect national security, even down to what we may or may not have in the lunchroom fridge. I hold out hope that my first instincts are wrong about him. In the meantime, he can start his cleanup work here.

RELATED

Thursday, February 09, 2006

Herding Sheep

President Bush was apparently one of the many watching his Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, refuse to answer questions this week before the Senate Judiciary Committee, making the whole illegal domestic wiretapping issue look that much worse. Even some of the regressive legislators are jumping ship on this issue, in this mid-term election year.

So W has decided to go back to the tried and true rightie playbook which guides him in crisis, the one that has served him well over the years, as well as such public service icons as Dick Cheney and Tom DeLay.

That book only has three chapters which cover variations on three tactics: Blame the Clintons, destroy the messenger, or scare the hell out of the sheep in the country. This time he realized that the first two would not meet the test (though his man Gonzales reminded us in the Senate hearings that there is precedent in the country's history for this broad use of presidential authority, citing the electronic surveillance conducted by the George Washington and Abraham Lincoln administrations among others), and realizing that the 9/11 shroud was wearing thin, he trotted out a retread of last June's story about a now 4 year old alleged plot to strike the L.A. area, apparently to scare us yet once more into "trusting him". I sincerely hope that for the sheep, this will be one wolf cry too many.

RELATED STORY

Tuesday, February 07, 2006

Fiddling


If there is any humor or entertainment value in the tragedy that occurred in the city of New Orleans this fall hurricane season, it must surely be in the antics and shenanigans of Mayor Ray Nagin. Here is a man who would not warrant even regional attention normally, but through this catastrophic event has been granted a global stage, and he's playing it for all its worth. Just as he seems to wear out his headline welcome, he manages to pull another rabbit out of his hat. Cindy Sheehan could learn a thing or two from him. I don't know whether he's sincere or just an opportunist, but he's never dull.

The latest rabbit seems to be a promising attempt to shame D.C. into fulfilling pledges to assist with the rebuilding of the Big Easy. He's entertaining world leaders, trying to get them to purchase a bit of the Louisiana Purchase. To say the least, the results will be amusing.

But beneath the prank is a familiar theme: W is long on political show (such as his pricey Jackson Square performance), but short on performance (even as he plans to spend still more on "national defense"). Assistance is critical now, before the city loses its character forever, and its residents lose their home forever. NOLA burns, Nero continues to fiddle.

Friday, February 03, 2006

Fiscal Fake-Out


Much attention is focused (and rightfully so) on the human cost of the invasion & occupation of Iraq, at least on the U.S. side, but little analysis is done on the monetary cost, which for all practical purposes is borne solely by the U.S.

Among the myriad of lies, gross miscalculations and misrepresentations the Beltway crowd sold us this arbitrary, elective war was the pledge that Iraqi oil revenues would pick up the tab. Well like the big bad WMDs, that promise has vanished into thin air.

Now I know most of us yawn or blanch (maybe both!) at the thought of a little financial analysis (SVT excluded), but please bear with me while we look at a couple of numbers from a report discussed on a recent conference call conducted by the OMB:

  • Since the invasion this has cost us an estimated $250B
  • The military operation alone is costing about $144M per day!
  • No large scale reconstruction costs are included in these estimates
  • Iraqi oil revenues are able to fund only a fraction of the reconstruction costs
  • This is over and above the projected annual Pentagon budget of nearly a half trillion dollars!
  • Some perspective? The total estimated U.S. government expenditures in 2005 (excluding the wars) is $2.47T (on revenues of $2.12T, btw)
The most sobering part of this? No end in sight.....

More from WaPo

Friday, January 27, 2006

Happy 250th!


Happy 250th birthday to Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, one of the six Greats!

JOIN THE CELEBRATIONS

WHAT ELSE HAPPENED TODAY

Contradictions

Ya' know, I'm surprised conspiracy theorists haven't had a field day with this one! Consider for a moment that W is a foreign agent, planted by, say, the House of Saud to bring down the good 'ole US of A. Let's look at the evidence:
  • Running the most rapidly progressing deficit in history, increasingly mortgaging our financial future to the Chinese
  • If the warrantless spying thing ever sees the inside of a courtroom and is found to be illegal, many legitimate "tearist" convictions could be overturned due to tainted evidence
  • Fueling the growth of Islamic extremism by invading an Islamic nation which did not pose a threat to the US
  • Dismantling the social infrastructure at home
  • Fracturing the post WWII alliance
  • Last but not least, rendering our military ineffective in the event of a real threat
Think about it. If even 3 of these things come to pass, it could begin the passing of a great nation.

RESPONSE FROM THE UNCREDIBLE MAN

Thursday, January 26, 2006

"Warriors and Wusses"



Touchy subject. Hate the war. Support the troops. No one dares handle that one. Kinda like the 800 lb. gorilla in the room that no one wants to acknowledge and discuss. Or the naked emperor with the lovely new "clothes".

Until now.

In a gutsy, albeit controversial column yesterday Joel Stein steps out of the chamber of hypocrisy and bares it all. And he says some things a lot of us have been thinking, but haven't had the cajones to say.

How can you possibly hate the war, but "support the troops"?

Mr. Stein tackles this one with a poignant and provocative column in yesterday's L.A. Times. Unlike its portrayal by the Regressives (and some Progressives) it is not an attack on "the troops", but rather on the phonies that stick the ribbon magnets on the back of their cars, never even having a clue about what war really is and what the troops endure there or after returning, and also the even more spineless who claim to be against the war but "support the troops" (whatever that means).

I don't agree with all his points, particularly those that deal with the realities of enlistment. I don't believe a 19 year old is going to spend a lot of time and thought on the morality of historical use of force. Additionally, in many cases he or she may be pursuing one of the few career options in the community. And once they are in, options for dissent are and should be nonexistent. And I think national service is an honorable and fruitful pursuit.

But he does lay bare the issue of taking a consistently firm stand (not just one of a tepid rejection of war) contrasted with a politically safe chest pounding patriotism. There's a contradiction here that doesn't pass the smell test.

Please read the column. Sure, there's a tone of unseemly bravado in it. Maybe even insensitivity. But it made me think. He's not anti-troops. He's anti-citizens who have reduced their understanding and involvement in war to a magnet on the back of their car, or a phony "our brave men and women" platitude. Whether they are for the invasion & occupation or not.

Thank you Joel. We know that no one wishes the troops ill will. but we also know that it is just as patriotic to speak out when there is a wrong to be exposed.

SOME FOLKS WEREN'T IMPRESSED

Hamas



It was a fascinating development in the Middle East yesterday, the stunning rise to elected power which Hamas achieved yesterday over Fatah thanks to Palestinian voters. There're a lot of juicy aspects to it; let's look at some of the obvious ones.

First and foremost, its got to be an absolute shocker to the U.S. and other countries who had labeled the radical militant organization as a terrorist group (which it is). And they were democratically elected. We'll see the usual spin in the next few days: it wasn't so much a vote for Hamas as much as it was a vote against Fatah and the PA, who are corrupt and have dramatically failed the Palestinian people for so many years, blah blah blah.

The second and third things that come to mind are kind of in-your-face issues for Hamas itself.

One is the fact that part of their charter from day one was the goal of wiping Israel off the face of the earth. As recently as a few days ago they were stickin' with that story. But the PA and the West Bank settlements are not exactly an autonomous, stand-alone nation. Their public infrastructure (public works, water, power) is provided mostly by, well, Israel. So the first couple of conversations with their new patron will be a bit uncomfortable. And because the PA is currently on the brink of bankruptcy other benefactors may have some tough questions before providing more aid. How's the rewrite of the charter coming boys? And that logo?

The other is the fact that transforming from a disruptive force to a governance & diplomatic entity is quite a journey. The IRA was very creative about the way they accomplished this (assuming you'd consider them successful). For sure, Hamas provides a lot of charitable aid to Muslims which most westerners are unaware of. But they are largely composed by the guns and bombs group as well (the "T" word). Its easy to start the fires, harder to manage them and put them out. It will be interesting to see if they can make the transition from a negative to a positive role. It certainly will take a lot of readjustment, and some big time patience on the part of some outsiders. Plus a change in leadership, as we have learned from the likes of Mr. Arafat.

One thing is certain at this point. If relations between Israel and the Palestinian people don't continue to improve, or if the peace process deteriorates, it can no longer be blamed solely on disingenuous leaders like Yasir Arafat or Israel. Partial blame can now be placed at the feet of the Palestinians themselves.

MORE OPINION

Thursday, January 19, 2006

The Curious Case of Jill Carroll


Unfortunately the average American knows little (or nothing) about the people we are in armed conflict with in the middle east currently, particularly those in Iraq, the folks we have "liberated". There are many reasons for that, ranging from the spin doctors in D.C. (on both sides) feeding us distilled and hopelessly oversimplified explanations of the area to the dangerous conditions making it difficult for journalists to travel outside of the Green Zone for the real stories. We are told they are murderous "terrorists", hell-bent on destroying "our way of life". We are also told they are not ordinary Iraqis; those were going to greet us with rose petals, and dance on Saddam Hussein's grave.

The latest target of the "kill the messenger" squad of the RadCons, Rep. John Murtha, tells us differently. He reports that they are 93% Iraqi; our friends during the day, tossing bombs at night. And the citizens not only know who they are but also support them clandestinely. Would you support an occupying force in your neighborhood?

But these "tearists", or "insurgents" have a curious PR problem. And the case of Jill Carroll is the latest example of this. Here we have an American journalist, familiar with the language and the culture, having friends in the area and trying to report what the real facts are on the ground, so we might understand the nuances of the war. So they (I realize there are many conflicting factions, have seen Monty Python's Life of Brian at least 30 times) abduct this woman, threatening to kill her unless several demands are met by the Americans and their Iraqi government. It's a message kinda like "they tell you we're barbarians so now we'll prove it!". I would think these folks would be giving foreign journalists an armed escort around the country (except FOX "news") so the world can see for themselves the extent to which the average Iraqi is affected by the occupation and growing civil war.

The American invasion and occupation of Iraq was wrong. The abduction and threat against Jill Carroll is just as wrong, arguably more so.

Tuesday, January 17, 2006

Soooo Busted!


File this one under Pets NOT to Have if you are having an surreptitious tryst. Its kinda funny and sad at the same time. I think he should have kept Ziggy. And I wonder what Gary's up to now.

Friday, January 13, 2006

The True Patriot

Al Franken has a great way to simply characterize the difference between an extreme conservative's love of country and a progressive's. The conservative love is much the same as a 5 year old boy's love for his mommy: its simple, unconditional, and anyone who says mommy is less than perfect is gonna get a big punch in the nose! The progressive's love, in contrast, more closely resembles a mature adult romantic relationship: deep, complex, always open to ways it can become better; recognizing that there are flaws in all of us, but still loving, building, growing.

There has been a lot of good, constructive analysis from a lot of great minds in the U.S. detailing what is wrong with our foreign policy, and our military approach in Iraq. The 5 year old calls many of them traitors, cowards, soft on terrorism, Osama-lovers; well, you get the idea (funny how just 6 years ago criticizing the Commander-in-Chief was tres fashionable in their circles). We've also endured considerable criticism from around globe, much of it virulent, from friend and foe alike. However, now we have some comprehensive feedback from one of our oldest and closest friends and allies, the British. A high ranking officer in the British military has written a very constructive but painfully frank critique of U.S. performance in Iraq after spending a few years working alongside the Americans in Iraq. There is much praise, but also a heaping helping of some friendly advice. What is more remarkable and very encouraging is that the U.S. Army published in in their magazine, Military Review (kudos to Colonel William Darley, editor; it's a great first step). No "peacenik", the man who wrote it.

While the British understandably are distancing themselves from the article by saying it does not reflect the view from 10 Downing, indications are that his are widely held opinions among high ranking officials, perhaps even in the mind of Mr. Blair himself. Of course, the rightie rule number one being to viciously attack the messenger, Brig Aylwin-Foster will be the target of long worn out negative cliches about the British over the coming months. Perhaps there will be a ban on fish-and-chips in the senate lunchroom. Maybe something less mature like giving up gin. Or, as we love to do to the French, we can declare "we pulled your fat out of the fire in WW II!" with all the righteous indignation we can muster.

Or we could listen to the sober words of a good friend.

No doubt there are some misconceptions in the article, but the overall tone supports many, many other assessments from other sources. We are morphing into a caricature of wild west movie gunslingers in our approach to the rest of the world, allowing our diplomatic skills to atrophy. No subtleties, no grays or nuance; Black or white, with us or again' us, good guys or bad guys. And what we don't like we blow up. Then we blow it up with a bigger bomb. Shock and awe. Civilian casualties? What civilians? They're all bad guys!

I know, I know. The world's an ugly place with some pretty ugly characters in it, who'd cut my throat without a second thought. True. And then we can trot out that Swiss army knife of excuses and justification, 9/11. And I take this life for granted in the comfort of my living room, never threatened by the hell that's out there. Again the all or nothing approach.

But the reality is that the world is evolving politically and diplomatically, especially the west, and we are becoming increasingly out of touch. We are losing our credibility in diplomatic circles as we continue arrogant unilateral actions, much as we are losing our moral authority through situations like Abu Graib, illegal detentions, black sites, illegal wiretapping, torture and rendition. Most progressives love this country, and are desperately trying to sound the wake-up call. This article is the latest wake-up call, let's hope its loud enough. We've stopped growing, folks (in some ways we're regressing).

Bill Clinton (among others, like W's dad) has said that we can never kill, capture or contain all those in the world who mean us harm. In fact trying to do so alienates those who would be our friend, and fuels those who won't. We can still set a major example for the world if we recognize this, and act accordingly. Mr. Clinton understands the world community we live in; he's a true patriot. Mr. G.W. Bush is an oligarch (or a plutocrat?).

Thursday, January 12, 2006

Bremer

Hidden behind the current Alito coverage are other stories of the news cycle, particularly the attempt of L. Paul Bremer III to sell a book. Mr. Bremer, who prefers to go by the forename L and the surname III is attempting to be the latest public figure to secure his future by distancing himself from his past. Despite his rabid defense of the W approach to the invasion and occupation of Iraq when he was the man in charge, he now has considerable criticism, much of it quite valid, now that he has a career to cultivate and a book to sell. Mr. L. III does little, however, to take responsibility for his role in the Iraq mess, or his inability to correct it, much less extricate his reputation from it. Easy to call it on monday, Mr. III. Perhaps you can also blame Jacques Chirac and Jean Chretien? Enjoying that Medal of Freedom, are we?

Another Opinion

Now he wants to distance himself from his book!

Wednesday, January 11, 2006

Happy Anniversary to...... Us!!

It was one year ago this blog was started for a number of reasons, among them the need to vent over pent up frustrations, to celebrate the good stuff, and the desire to develop and improve a writing style (you might say it was a New Year's resolution). I was not sure how long it would endure, but here we are going strong a year later, and I feel like I'm just getting started! For those who have been repeat visitors, I thank you!

Here's the very first post from January 11, 2005.
SEE THE FIRST COMPLETE MONTH HERE