Tuesday, March 04, 2003
Monday, March 03, 2003
Sunday, March 02, 2003
Apocalyptic Nexus of Evil and Ignorance, Part 2
Kurdistan
Talking Points Memo beat me to this, but only because I delayed writing it for several days. It seems as if the folks in Washington weren't sure enough of getting mired in a difficult war, so they had to setup the conditions for another Vietnam. Turkey has so far demanded two things in exchange for getting the parliament to vote on letting US troops use Turkey as a staging area. First they demanded that we give them an aid package to compensate for the disruption of the cash flow their getting from Iraq's oil for food program renting Turkey's pipeline. Now they want to send Turkish troops into northern Iraq, to prevent Kurdish revolutionaries from obtaining Iraqi weapon. This is such a blatant falsehood that it is not surprising the Kurds will resist a Turkish occupation. First the obvious.
The Iraqi weapons will probably be closest to these Kurdish revolutionaries when there being fired at them. If there was a real danger of the Kurds obtaining weapons that could be used for terrorist purposes, or for protecting an independent Kurdistan from foreign suppresion, the US forces could easily take care of that problem on their own. The Turks claim that their troops will provide humanitarian aid is hypocritical, given that they are having troops placed on the Turkey-Iraq border to prevent Kurdish refugees from escaping possible slaughter by the Iraqis.
Also, Turkey has not exactly been supportive of Kurdish nationalism. They have banned several Kurdish independence groups in Turkey, imprisoned politicians, such as Leyla Zana, who advocated the peaceful establishment of a Kurdish state. The Kurds are generally treated as second-class citizens in Turkey and Iran, and in Iraq the Mi-24 helicopter was excluded from the ban on military aircrafts in northern Iraq, which made it easy for the Iraqi to continue to slaughter Kurds. (see an Air & Space magazine from a few years ago with a cover story about the Mi-24)
Turkey is sending troops in so many Kurdish leaders can be shot in "defensive actions against Kurdish attacks." They will go in there and do whatever they can get away with against the Kurdish nationalists. But they aren't in it just to suppress the Kurds; they want to protect the oil town of Kirkuk so that the Kurds don't claim it in an independent state and stop paying Turkey to send oil from it through Turkish pipelines. Its very possible the response of the Kurdish nationalists to Turkish troops in the region will be to shoot at any Turkish soldier they see. Then Turkey will complain to the U.S. about unprovoked Kurdish attacks on Turkish troops, request U.S. assistance, and pretty soon we're embroiled in someone else's war to persecute an ethnic group that has been suppressed since the 1800's. The fact that we'll be fighting in desert and not jungle won't make the war winnable, it will make it more horrific.
The Kurds are perhaps the most under-recognized oppressed people in the world. People routinely denounce China for continuing to occupy Tibet, violence against an ethnic group on a litlle Island called Timor on the other side of the world is international news, and rhe Palestinians who aren't even an ethnic group have an observer on the UN and a whole comittee devoted to them. Somehow, when it is Jews "oppresing" an ethnic group the Arabs created, it is the worst crime since the Holocaust (Yes, it is a #$%@$ stupid comparison, but some people actually make it), but when three Arab nations suppress the nationalistic ambitions of an Arab people, it's "okay." And neither the UN nor the US want to make an issue of it. Perhaps a generation from now Kurds will curse not Saddam Hussein, but George W. Bush.
Kurdistan
Talking Points Memo beat me to this, but only because I delayed writing it for several days. It seems as if the folks in Washington weren't sure enough of getting mired in a difficult war, so they had to setup the conditions for another Vietnam. Turkey has so far demanded two things in exchange for getting the parliament to vote on letting US troops use Turkey as a staging area. First they demanded that we give them an aid package to compensate for the disruption of the cash flow their getting from Iraq's oil for food program renting Turkey's pipeline. Now they want to send Turkish troops into northern Iraq, to prevent Kurdish revolutionaries from obtaining Iraqi weapon. This is such a blatant falsehood that it is not surprising the Kurds will resist a Turkish occupation. First the obvious.
The Iraqi weapons will probably be closest to these Kurdish revolutionaries when there being fired at them. If there was a real danger of the Kurds obtaining weapons that could be used for terrorist purposes, or for protecting an independent Kurdistan from foreign suppresion, the US forces could easily take care of that problem on their own. The Turks claim that their troops will provide humanitarian aid is hypocritical, given that they are having troops placed on the Turkey-Iraq border to prevent Kurdish refugees from escaping possible slaughter by the Iraqis.
Also, Turkey has not exactly been supportive of Kurdish nationalism. They have banned several Kurdish independence groups in Turkey, imprisoned politicians, such as Leyla Zana, who advocated the peaceful establishment of a Kurdish state. The Kurds are generally treated as second-class citizens in Turkey and Iran, and in Iraq the Mi-24 helicopter was excluded from the ban on military aircrafts in northern Iraq, which made it easy for the Iraqi to continue to slaughter Kurds. (see an Air & Space magazine from a few years ago with a cover story about the Mi-24)
Turkey is sending troops in so many Kurdish leaders can be shot in "defensive actions against Kurdish attacks." They will go in there and do whatever they can get away with against the Kurdish nationalists. But they aren't in it just to suppress the Kurds; they want to protect the oil town of Kirkuk so that the Kurds don't claim it in an independent state and stop paying Turkey to send oil from it through Turkish pipelines. Its very possible the response of the Kurdish nationalists to Turkish troops in the region will be to shoot at any Turkish soldier they see. Then Turkey will complain to the U.S. about unprovoked Kurdish attacks on Turkish troops, request U.S. assistance, and pretty soon we're embroiled in someone else's war to persecute an ethnic group that has been suppressed since the 1800's. The fact that we'll be fighting in desert and not jungle won't make the war winnable, it will make it more horrific.
The Kurds are perhaps the most under-recognized oppressed people in the world. People routinely denounce China for continuing to occupy Tibet, violence against an ethnic group on a litlle Island called Timor on the other side of the world is international news, and rhe Palestinians who aren't even an ethnic group have an observer on the UN and a whole comittee devoted to them. Somehow, when it is Jews "oppresing" an ethnic group the Arabs created, it is the worst crime since the Holocaust (Yes, it is a #$%@$ stupid comparison, but some people actually make it), but when three Arab nations suppress the nationalistic ambitions of an Arab people, it's "okay." And neither the UN nor the US want to make an issue of it. Perhaps a generation from now Kurds will curse not Saddam Hussein, but George W. Bush.
Friday, February 28, 2003
Jonah Goldberg goes off the deep end
Next thing you know he'll be claiming all Catholics are agents of the Pope. One thing about the American Communist Party: Rosa Parks went to a training camp run by them. Try calling her a treasonous communist. Goldberg has just insulted hundreds of people whose lives were ruined by the Comunist witch hunts. What proof of spying was he talking about exactly? There is a little thing called free speech in this country, Jonah, where even if you did support the Holocaust it doesn't become treason. It is not a crime to be a Communist any more than it is to be a Republican. Just because somebody is wrong doesn't mean they must be treated as criminals. His implication that the Hollywood Ten were traitors because they were Communists and refused to be badgered by McCarthy is pure nonsense. If this is mainstream conservative thought I fear for the future of this republic.
Next thing you know he'll be claiming all Catholics are agents of the Pope. One thing about the American Communist Party: Rosa Parks went to a training camp run by them. Try calling her a treasonous communist. Goldberg has just insulted hundreds of people whose lives were ruined by the Comunist witch hunts. What proof of spying was he talking about exactly? There is a little thing called free speech in this country, Jonah, where even if you did support the Holocaust it doesn't become treason. It is not a crime to be a Communist any more than it is to be a Republican. Just because somebody is wrong doesn't mean they must be treated as criminals. His implication that the Hollywood Ten were traitors because they were Communists and refused to be badgered by McCarthy is pure nonsense. If this is mainstream conservative thought I fear for the future of this republic.
Sunday, February 23, 2003
Apocalyptic Nexus of Evil and Ignorance, Part 1
Two crisises threaten to coincide that could very well be the most important events since the fall of the Soviet Union.
North Korea
This is going to be controversial, but I think that Bush has made one of the worse foreign policy decisions in the history of the United States. I think he is lying about North Korea having a uranium nuclear program. The evidence he has given for it is a few intelligence reports that we don't know the source of that give circumstantial evidence, and North Korea's "admission," which they have repeatedly denied happened. If there is a smoking gun out there that I don't know about, please e-mail it to me at natfre -at- hotmail.com. Bush is manipulating the situation in North Korea for political gain. He has cut off aid, and had set the return of it conditional on the end of the uranium nuclear program the North Korean s aren't doing and the inspectors in North Korea haven't been able to find any evidence of. North Korea accused the U.S. of lying and threatening them, and proceeded to threaten to actually restart the plutonium program unless the U.S. started a dialogue throught the Governor of New Mexico, who was an ambassador to NK. Bush refused, and North Korea gradually kicked out inspectors and has now shipped out the spent fuel rods that the inspectors were guarding. Whe NK threatened to do this in 1994, it led to a major crisis that ended with the '94 Agreed Framework, which Bush broke. As perhaps should have been expected, Bush ignored this. It appears that Bush may actually be getting serious about NK 5 months after they should have been dealt with, having sent Colin Powell to talk to China about dealing with NK. The problem appears to be that the crisis in NK peaked too early, and that dealing "conclusively" with NK will happen as the invasion of Iraq is, not afterward as Bush planned.
The problem is that it gets worse. NK could have a nuke in a month. It is not bluffing. Sure claiming that you are going to get a nuke is a good bluff, butr actually trying to make one is an even better threat. The real problem is that by not taking NK serious when they made their first move towards getting plutonium nukes, Kim Jong-Il thinks that Bush will only take them serious if they have a nuke. In fact, he may have gone off the deep end, and decided that he doesn't need aid if he can use nukes to control Eastern Asia. Worst-case scenario: North Korea issuaes an ultimatum to the U.S.; send U.S. troops out of South Korea, opening it up to invasion, or Tokyo gets nuked. You figure out a non-messy solution to that. The reason I don't think Kim Jong-Il is going to be bluffing about anything is that he has made isolation and resilience of the nation into a cult. If he starts a nuclear war, he will simply send the Koreans into the countryside for who knows how long, surely plotting a return to power. North Korea is the most important issue in foreign policy right now, and Bush refuses to see that.
Two crisises threaten to coincide that could very well be the most important events since the fall of the Soviet Union.
North Korea
This is going to be controversial, but I think that Bush has made one of the worse foreign policy decisions in the history of the United States. I think he is lying about North Korea having a uranium nuclear program. The evidence he has given for it is a few intelligence reports that we don't know the source of that give circumstantial evidence, and North Korea's "admission," which they have repeatedly denied happened. If there is a smoking gun out there that I don't know about, please e-mail it to me at natfre -at- hotmail.com. Bush is manipulating the situation in North Korea for political gain. He has cut off aid, and had set the return of it conditional on the end of the uranium nuclear program the North Korean s aren't doing and the inspectors in North Korea haven't been able to find any evidence of. North Korea accused the U.S. of lying and threatening them, and proceeded to threaten to actually restart the plutonium program unless the U.S. started a dialogue throught the Governor of New Mexico, who was an ambassador to NK. Bush refused, and North Korea gradually kicked out inspectors and has now shipped out the spent fuel rods that the inspectors were guarding. Whe NK threatened to do this in 1994, it led to a major crisis that ended with the '94 Agreed Framework, which Bush broke. As perhaps should have been expected, Bush ignored this. It appears that Bush may actually be getting serious about NK 5 months after they should have been dealt with, having sent Colin Powell to talk to China about dealing with NK. The problem appears to be that the crisis in NK peaked too early, and that dealing "conclusively" with NK will happen as the invasion of Iraq is, not afterward as Bush planned.
The problem is that it gets worse. NK could have a nuke in a month. It is not bluffing. Sure claiming that you are going to get a nuke is a good bluff, butr actually trying to make one is an even better threat. The real problem is that by not taking NK serious when they made their first move towards getting plutonium nukes, Kim Jong-Il thinks that Bush will only take them serious if they have a nuke. In fact, he may have gone off the deep end, and decided that he doesn't need aid if he can use nukes to control Eastern Asia. Worst-case scenario: North Korea issuaes an ultimatum to the U.S.; send U.S. troops out of South Korea, opening it up to invasion, or Tokyo gets nuked. You figure out a non-messy solution to that. The reason I don't think Kim Jong-Il is going to be bluffing about anything is that he has made isolation and resilience of the nation into a cult. If he starts a nuclear war, he will simply send the Koreans into the countryside for who knows how long, surely plotting a return to power. North Korea is the most important issue in foreign policy right now, and Bush refuses to see that.
Saturday, February 22, 2003
The FY2002 Budget and the Incredible Vanishing Surplus, Part 1
(Warning: Budget Figures Intensive, unlike certain other discussions of the budget)
Myth: The deficit can be overcomed by eliminating "pork-barrel" spending and making the budget leaner.
Fact vs. Reality
Fact: The amount of "pork-barrel" spending in the FY2002 Budget, according to Citizens Against Government Waste(a conservative watchdog group): $20.1 billion
Reality: Size of FY2002 Budget Deficit, according to U.S. Treasury Department: $157.7 billion
I think the numbers speak for themselves.
Sources:
FY2002 Budget Highlights: Financial Management Service, a branch of the U.S. Treasury Department
2002 Pig Book: A publication of Citizens Against Government Waste
(Warning: Budget Figures Intensive, unlike certain other discussions of the budget)
Myth: The deficit can be overcomed by eliminating "pork-barrel" spending and making the budget leaner.
Fact vs. Reality
Fact: The amount of "pork-barrel" spending in the FY2002 Budget, according to Citizens Against Government Waste(a conservative watchdog group): $20.1 billion
Reality: Size of FY2002 Budget Deficit, according to U.S. Treasury Department: $157.7 billion
I think the numbers speak for themselves.
Sources:
FY2002 Budget Highlights: Financial Management Service, a branch of the U.S. Treasury Department
2002 Pig Book: A publication of Citizens Against Government Waste
Friday, February 21, 2003
Saturday, February 01, 2003
"The Space Shuttle Columbia has disappeared over Texas..."
They're gone. Ilan Ramon, the first Israeli astronaut; Laurel Clark, a Navy physician from Wisconsin; David Brown, a 46-year old jet pilot/doctor on his first shuttle flight; Kalpana Chawla, an immigrant from India on her second spaceflight after making a mistake on her first; Michael Anderson, son of an Air Force pilot who followed in his father's footsteps, and went on to become one of the first few African American astronauts; Willian McCool, a Navy test pilot who was afraid of drawing blood; and Rick Husband, a test pilot who had a dazzling rise to the rank of Space Shuttle Commander. This is a cross-section of America, and of the brave. They handled the risk inherent in spaceflight with a bravery and fortitude that is exemplary, and they perished piloting the ultimate manned vehicle. Less than 0.000001% of the Earth's population has left our atmosphere, but those that have are living out the myths of such people as Daedalus' son, and like his son, some perish because they have soared so high, flown so fast. 22 astronauts and cosmonauts have died in space exploration; they are the martyrs of humanities quest to soar above the sky, and they are a testament to the human resolve to risk our life to discover and explore for the betterment of all. These are our pioneers, and should forever be honored for their sacrifice. May we return to space again, and may those who died today rest in peace.
"Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I shall fear no evil..."
-Psalm 23:4
They're gone. Ilan Ramon, the first Israeli astronaut; Laurel Clark, a Navy physician from Wisconsin; David Brown, a 46-year old jet pilot/doctor on his first shuttle flight; Kalpana Chawla, an immigrant from India on her second spaceflight after making a mistake on her first; Michael Anderson, son of an Air Force pilot who followed in his father's footsteps, and went on to become one of the first few African American astronauts; Willian McCool, a Navy test pilot who was afraid of drawing blood; and Rick Husband, a test pilot who had a dazzling rise to the rank of Space Shuttle Commander. This is a cross-section of America, and of the brave. They handled the risk inherent in spaceflight with a bravery and fortitude that is exemplary, and they perished piloting the ultimate manned vehicle. Less than 0.000001% of the Earth's population has left our atmosphere, but those that have are living out the myths of such people as Daedalus' son, and like his son, some perish because they have soared so high, flown so fast. 22 astronauts and cosmonauts have died in space exploration; they are the martyrs of humanities quest to soar above the sky, and they are a testament to the human resolve to risk our life to discover and explore for the betterment of all. These are our pioneers, and should forever be honored for their sacrifice. May we return to space again, and may those who died today rest in peace.
"Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I shall fear no evil..."
-Psalm 23:4
Friday, January 10, 2003
Columnists I read, or did read, often:
Molly Ivins- Progressive Liberal, perhaps the only columnist really proud to call herself a liberal, good expository pieces
Cal Thomas- Religious Right Columnist, Pulse of the Religious Right
George Will- Mainstream Right Intellectual, as George Carlin would say intelligent, but full of ____. I do try to keep a varied diet.
Ann Coulter- Crazy Racist Blonde. I read her when I need someone to be outraged at. Very right-wing
Arianna Huffington- Radical Moderate. ex-Republican, shares some progressive tendencies of Molly Ivins, distaste for both parties.
Michael Kinsley- Used to be funny. Leftist, former editor of Slate.com.
Colbert King- Columnist on WaPo not afraid to say what he thinks.
Molly Ivins- Progressive Liberal, perhaps the only columnist really proud to call herself a liberal, good expository pieces
Cal Thomas- Religious Right Columnist, Pulse of the Religious Right
George Will- Mainstream Right Intellectual, as George Carlin would say intelligent, but full of ____. I do try to keep a varied diet.
Ann Coulter- Crazy Racist Blonde. I read her when I need someone to be outraged at. Very right-wing
Arianna Huffington- Radical Moderate. ex-Republican, shares some progressive tendencies of Molly Ivins, distaste for both parties.
Michael Kinsley- Used to be funny. Leftist, former editor of Slate.com.
Colbert King- Columnist on WaPo not afraid to say what he thinks.
Flash Point in North Korea is Near:
Junkyardblog has a good take on the military situation. I think he has an overly low opinion of the Democrats to say that they will obstruct Bush in taking action here, but if I'm wrong I'll be shouting about it from the mountaintops.
"All through the day; I me mine, I me mine, I me mine...All through the night; I me mine, I me mine, I me mine..."
-"I Me Mine", Let It Be, The Beatle
Junkyardblog has a good take on the military situation. I think he has an overly low opinion of the Democrats to say that they will obstruct Bush in taking action here, but if I'm wrong I'll be shouting about it from the mountaintops.
"All through the day; I me mine, I me mine, I me mine...All through the night; I me mine, I me mine, I me mine..."
-"I Me Mine", Let It Be, The Beatle
Wednesday, January 08, 2003
This from an article in Slate.Com:
Once again a mainstream writing echoes a point I made earlier. I'm not sure what "pecuniary" means, but trying to pretend that it has nothing to do with the "larger issues" doesn't make it so. These issues have much more to do with regime change in Iraq than anything else. If the Middle East did not wield such disproportionate influence by controlling the flood of oil, Zionism would be a non-issue in the U.N. The reason most of the world supported a resolution condemning not only Israel but the whole existence of Israel was European nations and petty third-world dictators terrified of losing access to Middle East oil. The Saudis and OPEC have been using their near monopoly on oil production to try to impose a new world order in which the Arab world is omnipotent. Small, resilient, democratic Israel stands out in the middle of the Arab world as a contrast to the rot of the totalitarian and Islamically oppresive governments that are typical of said Arab world. Jihad isn't a war. It's a political movement.
Some rant...
There are other equally awkward reasons that might support invading Baghdad but not Pyongyang. Oil is an obvious factor—not so much in a crudely Marxian sense as in a general sense that everything in Middle Eastern politics is wrapped up, to some degree, in oil. U.S. officials tend to avoid mentioning this factor, in part to avoid appearing overly pecuniary, but in much larger part to avoid explicitly entangling the issue of Iraq with precisely those larger issues of Middle Eastern politics—those issues being the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the future of Saudi Arabia.
Once again a mainstream writing echoes a point I made earlier. I'm not sure what "pecuniary" means, but trying to pretend that it has nothing to do with the "larger issues" doesn't make it so. These issues have much more to do with regime change in Iraq than anything else. If the Middle East did not wield such disproportionate influence by controlling the flood of oil, Zionism would be a non-issue in the U.N. The reason most of the world supported a resolution condemning not only Israel but the whole existence of Israel was European nations and petty third-world dictators terrified of losing access to Middle East oil. The Saudis and OPEC have been using their near monopoly on oil production to try to impose a new world order in which the Arab world is omnipotent. Small, resilient, democratic Israel stands out in the middle of the Arab world as a contrast to the rot of the totalitarian and Islamically oppresive governments that are typical of said Arab world. Jihad isn't a war. It's a political movement.
Some rant...
Monday, January 06, 2003
or
How To Reform Our Political System In Two Easy Steps
Still with me? Good.
Why is inter- and intra-party politics such a problem? Frist has been solidly backed by the Republican party to be the next Senate Majority Leader. Do we know why he was chosen over Santorum or Mitch McConnell? No, of course not. All the important talk over Lott's sucessor was done on the inside. Is there anything wrong with this? No, unless he was chosen for reasons that could not be stated openly. The same goes for Pelosi's rise. In Cheney's meeting with Kenneth Lay of Enron, this issue played out most obviously.
My grandmother was elected to the Rowley (Massachussets) board of selectmen in the '50s. Her only campaign method was a flyer that read as follows, "I shall insist that all matters of town and local interest...be brought before regular meetings of the board. I will not deal privately with any elected or appointed official, nor with any citizen on civic issues. In all matters, other than those protected by law, I shall insist upon open meetings with public and press welcome. Only in this matter may the true picture, pro and con, of any issue be presented to the people-the taxpayers and citizens-whose business town government is.[my emphasis]"
What can be drawn from this is that the concept of open political dealing is only a memory, illustrated by the Bush Administrations complete refusal to reveal the details of Dick Cheney's meeting with Kenneth Lay as part of the formation of the Bush/Cheney energy plan. On another note, it is utterly hypocritical for the Republicans to defend Bush's decision not to release a transcript of the conversation, even though they were absolutely outraged that Hillary Clinton's health-care committee worked in secret. (And many Republicans in Washington are the same Republicans who were outraged in '94) Does anyone really know what goes on in the leadership of the Democratic and Republican parties? There should be a saying that people only hide things when there is something to hide. If we had open record of party dialogue, maybe it would have been clear that Trent Lott was a racist, maybe we would know things months ago we don't even know now. Maybe the budget would have less pork in it because it would look embarassing for a member of Congress to lobby for it.
In summary, I am proposing two things. 1) Voters pressure elected officials to release transcripts of meeting with lobbyists they accepted campaign donations from, and transcripts of political dealings with politicians in private, or demand that such dealings be done in public, and 2) Voters pressure political parties to reveal all major intra-party political discussions, so that there will be no back-room dealings that have major effects on the party. The first of these will be difficult to accomplish by voter pressure alone, but the second one would be easy with enough pressure. The Democratic and Republican Party are so large that if they begin to operate transparently it will be hard for them to keep anybody from revealing when they have covered up something. I think this is a good place to stop, so I will close here with the hope the that a new era of political transparency begins today, or next month.
Note to self: Bug Republican and Democratic Headquarters and send the tapes to the New York Times and Washington Times, respectively.
Thursday, January 02, 2003
You heard it here first!
A Columbia University professor weighs in on the dangers of an attempt to depose Saddam Hussein.
A Columbia University professor weighs in on the dangers of an attempt to depose Saddam Hussein.
Thursday, December 26, 2002
In Summary:
Yesterday I was finally indexed on the Google New England search database. Hurrah. To all the people who came to my site in search of whatever they were looking for, I am sorry it probably wasn't here.
I started this blog back in July, posting about 1.5 times a month since then. I realize now the title is very confusing as it is not clear what it means. Au Contraire. It is perfectly clear what it means: nothing. I thought contrasting post-modern with present-day was funny, that this is a collection of mostly unrelated, "meandering," thoughts, and "wit" was a little self-conceit. Truthfully, I do not understand in the least what post-modernism is, nor am I interested in finding out. Anyone who can't see that I have created a funny contradiction with my title needs to get a life and stop reading Ayn Rand, or something like that. The only real implication of any post-modernism is the web address, which is a result of someone having already taken meanderings.blogspot.com. So please stop not sending me e-mails to an address not displayed prominently anywhere from no one complaining about me being post-modern or not post-modern. And stop sending me junk e-mail too.
Now for non-post-modern denial writing/typing. My archives are on the fritz. Blogger is having problems.
I intend to continue meandering for a while. I may even have a link page eventually. Maybe I'll evn find an arch-nemesis, in the spirit Andrew Sullivan vs. Paul Krugman, Junkyardblog vs. Democrats.com, or Kausfiles vs. New york Times. Proposal 1: Conservative blogging vs. Meanderings, an attempt to make an intelligent somewhat leftist blog.
Mission Statement Proposal: To build an intelligent somewhat-leftist blog, one post at a time.
NF
Update: I have just noticed that not only is Meanderings already taken, but it is a sorry excuse for a weblog. I'm starting to feel like Guster. I intend to brighten the shade of gray on the title bar so it contrasts better at some point. So long for now.
Yesterday I was finally indexed on the Google New England search database. Hurrah. To all the people who came to my site in search of whatever they were looking for, I am sorry it probably wasn't here.
I started this blog back in July, posting about 1.5 times a month since then. I realize now the title is very confusing as it is not clear what it means. Au Contraire. It is perfectly clear what it means: nothing. I thought contrasting post-modern with present-day was funny, that this is a collection of mostly unrelated, "meandering," thoughts, and "wit" was a little self-conceit. Truthfully, I do not understand in the least what post-modernism is, nor am I interested in finding out. Anyone who can't see that I have created a funny contradiction with my title needs to get a life and stop reading Ayn Rand, or something like that. The only real implication of any post-modernism is the web address, which is a result of someone having already taken meanderings.blogspot.com. So please stop not sending me e-mails to an address not displayed prominently anywhere from no one complaining about me being post-modern or not post-modern. And stop sending me junk e-mail too.
Now for non-post-modern denial writing/typing. My archives are on the fritz. Blogger is having problems.
I intend to continue meandering for a while. I may even have a link page eventually. Maybe I'll evn find an arch-nemesis, in the spirit Andrew Sullivan vs. Paul Krugman, Junkyardblog vs. Democrats.com, or Kausfiles vs. New york Times. Proposal 1: Conservative blogging vs. Meanderings, an attempt to make an intelligent somewhat leftist blog.
Mission Statement Proposal: To build an intelligent somewhat-leftist blog, one post at a time.
NF
Update: I have just noticed that not only is Meanderings already taken, but it is a sorry excuse for a weblog. I'm starting to feel like Guster. I intend to brighten the shade of gray on the title bar so it contrasts better at some point. So long for now.
Monday, December 23, 2002
Holiday Book Recommendation:
When you think of John Grisham, what comes to mind? Legal thrillers, right? How about one of the funniest and most heartwarming Christmas written in the last few years? If you have been having your doubts about Christmas, satisfy your inner Scrooge by reading Skipping Christmas. This book is great, and is a funny book for the whole family. As Grisham's first non-thriller book, it is definitely a good sign of things to come.
"His left foot sank into five inches of cold slush...He yanked his foot upward and slung dirty water on his pants leg, and standing at the curb with two frozen feet and the bell clanging away and "Santa Claus is Coming to Town" blaring from the loudspeaker and the sidewalk blocked by revelers, Luther began to hate Christmas."
-Skipping Chrismas, by John Grisham
When you think of John Grisham, what comes to mind? Legal thrillers, right? How about one of the funniest and most heartwarming Christmas written in the last few years? If you have been having your doubts about Christmas, satisfy your inner Scrooge by reading Skipping Christmas. This book is great, and is a funny book for the whole family. As Grisham's first non-thriller book, it is definitely a good sign of things to come.
"His left foot sank into five inches of cold slush...He yanked his foot upward and slung dirty water on his pants leg, and standing at the curb with two frozen feet and the bell clanging away and "Santa Claus is Coming to Town" blaring from the loudspeaker and the sidewalk blocked by revelers, Luther began to hate Christmas."
-Skipping Chrismas, by John Grisham
Friday, December 13, 2002
Microsoft: Card-Carrying Member of The Axis of Evil?
You'll love this.
(From the help section of Windows Media Player Series 9)
Special features
The following Windows Media Player features are available only on computers running the Windows XP Home Edition or Windows XP Professional operating systems.
Features:
Add static lyrics to a file
(has nothing to do with processor power)
Add synchronized lyrics to a file
(Mostly work for the user, same as above)
Advanced Tag Editor
To add or edit media information by using the Advanced Tag Editor
(I don't have a clue what this is)
Automatic VCD playback
To play a VCD
(I think there talking about DVD-like things)
Color Chooser
To change the color of the Player
(What the hell is so special about that!?!)
Commands available when right-clicking a digital media item in Media Library or My Computer:
Add to Playlist
Copy to CD or Device
Queue-It-Up
(These were all available in the beta that I upgraded from, which ******ed me off)
Create and edit auto playlists
(This wasn't in the beta, but would be freaking awesome)
DVD playback
(I don't play DVDs, but DVD-players are getting so they come with nearly all computers. They're asking for a beating for this one.)
Enhanced audio playback (High Definition Compatible Digital (HDCD®) decoding and playback, multichannel audio playback, volume leveling, crossfading, Quiet Mode)
(I liked crossfading and volume leveling, also in the beta. Quiet mode was ineffective but on XP you can adjust it. Argghh!)
Enhanced Copy from CD (Windows Media Audio Lossless)
Compressing copies of CD tracks to use less disk space
(I think they're trying to fool people into thinking only XP can do this)
Enhanced Copy to CD (data CDs, Microsoft HighM.A.T.™ CDs, volume-leveled audio CDs, erasing CDs)
(I thought Microsoft was still trying to take over the market by giving away stuff that you normally pay for. Or is that only their policy for loyal Microsoft (slaves) customers?)
Enhanced user interface (full color, full-screen audio and video controls)
(I don't really care that it is only in XP at this point)
Find media information for music copied with another program
(This will only be useful for the people who are using non-microsoft players. So their plan is to make sure everybody using non-microsoft media players will use Series 9 and XP?)
Info Center View
To view information about content
(I have a visceral urge to rip someone's throat out but cannot because they have sapped my strength with their sadistic XP (arm twisting) marketing)
And I'm ignoring the last few that are XP-only because I they're nothing special and I stopped being angry after "enhanced user interface."
Its as if they weren't ramming enough down our throat already. For a free product, to show this much OS version bias is unbelievable.
“...he has been known as a tough competitor who seems to value winning in a competitive environment over money.”
-ending of entry on Bill Gates from Funk and Wagnall's '93 edition encyclopedia
“...he is known for his personal and corporate contributions to charity and educational institutions.”
-ending of an otherwise identical entry on Bill Gates from the original Encarta, which was a digitalization of the Funk and Wagnall encyclopedia
You'll love this.
(From the help section of Windows Media Player Series 9)
Special features
The following Windows Media Player features are available only on computers running the Windows XP Home Edition or Windows XP Professional operating systems.
Features:
Add static lyrics to a file
(has nothing to do with processor power)
Add synchronized lyrics to a file
(Mostly work for the user, same as above)
Advanced Tag Editor
To add or edit media information by using the Advanced Tag Editor
(I don't have a clue what this is)
Automatic VCD playback
To play a VCD
(I think there talking about DVD-like things)
Color Chooser
To change the color of the Player
(What the hell is so special about that!?!)
Commands available when right-clicking a digital media item in Media Library or My Computer:
Add to Playlist
Copy to CD or Device
Queue-It-Up
(These were all available in the beta that I upgraded from, which ******ed me off)
Create and edit auto playlists
(This wasn't in the beta, but would be freaking awesome)
DVD playback
(I don't play DVDs, but DVD-players are getting so they come with nearly all computers. They're asking for a beating for this one.)
Enhanced audio playback (High Definition Compatible Digital (HDCD®) decoding and playback, multichannel audio playback, volume leveling, crossfading, Quiet Mode)
(I liked crossfading and volume leveling, also in the beta. Quiet mode was ineffective but on XP you can adjust it. Argghh!)
Enhanced Copy from CD (Windows Media Audio Lossless)
Compressing copies of CD tracks to use less disk space
(I think they're trying to fool people into thinking only XP can do this)
Enhanced Copy to CD (data CDs, Microsoft HighM.A.T.™ CDs, volume-leveled audio CDs, erasing CDs)
(I thought Microsoft was still trying to take over the market by giving away stuff that you normally pay for. Or is that only their policy for loyal Microsoft (slaves) customers?)
Enhanced user interface (full color, full-screen audio and video controls)
(I don't really care that it is only in XP at this point)
Find media information for music copied with another program
(This will only be useful for the people who are using non-microsoft players. So their plan is to make sure everybody using non-microsoft media players will use Series 9 and XP?)
Info Center View
To view information about content
(I have a visceral urge to rip someone's throat out but cannot because they have sapped my strength with their sadistic XP (arm twisting) marketing)
And I'm ignoring the last few that are XP-only because I they're nothing special and I stopped being angry after "enhanced user interface."
Its as if they weren't ramming enough down our throat already. For a free product, to show this much OS version bias is unbelievable.
“...he has been known as a tough competitor who seems to value winning in a competitive environment over money.”
-ending of entry on Bill Gates from Funk and Wagnall's '93 edition encyclopedia
“...he is known for his personal and corporate contributions to charity and educational institutions.”
-ending of an otherwise identical entry on Bill Gates from the original Encarta, which was a digitalization of the Funk and Wagnall encyclopedia
Wednesday, November 13, 2002
Random Thought
The reason the US makes consistently bad foreign policy decisions or none at all because of intraparty or interparty squabbling is that too few people care about foreign policy beyond fighting wars. The only time the masses care about foreign policy that doesn't directly involve our security is when someone throws some domestic issue intio it, such as abortions in China and UN aid for population control, or drugs in Colombia. When was the last time you heard any politician talking about a long-term plan for foreign policy that didn't revolve around defence? The public doesn't care, so we either have no coherent foreign policy or some demagogue stringing people along. The latter has actually happened. Why else do you think we invaded Cuba, Hawaii, the Philllipines, and Haiti, all in 1898?
The reason the US makes consistently bad foreign policy decisions or none at all because of intraparty or interparty squabbling is that too few people care about foreign policy beyond fighting wars. The only time the masses care about foreign policy that doesn't directly involve our security is when someone throws some domestic issue intio it, such as abortions in China and UN aid for population control, or drugs in Colombia. When was the last time you heard any politician talking about a long-term plan for foreign policy that didn't revolve around defence? The public doesn't care, so we either have no coherent foreign policy or some demagogue stringing people along. The latter has actually happened. Why else do you think we invaded Cuba, Hawaii, the Philllipines, and Haiti, all in 1898?
Bush wants to depose Saddam because Iraq has oil-though not for the reasons you'd expect.
It appears that it will be far safer to simply contain Saddam, rather than overthrow him, in terms of the terrorist fallout his weapons could create. Why did Bush want to overthrow Saddam? I think the reason is oil, but not because oil is money, but because oil is power.
Think about what control of the flow of oil wrought in the '70s with the oil embargoes. Think about how many third-world nations are willing to support the latest Arab jihad in the UN, such as declaring Zionism racist. What reason did any of the nations outside of the Middle East have for supporting a tirade against a nation they have probably never officially communicated with. There is only one reason: the Middle East has oil, and they need it. In the past the Arab world has not shown itself reluctant about embargoes, and their influence is waning now (witness the failure of their secon Zionism is racism resolution to pass) only because they have not embargoed anyone recently.
If we establish a more moderate, pro-Western World government in Iraq, the flow of oil from there should counter the influennce of Saudi Arabia, The United Arab Empirates, and Iran, because it would not be subject to the same political control. This could have far-reaching implication for foreign policy.
However, because of this, Arab terrorist groups will probably do whatever they can to destroy a pro-West government. It is worth noting that the Shah of Iran fell just after an oil embargo.
It appears that it will be far safer to simply contain Saddam, rather than overthrow him, in terms of the terrorist fallout his weapons could create. Why did Bush want to overthrow Saddam? I think the reason is oil, but not because oil is money, but because oil is power.
Think about what control of the flow of oil wrought in the '70s with the oil embargoes. Think about how many third-world nations are willing to support the latest Arab jihad in the UN, such as declaring Zionism racist. What reason did any of the nations outside of the Middle East have for supporting a tirade against a nation they have probably never officially communicated with. There is only one reason: the Middle East has oil, and they need it. In the past the Arab world has not shown itself reluctant about embargoes, and their influence is waning now (witness the failure of their secon Zionism is racism resolution to pass) only because they have not embargoed anyone recently.
If we establish a more moderate, pro-Western World government in Iraq, the flow of oil from there should counter the influennce of Saudi Arabia, The United Arab Empirates, and Iran, because it would not be subject to the same political control. This could have far-reaching implication for foreign policy.
However, because of this, Arab terrorist groups will probably do whatever they can to destroy a pro-West government. It is worth noting that the Shah of Iran fell just after an oil embargo.
Friday, October 18, 2002
Time For a Constitutional Convention:
You need only look at the state of judicial policy in the U.S. to realize that something has gone wrong, if it doesn't involve spending large amounts of money(for which there are few unclear constitutional statements), almost everything voted on in Congress and passed by the Executive Branch goes to the Supreme Court. What the Framers would have found to be an absurd amountof judicial interpretation is becoming routine. And it is tearing this nation apart and jamming up our political system. Its not a conservative issue. Its not a liberal issue. I'm talking about abortion, gun policy, drug policy, affirmative action, racial profiling, etc. We need to have politicians be able to pass laws on these issues without being afraid that a justice is going to chew it up. The Framers did not intend the Supreme Court to be the interpreters in chief. They were meant to be safeguarders of our liberty, the rights we take for granted. It's time to have a second Constitutional Convention to Clarify the Constitution. Why did you think the Framers made such provisions for amending the constitution? I'll probaly write more on this later.
"Peace out, Dawg"
-Zonkers, of Doonesbury
Do a good deed for the world, do a good deed for your soul.
You need only look at the state of judicial policy in the U.S. to realize that something has gone wrong, if it doesn't involve spending large amounts of money(for which there are few unclear constitutional statements), almost everything voted on in Congress and passed by the Executive Branch goes to the Supreme Court. What the Framers would have found to be an absurd amountof judicial interpretation is becoming routine. And it is tearing this nation apart and jamming up our political system. Its not a conservative issue. Its not a liberal issue. I'm talking about abortion, gun policy, drug policy, affirmative action, racial profiling, etc. We need to have politicians be able to pass laws on these issues without being afraid that a justice is going to chew it up. The Framers did not intend the Supreme Court to be the interpreters in chief. They were meant to be safeguarders of our liberty, the rights we take for granted. It's time to have a second Constitutional Convention to Clarify the Constitution. Why did you think the Framers made such provisions for amending the constitution? I'll probaly write more on this later.
"Peace out, Dawg"
-Zonkers, of Doonesbury
Do a good deed for the world, do a good deed for your soul.