Yesterday morning, Angela took the kids to a Home Depot Kids Workshop, where they assembled a trivet. Yesterday afternoon, Joshua began asking me to go out into the garage and "make something."
Now I know someone more prepared might have had a project waiting in the wings for this opportunity, but I didn't. I knew that I couldn't miss my chance, however, so the two of us went out into the garage and scrounged around for something we could build.
Fortunately, I have some scrap lumber pieces out there, and the remnants of my attempts at making Christmas Tree ornaments with my scrounged scroll saw were still laying about. Josh wanted to build something using a hammer and nails, so we knocked a simple display stand together with a couple of cut-off hunks of 2x4 and a piece of 1x3, to which we attached the surviving remnants of the Christmas Tree project. 45 minutes later and he had something to bring inside to show to Angela. Perfect!
It has created an appetite for more. Today, Savannah fell ill with what we think is probably the H1N1 flu. Angela took her to the urgent care clinic--she's immune suppressed, so what would be a routine day spent in bed for the usual kid is somewhat more concerning for her. Meanwhile, Joshua and I were left to our own devices for a couple of hours, and guess what? He wanted to go out to the garage and build something. Of course, this is remarkable to me. I've been hacking and slashing mercilessly at helpless pieces of lumber and machinery in my garage for the kid's entire life and then some. Somehow, at about age 7 1/2, he's taken notice and decided he wants to participate. Awesome!
Today we started a bird feeder project. It will be a simple affair built from scrap lumber. Josh learned how to use a hand saw and an electric palm sander today. Immediately, as I was teaching him how to cut lumber, my mind traveled back over 30 years to when I had the same experience of being taught by my dad and my Uncle Mark, who happened to be visiting at the time. We were in Grandma G's basement, and I clearly remember placing the board on the bottom step of the basement stairs, putting a knee on it, and attempting to saw through it. It took me just as long, if not longer, than Joshua did today. Maybe that was the key to remembering it so well; I'm not sure. But somehow the connection between those two events slammed me right in the face this afternoon, and when it did, it was hard for me to keep the tears of pure, unadulterated joy from flowing (try explaining that emotional response to a little kid with a saw in his hand!)
When I think back about the course that my life has taken since that day sometime in the 1970s, I realize how important it was and still is to me. It didn't form the course of my entire life -- that has taken shape over decades in response to a million things that have happened -- but it was certainly one of the things that helped direct the current toward where I am today. A boy only gets taught how to saw a piece of lumber for the first time once, if he's lucky, and if at all. It will take him a decade or more to perfect the skill, if he ever does, and if he's like me he'll screw it up every way possible. I couldn't be more thankful that I got to be there when Joshua picked up a saw for the first time, and that I was able to connect two events, separated by 30 years. What a day.
08 November 2009
31 March 2009
Here's a quote for you
I just finished watching the excellent Tommy Lee Jones flick "In the Electric Mist". In the movie, the ghost of a Civil War general by the name of General John Bell Hood offers up this quote:
Needless to say, I had to pause the movie several times to make sure I transcribed what he said properly. It literally stopped me cold in the middle of a very engrossing film so I could write it down. The circumstances we face here in the current political context are rather similar, are they not?! All I can say is that whoever actually wrote those words -- since I can't seem to attribute them to the actual General -- had a prescience and literary grace about them that simply amazes me.
By the way, don't miss the movie, it was extremely good. I'm a fan of Tommy Lee Jones in particular, but this flick was well written and cast in general, and the soundtrack is excellent!
Venal and evil people are destroying the world you were born in. It's us against them, my good friend. Don't compromise your principles, or abandon your cause.
Needless to say, I had to pause the movie several times to make sure I transcribed what he said properly. It literally stopped me cold in the middle of a very engrossing film so I could write it down. The circumstances we face here in the current political context are rather similar, are they not?! All I can say is that whoever actually wrote those words -- since I can't seem to attribute them to the actual General -- had a prescience and literary grace about them that simply amazes me.
By the way, don't miss the movie, it was extremely good. I'm a fan of Tommy Lee Jones in particular, but this flick was well written and cast in general, and the soundtrack is excellent!
05 November 2008
President-elect Obama
So if you're like me, you might have had some trouble sleeping last night. Despite my best effort to avoid election returns, the fact that Barack Obama won yesterday's presidential election in an apparent landslide did not escape me.
Diametrically opposed as I am to Mr. Obama's politics, this is a bitter pill to swallow. We are now going to sort out, firsthand, the difference between the fact and fiction of the claims made during the campaign by the Republican side. One certainly hopes that most of it was hyperbole, but we shall see.
In the meantime, there are some things to consider as being the bright side.
First, the election was won fair and square. Unlike 2000, where the balance was tipped by hanging chads and a trip to the Supreme Court, there is no doubt that Obama won this election handily. Our Democrat friends have been vindicated, and their anger over the Bush administration's very existence should dissipate. On the other hand, the Republicans don't have reason to become upset over the results. Hopefully the next 3 years of non-campaign time will be less contentious on the point of the election's legitimacy.
Second, the Republicans did not show up with a candidate that expressed their true strength: conservatism. What we got instead was a lame turkey of a candidate who at best could only describe himself as a "maverick", which is to say he probably really didn't stand for much of anything at all besides political expediency. Frankly, John McCain was this decade's Bob Dole, and the election results bear that out. Such candidates are not worthy of office, no matter how good their running mates are. Hopefully, Mr. McCain will now fade into the background and won't consider another run for the top ticket in 2012.
Third, for better or worse, George Bush's presidency will soon come to an end. I am a Bush supporter based on his foreign policy approach and his reaction to 9/11. Domestically, he has been a marked disaster, eschewing conservative values for the tiny political gain that expanding the nation's entitlement spending problems bought him. With a Republican like George Bush in office, we might as well have had a Democrat for all the difference it made in domestic policy. The small bright spots, those being the tax reductions, will unfortunately expire shortly after his term. Other than those reductions however, the net effect of his presidency was likely more negative than positive. Moving on from that situation is something we can look forward to.
Will Obama be the most liberal President in history since FDR? Undoubtedly. Will he get a blank check from an overwhelmingly Democratic Congress? It seems likely. Will he destroy America and irrevocably change life as we know it? Unlikely. Some people think this is the beginning of the end of the United States' remarkable run as the world's superpower, and that our prosperity is in question. I would argue that the beginning really dates back to the Vietnam era, if not before. We have a major city, Detroit, standing in ruins today, as it has been since the late 1960s. Three quarters of a million people live in squalor in that city alone. Its major industry is undergoing an unprecedented implosion, and a large percentage of its housing either won't sell, or sells for less than the price of an eight-year-old used car. I find it difficult to believe that a President Obama could make things worse. Call that a backhanded sort of optimism if you will.
Diametrically opposed as I am to Mr. Obama's politics, this is a bitter pill to swallow. We are now going to sort out, firsthand, the difference between the fact and fiction of the claims made during the campaign by the Republican side. One certainly hopes that most of it was hyperbole, but we shall see.
In the meantime, there are some things to consider as being the bright side.
First, the election was won fair and square. Unlike 2000, where the balance was tipped by hanging chads and a trip to the Supreme Court, there is no doubt that Obama won this election handily. Our Democrat friends have been vindicated, and their anger over the Bush administration's very existence should dissipate. On the other hand, the Republicans don't have reason to become upset over the results. Hopefully the next 3 years of non-campaign time will be less contentious on the point of the election's legitimacy.
Second, the Republicans did not show up with a candidate that expressed their true strength: conservatism. What we got instead was a lame turkey of a candidate who at best could only describe himself as a "maverick", which is to say he probably really didn't stand for much of anything at all besides political expediency. Frankly, John McCain was this decade's Bob Dole, and the election results bear that out. Such candidates are not worthy of office, no matter how good their running mates are. Hopefully, Mr. McCain will now fade into the background and won't consider another run for the top ticket in 2012.
Third, for better or worse, George Bush's presidency will soon come to an end. I am a Bush supporter based on his foreign policy approach and his reaction to 9/11. Domestically, he has been a marked disaster, eschewing conservative values for the tiny political gain that expanding the nation's entitlement spending problems bought him. With a Republican like George Bush in office, we might as well have had a Democrat for all the difference it made in domestic policy. The small bright spots, those being the tax reductions, will unfortunately expire shortly after his term. Other than those reductions however, the net effect of his presidency was likely more negative than positive. Moving on from that situation is something we can look forward to.
Will Obama be the most liberal President in history since FDR? Undoubtedly. Will he get a blank check from an overwhelmingly Democratic Congress? It seems likely. Will he destroy America and irrevocably change life as we know it? Unlikely. Some people think this is the beginning of the end of the United States' remarkable run as the world's superpower, and that our prosperity is in question. I would argue that the beginning really dates back to the Vietnam era, if not before. We have a major city, Detroit, standing in ruins today, as it has been since the late 1960s. Three quarters of a million people live in squalor in that city alone. Its major industry is undergoing an unprecedented implosion, and a large percentage of its housing either won't sell, or sells for less than the price of an eight-year-old used car. I find it difficult to believe that a President Obama could make things worse. Call that a backhanded sort of optimism if you will.
16 June 2008
Book: Gang Leader for a Day
In Gang Leader for a Day: A Rogue Sociologist Takes to the Streets author and sociologist Sudhir Venkatesh describes nearly a decade spent in Chicago's Robert Taylor housing projects, interacting with members of the Black Kings, a gang that sold crack cocaine during the late 1980s and 1990s.
Having blundered into the gang's turf at the beginning of a seemingly innocuous sociology project, Venkatesh wound up being befriended by the local gang leader. The result of this was an opportunity to get an inside look at the inner workings of a drug dealing street gang, from the economics of selling drugs to the management of the gang's foot soldiers, and virtually every aspect besides.
The book is a fascinating read; Venkatesh is a very talented author who manages to make this work of non-fiction completely engrossing. We learn of his own moral struggles with being in the presence of men who are planning to kill rival gang members, we glimpse the surprisingly human side of the monstrous gang members themselves, and we hear some of the stories of the supporting cast of characters living in the projects.
One truth becomes painfully clear as you read this book: 'Poor Black America' is headed nowhere fast. The reasons for this are complex, but they can be boiled down to this: poor blacks in many cases are their own worst enemies. Venkatesh documents how a maleficent housing coordinator routinely shakes down the residents of the projects for the sin of being entrepreneurial; how the gangs are allowed to operate amongst otherwise law-abiding people because they have been paid off, and how bringing the police in to deal with the criminals can be as hazardous as taking matters into one's own hands would be. The situation Venkatesh lays out in the book would be ridiculous to the point of comical if it weren't so sad and so utterly devoid of hope. People living in white neighborhoods would be outraged if asked to endure conditions such as these that are routinely accepted as part of day to day life in the Chicago projects.
This book was an accidental find; a library search for 'Freakonomics' turned it up as a related work. Although it just came out this year, it somehow had found anonymity among the stacks upstairs in the library, instead of being featured as a new book alongside all of the anti-George Bush/Iraq War books that are the more routine fare on the 'new book' shelves.
Not only do I recommend this book, I strongly encourage you; hell I implore you to read it.
Listen to audio of Venkatesh reading an excerpt from the book on NPR
************************
Gang Leader for a Day: A Rogue Sociologist Takes to the Streets ISBN 1594201501; Penguin Press, 2008. Hardcover, 320 pages. $25.95
Having blundered into the gang's turf at the beginning of a seemingly innocuous sociology project, Venkatesh wound up being befriended by the local gang leader. The result of this was an opportunity to get an inside look at the inner workings of a drug dealing street gang, from the economics of selling drugs to the management of the gang's foot soldiers, and virtually every aspect besides.
The book is a fascinating read; Venkatesh is a very talented author who manages to make this work of non-fiction completely engrossing. We learn of his own moral struggles with being in the presence of men who are planning to kill rival gang members, we glimpse the surprisingly human side of the monstrous gang members themselves, and we hear some of the stories of the supporting cast of characters living in the projects.
One truth becomes painfully clear as you read this book: 'Poor Black America' is headed nowhere fast. The reasons for this are complex, but they can be boiled down to this: poor blacks in many cases are their own worst enemies. Venkatesh documents how a maleficent housing coordinator routinely shakes down the residents of the projects for the sin of being entrepreneurial; how the gangs are allowed to operate amongst otherwise law-abiding people because they have been paid off, and how bringing the police in to deal with the criminals can be as hazardous as taking matters into one's own hands would be. The situation Venkatesh lays out in the book would be ridiculous to the point of comical if it weren't so sad and so utterly devoid of hope. People living in white neighborhoods would be outraged if asked to endure conditions such as these that are routinely accepted as part of day to day life in the Chicago projects.
This book was an accidental find; a library search for 'Freakonomics' turned it up as a related work. Although it just came out this year, it somehow had found anonymity among the stacks upstairs in the library, instead of being featured as a new book alongside all of the anti-George Bush/Iraq War books that are the more routine fare on the 'new book' shelves.
Not only do I recommend this book, I strongly encourage you; hell I implore you to read it.
Listen to audio of Venkatesh reading an excerpt from the book on NPR
************************
Gang Leader for a Day: A Rogue Sociologist Takes to the Streets ISBN 1594201501; Penguin Press, 2008. Hardcover, 320 pages. $25.95
12 May 2008
Movie: Juno
Stop the presses! Hollywood actually comes out with a movie about a teenaged girl getting pregnant *and doing the right thing*??
...and *not* spending two hours whining about how unfair it all is?!?
There simply HAS to be a reason why this anti-feminist sacrilege was allowed to be committed to celluloid, right?
Oh, yeah, that's it. It was put out by Fox.
Good show. Pretty darn funny. It has a serious moment designed to show you how serious this business is, but it's not overdone.
Rent it.
...and *not* spending two hours whining about how unfair it all is?!?
There simply HAS to be a reason why this anti-feminist sacrilege was allowed to be committed to celluloid, right?
Oh, yeah, that's it. It was put out by Fox.
Good show. Pretty darn funny. It has a serious moment designed to show you how serious this business is, but it's not overdone.
Rent it.
11 March 2008
This is delicious! Detroit mayor's house of cards coming down
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080311/METRO/803110374/&imw=Y
If you haven't been following the sordid tale of the City of Detroit's mayor, it is a wonderful thing to watch. An arrogant, powerful Democrat whose parents are also arrogant, powerful Democrats, Kwame Kilpatrick swept into office as the nation's first "hip hop mayor".
Turns out that his earring and partying weren't the only things about him that were "hip hop." He brought an entire host of thug buddies, many of whom he'd been hanging out with since high school, along with him in his entourage.
You've probably already heard about the text messages scandal, in which it was revealed that he and his mistress perjured themselves on the stand during a whistleblower lawsuit this past summer. Turns out that the mayor ordered the $8 million case settled after he found out that the text messages betwixt him and his illicit lover (who was his chief of staff) showed there had been a conspiracy to fire the police officers when on the stand they claimed that a.) there had been no such conspiracy and b.) the two of them weren't romantically involved. Whoops.
Well, the reason why this particular pair of cops were fired was that they started getting close to the source of something else the mayor has apparently been covering up: a legendary party in the mayoral mansion around the time he was first sworn into office involving strippers, drunken appointees crashing city owned vehicles, and a violent showdown between the mayor's wife and one of the strippers who, um, was apparently "extra friendly" with hizzoner during the show...
...you know, the stripper who mysteriously wound up dead in a gangland style drive-by shooting a few short months after the incident. An incident in which the stripper was about to press charges against the mayor's wife for assault with a wooden object. Incidentally, this was the same mayor's wife who somehow came into possession of a "Detroit Police vehicle" which turned out to be a leased Lincoln Navigator (which had to be returned to the dealership...one that I used to work at. How many car dealers do you know of that have a returns policy?)
Of course, the police disclaim any knowledge that this stripper's complaint ever existed, and an "official" investigation by the state's attorney general found the rumor of the party itself to be "an urban legend."
And also, of course, the police seemed to have other things to do when it came time to investigate just exactly why somebody would want to fill the stripper's Buick full of lead as she was driving on a city street. The rumor is that this is because one of the mayor's crooked cop buddies did the hit for him.
Well, those same text messages revealed a few days ago that the mayor was steering insider information on city construction contracts to one of his thug buddies who owns a construction company. (Yeah, this guy has poured concrete for free for the mayor's mistress, and yeah, his most recent brush with the law involved pistol whipping an employee.)
If you listen closely and cock your ear in the general direction of downtown Detroit...yep, that's the sound of a very large house of cards collapsing.
And now, it seems, somebody connected with the police department at the time of the stripper's supposed complaint who has since retired, suddenly remembers something about that complaint's existence before it went to the shredder. And has signed an affidavit to this effect.
Last night, when the affidavit became public, the Chief of Police suddenly called a press conference for shortly after the 6PM news.
And then failed to show up.
Oh, yeah, said Chief of Police is one of the mayor's appointees, who, curiously enough, is *another* appointee who happens to be an attractive black woman about the same age as the mayor. Hmmm.
Now I wonder why she would call a press conference and then within an hour or so decide not to show up? The entire news media in southeast Michigan is now wondering the same thing.
I can't wait to see Kwame "hip hop" his way off to the Jackson maximum security correctional facility, along with a bunch of his buddies. I will probably go downtown with a lawn chair, umbrella and a cooler full of fruity alcoholic beverages to watch them haul his ass off to the slam when it finally comes to an end.
12 February 2008
Project Idea: UPC-based database
I've been toying around with a few ideas lately regarding UPC bar codes. It seems like I can never find stuff in the pantry when I'm looking for it, for example. I also have noticed a tendency to buy the same thing at the grocery store when we already have it.
I discovered today that there is a guy running a UPC database with a web front end at http://www.upcdatabase.com. He's also offering an XML-RPC based API that can be used to automate lookups.
I plinked around with this for a bit. I came up with three items in my workroom here that had UPC codes on them, and sure enough, they were represented in the database accurately. It looks like you can get a Chinese-manufactured USB bar code scanner on eBay for about $15 shipped. Hmmm, I think to myself: here's another way to gather data! :-)
Some ideas:
I discovered today that there is a guy running a UPC database with a web front end at http://www.upcdatabase.com. He's also offering an XML-RPC based API that can be used to automate lookups.
I plinked around with this for a bit. I came up with three items in my workroom here that had UPC codes on them, and sure enough, they were represented in the database accurately. It looks like you can get a Chinese-manufactured USB bar code scanner on eBay for about $15 shipped. Hmmm, I think to myself: here's another way to gather data! :-)
Some ideas:
- UPC-based food inventory and automated grocery order compilation system
- UPC-based home inventory system for use in case of an insurance claim
- UPC-based inventory of books/CDs/DVD collection
08 February 2008
Are we electing a President, or buying a refrigerator?
Ever had to buy something you didn't want to buy?
Let's say the refrigerator goes on the blink. It ends up that replacing it will cost less than repairing it. Wonderful. So what do you do?
Unless you happen to have a passion for kitchen appliances, you probably go shopping for the best deal. Your mission becomes one of getting the most fridge for your money. You probably limit your search to units which have the same features as what you're used to having, or maybe a few more if it doesn't expand the price tag by too much. At the end of the day, you look at all of your choices, and keeping in mind that there's really no getting around it, make a selection and pay your money.
This is precisely the choice I'm being presented as a voter in the November elections.
Our current president is past his freshness date. There's no getting around it, we have to elect a new one. The Constitution says so.
Unlike kitchen appliances, I do happen to have some passion for politics. The trouble is, all of the attractive choices seem to be off the table now.
Ultimately, I think Fred Thompson would have been our best bet. For reasons known only to him, he didn't run a campaign that really had a chance of success. He was basically finished before he started. It's too bad.
With the Republican nomination all but sewn up by McCain, the only thing left worth wondering about is his choice for Vice President.
On the Democrat side, Hillary and Barack Obama are still slugging it out. It looks like it will be awhile before it gets settled. One hopes that the Democrats come to their senses and realize we have already seen what a Clinton presidency looks like, and cast their lot with Obama.
So the only two realistic choices if this were to come to pass would be between McCain and Obama. Ron Paul is somehow keeping the dollars flowing in, perhaps because his devotees expect that he'll run as a third party candidate when he fails to get the nomination. But if you watch Mr. Paul speak, he fails in one extremely important regard: he doesn't sound presidential. It's a quirk of his voice and vocal patterns. It's also a product of his political standpoint, which as a pundit far more experienced than me compared rather successfully to that of Cindy Sheehan. Honestly, I just don't believe the man stands a chance. And remember, we haven't talked yet about his actual policies.
Ideology aside, he just won't be taken seriously. I think we can count him out.
So that leaves me, the American voter, with a refrigerator-style choice to make. And I am most assuredly NOT a kitchen appliance aficionado.
What to do? I've been sternly reminded that regardless of how distasteful the choice might be, I am obliged to cast a vote. I guess sitting out probably is kind of dumb.
If you consider that the Republicans have utterly failed to deliver a candidate that aligns well with my political standpoint, I'm quite sure they're not gonna care much if I put their candidate on an even footing with that of the competition. Honestly, if it really mattered that much to them, they wouldn't have made such a mess of domestic policy since 2000. Obviously, they've bought into the same vein of American-style socialism that the Democrats have been pushing since the days of FDR.
So as a voter, I get to choose between the model with the crummy open-the-freezer-door ice maker I don't like, or the one without the gallon jug storage in the door. Exciting, huh?
If the Democrat nominee turns out to be Hillary Clinton, I'm pretty sure my choice is made for me. I won't cast a vote for her. Any fridge is better than the one that can't be trusted to actually be a fridge. If Hillary was a refrigerator, I believe she'd wait until 3AM and suddenly and quietly go on "heat cycle" and spoil all your food, then chill back down so you'd eat botulism for breakfast.
But if they run Obama, the only realistic thing to do is to go between his and McCain's web sites and see which one gives me the most stuff for my vote. Just like you'd check to see if both fridges had a self-defrosting feature.
I daresay that there isn't a hell of a lot of difference between the two men as candidates, with the possible exception of their policy in Iraq. And you know what? That issue has gotten so muddy that I don't know anymore what the right thing to do is. Somewhere in between staying in there and kicking every ass in sight versus pulling out a brigade a month is going to be the reality, probably regardless of whether we elect either of these two, or one of the dog turds lying in my back yard. In other words, it probably doesn't matter much which guy ends up in office; the military situation has taken on a life and mind of its own and the President only nominally has control.
Since the Republicans obviously don't feel like they owe me any loyalty, I don't feel like I owe them any, either.
So I'm left looking for the best deal out of two bad choices.
I might just vote Obama. And I'm not just speaking metaphorically.
Let's say the refrigerator goes on the blink. It ends up that replacing it will cost less than repairing it. Wonderful. So what do you do?
Unless you happen to have a passion for kitchen appliances, you probably go shopping for the best deal. Your mission becomes one of getting the most fridge for your money. You probably limit your search to units which have the same features as what you're used to having, or maybe a few more if it doesn't expand the price tag by too much. At the end of the day, you look at all of your choices, and keeping in mind that there's really no getting around it, make a selection and pay your money.
This is precisely the choice I'm being presented as a voter in the November elections.
Our current president is past his freshness date. There's no getting around it, we have to elect a new one. The Constitution says so.
Unlike kitchen appliances, I do happen to have some passion for politics. The trouble is, all of the attractive choices seem to be off the table now.
Ultimately, I think Fred Thompson would have been our best bet. For reasons known only to him, he didn't run a campaign that really had a chance of success. He was basically finished before he started. It's too bad.
With the Republican nomination all but sewn up by McCain, the only thing left worth wondering about is his choice for Vice President.
On the Democrat side, Hillary and Barack Obama are still slugging it out. It looks like it will be awhile before it gets settled. One hopes that the Democrats come to their senses and realize we have already seen what a Clinton presidency looks like, and cast their lot with Obama.
So the only two realistic choices if this were to come to pass would be between McCain and Obama. Ron Paul is somehow keeping the dollars flowing in, perhaps because his devotees expect that he'll run as a third party candidate when he fails to get the nomination. But if you watch Mr. Paul speak, he fails in one extremely important regard: he doesn't sound presidential. It's a quirk of his voice and vocal patterns. It's also a product of his political standpoint, which as a pundit far more experienced than me compared rather successfully to that of Cindy Sheehan. Honestly, I just don't believe the man stands a chance. And remember, we haven't talked yet about his actual policies.
Ideology aside, he just won't be taken seriously. I think we can count him out.
So that leaves me, the American voter, with a refrigerator-style choice to make. And I am most assuredly NOT a kitchen appliance aficionado.
What to do? I've been sternly reminded that regardless of how distasteful the choice might be, I am obliged to cast a vote. I guess sitting out probably is kind of dumb.
If you consider that the Republicans have utterly failed to deliver a candidate that aligns well with my political standpoint, I'm quite sure they're not gonna care much if I put their candidate on an even footing with that of the competition. Honestly, if it really mattered that much to them, they wouldn't have made such a mess of domestic policy since 2000. Obviously, they've bought into the same vein of American-style socialism that the Democrats have been pushing since the days of FDR.
So as a voter, I get to choose between the model with the crummy open-the-freezer-door ice maker I don't like, or the one without the gallon jug storage in the door. Exciting, huh?
If the Democrat nominee turns out to be Hillary Clinton, I'm pretty sure my choice is made for me. I won't cast a vote for her. Any fridge is better than the one that can't be trusted to actually be a fridge. If Hillary was a refrigerator, I believe she'd wait until 3AM and suddenly and quietly go on "heat cycle" and spoil all your food, then chill back down so you'd eat botulism for breakfast.
But if they run Obama, the only realistic thing to do is to go between his and McCain's web sites and see which one gives me the most stuff for my vote. Just like you'd check to see if both fridges had a self-defrosting feature.
I daresay that there isn't a hell of a lot of difference between the two men as candidates, with the possible exception of their policy in Iraq. And you know what? That issue has gotten so muddy that I don't know anymore what the right thing to do is. Somewhere in between staying in there and kicking every ass in sight versus pulling out a brigade a month is going to be the reality, probably regardless of whether we elect either of these two, or one of the dog turds lying in my back yard. In other words, it probably doesn't matter much which guy ends up in office; the military situation has taken on a life and mind of its own and the President only nominally has control.
Since the Republicans obviously don't feel like they owe me any loyalty, I don't feel like I owe them any, either.
So I'm left looking for the best deal out of two bad choices.
I might just vote Obama. And I'm not just speaking metaphorically.
30 January 2008
Michigan's new saving grace: Marijuana Tourism!
I was outside just now chipping through a 1" buildup of ice in 17 degree temperatures and 30MPH winds and thought to myself: Michigan, you gotta be high to love it.
Wait a minute!
Now's the perfect time, Libertarians. The gov needs money bad. We have this insatiable need to give money to poor people and special interests. Why don't we:
1. Legalize marijuana to save on the enforcement costs
2. Encourage "marijuana tourism": tell all the potheads that Michigan is the place to spend their vacations
3. Tax the living crap out of the stuff
Jennifer Granholm is a good Democrat and a Canadian to boot. You mean to tell me she hasn't been high sometime in her life? Hell, I'm surprised she doesn't go down to the parking lot behind the Capitol building to burn one every Friday after lunch. Why not take advantage of this perfect celestial alignment to rid ourselves of the onerous, intrusive laws, the outrageous enforcement costs, and in the meantime give Michigan a new cash crop? We're at the bottom of the economic barrel, folks, it's time to start scraping. With GM close to losing the number one spot, Ford with one foot on a banana peel, and Chrysler offering $100K buyouts to anybody on the shop floor with a pulse, new manufacturers are staying away in droves.
We've achieved the point where we can't tax anything new, because there isn't anything new to tax. Our displaced factory workers are going to need jobs. Let's have 'em sell potato chips and Doritos to tourists with the munchies! There's got to be a business opportunity there.
It's time for a Democrat's good friend Mary Jane to come in and save the day!
Who's with me?
Wait a minute!
Now's the perfect time, Libertarians. The gov needs money bad. We have this insatiable need to give money to poor people and special interests. Why don't we:
1. Legalize marijuana to save on the enforcement costs
2. Encourage "marijuana tourism": tell all the potheads that Michigan is the place to spend their vacations
3. Tax the living crap out of the stuff
Jennifer Granholm is a good Democrat and a Canadian to boot. You mean to tell me she hasn't been high sometime in her life? Hell, I'm surprised she doesn't go down to the parking lot behind the Capitol building to burn one every Friday after lunch. Why not take advantage of this perfect celestial alignment to rid ourselves of the onerous, intrusive laws, the outrageous enforcement costs, and in the meantime give Michigan a new cash crop? We're at the bottom of the economic barrel, folks, it's time to start scraping. With GM close to losing the number one spot, Ford with one foot on a banana peel, and Chrysler offering $100K buyouts to anybody on the shop floor with a pulse, new manufacturers are staying away in droves.
We've achieved the point where we can't tax anything new, because there isn't anything new to tax. Our displaced factory workers are going to need jobs. Let's have 'em sell potato chips and Doritos to tourists with the munchies! There's got to be a business opportunity there.
It's time for a Democrat's good friend Mary Jane to come in and save the day!
Who's with me?
25 January 2008
2008: Coke vs Pepsi vs Kool Aid
In reference to an article about the Reagan coalition being "broken up" and an email from Marty on MGAP contending that the coalition was broken up almost immediately when George HW Bush was nominated Vice President...
I've heard about this too. Your contention is interesting, but I think it misses the point.
The "coalition" never existed as posited by the pundits. What existed was the Reagan political machine, and it was formidable. It made the Clinton political machine look like a firecracker compared to a howitzer. Peace and love, redneck evangelists hugging blue blooded country club members: it was a sales job, and a damn good one for a damn good product, which is why it worked.
Or perhaps, Wikipedia has it right, and the chattering classes have it all wrong: coalition as the term is used today implies some sort of long term permanence that can be "broken up" -- as if by its very nature inertia holds it together. Wikipedia says of the word 'coalition': "A coalition is an alliance among individuals, during which they cooperate in joint action, each in their own self-interest. This alliance may be temporary or a matter of convenience. A coalition thus differs from a more formal covenant. Possibly described as a joining of 'factions'."
See, this is much more correct and a more astute observation of what actually took place. I like to think of this all as a soda pop competition.
In 1980, disgusted by the Carter mishandling of Iran, everybody on the Republican side decided they would buy conservative-flavored Coke, even though a lot of 'em liked moderate-flavored Pepsi better, because they knew if they didn't buy the Coke, they'd be forced to drink the Kool Aid offered up by the Democrats in the form of four more years of Jimmy Carter. Nobody really wanted Kool Aid. It was a serious time in our country, and a serious time with serious (international) problems calls for a serious drink. Even the Democrats of Macomb County, usually Kool Aid drinkers to the core, decided they wanted something with more bite: Coke. So Ronald Reagan rode the tidal wave of anti-Kool Aid sentiment and cleaned up in the election of 1980. In 1984, with the Soviets reeling and the positive message of Conservatism ringing true, and in the midst of some pretty good times for capitalists, Coke came through again.
In the case of Bush 41, the beverage of choice turned out to be the Pepsi of the blue blood Republicans. This was an election that took place in the absence of true coalition. The Coke drinkers--the conservatives, still tasting the Reagan in their mouths, thought Bush 41 was going to be more of the Reagan flavor they knew and loved. Why mess with a good thing? The guy already had his bags unpacked in DC. Maybe this George H.W. Bush was New Coke, and in 1988, everybody knew that New Coke would eventually get changed into Coke Classic, right?
But when the truth came out -- the Bushes weren't New Coke at all, but rather Pepsi, and Pepsi drinkers looked down their noses at conservative Coke drinkers...well, 1992 happened, and we all drank Kool Aid and got Bill Clinton. (Fortunately, few killed themselves as a result).
Now the Kool Aid faction in this country is a strong one. A lot of different kinds of drink lovers can agree to like Kool Aid: the union guys (shot and a beer), the minorities (Hawaiian punch), the fucking socialists (prune juice). And when the cola drinkers get bifurcated like they did in 1992, well, grape Kool Aid starts looking good to about 51% of the people--or is it 49%...I almost forgot about Ross Perot (V8 juice).
* can you tell it's Friday? *
In 1996, we got more Pepsi from the Republicans in the form of Bob Dole, and the Coke guys stayed home in droves. Nobody was ready to agree to drink Pepsi, even after the Coke drinkers enjoyed having the Pepsi drinkers come over for a sip during the 80s. See, Coke drinkers are more ardent in their passion for Coke, and are less willing to accept substitutes. Pepsi drinkers...well, if it's brown, wet and fizzy, sometimes they just don't care what label is on the can. Kool Aid ruled the day again.
Finally, the nation had its fill of Kool Aid in 2000. For some reason, the Democrats decided to try a new flavor altogether: the environmentally conscious Mountain Dew of Algore. Mountain Dew is quite similar to Kool Aid in some respects: it's sweet, brightly colored, and loved by children. And what the hell, the guy was already living near the White House. So the Democrats threw their lot in with Algore's Mountain Dewness.
But brilliantly, the Republicans came up with something equally persuasive, a Pepsi candidate in a Coke can: George W Bush. Wrapped in the conservative evangelical Coke can of a plain spoken Texan, this Harvard-educated son of privilege resonated well with the Pepsi drinkers of the Republican party, and a new "coalition" was formed. It wasn't the overwhelming coalition of the 80s; the product wasn't as good, after all, but it looked right to some, and tasted right to the rest, and as it turned out, it crossed the magic 50% barrier....just.
In 2004, nobody on the Cola drinking side gave a shit what label was on the can. Our drink of choice was the one that had been poured with some success on the fires of 9/11--even if nobody knew what brand it was (Walmart Cola, I suspect). Kool Aid tried to stage a comeback, but these again were serious times demanding a serious drink. Cola narrowly won out.
Here in 2008, all the flavors are back in play again. You have the Pepsi that is John McCain. You have the Kool Aid that is Hillary Clinton. You have the Hawaiian Punch that is Obamayomama. You have some Pepsi in a Coke can that is Huckabee. You had real, "true blue" Coke in Fred Thompson, but somebody let the fizz out. We've even got some of that new fruity V8 Fusion that is Ron Paul. So the question is, what flavor is America in the mood for? Are times still serious enough that a cola is going to sell? Have our inner children whined long enough that we're ready to feed 'em Kool Aid just to shut 'em up? Are we ready for the strange taste of V8 Fusion because we're tired of the same old flavors and are willing to risk gagging on something completely new and different?
I just wish somebody was selling water.
I've heard about this too. Your contention is interesting, but I think it misses the point.
The "coalition" never existed as posited by the pundits. What existed was the Reagan political machine, and it was formidable. It made the Clinton political machine look like a firecracker compared to a howitzer. Peace and love, redneck evangelists hugging blue blooded country club members: it was a sales job, and a damn good one for a damn good product, which is why it worked.
Or perhaps, Wikipedia has it right, and the chattering classes have it all wrong: coalition as the term is used today implies some sort of long term permanence that can be "broken up" -- as if by its very nature inertia holds it together. Wikipedia says of the word 'coalition': "A coalition is an alliance among individuals, during which they cooperate in joint action, each in their own self-interest. This alliance may be temporary or a matter of convenience. A coalition thus differs from a more formal covenant. Possibly described as a joining of 'factions'."
See, this is much more correct and a more astute observation of what actually took place. I like to think of this all as a soda pop competition.
In 1980, disgusted by the Carter mishandling of Iran, everybody on the Republican side decided they would buy conservative-flavored Coke, even though a lot of 'em liked moderate-flavored Pepsi better, because they knew if they didn't buy the Coke, they'd be forced to drink the Kool Aid offered up by the Democrats in the form of four more years of Jimmy Carter. Nobody really wanted Kool Aid. It was a serious time in our country, and a serious time with serious (international) problems calls for a serious drink. Even the Democrats of Macomb County, usually Kool Aid drinkers to the core, decided they wanted something with more bite: Coke. So Ronald Reagan rode the tidal wave of anti-Kool Aid sentiment and cleaned up in the election of 1980. In 1984, with the Soviets reeling and the positive message of Conservatism ringing true, and in the midst of some pretty good times for capitalists, Coke came through again.
In the case of Bush 41, the beverage of choice turned out to be the Pepsi of the blue blood Republicans. This was an election that took place in the absence of true coalition. The Coke drinkers--the conservatives, still tasting the Reagan in their mouths, thought Bush 41 was going to be more of the Reagan flavor they knew and loved. Why mess with a good thing? The guy already had his bags unpacked in DC. Maybe this George H.W. Bush was New Coke, and in 1988, everybody knew that New Coke would eventually get changed into Coke Classic, right?
But when the truth came out -- the Bushes weren't New Coke at all, but rather Pepsi, and Pepsi drinkers looked down their noses at conservative Coke drinkers...well, 1992 happened, and we all drank Kool Aid and got Bill Clinton. (Fortunately, few killed themselves as a result).
Now the Kool Aid faction in this country is a strong one. A lot of different kinds of drink lovers can agree to like Kool Aid: the union guys (shot and a beer), the minorities (Hawaiian punch), the fucking socialists (prune juice). And when the cola drinkers get bifurcated like they did in 1992, well, grape Kool Aid starts looking good to about 51% of the people--or is it 49%...I almost forgot about Ross Perot (V8 juice).
* can you tell it's Friday? *
In 1996, we got more Pepsi from the Republicans in the form of Bob Dole, and the Coke guys stayed home in droves. Nobody was ready to agree to drink Pepsi, even after the Coke drinkers enjoyed having the Pepsi drinkers come over for a sip during the 80s. See, Coke drinkers are more ardent in their passion for Coke, and are less willing to accept substitutes. Pepsi drinkers...well, if it's brown, wet and fizzy, sometimes they just don't care what label is on the can. Kool Aid ruled the day again.
Finally, the nation had its fill of Kool Aid in 2000. For some reason, the Democrats decided to try a new flavor altogether: the environmentally conscious Mountain Dew of Algore. Mountain Dew is quite similar to Kool Aid in some respects: it's sweet, brightly colored, and loved by children. And what the hell, the guy was already living near the White House. So the Democrats threw their lot in with Algore's Mountain Dewness.
But brilliantly, the Republicans came up with something equally persuasive, a Pepsi candidate in a Coke can: George W Bush. Wrapped in the conservative evangelical Coke can of a plain spoken Texan, this Harvard-educated son of privilege resonated well with the Pepsi drinkers of the Republican party, and a new "coalition" was formed. It wasn't the overwhelming coalition of the 80s; the product wasn't as good, after all, but it looked right to some, and tasted right to the rest, and as it turned out, it crossed the magic 50% barrier....just.
In 2004, nobody on the Cola drinking side gave a shit what label was on the can. Our drink of choice was the one that had been poured with some success on the fires of 9/11--even if nobody knew what brand it was (Walmart Cola, I suspect). Kool Aid tried to stage a comeback, but these again were serious times demanding a serious drink. Cola narrowly won out.
Here in 2008, all the flavors are back in play again. You have the Pepsi that is John McCain. You have the Kool Aid that is Hillary Clinton. You have the Hawaiian Punch that is Obamayomama. You have some Pepsi in a Coke can that is Huckabee. You had real, "true blue" Coke in Fred Thompson, but somebody let the fizz out. We've even got some of that new fruity V8 Fusion that is Ron Paul. So the question is, what flavor is America in the mood for? Are times still serious enough that a cola is going to sell? Have our inner children whined long enough that we're ready to feed 'em Kool Aid just to shut 'em up? Are we ready for the strange taste of V8 Fusion because we're tired of the same old flavors and are willing to risk gagging on something completely new and different?
I just wish somebody was selling water.
13 January 2008
It's not too often I run across a truly laugh-out-loud give me the giggles cartoon. Here's one that did it for me..
03 December 2007
06 October 2007
Sterling Heights Citizen's Police Academy: Week 1, Introduction
Last year around this time I took part in the Sterling Heights Citizen's Fire Academy. I had a lot of fun doing stuff like crawling through a smoke-filled building, using a fire hose, cutting off the roof of a car, etc. So when I learned that the Fire Academy was based off of the city's long-running Citizen's Police Academy, I knew I had to sign up. Our first class was yesterday.
There are 19 of us in the class, which is being held in a training room at the police station next door to City Hall. Last evening's class was hosted by Capt. John Wilk and Lt. Jim Hack. These two men are responsible for all of the hiring and training done in the department and took it upon themselves to introduce us to what we will be going through for three hours a week over the next 10 weeks.
Essentially, this class was really just a chance for people to familiarize themselves with the syllabus as well as to get a tour of the department. Both of the men presenting were personable guys, and it's easy to see that they're well-suited to hosting this class. The Police Department offers the course as part of its community outreach effort and as an attempt to show the citizens their side of how policing a medium-sized city works. There were some interesting things that came out of the discussion:
I have to admit that I have some misgivings going into the program. Personally, I know the police to be a necessary part of our society, but I also know that there are guys who end up in the job who don't belong there because they tend to go a bit mad with power. Having some libertarian sensibilities in my character, I tend to mistrust government in general, and the police really embody some of that mistrust for me. I think this will be an interesting program for me, because unlike the case with the Fire Department, I really do have some preconceived notions about the police. This course will either really confirm some of those preconceptions or give me a new way of looking at the force. I'm looking forward to seeing how that turns out.
One thing that clearly is an issue for me are the drug forfeiture laws that I mentioned earlier. These guys are pretty enthusiastic about the money that these laws bring to their department, and I'm uncomfortable with the fact that there is a financial incentive to the police for some of these really draconian drug laws to be enforced. It opens up the specter of "policing for hire", which only serves to exacerbate the problems that I believe the so-called 'war on drugs' has brought to our society as a whole. On the other side of the coin, the other 16 or so people in attendance didn't seem to have a problem with this at all, judging by their reaction. Of course, the guy on the one side of me was deaf and the guy on the other side was asking non-sequiter questions about diversity on the force, so maybe some of that apparent attitude can be discounted. Wholesale.
The group of folks I'm in there with range between ages 27 to someplace in their mid seventies, with a strong bias towards the older end of the range. There are three other people in the class which are under 40, near as I can tell, and the ones that are below the median age are mostly female. One of the overall group is a "happily divorced" apartment manager, one is a slightly neurotic fifth grade teacher, and yet another guy is an immigrant from IDon'tKnowWhere-istan. There are quite a large number of retirees -- it looks like the McDonald's breakfast club in there. I'm not trying to suggest that there is anything wrong with this group of people -- indeed, I'm a character of sorts myself -- but it's going to make for an interesting 10 weeks of class. Curiously there are no Chaldeans in the class, which strikes me as strange considering their large presence in the city and the interest I would presume they have in how their community is policed. The only person of color is the immigrant mentioned above, and really, he doesn't strike me as being of Arabic descent despite my reference to nations of the world ending in -stan. So it's a bunch of older white guys and some middle-aged women with the oddball youngster such as myself in for good measure. In contrast with the guys that showed up for the Fire academy program, suffice it to say most of these folks are not the sort that should be climbing ladders.
One final point before I close: the tour of the jail, which is where we spent most of our time, put the words "Scared Straight" into mind. The Sterling Heights Police Department jail is the *last* place anyone in their right mind would ever want to end up. It is the definition of dreary; the place is probably best described as a rat-infested shithole minus the rats. The drunk tank, with its yellow, easy hose-off rubberized surfaces probably epitomizes the I'm sure sordid experience of one's first contact with the criminal justice system. I'm sure that everyone that comes through there ends up needing a good hosing down themselves after the experience is over. I don't go to bars much. After seeing that place, I've got all the more reason to stay home.
There are 19 of us in the class, which is being held in a training room at the police station next door to City Hall. Last evening's class was hosted by Capt. John Wilk and Lt. Jim Hack. These two men are responsible for all of the hiring and training done in the department and took it upon themselves to introduce us to what we will be going through for three hours a week over the next 10 weeks.
Essentially, this class was really just a chance for people to familiarize themselves with the syllabus as well as to get a tour of the department. Both of the men presenting were personable guys, and it's easy to see that they're well-suited to hosting this class. The Police Department offers the course as part of its community outreach effort and as an attempt to show the citizens their side of how policing a medium-sized city works. There were some interesting things that came out of the discussion:
- The Police rely very heavily on the drug forfeiture laws to fund equipment purchases. One of the guys actually said, "we really make a lot of money off of drug busts." According to the Lieutenant, that's fortunate, because they have a hard time getting the city to pay for any equipment outside of their squad cars or their regular operating expenses.
- Technically, the Police Department is understaffed if you use the rule of thumb which indicates you should have 2.5 officers per every 1,000 residents. At approximately 127,000 residents that would amount to a force of 317 officers. Sterling Heights has 170 or so, so they're well below the level they would have even at 2 officers per 1000 residents. Paradoxically, the city's low crime statistics acts as a disincentive for the city to fund a larger department.
- There are three shifts in the department, with considerable overlap between the shifts. At any one time there are approximately 15-20 cars out on patrol, servicing nearly 60,000 runs per year. This compares to the Fire Department, which serves all of the EMS in Sterling Heights at ~12,000 runs per year. During the overlap period they might briefly have as many as 30 cars out on the road at peak times during the year.
- The department has several different divisions, e.g. patrol, etc., but is undergoing a significant management restructuring after the departure of the previous chief two years ago. As a result, the number of captains has been reduced through attrition from four to two, and there has been a corresponding consolidation of the department's divisions. Captain Wilk himself is in his last 14 or 15 months of service as he has nearly 30 years on the job and is obligated to retire at the end of that time.
- As both of the men mentioned, the Police Officer's union has a strong presence in Sterling Heights. There was mention of the fact that there are two officers assigned to keep the jail operation under control at all times -- regular officers that are rotated into the assignment from their duty on the road. It was suggested apparently that perhaps it doesn't require a full-fledged police officer to keep an eye on his half of 24 cells (not counting the drunk tank and the other holding cell), but the union balked at this. There was another mention of the union's strength during another part of the discussion as well. Clearly it is a force to be reckoned with.
- Mention was made of last year's failure of a measure on the ballot which would have funded a new police department headquarters on city-owned property a few hundred feet down the street from the current location. Both of the presenters mentioned the age of the building (it was first occupied in 1980) and their disappointment that the tax levy didn't pass. On the same day, another measure passed that funded the modernization of several of the Fire Department stations, so I definitely got the sense that there is a little inter-departmental rivalry going on. Like most of the voters, I didn't feel the Police Department had really made their case as well as the Fire Department had. The Fire Department clearly had older, more dilapidated buildings and a more demonstrable need for additional space for equipment and modernization of their buildings with the introduction of female firefighters to the force. After the tour of the police building concluded yesterday, my impression remains the same. The building they're in, despite their characterization of its age, really does not give the impression of being inadequate to the task of housing the police. I suppose that if I had a tour of more than one police department, perhaps some of the differences would stand out and it would be easier to see why the cops want to update their facility, but taken on its individual merits as a building, I'm having a hard time seeing much wrong with what they've got. I think they're going to be right where they are for a long, long time unless they can make their case stronger.
- The events surrounding the Iraq win of the World Soccer Cup earlier this summer, in which hundreds of people spontaneously came out to celebrate -- all in the streets around my house -- did catch the department off guard, especially the near riot I witnessed at 1AM on the following morning as two groups of celebrants, numbering approximately 400, shouted at each other from opposite sides of Ryan Road just north of 15 Mile Road. The cops both kind of shook their heads and said, well, we learned a few things from that experience about how we would handle it if it came up again, but we had absolutely no preparation for it.
I have to admit that I have some misgivings going into the program. Personally, I know the police to be a necessary part of our society, but I also know that there are guys who end up in the job who don't belong there because they tend to go a bit mad with power. Having some libertarian sensibilities in my character, I tend to mistrust government in general, and the police really embody some of that mistrust for me. I think this will be an interesting program for me, because unlike the case with the Fire Department, I really do have some preconceived notions about the police. This course will either really confirm some of those preconceptions or give me a new way of looking at the force. I'm looking forward to seeing how that turns out.
One thing that clearly is an issue for me are the drug forfeiture laws that I mentioned earlier. These guys are pretty enthusiastic about the money that these laws bring to their department, and I'm uncomfortable with the fact that there is a financial incentive to the police for some of these really draconian drug laws to be enforced. It opens up the specter of "policing for hire", which only serves to exacerbate the problems that I believe the so-called 'war on drugs' has brought to our society as a whole. On the other side of the coin, the other 16 or so people in attendance didn't seem to have a problem with this at all, judging by their reaction. Of course, the guy on the one side of me was deaf and the guy on the other side was asking non-sequiter questions about diversity on the force, so maybe some of that apparent attitude can be discounted. Wholesale.
The group of folks I'm in there with range between ages 27 to someplace in their mid seventies, with a strong bias towards the older end of the range. There are three other people in the class which are under 40, near as I can tell, and the ones that are below the median age are mostly female. One of the overall group is a "happily divorced" apartment manager, one is a slightly neurotic fifth grade teacher, and yet another guy is an immigrant from IDon'tKnowWhere-istan. There are quite a large number of retirees -- it looks like the McDonald's breakfast club in there. I'm not trying to suggest that there is anything wrong with this group of people -- indeed, I'm a character of sorts myself -- but it's going to make for an interesting 10 weeks of class. Curiously there are no Chaldeans in the class, which strikes me as strange considering their large presence in the city and the interest I would presume they have in how their community is policed. The only person of color is the immigrant mentioned above, and really, he doesn't strike me as being of Arabic descent despite my reference to nations of the world ending in -stan. So it's a bunch of older white guys and some middle-aged women with the oddball youngster such as myself in for good measure. In contrast with the guys that showed up for the Fire academy program, suffice it to say most of these folks are not the sort that should be climbing ladders.
One final point before I close: the tour of the jail, which is where we spent most of our time, put the words "Scared Straight" into mind. The Sterling Heights Police Department jail is the *last* place anyone in their right mind would ever want to end up. It is the definition of dreary; the place is probably best described as a rat-infested shithole minus the rats. The drunk tank, with its yellow, easy hose-off rubberized surfaces probably epitomizes the I'm sure sordid experience of one's first contact with the criminal justice system. I'm sure that everyone that comes through there ends up needing a good hosing down themselves after the experience is over. I don't go to bars much. After seeing that place, I've got all the more reason to stay home.
17 September 2007
Model A ride
I have a neighbor, Jim Ventimiglia, with two 1930 Model A Fords. One is a two door hard top coupe, the other is a two door hard top with a rumble seat.
The coupe was up on jacks one day a couple of years ago when I walked by with my dog, and I stopped in, introduced myself, and then gave him a hand adjusting the cable brakes. The rumble seat car is a restoration in progress; just the other day I helped Jim put it up on a trailer and drag it over to the body shop for some frame tweaks. He's about 70 years old -- same as the car -- and a retired Chrysler worker. I believe he was a machinist.
Well, this evening about 10PM I was just getting back from walking Leo and Jim pulled up, on his way to get gas, and asked if I wanted a ride!
Some of the old timers have probably ridden in these. For me, before I started occasionally helping him out I'd never even touched one--they've always been somebody's prized possession, and you learn early that you are to look but not touch. So when I hopped into the front seat I had no idea what to expect.
You sit up high on a softly sprung, bouncy seat, and you've got a great, SUV-like view of the road. There are no seat belts of course, no dashboard padding, no safety glass (as far as I know) -- all of the glass surfaces reflect a lot of light inside the car because they're flat panes. The headlamp switch is a lever located in the center of the steering wheel.
They're really quite narrow cars, and the seat back doesn't quite come up to your shoulder blades. I'm not sure the seats are adjustable fore and aft, but my feet were right up against the firewall.
The four cylinder engine is noisy, as is the drivetrain. There is a cloth headliner and a rubber floor mat, but no sound insulation. There are distinct gear whines from both the transmission and the rear end, both of which employ straight-cut gears. The dashboard has an instrument panel right in the center illuminated by an incandescent bulb. The speedometer swings wildly back and forth in this car; Jim say's he's not sure how accurate it is, but he thinks the fastest he's ever gone is 55MPH on the freeway.
The thing took on about 7 gallons of very carefully dispensed fuel. It was odd only pulling up to the pump roughly even with the windshield; the fuel tank is in the firewall!
He was nice enough to take me for about a 4 mile ride after we fueled it up.
The pace was gentle, but somehow it was pretty thrilling anyway!
The coupe was up on jacks one day a couple of years ago when I walked by with my dog, and I stopped in, introduced myself, and then gave him a hand adjusting the cable brakes. The rumble seat car is a restoration in progress; just the other day I helped Jim put it up on a trailer and drag it over to the body shop for some frame tweaks. He's about 70 years old -- same as the car -- and a retired Chrysler worker. I believe he was a machinist.
Well, this evening about 10PM I was just getting back from walking Leo and Jim pulled up, on his way to get gas, and asked if I wanted a ride!
Some of the old timers have probably ridden in these. For me, before I started occasionally helping him out I'd never even touched one--they've always been somebody's prized possession, and you learn early that you are to look but not touch. So when I hopped into the front seat I had no idea what to expect.
You sit up high on a softly sprung, bouncy seat, and you've got a great, SUV-like view of the road. There are no seat belts of course, no dashboard padding, no safety glass (as far as I know) -- all of the glass surfaces reflect a lot of light inside the car because they're flat panes. The headlamp switch is a lever located in the center of the steering wheel.
They're really quite narrow cars, and the seat back doesn't quite come up to your shoulder blades. I'm not sure the seats are adjustable fore and aft, but my feet were right up against the firewall.
The four cylinder engine is noisy, as is the drivetrain. There is a cloth headliner and a rubber floor mat, but no sound insulation. There are distinct gear whines from both the transmission and the rear end, both of which employ straight-cut gears. The dashboard has an instrument panel right in the center illuminated by an incandescent bulb. The speedometer swings wildly back and forth in this car; Jim say's he's not sure how accurate it is, but he thinks the fastest he's ever gone is 55MPH on the freeway.
The thing took on about 7 gallons of very carefully dispensed fuel. It was odd only pulling up to the pump roughly even with the windshield; the fuel tank is in the firewall!
He was nice enough to take me for about a 4 mile ride after we fueled it up.
The pace was gentle, but somehow it was pretty thrilling anyway!
10 September 2007
Book: No Speed Limit--The Highs and Lows of Meth
In No Speed Limit: The Highs and Lows of Meth, author Frank Owen takes on the media frenzy that has accompanied the recent uptick in crystal methamphetamine usage in America. Along the way, he demonstrates to us that the road to hell is indeed paved with good intentions, and there's nothing new under the sun.
Beginning with a prologue in which he describes his own meth use in the 1980s, Owen describes the effects of the drug in detail: the difference in the "high" from more traditional recreational drugs. As the author puts it, the drug turns the user into a machine: more alert, more capable, inexhaustible, sexually potent, emotionally stronger. His own experience with the drug then segues into its origins in the early 1900s as a substance that when at first isolated was thought to be of little use. He then covers its rise to near ubiquity throughout the first half of the 20th Century as a prescription medication thought by the medical establishment to be a cure-all, a performance enhancer given to soldiers on both sides of World War II, and finally, as a substance that was recognized to be harmful and ultimately banned by federal law.
During this discussion, he chronicles the rise of several cultural phenomena such as Uncle Fester, the author of how-to-cook-meth books who in reality is a chemist living in Green Bay, WI with whom he visits and interviews extensively. He tells the story of the Hell's Angels biker gang who gave the drug it's nickname "crank" through their practice of smuggling the drug in the hollow crankshafts of their motorcycles and were among the first to synthesize the drug after it was banned. He also details the effect the drug has on the least fortunate of America's children, trapped in homes where the parents place a higher premium on meth manufacture than on clean diapers and food.
A very telling part of the book is his treatment of the rise of so-called "Nazi meth" in America, and it's wildfire-like spread across the midwest where meth labs popped up by the thousands, leading the DEA to take countermeasures designed to cut off the manufacture of the drug by limiting the source materials. Owen's conclusion? The feds' good intentions had the unforeseen consequence of essentially exporting U.S. meth production to Mexican drug lords who were unencumbered by our laws against procurement of large amounts of pseudoephedrine! As he puts it, "just as Prohibition consolidated the hold of organized crime over the alcohol industry, so precursor laws helped the Mexican cartels increase their market share by stifling domestic competition."
This book is at once a compelling, entertaining read as well as a nearly hype-free detailing of what meth is, what it does, and how American society has responded to it. The author appears to be imbued with a level of honesty and clarity on the topic that can only come from his unique perspective as a trained journalist, former meth user, and British expatriate. If you're looking for a reasoned perspective on crystal meth, along with a highly unusual and clear view on American drug culture in general, I highly recommend this book.
****
No Speed Limit -- The Highs and Lows of Meth ISBN 0-312-35616-1; St. Martin's Press, 2007. Hardcover, 244 pages including bibliography. $24.95
Beginning with a prologue in which he describes his own meth use in the 1980s, Owen describes the effects of the drug in detail: the difference in the "high" from more traditional recreational drugs. As the author puts it, the drug turns the user into a machine: more alert, more capable, inexhaustible, sexually potent, emotionally stronger. His own experience with the drug then segues into its origins in the early 1900s as a substance that when at first isolated was thought to be of little use. He then covers its rise to near ubiquity throughout the first half of the 20th Century as a prescription medication thought by the medical establishment to be a cure-all, a performance enhancer given to soldiers on both sides of World War II, and finally, as a substance that was recognized to be harmful and ultimately banned by federal law.
During this discussion, he chronicles the rise of several cultural phenomena such as Uncle Fester, the author of how-to-cook-meth books who in reality is a chemist living in Green Bay, WI with whom he visits and interviews extensively. He tells the story of the Hell's Angels biker gang who gave the drug it's nickname "crank" through their practice of smuggling the drug in the hollow crankshafts of their motorcycles and were among the first to synthesize the drug after it was banned. He also details the effect the drug has on the least fortunate of America's children, trapped in homes where the parents place a higher premium on meth manufacture than on clean diapers and food.
A very telling part of the book is his treatment of the rise of so-called "Nazi meth" in America, and it's wildfire-like spread across the midwest where meth labs popped up by the thousands, leading the DEA to take countermeasures designed to cut off the manufacture of the drug by limiting the source materials. Owen's conclusion? The feds' good intentions had the unforeseen consequence of essentially exporting U.S. meth production to Mexican drug lords who were unencumbered by our laws against procurement of large amounts of pseudoephedrine! As he puts it, "just as Prohibition consolidated the hold of organized crime over the alcohol industry, so precursor laws helped the Mexican cartels increase their market share by stifling domestic competition."
This book is at once a compelling, entertaining read as well as a nearly hype-free detailing of what meth is, what it does, and how American society has responded to it. The author appears to be imbued with a level of honesty and clarity on the topic that can only come from his unique perspective as a trained journalist, former meth user, and British expatriate. If you're looking for a reasoned perspective on crystal meth, along with a highly unusual and clear view on American drug culture in general, I highly recommend this book.
****
No Speed Limit -- The Highs and Lows of Meth ISBN 0-312-35616-1; St. Martin's Press, 2007. Hardcover, 244 pages including bibliography. $24.95
23 July 2007
No Country For Old Men -- It's Coming!! :-)
My boys Joel and Ethan Coen are hard at work filming No Country for Old Men. Here's a teaser trailer snagged off of YouTube!
15 April 2007
Book: Truck (A Love Story)
In Truck - A Love Story, author Michael Perry describes a chunk of his life in rural Wisconsin during the year or so that he spent resurrecting his 1951 International L-120 with a lot of help from his brother-in-law. During that same period of time, he coincidentally fell in love with a woman after living 38 years as a bachelor, and proposed marriage.
The two stories happening in parallel, along with a number of other anecdotes, make for a pleasant walk through the life of a man not unlike many of us, with the exception that he's more observant than most. He's got family and friends to contend with, a set of avocations he's moderately successful in, a job (as a self-employed author) that takes up too much of his time, a love life to struggle with, and a need to share part of himself with the rest of the world in writing. That all of this is taking place just on the other side of Lake Michigan from here just underscores the fact that we all walk a similar path, and like Mr. Perry seems to be saying in between the lines, life is what you make of it. This is down-home country goodness for upper midwesterners. Recommended.
****
Truck: A Love Story ISBN 0-06-057117-9; HarperCollins 2006. Hardcover, 281 pages including postscript. $24.95
The two stories happening in parallel, along with a number of other anecdotes, make for a pleasant walk through the life of a man not unlike many of us, with the exception that he's more observant than most. He's got family and friends to contend with, a set of avocations he's moderately successful in, a job (as a self-employed author) that takes up too much of his time, a love life to struggle with, and a need to share part of himself with the rest of the world in writing. That all of this is taking place just on the other side of Lake Michigan from here just underscores the fact that we all walk a similar path, and like Mr. Perry seems to be saying in between the lines, life is what you make of it. This is down-home country goodness for upper midwesterners. Recommended.
****
Truck: A Love Story ISBN 0-06-057117-9; HarperCollins 2006. Hardcover, 281 pages including postscript. $24.95
Book: Applebee's America
Applebee's America: How Successful Political, Business and Religious Leaders Connect with the New American Community promises to share with the reader the secrets for successful marketing campaigns gleaned from President Bush's two electoral victories, the Clinton White House, Applebee's restaurants, "mega churches" and several other examples. Written by Douglas B. Sosnik, Clinton White House Strategist, Matthew J. Dowd, Bush campaign strategist, and Ron Fournier, a political journalist, the authors do a credible job of explaining their philosophy that Americans rely on emotional triggers to make important decisions such as who to vote for, or where to live, and have come to trust those who can connect with them on an emotional level.
The authors explain that people have gradually come to distrust the media, and instead rely upon local "experts" that they term "Navigators". Navigators are personal friends or colleagues who have developed some expertise in key subject areas. For example, the authors describe a fellow living in suburban Chicago who is often sought after for advice by people contemplating a new computer purchase. Their claim? People who know this guy won't buy a computer unless he signs off on it. The authors go on to say that these "Navigators" are among all of us, and successful marketing campaigns identify who they are and target their message towards them. The trickle-down effect takes care of the rest.
There are several other tactics that get substantial coverage in the book. The claim is that people can be exploited by the marketing campaigns that enable them to feel like they're part of something larger than themselves. That's the secret behind the rise of "mega churches" and organizations like MoveOn.org. People are looking for a sense of community, especially white middle-class Americans who have relocated to the exurbs, having uprooted themselves from their friends and families in the process. Give them the opportunity to feel as part of a group, and they'll become loyal customers, as Applebee's restaurant chain has discovered.
Other topics discussed include so-called "Gut Values" connections, the change in the American landscape that was brought about by 9/11, and a strategy called "Life Targeting:" tailoring your message in such a way as to make it compatible with peoples' lifestyles.
All of these observations are well and good, and it's difficult to find fault with any of them, since the examples they cite are, not surprisingly, chosen carefully to illustrate their point. Such is the way a contemporary business book gets written; it's a revision of the old case studies idea that was promoted in business classes back in the 1980s when I was in college. Will following the concepts presented in this book guarantee that your own marketing campaign will succeed? It seems to me that marketing depends on being able to deliver on what you promise as much as connecting with people in the first place, although that first connection is certainly important.
Is it possible to exploit social trends to make your message resonate? Can a politician really tailor his message to comfort us and make us feel like they're going to take care of our needs? It certainly seems possible, and this book gives you a pretty good idea of the direction you need to go in to do so. To me, this seems almost a bit frightening: are we really little more than sheep, waiting to be led by somebody who seems at least credible on the surface?
My recommendation is to read this book if this last question interests you: the favorable advance praise for the book that was written by Hillary Clinton on the back of the dust jacket ought to give you pause.
*****
Applebee's America: ISBN 0-7432-8718-5, Simon and Schuster, 2006. Hardcover, 260 pages including appendices and index. $26.00
The authors explain that people have gradually come to distrust the media, and instead rely upon local "experts" that they term "Navigators". Navigators are personal friends or colleagues who have developed some expertise in key subject areas. For example, the authors describe a fellow living in suburban Chicago who is often sought after for advice by people contemplating a new computer purchase. Their claim? People who know this guy won't buy a computer unless he signs off on it. The authors go on to say that these "Navigators" are among all of us, and successful marketing campaigns identify who they are and target their message towards them. The trickle-down effect takes care of the rest.
There are several other tactics that get substantial coverage in the book. The claim is that people can be exploited by the marketing campaigns that enable them to feel like they're part of something larger than themselves. That's the secret behind the rise of "mega churches" and organizations like MoveOn.org. People are looking for a sense of community, especially white middle-class Americans who have relocated to the exurbs, having uprooted themselves from their friends and families in the process. Give them the opportunity to feel as part of a group, and they'll become loyal customers, as Applebee's restaurant chain has discovered.
Other topics discussed include so-called "Gut Values" connections, the change in the American landscape that was brought about by 9/11, and a strategy called "Life Targeting:" tailoring your message in such a way as to make it compatible with peoples' lifestyles.
All of these observations are well and good, and it's difficult to find fault with any of them, since the examples they cite are, not surprisingly, chosen carefully to illustrate their point. Such is the way a contemporary business book gets written; it's a revision of the old case studies idea that was promoted in business classes back in the 1980s when I was in college. Will following the concepts presented in this book guarantee that your own marketing campaign will succeed? It seems to me that marketing depends on being able to deliver on what you promise as much as connecting with people in the first place, although that first connection is certainly important.
Is it possible to exploit social trends to make your message resonate? Can a politician really tailor his message to comfort us and make us feel like they're going to take care of our needs? It certainly seems possible, and this book gives you a pretty good idea of the direction you need to go in to do so. To me, this seems almost a bit frightening: are we really little more than sheep, waiting to be led by somebody who seems at least credible on the surface?
My recommendation is to read this book if this last question interests you: the favorable advance praise for the book that was written by Hillary Clinton on the back of the dust jacket ought to give you pause.
*****
Applebee's America: ISBN 0-7432-8718-5, Simon and Schuster, 2006. Hardcover, 260 pages including appendices and index. $26.00
11 April 2007
Book: Indefensible
In Indefensible, author David Feige recounts his activities as a pro-bono attorney working in the New York City court system.
The book is a work of non-fiction, yet it reads like a fictional piece. It is difficult to believe the apparent frequent miscarriages of justice that take place in the courtrooms: the lackadaisical prosecutors, the judges with agendas, the indigent accused are all embroiled in a dance whose ultimate goal seems to be the perpetuation of the system, rather than the arrival of justice. There are numerous cases, for example, of domestic disputes being dramatically overblown by the police and prosecutors, and the accused finding themselves incarcerated for weeks or months awaiting trial all the while their spouses are pleading for their release. There are the minor drug offenders locked up for months awaiting trial -- in many cases for longer than their sentences would have been had they simply plead guilty.
The book is entertaining yet frightening at the same time. Feige does an excellent job of describing the plight of the indigent when they fail to avoid prosecution for the most minor of offenses; one can see that the police and the courts in NYC have a good racket going. The message is clear: you don't want to become involved in the system if you can help it.
Excellent reading for those who still believe in the system of American justice.
The book is a work of non-fiction, yet it reads like a fictional piece. It is difficult to believe the apparent frequent miscarriages of justice that take place in the courtrooms: the lackadaisical prosecutors, the judges with agendas, the indigent accused are all embroiled in a dance whose ultimate goal seems to be the perpetuation of the system, rather than the arrival of justice. There are numerous cases, for example, of domestic disputes being dramatically overblown by the police and prosecutors, and the accused finding themselves incarcerated for weeks or months awaiting trial all the while their spouses are pleading for their release. There are the minor drug offenders locked up for months awaiting trial -- in many cases for longer than their sentences would have been had they simply plead guilty.
The book is entertaining yet frightening at the same time. Feige does an excellent job of describing the plight of the indigent when they fail to avoid prosecution for the most minor of offenses; one can see that the police and the courts in NYC have a good racket going. The message is clear: you don't want to become involved in the system if you can help it.
Excellent reading for those who still believe in the system of American justice.
22 February 2007
Book: Oil on the Brain
In Oil on the Brain, author Lisa Margonelli recounts her experiences between the years of 2003 to 2006, wherein she followed the path that oil takes to American consumers, working backward from the gas pump all the way to the oil fields in places like Nigeria, Iran, and Venezuela.
This is a remarkable book; it is the Blue Highways of our times. Ms. Margonelli literally sat in the gas station and learned of our purchasing habits, rode with the tanker truck driver that delivers the fuel, toured the refinery, and joined a drilling operation seeking natural gas in Texas. She travelled to the countries mentioned above as well as China, where she learned how the Chinese are adjusting to their new status as a mobile nation. As a descriptive work, it is simply marvelous. The writing is vivid, and there are many things to learn from what she has seen.
But.
Margonelli doesn't come right out and say so in the book (she does on her website), but she is a liberal Democrat, and consequently the latter half of the book gently bashes on the United States for its dependency on foreign oil. I got the impression that the second half of the book is, as much as it is a descriptive work, also an exhortation for Americans to change their ways.
Your reaction to this subtle change in the direction of the book will probably vary according to your personal politics and world view. Is she being sneaky in her attempt to persuade you that you bear part of the responsibility for the conditions in Nigeria by your choice of an S.U.V. instead of a Prius? Does the world need yet another book telling the United States that it lives too large, pollutes too much, and pisses off the rest of the world?
To be honest, I was mildly disappointed by this turn of events. Frankly, the descriptive part of the book was just too damn good to destroy it with subjective politics, and I wish Margonelli had managed to restrain herself and let the reader come to his own conclusions. Nowhere else in one place will you find a description of how a gas station makes its profit alongside the story of the people who bring the oil to you. Why on Earth would Margonelli choose to do this to her book?
One of the other things I found disturbing was the fact that Canada — America's single largest supplier of crude — is mentioned nowhere in the book. Even though Canada's exports to the United States are featured prominently on Margonelli's website, it doesn't even rate a mention in the book. One has to wonder why this is the case. Could it be because Canada's good relationship with the United States does little to augment Margonelli's argument that our usage of imported oil causes America more problems than it's worth? If the book didn't have a political slant, I might never have thought to question this. Under the circumstances, however, questions like this seem fair to me.
Whatever her motivations, you cannot discount the powerful descriptive work she has done in explaining how the gas gets to the pump. It's something we all take very much for granted, and something we all should know more about. On the balance, I have to recommend the book because you aren't going to get this information anywhere else, and it is truly well done. Caveat emptor, however, the book is not without a political side.
Oil on the Brain by Lisa Margonelli, ISBN 978-0-385-51145-2, Doubleday, 310 pages excluding index, hardcover, $26.00 list.
This is a remarkable book; it is the Blue Highways of our times. Ms. Margonelli literally sat in the gas station and learned of our purchasing habits, rode with the tanker truck driver that delivers the fuel, toured the refinery, and joined a drilling operation seeking natural gas in Texas. She travelled to the countries mentioned above as well as China, where she learned how the Chinese are adjusting to their new status as a mobile nation. As a descriptive work, it is simply marvelous. The writing is vivid, and there are many things to learn from what she has seen.
But.
Margonelli doesn't come right out and say so in the book (she does on her website), but she is a liberal Democrat, and consequently the latter half of the book gently bashes on the United States for its dependency on foreign oil. I got the impression that the second half of the book is, as much as it is a descriptive work, also an exhortation for Americans to change their ways.
Your reaction to this subtle change in the direction of the book will probably vary according to your personal politics and world view. Is she being sneaky in her attempt to persuade you that you bear part of the responsibility for the conditions in Nigeria by your choice of an S.U.V. instead of a Prius? Does the world need yet another book telling the United States that it lives too large, pollutes too much, and pisses off the rest of the world?
To be honest, I was mildly disappointed by this turn of events. Frankly, the descriptive part of the book was just too damn good to destroy it with subjective politics, and I wish Margonelli had managed to restrain herself and let the reader come to his own conclusions. Nowhere else in one place will you find a description of how a gas station makes its profit alongside the story of the people who bring the oil to you. Why on Earth would Margonelli choose to do this to her book?
One of the other things I found disturbing was the fact that Canada — America's single largest supplier of crude — is mentioned nowhere in the book. Even though Canada's exports to the United States are featured prominently on Margonelli's website, it doesn't even rate a mention in the book. One has to wonder why this is the case. Could it be because Canada's good relationship with the United States does little to augment Margonelli's argument that our usage of imported oil causes America more problems than it's worth? If the book didn't have a political slant, I might never have thought to question this. Under the circumstances, however, questions like this seem fair to me.
Whatever her motivations, you cannot discount the powerful descriptive work she has done in explaining how the gas gets to the pump. It's something we all take very much for granted, and something we all should know more about. On the balance, I have to recommend the book because you aren't going to get this information anywhere else, and it is truly well done. Caveat emptor, however, the book is not without a political side.
Oil on the Brain by Lisa Margonelli, ISBN 978-0-385-51145-2, Doubleday, 310 pages excluding index, hardcover, $26.00 list.
16 January 2007
Book: America Alone
In America Alone - The End of the World As We Know It, author and political commentator Mark Steyn details the creeping death of western civilization by demographics: Europe will, in the space of two generations, almost surely become Eurabia as the Anglo birthrate falls well below the replacement rate and the Muslim birthrate exceeds it by a factor of two.
Steyn's argument is essentially that western Anglo Judeo-Christian women, long coddled by the socialist state and turned self-indulgent by the decline of Christianity in favor of atheism, have for various reasons lost interest in reproduction on the scale seen early in the twentieth century. On average, Steyn explains, the average European woman delays motherhood until her late thirties, and then opts to only have one so-called "designer" baby, resulting in a Anglo birthrate somewhere in the neighborhood of 1.2 children per female. Since the replacement rate is 2.1 children per female, Anglo populations will surely decline. Muslims, on the other hand, are showing birthrates in the neighborhood of 4-5 children per female, meaning that their population is burgeoning. What is the expected outcome? The collapse of the European Union and Japan due to Muslim indifference, the end of the socialist democracies, and the almost inevitable move towards Islamic supremacy and Sharia.
Interestingly, the United States' Anglo Judeo-Christian birthrate is right at the replacement rate of 2.1 children per female. This fact, combined with the Christian immigration from Mexico, is in Steyn's analysis American democracy's saving grace. Steyn warns ominously that European-style atheism is establishing a foothold here in the United States, thus endangering our culture and political system as well, however the timing is such that the Muslim birthrate will likely begin to drop before the worst of the potential effects can become a possibility here in the U.S.
Much has been made in recent times about how the Muslims are poised to come into prominence in the second half of the 21st Century. Unabashedly anti-Islamic, Steyn's book fills in the rest of the picture: the world will become Muslim dominated with the notable exception of the United States within the span of the next 50 years. Long before 50 years goes by, however, the changes on the maps will become blatantly obvious. Major effects are expected within the next 10-15 years. Japan will be the first to experience dramatic effects as their society has aged tremendously in the past 50 years. The French and Germans have almost uncontainable problems with Muslim youths even today. Steyn predicts bloody revolutions and perhaps even genocide as last-ditch attempts are made to reverse the effects of the demographic change.
The question one has to ask oneself of such a doomsday piece is, can this really be believed? Is it possible that all of the factors Mr. Steyn assumes will be in play will actually come to be? Is European atheism the society's downfall? Could we lose the Italians, the Dutch, the French, the British, the Canadians and the Japanese as distinct ethnic groups? Will the world enter a new dark ages as it comes within the grasp of Islamic law? Will scientific progress stop? Will America truly be alone in the world as the last outpost of freedom and democracy?
Having only read one book on the subject, I cannot really judge Steyn's argument objectively. What I can say is that the writing is convincing, the demographic facts appear to be well-researched, and the potential outcome is a nightmare scenario. Even though the Y2K-doomsday predictors ultimately turned out to be wrong, the response they engendered was a necessary one in the final analysis. Could this be a similar case? Unfortunately, only time will tell. Recommended reading.
America Alone by Mark Steyn, ISBN 0-89526-078-6, Regnery Books, 214 pages excluding index, hardcover, $27.95
Steyn's argument is essentially that western Anglo Judeo-Christian women, long coddled by the socialist state and turned self-indulgent by the decline of Christianity in favor of atheism, have for various reasons lost interest in reproduction on the scale seen early in the twentieth century. On average, Steyn explains, the average European woman delays motherhood until her late thirties, and then opts to only have one so-called "designer" baby, resulting in a Anglo birthrate somewhere in the neighborhood of 1.2 children per female. Since the replacement rate is 2.1 children per female, Anglo populations will surely decline. Muslims, on the other hand, are showing birthrates in the neighborhood of 4-5 children per female, meaning that their population is burgeoning. What is the expected outcome? The collapse of the European Union and Japan due to Muslim indifference, the end of the socialist democracies, and the almost inevitable move towards Islamic supremacy and Sharia.
Interestingly, the United States' Anglo Judeo-Christian birthrate is right at the replacement rate of 2.1 children per female. This fact, combined with the Christian immigration from Mexico, is in Steyn's analysis American democracy's saving grace. Steyn warns ominously that European-style atheism is establishing a foothold here in the United States, thus endangering our culture and political system as well, however the timing is such that the Muslim birthrate will likely begin to drop before the worst of the potential effects can become a possibility here in the U.S.
Much has been made in recent times about how the Muslims are poised to come into prominence in the second half of the 21st Century. Unabashedly anti-Islamic, Steyn's book fills in the rest of the picture: the world will become Muslim dominated with the notable exception of the United States within the span of the next 50 years. Long before 50 years goes by, however, the changes on the maps will become blatantly obvious. Major effects are expected within the next 10-15 years. Japan will be the first to experience dramatic effects as their society has aged tremendously in the past 50 years. The French and Germans have almost uncontainable problems with Muslim youths even today. Steyn predicts bloody revolutions and perhaps even genocide as last-ditch attempts are made to reverse the effects of the demographic change.
The question one has to ask oneself of such a doomsday piece is, can this really be believed? Is it possible that all of the factors Mr. Steyn assumes will be in play will actually come to be? Is European atheism the society's downfall? Could we lose the Italians, the Dutch, the French, the British, the Canadians and the Japanese as distinct ethnic groups? Will the world enter a new dark ages as it comes within the grasp of Islamic law? Will scientific progress stop? Will America truly be alone in the world as the last outpost of freedom and democracy?
Having only read one book on the subject, I cannot really judge Steyn's argument objectively. What I can say is that the writing is convincing, the demographic facts appear to be well-researched, and the potential outcome is a nightmare scenario. Even though the Y2K-doomsday predictors ultimately turned out to be wrong, the response they engendered was a necessary one in the final analysis. Could this be a similar case? Unfortunately, only time will tell. Recommended reading.
America Alone by Mark Steyn, ISBN 0-89526-078-6, Regnery Books, 214 pages excluding index, hardcover, $27.95
Book: Unto the Breach
In Unto The Breach, author John Ringo brings us another installment in the tale of Mike Harmon, ex-Navy Seal, Georgian Warlord, harem-keeper, multimillionaire, anti-Islamist, and all-around troubled good guy. This time, Mike's been asked by the President of the United States to clean up a little matter involving a kidnapped Russian micro-biologist and a stolen strain of pathogen so virulent that the President has authorized the use of nuclear weapons to destroy it should Mike fail to retrieve it.
Ringo breaks little new ground in this book, however the story of the Keldara remains as entertaining as it did starting back in book two. Casualties pile up in this episode, the ongoing sexual escapades continue (although they've been muted down to a very quiet dull roar compared to book number one) and the reader is entertained by the military hardware Mike continues to acquire. Two new characters are introduced in the persons of ex-military female helicopter pilots, and Mike suffers a personal tragedy that bodes ill for the Rite of the Kardane. Can the next book be very far behind? I'll be pre-ordering on Amazon yet again.
Unto the Breach by John Ringo: ISBN 1-4165-0940-2, Baen Books, hardcover, 610 pages, $26.00
Ringo breaks little new ground in this book, however the story of the Keldara remains as entertaining as it did starting back in book two. Casualties pile up in this episode, the ongoing sexual escapades continue (although they've been muted down to a very quiet dull roar compared to book number one) and the reader is entertained by the military hardware Mike continues to acquire. Two new characters are introduced in the persons of ex-military female helicopter pilots, and Mike suffers a personal tragedy that bodes ill for the Rite of the Kardane. Can the next book be very far behind? I'll be pre-ordering on Amazon yet again.
Unto the Breach by John Ringo: ISBN 1-4165-0940-2, Baen Books, hardcover, 610 pages, $26.00
25 November 2006
Book: Rewriting History
Note: I've probably read half a dozen books in the past month and a half, and the "homework" aspect -- writing about my impressions -- has been weighing me down. It turns out I'd rather read for enjoyment than to have something to "turn in" every time. Sorry about that; I will attempt to pick back up where I left off. A couple of books, however, are going to go unremarked upon....but this one certainly merits discussion.
***
In Rewriting History, author Dick Morris argues that Hillary Clinton is really a different person from "Hillary, the brand". Morris draws upon his years of experience in working with the Clintons, starting from Bill's run for governor in Arkansas to describe Hillary's transformation from the ambitious, activist governor's wife to the Senator Clinton of today.
If one were to draw an inference from what Morris has to say, it would be that Hillary Clinton is a disingenuous, power and wealth hungry woman who has a decent shot at becoming the President of the United States in 2008. He details such things as her susceptibility to influence by "gurus", her failed attempts as first lady to influence the course of the nation's politics, her abject greed in courting gifts from wealthy supporters of Bill Clinton, and her continual attempts to remake her public image in such a way as to display herself in the best possible light.
To be frank, this sort of writing comes with an enormous responsibility on the part of the reader to judge what is said critically. Morris describes the point at which his attitude towards the Clinton family changed for the worse, and obviously this book is the product of that failed relationship. He, unfortunately, calls his own credibility into question when he admits that he has told a different version of the same events in earlier books; one wonders why we're supposed to believe him now? On the other hand, much of what is said is independently verifiable, and meshes well with the general impression I've had of Hillary since the early 1990s. Is it really fair of me to expect the unvarnished truth from such a "tell-all" book? I'm not sure it is. However, I think it bears mention that about 20% of the book seems like hyperbole to me. Perhaps Morris is guilty of trying to overstate his case.
What is interesting, however, is the length Morris goes to in challenging the assertions that Hillary has made in her own books. Some of the "facts" directly contradict what she's saying, and given the accusation made against her -- that she's a bold-faced liar, given to misrepresentations in the name of supporting her "brand" -- the contrast is eye-opening to say the least. If Hillary were not a public figure, this book would almost certainly result in a lawsuit for defamation of character. Given that she's a politician with clear aims toward the Oval Office, she becomes fair game. The question I have is whether or not Morris' writings will change the opinion anyone has of her, especially when you consider that it was published in 2004, before the most recent presidential election. Will it still be part of the public discourse in 2008? Only time will tell.
The book is sometimes gentle with Hillary, sometimes harsh. I think at times Morris was trying to play the part of the iron fist in the velvet glove in his treatment of his subject. Make no mistake, however, the net effect is strongly negative and anti-Hillary.
As far as my impression of the read: this was not a 'fun' book to read -- it was more like work. I read it because I was made aware of it inadvertently, and it seemed like an important piece of work that would help me understand one of the most potent political figures of these times. I would not recommend it for enjoyment reading, but I still encourage you to pick it up and think carefully about what it says. It seems worthwhile, given the current political climate.
Rewriting History: ISBN 0-06-073668-2, Regan Books, hardcover, 303 pages (including index and citations) $24.95
***
In Rewriting History, author Dick Morris argues that Hillary Clinton is really a different person from "Hillary, the brand". Morris draws upon his years of experience in working with the Clintons, starting from Bill's run for governor in Arkansas to describe Hillary's transformation from the ambitious, activist governor's wife to the Senator Clinton of today.
If one were to draw an inference from what Morris has to say, it would be that Hillary Clinton is a disingenuous, power and wealth hungry woman who has a decent shot at becoming the President of the United States in 2008. He details such things as her susceptibility to influence by "gurus", her failed attempts as first lady to influence the course of the nation's politics, her abject greed in courting gifts from wealthy supporters of Bill Clinton, and her continual attempts to remake her public image in such a way as to display herself in the best possible light.
To be frank, this sort of writing comes with an enormous responsibility on the part of the reader to judge what is said critically. Morris describes the point at which his attitude towards the Clinton family changed for the worse, and obviously this book is the product of that failed relationship. He, unfortunately, calls his own credibility into question when he admits that he has told a different version of the same events in earlier books; one wonders why we're supposed to believe him now? On the other hand, much of what is said is independently verifiable, and meshes well with the general impression I've had of Hillary since the early 1990s. Is it really fair of me to expect the unvarnished truth from such a "tell-all" book? I'm not sure it is. However, I think it bears mention that about 20% of the book seems like hyperbole to me. Perhaps Morris is guilty of trying to overstate his case.
What is interesting, however, is the length Morris goes to in challenging the assertions that Hillary has made in her own books. Some of the "facts" directly contradict what she's saying, and given the accusation made against her -- that she's a bold-faced liar, given to misrepresentations in the name of supporting her "brand" -- the contrast is eye-opening to say the least. If Hillary were not a public figure, this book would almost certainly result in a lawsuit for defamation of character. Given that she's a politician with clear aims toward the Oval Office, she becomes fair game. The question I have is whether or not Morris' writings will change the opinion anyone has of her, especially when you consider that it was published in 2004, before the most recent presidential election. Will it still be part of the public discourse in 2008? Only time will tell.
The book is sometimes gentle with Hillary, sometimes harsh. I think at times Morris was trying to play the part of the iron fist in the velvet glove in his treatment of his subject. Make no mistake, however, the net effect is strongly negative and anti-Hillary.
As far as my impression of the read: this was not a 'fun' book to read -- it was more like work. I read it because I was made aware of it inadvertently, and it seemed like an important piece of work that would help me understand one of the most potent political figures of these times. I would not recommend it for enjoyment reading, but I still encourage you to pick it up and think carefully about what it says. It seems worthwhile, given the current political climate.
Rewriting History: ISBN 0-06-073668-2, Regan Books, hardcover, 303 pages (including index and citations) $24.95
08 November 2006
A lesson in respect during these Democrat-led times
Since the party of Conservatism has just been handed its collective ass at the polls, it's time to review your own conduct in order to better fall in line with the rest of the thinking in America. Here are a few helpful suggestions to help you show the proper respect to the powers that be.
I hope this clears up for you the matter of how the majority of your fellow citizens feel you should be living. Take these lessons to heart; we're likely to be led by Democrats for the next decade at least.
- Respect the mainstream media. They have proven they still are responsible for framing the debate in America over important issues such as the war in Iraq, economic performance, and immigration. When they lie to us or cheat by manufacturing documents, it is for the betterment of all, and we should accept this as the benevolent action it is. After all, they only want what's good for us, and to end the suffering that war brings. Treating CBS with disdain is no longer politik, comrade.
- Respect our immigrants. After all, they are coming here to pursue the American dream, not to take our jobs or threaten us with potential acts of terror. If they come here illegally, remember that we all violate laws every day for minor things, like speeding and reporting our income to the IRS. You have to remember they're only human, so they might need a hand up once they get here. We should be magnanimous and be willing to extend that hand. Oh, and everyone needs to learn to speak Spanish while they're at it; learning a second language is good for you!
- Respect socialism. Most modern industrialized nations have adopted socialism to take care of the needs of their people. For example, it is far better that everyone have free, unfettered access to health care than wastefully using our resources to advance medical research, especially when the research that's desired conflicts with the morals of a large percentage of the populace. It's time for America to catch up with nations like Germany and Sweden, and become a really great place to live, even if you don't have a large income or want to work. Obviously a majority of your fellow citizens already feel this way, witness the election results. Don't fight it; you can't win anyway.
- Respect diversity. Diversity is good. Diversity is an end in itself. Diversity will soothe your conscience over past wrongs dealt to Native Americans, Blacks, Orientals, Mexicans, Muslims and even Canadians promulgated by America's evil white founders. Trumpet the cause of diversity whenever possible and watch as we reap the benefits as a society. Remember, diversity is good. Just don't ask us why, because questioning diversity would mean you are a racist.
- Respect Islam. Christianity has been the dominant force in America's religious makeup for many centuries, but we have to remember there are alternative viewpoints, even if they seem somewhat incompatible with our own and some elements of those other viewpoints are best expressed with violence. It is time for Christianity to step aside and make up for the wrongs it perpetrated on other faiths during the Crusades. We have to remember that Jihadists are just responding to the hopelessness of the economic conditions in the Middle East, caused largely by American Imperialism. We need to let them have their say. Venting is good for the soul.
- Respect the United Nations. They have the best shot at achieving consensus among world leaders such as Vladimir Putin, Kim Jong Il, Bashar Al-Assad and Hillary Clinton. What could be better for the world than the democratic process of the U.N. and U.N. peacekeeper troops sent to world trouble spots? Surely we cannot expect the United States to act as the world's police force without having the blessing of the United Nations to legitimize it. It is far more important that there first be consensus rather than rash acts taken by the world's most powerful nation in its own interest. And if it seems to be taking a long time to reach that consensus, remember that all viewpoints must carefully be considered and given equal weight, regardless of who is espousing them.
- Respect the goals and agendas of America's educators. The best people to set the political agenda in America are the learned folks in places such as the University of Michigan or the California university system. Pay special attention to the east-coast Ivy-league schools such as Harvard. Remember that if you were as smart as these people were, you'd be signing your name with a doctoral prefix. Leave the thinking to these people; they've conclusively proven to themselves that they're the best at it.
- Respect the environment. It's time to realize that the best way to go forward is to give something back to Mother Earth. Let us not risk the life of another sea creature by drilling for oil in places where we haven't already. Remember, oil drilling leads to the burning of fossil fuels, which is the single largest man-made contribution to climate change on Earth, perhaps even a measurable fraction of other forces like variance in the sun's output and global weather cycles that have existed for millions of years.
- Respect Hollywood. The men and women who entertain us on television each night have a unique perspective on the problems we face as a nation, and they are among the few of us who are wealthy enough and conscientious enough to bring matters such as stem cell research to light. We should encourage them to testify before Congress more frequently; after all, it is experts like Susan Sarandon who are best qualified to explain to our legislators why the situation in the Middle East is so grave and deserves our dollars, rather than our bullets. Remember, if violence worked to resolve problems, then Israel would be at peace today.
- Respect yourself. Remember, it is not what you can give to the country, rather it is what you can do to make sure that the wealthy give to the country. You are just a working person putting your time in on the job, you should be able to come home after a hard day and relax. Have respect for your own need for downtime, and don't stress yourself out worrying about global issues out of your control. Why concern yourself when it is so clear that the real experts are now in charge? Just sit back, relax and have a Budweiser, my friend, while our elected leaders in Congress work hard to make America the working class mecca it should be, and punish those who would profit unfairly by your efforts.
I hope this clears up for you the matter of how the majority of your fellow citizens feel you should be living. Take these lessons to heart; we're likely to be led by Democrats for the next decade at least.
02 November 2006
Book: The Darkest Place
In The Darkest Place, author Daniel Judson tells the story of a writer-turned-college professor who finds himself tangled in web of mysterious murders, an attractive prostitute, another lover who is a married woman, and a couple of private investigators who try to save him from himself. The story is set on eastern Long Island, in the seedy part of the Hamptons, during a record cold snap where the temperature hardly ever exceeds 0F.
This story was extremely well constructed. Judson has layered all of the elements together in such a way as to make the story extremely compelling, yet he manages to do so without revealing the true source of the protagonist's troubles until the last pages of the book. This is a book that deserves to become a movie. I could see the setting very clearly in my mind's eye; the descriptive prose was very powerful and crystal clear. The private investigators in the story are characters developed well enough that they deserve a book of their own; somehow they're like famous actors playing in a minor movie role: they're capable of much more than they do here.
If the crime fiction genre appeals to you, this is one of the best I've seen.
The Darkest Place: ISBN 0-312-35253-0, St. Martin's Minotaur, hardcover, 310 pages, $23.95
This story was extremely well constructed. Judson has layered all of the elements together in such a way as to make the story extremely compelling, yet he manages to do so without revealing the true source of the protagonist's troubles until the last pages of the book. This is a book that deserves to become a movie. I could see the setting very clearly in my mind's eye; the descriptive prose was very powerful and crystal clear. The private investigators in the story are characters developed well enough that they deserve a book of their own; somehow they're like famous actors playing in a minor movie role: they're capable of much more than they do here.
If the crime fiction genre appeals to you, this is one of the best I've seen.
The Darkest Place: ISBN 0-312-35253-0, St. Martin's Minotaur, hardcover, 310 pages, $23.95
01 November 2006
Hubble will be spared after all
According to the latest news, the Hubble Space Telescope will get a necessary repair mission to extend its life beyond 2008.
Originally, the Space Shuttle was deemed too dangerous after the second accident in 2003, and NASA determined that outside of its primary mission of completing the build of the International Space Station, it would sit idle, despite the fact that Hubble was going to have to be decommissioned.
Now, after an apparently extensive review, the most important space observatory in history will be preserved.
This is an important thing for humanity, and I believe it will go far to enhance our understanding of the Universe in which we find ourselves. Although I sometimes struggle with the use of taxpayer dollars to support the space program, the fact of the matter is that private enterprise is not yet ready to take the baton from Uncle Sam. Rather than lose Hubble, we're going to get 18 or 19 more years out of it, by which time hopefully it will be replaced with something (or several things) even better.
Good news on the space front, if you ask me!
Originally, the Space Shuttle was deemed too dangerous after the second accident in 2003, and NASA determined that outside of its primary mission of completing the build of the International Space Station, it would sit idle, despite the fact that Hubble was going to have to be decommissioned.
Now, after an apparently extensive review, the most important space observatory in history will be preserved.
This is an important thing for humanity, and I believe it will go far to enhance our understanding of the Universe in which we find ourselves. Although I sometimes struggle with the use of taxpayer dollars to support the space program, the fact of the matter is that private enterprise is not yet ready to take the baton from Uncle Sam. Rather than lose Hubble, we're going to get 18 or 19 more years out of it, by which time hopefully it will be replaced with something (or several things) even better.
Good news on the space front, if you ask me!
30 October 2006
Fixing up an old watch
I like watches, and the type I typically go for are the relatively inexpensive, "high-feature" type. I've got a Casio Wave Ceptor as my main wristwatch right now; I've had Timexes with the built-in electronic compass, and a host of other ones.
Trouble is, the plastic crystals don't hold up well to my wrenching lifestyle. I'm always forgetting to take the watch off, then squeezing my arm into some tight spot in the car, and invariably I scratch the bejeezus out of the crystal. After a year or so, the watch looks like it was attacked by a herd of tiny cats.
Of course, these are inexpensive (<$100) watches, so my remedy in the past has been to get a new one once they start looking crummy. But I really really LIKE my Wave Ceptor, and so I started wondering if I might be able to fix it up somehow. It was very scratched up, and getting hard to read.
Well, I've come up with the answer: sand the crystal. I started out with 3M Wet-Or-Dry 600 grit sandpaper to take down all the scratches. After a little sanding under a steady stream of cold water, I then moved up (down?) to 3M Wet-Or-Dry 800 grit. I polished some more like that, and then finally hit it with 3M Wet-Or-Dry 1200 grit. This will bring you close to the final finish you're looking for. Remember to keep the stream of water flowing across the crystal while you sand, and use an orbital sanding motion -- try to keep the pattern as random as possible.
Finally, finish it up with a jeweler's rouge cloth. Use the red (rouge) side first, then polish it up with the yellow side.
I tried it on an old watch first to see what would happen, then took the plunge and polished up the Wave Ceptor. It worked great! It remains to be seen if I've taken off any layer(s) of anti-scratch coating -- it might scratch right back up even more quickly -- but for now, the crystal looks almost as good as a new watch's.
Trouble is, the plastic crystals don't hold up well to my wrenching lifestyle. I'm always forgetting to take the watch off, then squeezing my arm into some tight spot in the car, and invariably I scratch the bejeezus out of the crystal. After a year or so, the watch looks like it was attacked by a herd of tiny cats.
Of course, these are inexpensive (<$100) watches, so my remedy in the past has been to get a new one once they start looking crummy. But I really really LIKE my Wave Ceptor, and so I started wondering if I might be able to fix it up somehow. It was very scratched up, and getting hard to read.
Well, I've come up with the answer: sand the crystal. I started out with 3M Wet-Or-Dry 600 grit sandpaper to take down all the scratches. After a little sanding under a steady stream of cold water, I then moved up (down?) to 3M Wet-Or-Dry 800 grit. I polished some more like that, and then finally hit it with 3M Wet-Or-Dry 1200 grit. This will bring you close to the final finish you're looking for. Remember to keep the stream of water flowing across the crystal while you sand, and use an orbital sanding motion -- try to keep the pattern as random as possible.
Finally, finish it up with a jeweler's rouge cloth. Use the red (rouge) side first, then polish it up with the yellow side.
I tried it on an old watch first to see what would happen, then took the plunge and polished up the Wave Ceptor. It worked great! It remains to be seen if I've taken off any layer(s) of anti-scratch coating -- it might scratch right back up even more quickly -- but for now, the crystal looks almost as good as a new watch's.
24 October 2006
The Space Elevator Concept
A couple of years ago I recall reading in Popular Mechanics about a proposed new means of getting stuff into orbit: the Space Elevator. Essentially, the space elevator would consist of a semi-permanent Earth-based ground station, a satellite in "beyond-geosynchronous" orbit, and a cable of some kind running between the two. The orbital velocity of the satellite would exert a force through the cable to the ground station, keeping the cable taut. Then devices called 'climbers' would use electric motors to run a payload out into space! Cool, huh?
Well, it turns out that this has gone from being just a gee-whiz idea in a magazine (actually, the concept dates back to the 1960s) to being a project sponsored in part by NASA called Project 2010. Project 2010's aim is to use carbon nanotube technology as the basis for an engineering project that will solve all of the major remaining tech problems of such an elevator by 2010. The hope is to have a working elevator by 2020, a mere 14 years from now.
Putting people and stuff on top of a rocket and blasting them into space is an enormously expensive, dangerous proposition. The design of the elevator would give it the capability to put one payload per day into geosynchronous orbit at a far lower cost than the equivalent rocket launch (about $100/pound). The thinking is that the elevator can be designed and built for $10 billion, also a relative bargain. The question is, can we overcome the enormous inertia the current space industry has in the direction of rocketry?
I think this is a question that has pretty well answered itself with the loss of two Space Shuttles. We always knew that people were going to die in the quest to explore the cosmos. I don't think we were prepared to accept the fact that this would be because of faulty equipment. Although I'm sure a lot can be done to improve the safety of launch vehicles, I suspect the paradigm of using rocket power is inherently flawed and fraught with the potential for disaster.
Hopefully, the Space Elevator, or a concept like it, will enhance the safety of space travel, while making it less expensive.
Well, it turns out that this has gone from being just a gee-whiz idea in a magazine (actually, the concept dates back to the 1960s) to being a project sponsored in part by NASA called Project 2010. Project 2010's aim is to use carbon nanotube technology as the basis for an engineering project that will solve all of the major remaining tech problems of such an elevator by 2010. The hope is to have a working elevator by 2020, a mere 14 years from now.
Putting people and stuff on top of a rocket and blasting them into space is an enormously expensive, dangerous proposition. The design of the elevator would give it the capability to put one payload per day into geosynchronous orbit at a far lower cost than the equivalent rocket launch (about $100/pound). The thinking is that the elevator can be designed and built for $10 billion, also a relative bargain. The question is, can we overcome the enormous inertia the current space industry has in the direction of rocketry?
I think this is a question that has pretty well answered itself with the loss of two Space Shuttles. We always knew that people were going to die in the quest to explore the cosmos. I don't think we were prepared to accept the fact that this would be because of faulty equipment. Although I'm sure a lot can be done to improve the safety of launch vehicles, I suspect the paradigm of using rocket power is inherently flawed and fraught with the potential for disaster.
Hopefully, the Space Elevator, or a concept like it, will enhance the safety of space travel, while making it less expensive.
21 October 2006
Movie: The Departed
In The Departed, Jack Nicholson, Leonardo DiCaprio and Matt Damon star in a crime thriller set in modern-day Boston. Nicholson plays an Irish mafia don running drugs and a series of seedy businesses. DiCaprio is the undercover cop who has infiltrated his organization and is working with the Massachusetts State Police to bring him down. Damon plays DiCaprio's counterpart: one of Nicholson's operatives within the State Police who helps to keep him out of the reach of the law. Things get rough when the cops and the crooks both realize they've been infiltrated, and the main action in the film centers around the effort to find each respective mole.
It's been quite some time indeed since I've seen a movie as gripping as this one. The relative dearth of good product coming out of Hollywood has left local video rental store owners here prominently featuring TV series DVDs instead of feature-length films. This one on the other hand is a winner, a movie we'll all be watching on late-night television 20 years from now.
Nicholson is his usual brilliant self; he portrays criminals probably as well as any actor that has come before him, and he makes guys like me wonder if there really are people that evil in the world.
The surprise for me was DiCaprio's performance. The only work I've seen him in previously was Titanic, where he played an engaging character, however not necessarily masterfully so. In this film he has clearly moved his performance up to the next level, and the direct side-by-side comparison of his performance with Damon's is interesting. Somehow he manages to make Damon's performance seem fairly one-dimensional -- which is not to say that Damon is incompetent. I think I'd like to see these two guys working together more often -- perhaps this is the Generation X equivalent of Lemmon/Matthau.
In short: if you're looking for a violent gangster film, this one's your ticket to ride for a two-and-a-half hour adventure that will have you talking about it the next day. Worthwhile, amid a sea of dreck.
It's been quite some time indeed since I've seen a movie as gripping as this one. The relative dearth of good product coming out of Hollywood has left local video rental store owners here prominently featuring TV series DVDs instead of feature-length films. This one on the other hand is a winner, a movie we'll all be watching on late-night television 20 years from now.
Nicholson is his usual brilliant self; he portrays criminals probably as well as any actor that has come before him, and he makes guys like me wonder if there really are people that evil in the world.
The surprise for me was DiCaprio's performance. The only work I've seen him in previously was Titanic, where he played an engaging character, however not necessarily masterfully so. In this film he has clearly moved his performance up to the next level, and the direct side-by-side comparison of his performance with Damon's is interesting. Somehow he manages to make Damon's performance seem fairly one-dimensional -- which is not to say that Damon is incompetent. I think I'd like to see these two guys working together more often -- perhaps this is the Generation X equivalent of Lemmon/Matthau.
In short: if you're looking for a violent gangster film, this one's your ticket to ride for a two-and-a-half hour adventure that will have you talking about it the next day. Worthwhile, amid a sea of dreck.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
