Obvious Study Report: Many People Living in Risky Coastal Regions

A study released today from the International Institute for Environment and Development in London finds that 10% of the world's population live in coastal regions that are at high risk of rising seas and storms caused by global warming, or let's just say weather. You can read a summary of the report at EarthTimes.org.

But you shouldn't need some study to state these facts. This is more like a ten minute exercise in deduction and mathematics. I'll demonstrate:

Eighty percent of the earth is made up of water, particularly oceans, while half of the world's population live in urban areas. Urban areas are often, if not usually, found on coastlines, because ports, which by definition are near the ocean, usually attract large populations. Weather, which causes storm surges, hurricanes, etc., generally has its most extreme conditions because of meteorological events that take place over an ocean. Thus, most of the disastrous meterological events that effect a human population, take place on coastal areas, and as such, those most at risk to come in contact with these storms are...take a guess...people living in large coastal cities, the percentage of which can be easily determined using a mathematical formula that compares inland versus coastal populations, and the sea level of those coastal populations.

To get the exact mathematical figures, I grant, should take at least a day for a single intelligent human being. It certainly does not require an institutional study. Besides which, none of this information goes toward solving the problem.

read more......

Obvious Study Report: Junk Food Ads Target Kids

I am starting a new column on my blog called the "Obvious Study Report," because it seems to me that almost everyday a new study, that no doubt cost at least thousands of dollars, is released that states some pretty obvious facts.

Today's study, from the Kaiser Family Foundation, shows that junk food ads target children and that nearly half of all ads airing during children's programs are for food, predominantly unhealthy food. Read a summary from the Monterey County Herald here.

As I see it, this column will frequently make use of this phrase: DUH! Of course junk food ads are targeted at children. What do you expect? That chocolate-candy and frozen-pizza-bagel advertisers are going to wait until 10pm when parents are watching to push their product? And then what, parents are going to say, "Oh, look at that delicious, completely unhealthy (and unnatural) product. I bet my kids will love that!" Of course not! They advertise to kids so that kids can push it on the parents, because they know kids are relentless in their consumer desires and parents are pushovers. It's like taking candy from a baby...actually, it's like giving candy to a baby, which, if you think about it, is much easier than taking it.

I'm just going to end this summary with a quote that was on my tea bag this morning (from an unknown individual): "Advertising may be described as the science of arresting the human intelligence long enough to get money from it." True dat!

read more......

[Media] Covering the Iranian Hostage Crisis

I think that everyone should watch the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer on PBS. It is the only source I really trust because Lehrer never utilizes suspect linguistics to deliver the facts. And all of the facts, he will deliver. That's why when I see coverage of British soldiers being detained by Iran on other stations, I keep thinking back to the early coverage about it on NewsHour.

What was so revealing about Lehrer's broadcast wasn't so much what he said, but what others weren't saying. Clearly, a great deal of the coverage regarding the crisis is about the Iranian's use of video footage that aired showing the hostages. NewsHour was not afraid to show this footage. And while, yes, it is a violation of the Geneva Convention for hostage takers to air video of prisoners, the video was very telling.

The video shows the only female soldier among the captured describing their situation. She said: "'Obviously, we trespassed into their waters,' Turney said in the tape, smoking a cigarette. 'They were very friendly and very hospitable, very thoughtful, nice people. They explained to us why we've been arrested, there was no harm, no aggression.'"

While I believe that Turney may have been compelled to say that they had "obviously trespassed," I do believe she was being sincere about their treatment. That is solely my judgment, but it is the video that gives me an outlet from which to form that judgement. What no other news source I've seen has said is that Turney describes their treatment as "friendly, hospitable and thoughtful." This is one fact that every other news source covering the story conveniently omits.

Why? I think it is because those news sources want us to see the Iranians as nothing more than monsters, and unfortunately for them, Turney's description humanizes them. Humanizing the enemy, for every journalist out there but Lehrer, is a complete taboo.

The fact is, they are not necessarily monsters. They are humans; humans who find themselves at war, same as we do. Is it possible that Turney made these statements under duress and coercion? Certainly. Do I think that video taping hostages is a cruel violation of the Geneva Convention? Absolutely. But seeing this video at least provided me with the understanding as to why the Iranians did it (if in fact they are being hospitable to the hostages). They wish to humanize themselves to the West, and that is an understandable desire.

Humanizing the enemy is not the same as giving them comfort or being sympathetic to their cause. Many in the public sphere (politicians, pundits, etc.) would like to conflate the ideas of humanizing someone and comforting them. They are very different (thus the two different words in our language). It is my belief that humanizing the enemy, in this day in age, in this war on terror(ism), is the only way to win. By humanizing the enemy you can at once begin to understand them and their motives. Demonizing them only serves to give us a blank check of comfort in our efforts, but it is a false comfort at that. We can no longer play the "they are the anti-thesis of us" game. If we are to achieve victory, it will be because we begin to see every gray area our current time has created. Anything less will only ensure complete failure, if not in the present then in the near future.

read more......

[Politics] Congressional Majority Changes Very Little in Washington

While the Democratic majority in Congress is certainly shifting debate and bringing about a new legislative focus, all of which this country desparately needed after six years with Republicans ruling Congress and the White House, it seems as though politics as usual in Washington is making so much of these changes completely moot. The Iraq spending bill working its way through the Senate this week, which provides $100 billion for the troops while also giving a September 2008 deadline for withdrawal from Iraq, is also laden with that old Washington additive: pork. CNN has a good report on this, though some may argue that it is a bit biased. So, for a completely opposing view you can read the The State's opinion (at least you know I'm being fair about it. Also, according to Pat Kiernan during NY1's "In the Papers" segment, the New York Times had an article this morning detailing the pork in the bill, but I can't find it on the Times website).

The problem is that if Demmocrats wish to bring about real change, that change cannot just be in the form of new bills, it must also aim right at the heart of the underhanded politics of Washington. As the CNN article briefly points out, in Washington, political allies will often vote as a group to support each other's state's pet projects in such emergency spending bills. It's a bit of quid pro quo that even an illiterate person with a U.S. Government textbook can point out. But it is exactly what the Democrats need to change if they want to be taken seriously (and traquilize the Republican attack dogs).

For years, the Democrats have been labeled as the cannibalizing party that defeats itself. For years that was an unfortunate fact, but right now, in Congress the Democrats have the power to stand up to politics as usual. Ironically, doing so will come from standing up to each other and eliminating extraneous spending that right-wing pundits can easily point to as the typical tax-and-spend trade of Democrats. What is so disturbing about this is that this bill represents the issue that is at the heart of why the Democrats were elected in the first place: mismanagement of the war in Iraq. And now, Republicans will easily point to the Democrat's bill as its own form of mismanagement.

This is stupid. If the Democrats want to be taken seriously on Iraq, they only have to do one thing: buck Washington politics and form a bill that deals with the one issue at hand, Iraq. I don't think it could be any more obvious that if you want to pass some riders and pork this is the one and only bill NOT to do that with. Will the folks in Washington ever learn?

read more......

Man-Animal War: Dog Saves Hostage (or Care) Taker

A Calvert, MD woman reported last Friday that her two-year-old Golden Retriever successfully performed the Heimlich maneuver on her after she got a piece of apple lodged in her throat. Read the All Headline News article here.

In the ongoing war between man and animal, this is clearly a tragic case of a POW displaying Stockholm Syndrome, the psychological condition whereby a hostage feels loyalty and even sympathy for the hostage taker. Unfortunately, it seems as though dogs are very susceptible to this condition.

After getting the piece of the forbidden fruit stuck in her throat, owner Debbie Parkhurst tried frantically to perform the Heimlich on herself unsuccessfully. The act caught the dog's attention, who then (and this is my favorite part) "pushed her to the ground and began jumping up and down on her chest." Given this fact, I won't immediately accuse the dog of giving aid to the enemy, because, for all I know, he was trying to kill her.

In any event, at least he got to knock her ass to the ground, even if ended up saving her life. If a two-year-old Golden Retriever can knock an adult woman over, then at least we know it is a fair fight.

read more......

[Sports] Reyes' Smile Is the Difference

Mets shortstop Jose Reyes is my favorite player in baseball today, certainly in part because I have always been one that is partial to speedy players (Ricky Henderson was my favorite growing up; Willy Mays my favorite of all time). But the real reason is something that a recent Village Voice article about Reyes completely missed.

All things considered, Allen Barra's article was a good description of Reye's ability and his placement on the team, in the present and the future, but the major theme of the article questions whether or not Reyes can live up to all that Met fans expect of him. When you talk about Jose Reyes, this is not an issue worth discussing. I think Met fans already get everything from Reyes they could truly want in a ball player: talent and fun.

It is easy to recognize Reyes' talents: from his speed to the power cloaked under his seemingly small frame. It is even easier to say how much potential he has and how much Met fans want to depend on that potential as time goes on. And it is still easier to say that Reye's numbers have not brought the team a World Series ring and have not given him the status of certain Hall-of-Fame material yet, and in doing so point out his weaknesses. But beyond all of that, what is so much more important, is how much fun Reyes has playing baseball.

Baseball, perhaps more than any other team sport, is fundamentally dependent upon the mind set of the individuals involved. Because of how divided the labor is in a baseball game, the autonomy of each individual player's attitude is at the crux of every victory, and, as such, pure talent enjoys no better company than pure enjoyment. That is what Jose Reyes offers the game and the fans. I challenge anyone to find a player in the game today that looks to be having more fun than Jose Reyes. The fact is, you won't.

His smile is infectious to fans and teamates, and, almost ironically, it is intimidating to opponents. He has been described on numerous occasions as "electric," and in one game at Shea Stadium that electricity is completely visible. I saw it all last year. When he did one of those signature handshakes with a teammate, the crowd would light up, half of the fans trying to do their own intimations. When he hit for the cycle, the crowd was overcome with joy, so easily so that it truly seemed as if everyone in the stadium felt like a ten-year-old at their first ball game again. I venture to say that few players in the history of the game can make their fans feel like they did when they were just zealous kids. Jose Reyes has that uncanny ability.

Sure, Met fans may come to expect a lot from Jose in the future. At only 23 years of age his potential is still bounded by nothing. But one thing I have learned from Mets fans is a deep passion for the game, even above a passion for their own team. From all we could expect from a player like Reyes, we have gotten something much better: a smile and the most simplest of American pleasures: baseball.

If Jose reads the Village Voice article, then I hope he follows it by reading this blog, because he should know that his visible love for the sport may be his greatest contribution to the game, and if nothing else, his success and potential to be a Hall of Famer is only dependent upon his continued enjoyment everyday he goes out there. As far as I can tell, there is no better fuel for maximizing athletic potential than pure enjoyment and nobody has it better than Jose.

read more......

[Civil Rights] Jesus Bong Hits Not Worth Fighting For

A case being argued in front of the Supreme Court this week is putting student rights back on the judicial front lines (and all over newspaper headlines) as Joseph Frederick of Juneau, Alaska is arguing his right to display a "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" sign across the street from his high school during a public parade in 2002. The principal of his high school, Deborah Morse, confiscated the banner and suspended Frederick sparking the suit that has now reached the nation's highest court.

For those that have read my blogs before, you know that I am a vocal advocate of student rights, which his why this blog is even more difficult to write than most. Unfortunately for students with valid points to express, Frederick's is exactly the type of protest that make authorities think students do not deserve the same rights as adults.

Let me just first say that I believe that schools should have absolutely no right to punish students for speech activities that do not take place during school hours or events. As the event, during which the "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" incident took place, was not during school hours, or a school sponsored activity, I side with Frederick's cliam that the school should not be allowed to levy punishment against him.

But right now, that is not my concern. My concern is protest for the sake of protest. Frederick displayed the banner simply to prove that he would get in trouble for what is little more than an asinine (albeit funny) comment during after-school hours. Okay, you made your point, but it is a silly point at that. If you are going to get in trouble for challenging your school's gag policy, do it for an issue that is worth fighting. The precedent at stake here is the famous Tinker v. Des Moines Supreme Court case of 1969, a student free speech suit in which 13-year-old Mary Beth Tinker challenged a supension she was given for wearing a black armband in protest of the Vietnam War.

Currently, I have a large issue with the way speech in this country works. Besides certain segments of the population being compelled to bite their tongues on serious issues, it seems that many are simply saying things because they believe it is their right to do so. In other words, free speech seems to have come to a point where people will say anything simply because they can. Speech may be a right, but words are a responsibility, or at least we should treat them as such. Saying something simply because it is your right to, when that expression is neither a belief you hold true nor one which is important to be heard, damages the reputation of the first amendment. Free speech is our right, but thinking before we speak is still our responsibility. The first amendment is not intended to severe intelligent thought before we speak. If anything, its intention is to promote intelligent thought. Unfortunately, many people seem to think our right to speak means our right to vacate intelligent thought and meaningful debate.

If students wish to show that they are deserving of their civil rights they should display their willingness to engage in those meaningful discourses, especially as many of the adults on cable television, and in politics, are incapable of doing so.

This could very well end up being a landmark case, and I hate to think that someday I may have to tell my child that they cannot voice their beliefs in school because some kid twenty years earlier wanted to make a mockery of their own first amendment rights by offering "Bong Hits 4 Jesus."

read more......

Man-Animal War: Rats Being Trained to Kill Us (or Save Us, If You Believe Evrything You Read)

Apparently, the other night on the reality TV series "The Amazing Race" contestants in Maputo, Mozambique were asked to find their next clue by having specially trained rats on leashes lead them through a field where the clue was hidden. According to the show these rats have become very useful in sniffing out land mines, but despite these amazing feets, you should all be worried. Read Fern Cohen's twisted view on this.

As someone that lives in a town full of rats just waiting to strike, there is nothing more harmful than the thought that one trained rat could lead an entire city of these vermon to attack unsuspecting humans. I mean surely a rat that can detect a land mine can also choose not to detect one. Isn't it bad enough they are already invading our fine-dining establishments such as Coffee Shop and Taco Bell?

We are in the midst of a war against the animals people! Yes, it is only the beginning, but the last thing we need are intelligent rats joining the animal ranks. Elephants, whales and chimpanzees are one thing. I expect them to be bloodthirsty, but if even one of these intelligent rats make it to New York City (and if they are truly that intelligent I imagine they'd have no trouble sniffing out an airport) then it may already be too late.

You see, as far as I can tell rats still do not realize that us humans are frightened of them. But if they can smell a land mine, they will learn to smell fear. If the human race has any chance of surviving this, certain to be, centuries-long battle we must keep the rats afraid of us. Teaching them to sniff out clues and land mines only lets them know that we are too weak to do so ourselves.

read more......

[Health] Shocker, Americans Are Unhealthy!

Last Thursday, the Centers for Disease Control released a report saying that less than a third of Americans eat the proper amount of fruits and vegetables, a trend that has been steady for over a decade.

You mean the culture of instant gratification isn't getting the necessary vitamins and minerals to maintain a healthy diet? I hope no one is surprised. Unfortunately, it seems everytime reports like this come out, the people commenting in them act shocked by the results. Yahoo! News has the report.

Since reports like this are so bogged down in political correctness and refuse to point toward the cycle of unhealthy habits that make these statistics true, I am going to cut through some of the crap to tell you why these unhealthy habits continue.

For one thing, many Americans have a tendency to think certain quantities of "vegetables" are adaquate. This is perpetuated by a system that, for example, allows ketchup as one of the two vegetables that every school cafeteria must offer students. Ketchup is NOT a vegetable. I hope that is obvious. Additionally, the pickle and onions on a McDonald's cheeseburger should not be considered vegetables. Strawberry PopTarts are not a source of fruit, and neither is orange soda. Once fruits and vegetables are processed like this, they lose most, if not all, of their nutritional value.

More importantly than that, because I hope the above is obvious, Americans are trying to substitute food with supplements. Instead of eating healthy foods, many people think it is adaquate to use energy bars and pills for their vitamins and minerals. This is so detrimental to our health I cannot begin to describe. First, it makes us dependent upon an expensive industry of supplement manufacturers, and, additionally, it does not give our bodies the optimum method for receiving necessary vitamins, minerals and fibers. Vitamins and minerals are most effectively used when they come from natural sources, not synthetic ones. In other words, VitaminWater is not a substitute for the fruits and vegeatbles with those same vitamins. My feeling is that many Americans think they are, that they don't have to worry about what they eat as long as they have a Power Bar that says it has 100% of the daily value of every vitamin and mineral. That is an unhealthy choice.

I also think Americans are lazy. So lazy that even thinking about what we eat, have eaten or are about to eat is considered too much work. This is a real problem. I am sure that there are days when I do not eat my proper share of fruits and vegetables. But instead of saying that it is too difficult to monitor, I simply make up for what I don't eat one day by making a conscious effort to eat more of it the next day. That should be an easy thing to do, but, of course, that would require thinking, planning and foresight, which does not fit well with the culture of instant gratification.

The other problem is, fresh fruits and vegetables are expensive. It sounds absurd to say it (though the CDC obviously won't), but to a certain extent, eating healthy is not necessarily affordable for all Americans. This is no secret. But, before we start setting goals about the number of people consuming the proper number of fruit and vegetable servings per day, we need to be sure that access to healthy foods is equal across economic lines. Currently, it is not. With only one stop to a grocery store in the 'hood you will see how much corporate America is willing to offer underpriviledged classes in terms of healthy food options. This may be the most unfortunate fact of them all.

Adding to that is the packaged (read synthetic) food industry's kung-fu like grip on our culture, particularly children. Many parents would rather please their children than raise them to lead healthy lifestyles. Let me tell you, kids hate being forced to eat their vegetables, but doing so will lead them to proper eating habits when they are older, and not doing so will lead them to considering it an unnecessary concern. I promise, if you force them to eat vegetables, they will thank you for it someday.

If we want to create healthier eating habits in this country, these are the issues that need addressing. The CDC cannot simply show us a food pyrmid and expect that to create awareness. The discussion must start with the contents of our products, the products on our shelves and the way in which those products are marketed. It must reach into the health care industry, and show once and for all how our system is more interested in treating disease than preventing it. It must reach into the very fabric of our thinking and the malaise with which we make the daily choices whose future implications do not concern us. These too are matters of our health as a society.

read more......

[City] Justice for Sean Bell One Step Closer

Over three months after the police fired 51 bullets killing Sean bell on the morning of his wedding, and wounding two of his friend, in front of a Queens' nightclub, a Queens' grand jury has indicted three of the five officers involved in the shooting. The case reignited the controversial subject of police brutality, specifically when the victims are minorities of color, but even Al Sharpton was hesitant to deem the incident racist.

No, racism would be an easy excuse. The case goes to the heart of a much bigger problem: the police department's authority and its lack of restraint that leads to abusing that authority, specifically in low-income neighborhoods. For one detective, Michael Oliver, who fired his weapon 31 times in the incident, an indictment should not have taken this long. The New York Times reports.

The indictments come only two days after a man went on a rampage through Greenwich Village killing a pizzeria bartender as well as two auxiliary police officers. Now, certainly the police department is concerned that indictments in the Bell case could give them less leeway in compromising situations, but can there not be a middle ground?

The fact is, officers like Mike Oliver who abuse their authority and lack restraint in using their weapons make a middle ground hard to find. The focus should actually be on another officer, one who was not indicted because he fired his weapon only once. That officer, Paul Headley, had been trained in the army, and represents the level of intelligence we should demand from our city's police officers, though granted it is difficult with rookie cops making only $25,100 a year. But when the city government hands someone a gun so that they may protect the streets, there must be accountability on whether or not that person, or the department itself, practiced due diligence in being sure that said made the streets safer. Michael Oliver's was a dangerous gun and one sponsored by the city to be active on the streets.

Michael Palladino, President of the Detectives' Endowment Association, said prior to the announcement regarding the indictments that "There was no criminality in their hearts, nor in their minds, when they took the actions they took."

But that point is not relevant. Cops are people, just like civilians, and everyday civilians are charged with crimes that were not "in their hearts." Shouldn't the same course of action apply to police officers? Admitting that your actions were a mistake do not let you off the hook for committing a crime, particularly murder. When a teenage girl neglects her baby in a way that results in its death, the girl is charged with murder (click here). How can an untrained teenage girl neglecting a child be more worth punishing than a trained police officer shooting at an unarmed suspect 31 times?

read more......

Man-Animal War: Humpback Whale Takes Out Legs of Diver

If you didn't believe me that animals are coming after us humans, now is the time to take note. A 50-year old diver had his leg broke by a humpback whale that whipped its tail at him during a dive off the coast of the Dominican Republic. It is a cheap mob-style tactic that the animals may begin to utilize more often as humans begin invading their turf. ABC News Reports.

The other thing I love about this story, is how the whale's attack forced the man to take a 9 hour boat ride before receiving medical treatment at a"prehistoric" hospital where doctors used a sledge hammer to insert a steel rod into his leg. Have the whales hired mafia doctors to do their dirty work too? Probably not, but they certainly made sure that man would not receive 21st century style medical care.

Lessons to be learned from this weak: Don't f**k with the whales.

read more......

Man-Animal War: Sperm Whale Harbors Grudge Against Would-Be Rescuer

If you haven't seen this video of a stray sperm whale stuck in Uwajima Bay in Japan attacking and killing one of his would be rescuers, you ought to check it out. The video will confirm the war I have been reporting on.

Animals are coming after humans, and this attack should serve as a warning. At first it seemed like the all too familiar suicide attack, as the whale trapped himself in a narrow bay to target his prey. But, yesterday, he finally escaped the bay, i.e. fled the scene of the crime. It was the perfect crime. Not only were a group of scientists working to help him escape, but they continued doing so after he took a man's life. If you ever had a doubt, you should know, whales are very smart creatures. And if literature has taught us anything, they are vengeful and dangerous.

First, a history lesson: You see, sperm whales are a bit of a sensitive breed these days. When whaling was still an unregulated industry, it was the sperm whale that was by far the most harvested because its rich concentration of spermaceti, a substance extracted from its blubber, which can be used as an ingredient in cosmetics, leatherworking, lubricants, candles and pharmaceutical ointments.

Now, if you recall a sperm whale is the central figure of Melville's now ironically prophetic Moby Dick, and if you remember your college lit class correctly, things did not work out too well for Captain Ahab. I'm pretty sure that sperm whales are fed up with the bad rap, and they are exacting revenge. Future rescuers beware.

read more......

Happy Pi Day!

Before I get started on the day's work, I just want to wish everyone a Happy Pi Day. Pi is the irrational constant, approximately 3.1415926..., that represents the ratio between the diameter of a circle and its circumference. And today, 3/14, is when we celebrate its greatness. It is also Albert Einstein's birthday. That's what I call an added bonus. So, where will you be at 1:59?

read more......

[Politics] The Misguided Politics of Loyalty

The Bush administration does not understand the concept of loyalty at all, and it will be their own demise.

The firing of eight U.S. prosecutors in the Justice Department late last year has prompted a Congressional investigation into the executive branches practices and how it infringes upon prosecutorial independence after it was revealed that the attorneys may have been forced out because they refused to investigate matters that came at the request of political allies to the White House. Now, the New York Times and Reuters are reporting that two years ago the White House suggested firing all 93 U.S. attorneys in an effort to keep political leanings at the Justice Department intact with their own. Reportedly, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Senior White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove settled on just a select list of candidates for firing.

None of this is surprising. I wish it were. The mob-style tactics of this administration to induce "loyalty" are nothing new. What is surprising is how misguided they are and, as a result, how much they are failing.

Bush, Rove, Cheney, and presumably many more insiders, seem to be of the belief that loyalty means you do what they say. In other words, they think true loyalty is being faithful to your associates; they believe loyalty is to people. This belief is one of society's tragic flaws. Loyalty should not be to people; loyalty is something you have toward your principals. If you are loyal to your principals, loyalty to people will come as a reflection of those principals; if you are loyal only to people or organizations instead, your principals will be sold out in favor of theirs. That is not freedom.

The fact is, I think most of the judges and attorneys in this country know this. The administration pegs so many of them as "activist judges" or "politically-motivated attorneys," but these accusations are all a smokescreen for the administration's belief that the government should be loyal by them and not by the principals those branches of government were founded upon. Even someone like Antonin Scalia, who may seem to toe the Bush administration line, realizes that the dignity and responsibility of his position lies within his willingness to be loyal to the word of the law. He is free to interpret the law (and Lord knows I usually disagree with that interpretation), but even within his political leanings he remains true to what he believes is written within the law, and not to what the executive branch wishes was written into the law.

For me it is hard to understand how forcing loyalty into the ranks can create the environment you wish. Loyalty to people and organizations is far more corruptible than loyalty to one's principals. I, for one, am much less trusting of someone who is more loyal to another's whims than to their own values. Shouldn't everyone be?

read more......

[Politics] White House Policy: Too Little Too Late

The White House announced yesterday that it will shift $3.2 billion of its defense budget out of investment in new weapons, such as the Lockheed Martin Corp. F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, and toward armor kits and transport vehicles for ground troops. The letter from the White House Office of Management and Budget said, "Items...that have been used as offsets have been deemed less timely or lower priorities than those in the current request. Reuters reports.

It's about freaking time! Or, worse, its entirely too late.

Again the Bush administration seems to be utilizing a too little too late policy. Addressing poor conditions at Walter Reed Hospital: too little too late; troop surge in Iraq: likely (though I pray it is not) too little too late, and now this. It has taken the administration nearly four years to realize that fighting the war in Iraq will be best done by giving our troops on the ground the best equipment available and not by investing in the military-industrial complex for weapons and aircraft that won't be operational for several years.

I hate to say it, but it does seem as though the administration is more interested in handing out big defense industry contracts than in protecting our troops. How else can you explain the billions of dollars being invested in aircraft at a time when we have 140,000 troops engaged in a war that can only be won on the ground?

Investing in new weapons is important, but when we are engaged in a hot struggle that is already straining our armed forces, our fiscal investments need to be focused on the troops that are fighting in that struggle. Poorly equipping the troops while we hand out billion-dollar defense contracts (and pay for the million dollar salaries, and grossly over-budgeted work of reconstruction companies like Halliburton) is an insult to the men and women that sacrifice for this country. I sincerely hope that people do not still think that this administration is more committed to the troops than the politicians that criticize them.

On a side note, this month's Wired magazine has a fascinating article on some of the things DARPA (the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) is doing to make our soldiers stronger. Check it out.

read more......

Man-Animal War: Smart Dog Saves Dumb Family, Dies

A story from last Thursday really got a lot of the human interest writers typing furiously over the heroism of a collie named Lassie that awoke her family during a house fire to save them from the blazing inferno. Unfortunetly, Lassie herself was not as lucky; for her heroic efforts, she was somehow left to die in the fire. Read the story.

This story bothers me, so I am writing to all of the collies that read my blog out there: If your house is burning down, get the f$@& outta there! While I can appreciate the care you have for your family, they clearly do feel the same for you, as they apparently rush out of the burning house you awoke them from, only to allow a piece of the roof to collapse on top of you.

This is America; we are a capaitalist country: it's every man, woman, child and dog for himself. So, for the Lassie whose family thought a dog was a good replacement for a smoke detector (and whose family is also as unoriginal as to name their collie Lassie), the next time there is a fire in the house and they are all sleeping, don't be a hero, gather yourself calmy and strut out of that fire as any good collie should do.

I'm the only one who'll be straight with you Lassie, so listen when I tell you man and animal are in a battle for the planet and this kind of chivalry will not be recipricated from our end. I promise, it does not serve your community well. Onward canine soldier.

read more......

[Education] Public Enemy Number 1: The Word "Vagina"

I'm sorry if this blog is going to sound redundent when you read it. Yes, I have already recently discussed the banning of words and I have separately dealt with student rights, but this story, if nothing else, should just prove my point again.

Three 16-year-old high school girls from John Jay High School in Westchester were each handed suspensions for saying the word "vagina" during a performance from Eve Ensler's "The Vagina Monologues" at an open mic nite sponsored by their school's literary magazine. The worst part is, the prinicpal told the girls when they auditioned that they would not be allowed to use the word during the show, though he denied that he was censoring them. Journal News reports.

The problem, Principal Rich Leprine, is that you gave them permission for their performance with a caveat focused on the single word that is at the heart of the show. If nothing else, banning use of the word "vagina," given that it is central to the title of play, is practically endorsing plagiarism. I mean, how else will they properly identify the source of the material they are performing?

But obviously the real problem is censorship, totally asinine censorship. School officials claim that they did not suspend the girls because they violated a censorship policy, but because they had agreed not to use the word and demonstrated insubordinance by using it. Arguments like this, and the people who make them, are making our kids stupider. Of course you were censoring them. If you weren't censoring them, what were they being insubordinate about?

It's just a word, and a scientific word at that. Individual words are not our enemies, and society needs to stop treating a single word as if it has value outside of its context. If you are going to hold linguistic grudges, make them against the context of words and the specific individual's use of them. John Jay High School officials gave approval to the context: the message of empowerment within the play, and instead they made the enemy the single operative word of the piece. If there is an argument against the performance of the play at a school-related function it should be in acknowledgment that the blatantly sexual nature of the materil is inappropriate for underaged girls (who cannot legally engage in intercourse) to be performing at an event that was being videotaped by a local cable channel.

Too bad the school tried to go the nuanced censorship route and now look completely fascistic, not too mention totally foolish.

read more......

[City] City Wants to Force Cabbies to Pimp Their Rides

The New York City Taxi & Limousine Commission is getting ready to implement new requirements for yellow cabs, and the members of the New York Taxi Workers Alliance are none too happy about them. This afternoon the alliance will hold a rally protesting the plan, which requires all cabs to be equipped with GPS tracking, credit card processing and television service by the end of the year. The cost of the upgrades will be the responisbility of the medallion owners. New York 1 reports.

Firstly, these are expensive costs to undertake, not to mention unnecessary, and forcing those costs upon the medallion owners, who are often the drivers themselves, is a cruel burden that, if you think about it, can only make the streets more danerous as taxi drivers make even crazier maneuvers to pick up fares and increase their income.

The biggest gripe of the of the Taxi Workers Alliance is the GPS tracking devices, which they say are an invasion of privacy (and are planning to strike if the requirements go forward). I can understand this concern, but if GPS can get a taxi driver from Manhattan to my house in Brooklyn without asking me for directions, then sorry cabby, it's worth it. Unfortunetly, the Taxi and Limousine says the GPS tracking will make it easier for passengers to recover lost property, and mention none of the benefits a GPS system could have on helping taxi drivers get around. That makes me inclined to side with the Workers Alliance and suspect the Commission of invading their privacy with a GPS system that cannot even provide directions.

The requirement to accept credit cards is an interesting one, and one which I feel opposed to. For one thing, what happened to cash? Does real money even exist anymore, or is it all just numbers and magnetic strips? My feeling is, if you want to take a cab, get some freaking money! But furthermore, the Taxi and Limousine Commission seems to believe that more people will take cabs if they accept credit cards. Personally, I think that's absurd. This is New York City; people hail cabs on the street. When you call a private cab business in other cities for what will be a $40 fare, I can understand that accepting credit cards will increase business, but in New York? The people who frequently take cabs in New York are not generally the type that would utter the phrase, "Oh no, I don't have enough cash on me; I'll just take the subway." People are not avoiding yellow cabs because they don't take credit cards. The only advantage I can perceive is for businesses reimbursing employees for taxi rides, but that is not the advantage being touted.

The proposal for television service in every cab really irks me. Can I go anywhere without having a TV shoved in my face? I can think of nothing that is more unnnecessary than a television in a taxi cab. In fact, the more I think about it, the more upset I get. When did our society decide that every car needs a TV in it? Apparently, New York City is taking advce from MTV's "Pimp My Ride," and doing their best to find any unused space to put a television. The real atrocity of it is that I suspect the real motive behind this is to generate more revenue for the city by having a specific cab channel (let me guess, some version of the Bloomberg Network?) that can sell advertisements to bombard us with.

A cab is one of the few places in New York City where, personally, I do not want to be bothered (and I know the drivers feel the same way). Maybe it is just the romantic in me, but riding a cab through the city is one of the rare moments where you can just stare out the window and absord and imagine every face, every building and everything that is the lifeline of the city. I am often amazed by the total silence that will overtake a group of people as they ride in a cab and stare out the windows. It is a profound silence, one that does not need to be filled by a television.

read more......

[Politics] Words Matter II: Why the GOP Needs to Listen to Huckabee

Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee may not inspire as much awe as Barack Obama, but the two candidates from opposing parties do have one thing in common: the right attitude and a positive message. But while Obama makes gains for the Democrats everyday, Huckabee is left trailing behind an unelectable pro-choice Giuliani and an unelectable Massachusetts Mormon in Mitt Romney. If the GOP is smart they'd be taking every chance they can get to put Huckabee in the national spotlight and cultivate him as the Barack Obama of the party.

I may be getting ahead of the game. Perhaps such a course of events is bound to take place. Salon.com's Michael Scherer reported on how Huckabee could just charm his way into contention. But still that seems unlikely to happen. Right now, it appears as though the cannabalization of the primary process will claim Huckabee, the GOP's best candidate as its victim.

Admittedly, I would be very unlikely to vote for Huckabee because I am quite sure we do not see eye-to-eye on social issues. But he represents his party and he has a positive message, one that is on many fronts bipartisan too. Huckabee references the leadership of Democrats such as John Kennedy and Bill Clinton when mentioning his idols and he seeks improved healthcare and education for children, specifically emphasizing the importance of the arts in educating our children.

Again, Huckabee does not represent many of my personal beliefs, but he represents something I will always support: an honest, straight-forward message. He said of Bush's handling of Hurrican Katrina that it "made his blood boil." No nuancing, no mincing words, Huckabee has an honest and hopeful message, and, along with Obama, seems to be the only one that wants to deliver bipartisan consensus. Words too often divide people, and it is always a pleasure for someone like me to see a poltician that uses words to unite people, even if he represents a different set of beliefs than mine.

read more......

[Health] Americans Want National Healthcare, So Why the Delay?

A New York Times/CBS poll released late last week shows that healthcare is the top domestic priority for more Americns, moreso than any other issue, including illegal immigration. And yesterday, a New York Times article revealed that a growing number, now 17 million of the 47 million uninsured citizens, come from middle class households earning over $40,000 a year, not poor households. The woman mentioned in the article, Vicki Readling, a real estate agent earning $60,000 dollars a year, who had cancer, found that when her individual policy expired at the beginning of this year she would be able to get coverage for no cheaper than $27,000 a year. So why are Congress and our president sitting idly by and doing nothing about it?

For Democrats seeking the White House in 2008 this has become a hot button issue, with several of them promising to implement a national plan to cover all Americans by the end of their first term. However, the Democratically-controlled Congress does not seem to be making healthcare a priority for its term, which is a bit bothersome. More bothersome though is the president's disregard for the issue that weighs most heavily on the domestic concerns of most Americans.

So why so much delay in addressing the people's demands? Of course we all know why.

For the Bush administration, I am sure it is the politics of cronyism and the interests of the insurance and pharmaceutical lobbies that keep the president from calling for real change. No surprise there. But my concern on the part of the Democrats is that they do not want to address the issue in Congress so that they can use it to grab the White House in '08. That should not be happening.

Americans want healthcare and are willing to give tax dollars for it (despite the fact that our government already spends more per capita on health care initiatives than any developed country, all of whom have national plans). Congress should act now and begin negotiating policy and drafting a bill that can bring healthcare to the millions of Americans living in fear without it. The worst that could happen: the president signs sweeping healthcare reforms in a show of bipartisanship, affording the millions of uninsured access to healthcare. I can think of a lot worse things for America.

read more......

[Art] Steven Spielberg: Communist, Art Thief or Sucka

This may not be the most important art story of the week, especially following the heist of two Picasso paintings from the home of a collector in Paris, but it is a great story of art theft recovery. It seems that Hollywood director Steven Spielberg is a collector of great works, and one of those works, a Norman Rockwell painting called Russian Schoolroom (above) actually turns out to be the same one that was stolen from a St. Louis art gallery in 1973, unbeknownst to Spielberg. The New York Post reports that Spielberg bought the painting at a legitimate auction in New York in 1989.

What I love about this story is that there are so many different angles to report from. Is the FBI art theft division completely incompetent for not realizing that a stolen work was being auctioned off publicly in the late 1980s? Will Spielberg be pegged as just another Hollywood elite pinko for owning a painting of a Russian school children facing a bust of Lenin? (Someone Ouija Joseph McCarthy now!) Was Spielberg complicit in the posession of stolen property? Or is Spielberg just a chump art collector for not even knowing the history behind his own collection?

It's so fascinating. But from my purely selfish end, I want the painting returned to the Rockwell Museum in Stockbridge, MA. Why? Because I have family there with connections to Norman Rockwell and the museum, and I want to see this painting! Especially because it shows one of the more controversial sides of an artist usually heralded for his portrayals of American values.

read more......

[Politics] Is Rudy Electable?

It's kind of a drag for the GOP. The leading candidate to win the 2008 presidential election from both parties, Republican Rudy Giuliani, aka "America's Mayor," is finally seeing a host of personal issues catching up to him as he attempts to ride his 9/11 fame to the White House. The New York Post reports.

What's interesting about Rudy Giuliani is that so many people outside of New York City seem to love him without really knowing why. This is particular true for American conservatives, who may be finally discovering t that behind all of the heroic glorification of his 9/11 mayorship, there is little about him that make him a truly electable Republican nominee. And that the Democratic attack dogs are being sedated as Giuliani demonstrates leads and gains in the race, should serve as a warning that he may actually be one of the easiest Republican candidates to defeat in a general election.

The fact is, the only thing that makes Giuliani electable, or even qualified, in the minds of most of his suporters, is 9/11. And while I think he did a rather commendable job handling the situation and showing leadership on that day, it does not make him immediately qualified to be president. And yet because of 9/11 he receives unquestioning support and heroic ovations as he tours the country. For New Yorkers, who have become disillusioned by Giuliani's use of 9/11 to vault his national image, there is a strange confusion about why America really loves this guy so much. And why, if the election were held today, he would be the next president.

The abortion issue is interesting because, like his opponent Mitt Romney, he was elected in a liberal area in part because he maintained a pro-choice stance. Now, Giuliani is trying to nuance his pro-choice belief by saying that as president he would nominate strict constructionists to the Supreme Court, which is considered code for pro-lifers. For an electorate that largely bought into the flip-flop attacks on John Kerry in 2004, it seems nearly impossible that a GOP candidate could more effectively flip their position for political gain.

But strangely, I still feel like most of America does not know that about Giuliani. Most of America is also probably not aware that Giuliani has supported gun control throughout his entire career. Can the GOP elect a gun control supporter? That too seems highly unlikely.

And now let's consider the personal issues that are finally catching up with Giuliani in what could very well be a highly-effective whisper campaign. Giuliani, for one, has been married three times. He had an affair during his previous marriage, and while he and his wife were splitting Giuliani stayed at the home of two friends: a gay couple. All of this, plus his several appearances in drag, are sure to make many middle Americans cringe. It begs the question, what will the GOP do for 2008?

The irony is that while Giulini is a conservative hero, he would probably have an easier time getting elected if he were still a Democrat, a tax-cutting Democrat. Giuliani says he became a Republican because of their tax policy. That's fair, but as much as America likes tax breaks, moral and lifestyle issues play a bigger role in presidential campaigns. And beyond even that, the Republican party is quickly losing its reputation for fiscal conservatism, despite those tax breaks. As a Republican though, Giuliani's beliefs make him look inconsistent at best, with those inconsistencies making a joke out of the Republican party if they are not careful.

I'll tell you this much, if the GOP ends up with Giuliani as its candidate in 2008, the Democrats will be making that joke. Right now they are sitting idly by just waiting to deliver the punchline.

read more......