Friday, September 11, 2009
Until The Last Jihadist Is Burning In Hell.
Monday, June 22, 2009
There Is No God But Obama, And Obama Is His Prophet.
Newsweek's Evan Thomas stirred controversy and debate after he said about President Barack Obama's Cairo speech, "In a way, Obama’s standing above the country, above-above the world, a sort of god." Thomas sort of complains that he is being taken out of context, which prompted Peter Wehner to write on Commentary magazine's Contentions blog: "So I would ask: Mr. Thomas, in what context can you call Barack Obama a 'sort of God'?" (Here.)
The correct context would be when Mr. Thomas is describing how President Obama's followers view his place in the world.
The apotheosis of Barack Obama to god-President begins with his name. Obama: the name's first letter is an "O," a circle, the perfect shape in nature, symbolic of unity. O-ba-ma is three syllables long, a magical and divine number, powerful in rhetoric. (See "the rule of three" here.) Say his name: Obama. To Western ears his name is exotic. A magic word, chantable: Obama, Obama, Obama. Don't think for a moment his marketers don't know it.
The apotheosis continued with his campaign. There were the creepy YouTube videos by will.i.am and others, the iconic posters, the proliferation of news photos with strange halo effects around Obama’s head, the Obama speeches attended by swooning and crying listeners, the campaign's instructions to volunteers to steer away from policy talk and testify about their own "come to Obama" moments, the thrill running up Chris Matthews’s leg, the cable news hype leading up to the inauguration. Need we go on?
An aspect of Barack Obama’s appeal is that he seems a sort of god or prophet. He has been sent to America to redeem its past sins and transform the country into something better than it’s ever been. He isn't just a messenger of hope and change, he is the very personification of hope and change. A man of humble means born from the union of an American white woman and an immigrant black African man who grows up to become President. In crisis he is calm, unflappable, cool. He stands above it all. He is a font of wisdom who sees the flaws in both sides of any issue or dispute and is able to show us the perfect middle way. His mere words are believed to have the power to effect miraculous change: Obama speaks in Cairo; an electoral miracle happens in Lebanon.
There is rhetorical exaggeration in all this, of course. But not much. There is no god but Obama, and Obama is his prophet. Peace be upon his name.
-tdr
First published in slightly different form as a comment to the Contentions blog on Commentary.org.
The correct context would be when Mr. Thomas is describing how President Obama's followers view his place in the world.
The apotheosis of Barack Obama to god-President begins with his name. Obama: the name's first letter is an "O," a circle, the perfect shape in nature, symbolic of unity. O-ba-ma is three syllables long, a magical and divine number, powerful in rhetoric. (See "the rule of three" here.) Say his name: Obama. To Western ears his name is exotic. A magic word, chantable: Obama, Obama, Obama. Don't think for a moment his marketers don't know it.
The apotheosis continued with his campaign. There were the creepy YouTube videos by will.i.am and others, the iconic posters, the proliferation of news photos with strange halo effects around Obama’s head, the Obama speeches attended by swooning and crying listeners, the campaign's instructions to volunteers to steer away from policy talk and testify about their own "come to Obama" moments, the thrill running up Chris Matthews’s leg, the cable news hype leading up to the inauguration. Need we go on?
An aspect of Barack Obama’s appeal is that he seems a sort of god or prophet. He has been sent to America to redeem its past sins and transform the country into something better than it’s ever been. He isn't just a messenger of hope and change, he is the very personification of hope and change. A man of humble means born from the union of an American white woman and an immigrant black African man who grows up to become President. In crisis he is calm, unflappable, cool. He stands above it all. He is a font of wisdom who sees the flaws in both sides of any issue or dispute and is able to show us the perfect middle way. His mere words are believed to have the power to effect miraculous change: Obama speaks in Cairo; an electoral miracle happens in Lebanon.
There is rhetorical exaggeration in all this, of course. But not much. There is no god but Obama, and Obama is his prophet. Peace be upon his name.
-tdr
First published in slightly different form as a comment to the Contentions blog on Commentary.org.
Labels: America, Politics, Religion
Thursday, April 30, 2009
The First 100 Days Down ...
Only 1381 days to go. January 20, 2013, cannot come too soon.
-tdr
Update: Okay, I added wrong. That's 1361 days to go. Even better.
-tdr
Update: Okay, I added wrong. That's 1361 days to go. Even better.
Thursday, March 05, 2009
Name That Institution.
California's Supreme Court heard arguments today on whether the California voters' decision to pass Proposition 8 and limit marriage to opposite sex couples would be allowed to stand. The argument was televised on the State of California's government channel.
Judging from the direction of the arguments, it appears the Court will uphold Proposition 8 and rule that the voters had the right to limit marriage to opposite sex couples. The Court's ruling will be extremely limited to holding that Proposition 8 merely affected nomenclature. The Court will rule that Proposition 8 changed nothing else with respect to the rights of same-sex couples.
The Court already found in The Marriage Cases last year that same-sex couples under California's Domestic Partnership law enjoy nearly all the same rights as those enjoyed by opposite-sex marriage partners. The argument today, and concessions by the attorney supporting Proposition 8, made it clear that Proposition 8 in no way changed any other part of the Supreme Court's ruling in The Marriage Cases. The argument today further clarified that California could expand the definition of Domestic Partnerships so that such partnerships would be marriages in all but name, and that expanded definition would not run afoul of Proposition 8's limitation of marriage to opposite-sex couples alone.
The course same-sex marriage advocates could follow after Proposition 8 is upheld is to seek to marginalize marriage and make domestic partnerships the norm. Use the arguments made at the Court to urge California's legislature to make domestic partnerships available to opposite-sex couples, to have California continue to issue marriage certificates to opposite-sex couples but also register every opposite-sex married couple as a domestic partnership, have California recognize domestic partnerships transacted in other states as valid in California when the partners move to California, and in every way possible change domestic partnerships so that legally they are identical to marriage.
-tdr
Judging from the direction of the arguments, it appears the Court will uphold Proposition 8 and rule that the voters had the right to limit marriage to opposite sex couples. The Court's ruling will be extremely limited to holding that Proposition 8 merely affected nomenclature. The Court will rule that Proposition 8 changed nothing else with respect to the rights of same-sex couples.
The Court already found in The Marriage Cases last year that same-sex couples under California's Domestic Partnership law enjoy nearly all the same rights as those enjoyed by opposite-sex marriage partners. The argument today, and concessions by the attorney supporting Proposition 8, made it clear that Proposition 8 in no way changed any other part of the Supreme Court's ruling in The Marriage Cases. The argument today further clarified that California could expand the definition of Domestic Partnerships so that such partnerships would be marriages in all but name, and that expanded definition would not run afoul of Proposition 8's limitation of marriage to opposite-sex couples alone.
The course same-sex marriage advocates could follow after Proposition 8 is upheld is to seek to marginalize marriage and make domestic partnerships the norm. Use the arguments made at the Court to urge California's legislature to make domestic partnerships available to opposite-sex couples, to have California continue to issue marriage certificates to opposite-sex couples but also register every opposite-sex married couple as a domestic partnership, have California recognize domestic partnerships transacted in other states as valid in California when the partners move to California, and in every way possible change domestic partnerships so that legally they are identical to marriage.
-tdr
Labels: America, California, Law, Society
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Flushing Baseball's Cheaters Out Of The Game.
Baseball's steroids scandal hit the front pages again this week with the revelation that Alex Rodriguez cheated his way to fame and fortune by taking performance-enhancing drugs. Rodriguez joins Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens in a triumvirate of superstar cheaters. News reports say there are 103 players who are known to have tested positive for steroids back in 2003.
Eventually the names will out. Baseball's dilemma is what to do about it. Bonds presents the biggest problem because he cheated his way to becoming the greatest homerun hitter of all time. If Bonds is banned and his record taken away the lifetime record reverts to Hank Aaron, a class guy who deserves to be number one. The problem is that Bonds single season record would revert to Mark McGwire or Sammy Sosa, both of whom are probably guilty as well.
Banning all steroids cheaters from baseball could be difficult. There are so many. But ignoring the scandal won't make it go away. The players who didn't cheat deserve to see the cheaters exposed and punished, and the fans deserve to know the extent of the corruption.
So, here's a modest proposal.
Let's give steroids cheaters a special place at the Hall of Fame. Don't add a Wing of Shame. Instead, designate the restrooms as memorials to the steroids era. Assign each shamed player to his own urinal or toilet, and imprint a picture of the player on the urinal or in the toilet bowl. For example, an A-Rod or Roger "The Rocket" Clemens urinal, or a Barry Bonds toilet. Visitors to the Hall could then leave an appropriate tribute to the baseball players who soiled America's national pasttime. And with so many players implicated in steroids, there would never be a line for the restrooms.
-tdr
Eventually the names will out. Baseball's dilemma is what to do about it. Bonds presents the biggest problem because he cheated his way to becoming the greatest homerun hitter of all time. If Bonds is banned and his record taken away the lifetime record reverts to Hank Aaron, a class guy who deserves to be number one. The problem is that Bonds single season record would revert to Mark McGwire or Sammy Sosa, both of whom are probably guilty as well.
Banning all steroids cheaters from baseball could be difficult. There are so many. But ignoring the scandal won't make it go away. The players who didn't cheat deserve to see the cheaters exposed and punished, and the fans deserve to know the extent of the corruption.
So, here's a modest proposal.
Let's give steroids cheaters a special place at the Hall of Fame. Don't add a Wing of Shame. Instead, designate the restrooms as memorials to the steroids era. Assign each shamed player to his own urinal or toilet, and imprint a picture of the player on the urinal or in the toilet bowl. For example, an A-Rod or Roger "The Rocket" Clemens urinal, or a Barry Bonds toilet. Visitors to the Hall could then leave an appropriate tribute to the baseball players who soiled America's national pasttime. And with so many players implicated in steroids, there would never be a line for the restrooms.
-tdr
Monday, February 09, 2009
I Am Chump.
Tonight I prepared and e-filed my tax returns. I did the long form and declared all my income and took no unlawful deductions. Heck, I even paid a use tax on my state return for online purchases I didn't pay sales tax on at the time of purchase. Joe Biden would call me a patriot, more patriotic than Tom Daschle or Tim Geithner.
But I feel like a chump. Not because I did my duty and paid my taxes. No, I'm a chump because I live in California. In this state, the government can't get its act together and pass a budget that works. Instead, California's government is running out of money and the state's controller has threatened to delay paying state tax refunds. Already, the controller has notified some vendors that the state will delay payments for services rendered for at least 30 days.
There is no solution in sight. We have a legislature gridlocked by partisan division. The parties are united in one thing only: their stubborn refusal to face facts and deal with the state's funding catastrophe.
The governor has no political clout whatsoever. He's a Republican (well, in name only) in a state where every other statewide elected official, but one, is a Democrat, and where both houses of the legislature are dominated by strong Democratic majorities. Arnold is a leader without followers and supporters. As a Republican he gets no support from Sacramento Democrats. He came in as a Republican conservative on money matters and liberal on social issues. Over time, he's morphed into a Republican, still liberal on social issues and no longer fiscally conservative. That has lost him the support of Republicans in the legislature. His political one man show has left him as weak as a girly man.
But the governor has done one thing right. He's tried to save money by cutting state payroll costs. First, he tried to cramdown state employee salaries to the federal minimum wage when the state entered its new fiscal year back in July without a budget. It's a measure of the strength of this state's public employee unions that the governor's plan went nowhere.
Now the governor has ordered state employees to take off two days of unpaid leave each month. This amounts to a 10 percent pay cut, albeit at 10 percent less work. But it's a measure of the governor's weakness and this state's immense partisan division that employees who work in departments run by elected state officials have been told to report to work by their bosses.
For example, employees of the state controller's department have been told to report to work. The controller won't save any money by reducing his employees' salaries. Instead, he saves money by withholding money from vendors and taxpayers.
So, that's California. In the middle of a terrible recession state employees get to keep their jobs, a small percentage are forced to take a 10 percent pay cut by getting two unpaid days off per month, but most get to keep their full salaries. Meanwhile, the unemployment rate in the state is around 9 percent and taxpayers who overpaid the state have to wait for their refunds. Chumps. We're a state full of chumps. But we've got the best weather in the country.
-tdr
But I feel like a chump. Not because I did my duty and paid my taxes. No, I'm a chump because I live in California. In this state, the government can't get its act together and pass a budget that works. Instead, California's government is running out of money and the state's controller has threatened to delay paying state tax refunds. Already, the controller has notified some vendors that the state will delay payments for services rendered for at least 30 days.
There is no solution in sight. We have a legislature gridlocked by partisan division. The parties are united in one thing only: their stubborn refusal to face facts and deal with the state's funding catastrophe.
The governor has no political clout whatsoever. He's a Republican (well, in name only) in a state where every other statewide elected official, but one, is a Democrat, and where both houses of the legislature are dominated by strong Democratic majorities. Arnold is a leader without followers and supporters. As a Republican he gets no support from Sacramento Democrats. He came in as a Republican conservative on money matters and liberal on social issues. Over time, he's morphed into a Republican, still liberal on social issues and no longer fiscally conservative. That has lost him the support of Republicans in the legislature. His political one man show has left him as weak as a girly man.
But the governor has done one thing right. He's tried to save money by cutting state payroll costs. First, he tried to cramdown state employee salaries to the federal minimum wage when the state entered its new fiscal year back in July without a budget. It's a measure of the strength of this state's public employee unions that the governor's plan went nowhere.
Now the governor has ordered state employees to take off two days of unpaid leave each month. This amounts to a 10 percent pay cut, albeit at 10 percent less work. But it's a measure of the governor's weakness and this state's immense partisan division that employees who work in departments run by elected state officials have been told to report to work by their bosses.
For example, employees of the state controller's department have been told to report to work. The controller won't save any money by reducing his employees' salaries. Instead, he saves money by withholding money from vendors and taxpayers.
So, that's California. In the middle of a terrible recession state employees get to keep their jobs, a small percentage are forced to take a 10 percent pay cut by getting two unpaid days off per month, but most get to keep their full salaries. Meanwhile, the unemployment rate in the state is around 9 percent and taxpayers who overpaid the state have to wait for their refunds. Chumps. We're a state full of chumps. But we've got the best weather in the country.
-tdr
Labels: America, California, Politics, Taxes
Tuesday, February 03, 2009
The Audacity Of Nope: Tom Daschle Out.
Tom Daschle has been forced to withdraw from consideration for Secretary of Health and Human Services because of his tax evasions and conflicts of interest. (Here.) Yes, we can!
-tdr
-tdr
Labels: America, Politics, Taxes
Monday, February 02, 2009
Ending The Paleolithic Era At Sea.
Millenia ago humans went from a hunter gatherer society to one that relies on agriculture for food. This dramatic change led to villages, towns, cities, and civilization. Civilized humans would never think of relying on hunter-gatherers to feed society. Well, on land, anyway. On the seas, hunter-gathering still dominates.
The oceans are an aquatic wilderness. Food from the sea mostly comes from fishing boats that take to the waters to hunt for schools of wild fish, gather them in nets, and bring them back to market.
Today's San Diego Union-Tribune has a story on an aquaculture experiment proposed by Hubbs-SeaWorld Research Institute for the deep waters off San Diego that would change all that.
Imagine if food from land were produced the same way that most sea food is produced. Hunters would leave the city every day to roam the wilderness in search of wild game to bring back to market. Long ago, humans figured out that hunter-gathering was inefficient and unreliable and we turned to agriculture. It's time to bring the production of sea food out of the pre-civilized era and into the modern world.
-tdr
The oceans are an aquatic wilderness. Food from the sea mostly comes from fishing boats that take to the waters to hunt for schools of wild fish, gather them in nets, and bring them back to market.
Today's San Diego Union-Tribune has a story on an aquaculture experiment proposed by Hubbs-SeaWorld Research Institute for the deep waters off San Diego that would change all that.
"Hubbs' operation would cover about 30 football fields' worth of the ocean's surface in water that's approximately 300 feet deep.Before Hubbs can go forward with its proposal it needs to convince environmentalists and fishing interests of its value, and obtain permits from the federal government. But Hubbs is on the right track.
"At first, the institute would deploy eight circular nets – each large enough to hold about 125,000 fish. The nets would be anchored to the sea floor and stocked with striped bass, a fish that was introduced to California more than 100 years ago. The captive bass would grow for about two years until they top 2 pounds each, at which point they would be collected in batches and sold to seafood wholesalers.
"The species was chosen for several reasons, including the availability of juveniles for rearing and what Hubbs researchers said were slim chances that any escaped fish would disrupt the native food chain.
"Over five years, Hubbs would install 24 pens and produce 3,000 metric tons of fish annually – about three times the current commercial fish harvest brought ashore in San Diego County.
"That would provide a dramatic boost to the state's aquaculture industry, which generates about $100 million in revenue each year for seafood producers. At full capacity, Hubbs officials said, they could raise about 3 million fish per year worth $21 million." (Here.)
Imagine if food from land were produced the same way that most sea food is produced. Hunters would leave the city every day to roam the wilderness in search of wild game to bring back to market. Long ago, humans figured out that hunter-gathering was inefficient and unreliable and we turned to agriculture. It's time to bring the production of sea food out of the pre-civilized era and into the modern world.
-tdr
Labels: Agriculture, America, Aquaculture, Civilization, Food, Science, Society
Taxes Are For Chumps.
President Barack Obama promised change when he ran for President and change he brought. When Republicans were in charge, there was a culture of corruption in Washington. Now there's a culture of tax evasion: Timothy Geithner (here), Charles Rangel (here), and now Tom Daschle.
Daschle, former million dollar "special policy advisor" to the lobbying firm of Alston and Bird (here), visited Capitol Hill to make the case for his nomination as Secretary of Health and Human Services. Because he's the second tax cheat nominated by President Obama for a cabinet position, Daschle had to spend the day dealing with his personal tax problem. Or as the Associated Press put it:
Vice-President Joe Biden said during the campaign that it's patriotic to pay higher taxes. Not to question Daschle's patriotism, that's apparently a job for Vice-President Biden, but Daschle's tax dodge suggests that, when it comes to taxes, he believes dissent is the highest form of patriotism.
-tdr
Daschle, former million dollar "special policy advisor" to the lobbying firm of Alston and Bird (here), visited Capitol Hill to make the case for his nomination as Secretary of Health and Human Services. Because he's the second tax cheat nominated by President Obama for a cabinet position, Daschle had to spend the day dealing with his personal tax problem. Or as the Associated Press put it:
"Fighting to salvage his Cabinet nomination, Tom Daschle apologized from morning to night on Monday for failing to pay more than $120,000 in federal taxes." (Here.)Sorry, morning to night is not enough. Even apologizing from now to April 15th won't cut it, although there would be poetic justice if he did.
Vice-President Joe Biden said during the campaign that it's patriotic to pay higher taxes. Not to question Daschle's patriotism, that's apparently a job for Vice-President Biden, but Daschle's tax dodge suggests that, when it comes to taxes, he believes dissent is the highest form of patriotism.
-tdr
Labels: America, Politics, Taxes
Friday, January 30, 2009
The King Is Gone, Long Live The King.
When George W. Bush was President, his opponents were beside themselves with fear over the Imperial Presidency. There was hyperventilation over the so-called unitary executive and alleged suppression of speech and dissent. Fear-driven opponents of President Bush took to calling him names, Bushitler, for example.
Even government officials were not immune. Lawrence Wilkerson, an aide to Colin Powell, once accused President Bush and Vice-President Cheney of running a "cabal" that had hijacked America's foreign policy. (Here at my former blog.) Think about that. The only two nationally elected officials in the United States government were accused of hijacking foreign policy. But that's what elections are about. In a democracy, if we don't like what the present government is doing, we elect new leaders to take charge and do things differently.
That's what happened in 2008 and the country chose Barack Obama to take over and do things differently. One change that hasn't come to America, however, is cutting back on the power of the Imperial Presidency. On foreign policy, President Obama is following a similar path to that walked by President Bush. The new President has appointed special envoys, George Mitchell and Richard Holbrooke, answerable directly to him, to handle the Middle East and Afghanistan, respectively. This tactic allows the new President to bypass Congress because neither envoy requires Senate approval. This tactic also allows the new President to bypass the State Department, run by his former rival, Hillary Clinton. This tactic ultimately allows the new President to have direct control over these foreign policy matters.
I have no problem with this. I believe in the oh-so-scary unitary executive theory. All that theory holds is that the entire executive power defined by the Constitution is granted to the President. (Here.) It's not granted in pieces to lesser officials in the Executive Branch. Whatever authority lesser officials in the Executive Branch may have comes to them through the President from the Constitution. So, if the new President wants to retain direct hands-on control over foreign policy by appointing special envoys and bypassing the Cabinet, well, that's his prerogative.
The Politico.com has a very good analysis of President Obama's executive power play. (Here.) He's not just bypassing the Cabinet in foreign policy. Every issue that matters to him has a policy czar in the White House.
But don't hold your breath waiting for the brave dissidents against Bush's presidency to start accusing the new President of executive overreach. Their tasks today are to disparage Congressional Republicans for not supporting the President, and to demonize talk radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh. From 2001 to 2008, dissent was the highest form of patriotism. In the new era of hope and change, it's now the lowest.
The more things change ...
-tdr
Even government officials were not immune. Lawrence Wilkerson, an aide to Colin Powell, once accused President Bush and Vice-President Cheney of running a "cabal" that had hijacked America's foreign policy. (Here at my former blog.) Think about that. The only two nationally elected officials in the United States government were accused of hijacking foreign policy. But that's what elections are about. In a democracy, if we don't like what the present government is doing, we elect new leaders to take charge and do things differently.
That's what happened in 2008 and the country chose Barack Obama to take over and do things differently. One change that hasn't come to America, however, is cutting back on the power of the Imperial Presidency. On foreign policy, President Obama is following a similar path to that walked by President Bush. The new President has appointed special envoys, George Mitchell and Richard Holbrooke, answerable directly to him, to handle the Middle East and Afghanistan, respectively. This tactic allows the new President to bypass Congress because neither envoy requires Senate approval. This tactic also allows the new President to bypass the State Department, run by his former rival, Hillary Clinton. This tactic ultimately allows the new President to have direct control over these foreign policy matters.
I have no problem with this. I believe in the oh-so-scary unitary executive theory. All that theory holds is that the entire executive power defined by the Constitution is granted to the President. (Here.) It's not granted in pieces to lesser officials in the Executive Branch. Whatever authority lesser officials in the Executive Branch may have comes to them through the President from the Constitution. So, if the new President wants to retain direct hands-on control over foreign policy by appointing special envoys and bypassing the Cabinet, well, that's his prerogative.
The Politico.com has a very good analysis of President Obama's executive power play. (Here.) He's not just bypassing the Cabinet in foreign policy. Every issue that matters to him has a policy czar in the White House.
But don't hold your breath waiting for the brave dissidents against Bush's presidency to start accusing the new President of executive overreach. Their tasks today are to disparage Congressional Republicans for not supporting the President, and to demonize talk radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh. From 2001 to 2008, dissent was the highest form of patriotism. In the new era of hope and change, it's now the lowest.
The more things change ...
-tdr
Labels: America, Elections, Obama, Politics, Society
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
The Gatling Gun Loophole
You don't have to fork over $20,000 to own a gatling gun. (Here.) There's a company, RG-G, Inc., that provides blueprints and parts for the DIYer. (Here.) The company also manufactures gatling guns for considerably less than $20,000. There are some decent photos of the gatling gun on the the company's homepage and some mediocre videos of gun in action.
RG-G Inc.'s FAQ webpage has interesting information about the gun and the legality of owning a gatling gun in the United States. (Here.) The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, has determined the guns are legal. (BATF letter here.)
-tdr
RG-G Inc.'s FAQ webpage has interesting information about the gun and the legality of owning a gatling gun in the United States. (Here.) The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, has determined the guns are legal. (BATF letter here.)
-tdr
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Taking The iPod To The Battlefield.
Perhaps the coolest application for the iPod Touch is a ballistics calculation program developed for Knights Armament. Install the application to your iPod Touch, attach the device to KA's M110 Sniper Rifle using a special mount, and you're good to go. (Pics at the firearm blog here.) Ready, aim, fire, insert ear buds, and rock on! Let's hear it for American ingenuity.
-tdr
-tdr
Friday, January 23, 2009
Closing Guantanamo: O, The Humanity!
There's one good thing to say about the President's decision to close Guantanamo Bay's prison for war criminals. Candidate Obama campaigned on the promise that he would close the facility. Ordering the closure fulfills a central promise of his campaign.
But closing Guantanamo is meaningless because the detainees have to be held somewhere. The significant decisions yet to come are how the detainees will be tried and what kind of access they will have to America's court system. Also, what will be done with those who belong to Al Qaeda but who end up not being tried in court because the evidence against them would not be admissible in court or is too secret to reveal publicly?
There is no need to close the facility. Guantanamo is as good a place as any to hold the detainees. It's better, in fact. Guantanamo has the advantage over any prison on the American mainland as being completely under the control of the United States military and it's in the middle of nowhere. Escape from there is nearly impossible. The facility is not the hell hole that common knowledge would have us believe.
The Boston Globe's Big Picture website did a tremendous service in December 2008, when it published a set of pictures showing the conditions at the prison. (Here.) It's eye opening.
Photo number 8 shows a stencil written on concrete of the word Mecca, in Arabic, and an arrow pointing to Islam's holy city. The better for inmates to pray. O, the humanity!
Photo number 9 shows a literacy instructor preparing for a lesson. The instructor is at the facility as part of a US Government program "to improve educational opportunities for the detainees." O, the humanity!
Photo number 13 shows a beautiful gold-embossed Koran that belongs to a detainee. O, the humanity!
Photo number 14 shows a detainee exercising outside during his 12 hours of outdoor recreation per day. O, the humanity!
Photo number 20 shows a copy of a Harry Potter novel in Arabic, one of 7,500 books in the circulating library available to detainees. Apparently, Harry Potter books are especially popular among the inmates. O, the humanity!
Photo number 26 shows a group of detainees praying, 27 shows a beautiful prayer rug owned by one of the inmates, and 29 shows a sign telling American guards to be quiet during prayer time. O, the humanity!
On the other hand, maybe putting the detainees among the general population of the type of violent criminals who populate maximum security prisons in the United States is just the punishment the detainees deserve. It worked for Jeffrey Dahmer. (Here.) O, the humanity!
-tdr
But closing Guantanamo is meaningless because the detainees have to be held somewhere. The significant decisions yet to come are how the detainees will be tried and what kind of access they will have to America's court system. Also, what will be done with those who belong to Al Qaeda but who end up not being tried in court because the evidence against them would not be admissible in court or is too secret to reveal publicly?
There is no need to close the facility. Guantanamo is as good a place as any to hold the detainees. It's better, in fact. Guantanamo has the advantage over any prison on the American mainland as being completely under the control of the United States military and it's in the middle of nowhere. Escape from there is nearly impossible. The facility is not the hell hole that common knowledge would have us believe.
The Boston Globe's Big Picture website did a tremendous service in December 2008, when it published a set of pictures showing the conditions at the prison. (Here.) It's eye opening.
Photo number 8 shows a stencil written on concrete of the word Mecca, in Arabic, and an arrow pointing to Islam's holy city. The better for inmates to pray. O, the humanity!
Photo number 9 shows a literacy instructor preparing for a lesson. The instructor is at the facility as part of a US Government program "to improve educational opportunities for the detainees." O, the humanity!
Photo number 13 shows a beautiful gold-embossed Koran that belongs to a detainee. O, the humanity!
Photo number 14 shows a detainee exercising outside during his 12 hours of outdoor recreation per day. O, the humanity!
Photo number 20 shows a copy of a Harry Potter novel in Arabic, one of 7,500 books in the circulating library available to detainees. Apparently, Harry Potter books are especially popular among the inmates. O, the humanity!
Photo number 26 shows a group of detainees praying, 27 shows a beautiful prayer rug owned by one of the inmates, and 29 shows a sign telling American guards to be quiet during prayer time. O, the humanity!
On the other hand, maybe putting the detainees among the general population of the type of violent criminals who populate maximum security prisons in the United States is just the punishment the detainees deserve. It worked for Jeffrey Dahmer. (Here.) O, the humanity!
-tdr
Labels: America, International, Politics, War on Jihad
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Watching The Inauguration.
Duty called for work today. But thanks to a 20th Century VCR, I'm able to watch the 43d peaceful transfer of power in the United States tonight. Here's what struck me.
Barack Obama walking the hallway to the stage is a supremely self-confident man. It's still more than a bit off putting to hear Obama's supporters chanting his last name, but seeing them wave the American flags was a beautiful sight. I didn't vote for the new President, but if electing him is what it takes to get liberals to start waving the flag, well, maybe his election is a good thing.
Dianne Feinstein of California, my Senator, is a great master of ceremonies. Why can't she be majority leader of the Senate instead of that worm from Nevada? Her remarks put today's exciting event into a nice historical context of the civil rights struggle. It would have been even nicer if she had hearkened back to the Civil War when hundreds of thousands of Americans died to remove the blight of slavery from this country and from our constitution.
Pastor Rick Warren's prayer stumbled in the beginning but ended powerfully. His unapologetic Christianity, and the subtle ecumenical references in the speech, were refreshing to hear. A people committed to true diversity doesn't need to steer expression to the least offensive denominator. A people committed to true diversity listens silently and respectfully to a prayer that expresses a faith not shared by all. A people committed to true diversity understands that diversity of thought is the hallmark of freedom.
John Roberts screw up of the oath of office did not look so bad on TV. When I heard it on radio this morning, it sounded catastrophic. Even so, you've got to wonder why he didn't just read the oath from a card like the one John Paul Stevens used for Joe Biden's oath.
The President's speech comes off better on TV than it did on radio. On radio, it sounded pedestrian and banal. On TV his presence infuses the speech with a power beyond its words. President Obama's speech was at its weakest when he argued against straw men, attacked his predecessor, and asserted that his own plans are something new beyond today's partisan divide. But his speech was most powerful when it reached into history to put our task today into the context of America's work over time to make a better world for succeeding generations. Our generations alive today are links in a chain of progress. It also had power when he assertively defended the greatness that is America, told the world that we will not apologize for who we are, that we will fight to defend ourselves against those who would destroy us, and that our enemies will be judged by their people for what they build not what they destroy. Finally, his concluding analysis of the American character and his call to service showed a powerful understanding and appreciation of this country's people.
The new President clearly loves his daughters. That big smile cracking his stern visage when he greeted them after his speech spoke volumes.
Elizabeth Alexander is reciting her poem. Sorry, but here's a thought, how about we have no more inaugural poems, okay?
Reverend Joseph Lowery's benediction is a poem. That old guy at 87 years old still has what it takes. What a beautiful prayer with coy and delightful final lines. Lowery's prayer was a fitting conclusion to the inauguration's speeches.
The final ritual of the inaugural ceremony is the most practical one and the least public. After the speeches, and as everybody is leaving the inaugural site, the President walks the former President to a helicopter waiting to take the former President out of the capital city. There's a powerful symbolism to that. The new President essentially shows the former President the door as if to say, "there's only room in this town for one President. That's me, not you." It's all very polite and friendly but it is firm, final, and humbling. The formerly most powerful man in the world is now a private citizen with no authority and no place in the capital.
And so now our country moves forward with a new leader freely chosen by us, toward a destiny uncertain, but one we still have the power to shape. May we choose our path wisely.
-tdr
Barack Obama walking the hallway to the stage is a supremely self-confident man. It's still more than a bit off putting to hear Obama's supporters chanting his last name, but seeing them wave the American flags was a beautiful sight. I didn't vote for the new President, but if electing him is what it takes to get liberals to start waving the flag, well, maybe his election is a good thing.
Dianne Feinstein of California, my Senator, is a great master of ceremonies. Why can't she be majority leader of the Senate instead of that worm from Nevada? Her remarks put today's exciting event into a nice historical context of the civil rights struggle. It would have been even nicer if she had hearkened back to the Civil War when hundreds of thousands of Americans died to remove the blight of slavery from this country and from our constitution.
Pastor Rick Warren's prayer stumbled in the beginning but ended powerfully. His unapologetic Christianity, and the subtle ecumenical references in the speech, were refreshing to hear. A people committed to true diversity doesn't need to steer expression to the least offensive denominator. A people committed to true diversity listens silently and respectfully to a prayer that expresses a faith not shared by all. A people committed to true diversity understands that diversity of thought is the hallmark of freedom.
John Roberts screw up of the oath of office did not look so bad on TV. When I heard it on radio this morning, it sounded catastrophic. Even so, you've got to wonder why he didn't just read the oath from a card like the one John Paul Stevens used for Joe Biden's oath.
The President's speech comes off better on TV than it did on radio. On radio, it sounded pedestrian and banal. On TV his presence infuses the speech with a power beyond its words. President Obama's speech was at its weakest when he argued against straw men, attacked his predecessor, and asserted that his own plans are something new beyond today's partisan divide. But his speech was most powerful when it reached into history to put our task today into the context of America's work over time to make a better world for succeeding generations. Our generations alive today are links in a chain of progress. It also had power when he assertively defended the greatness that is America, told the world that we will not apologize for who we are, that we will fight to defend ourselves against those who would destroy us, and that our enemies will be judged by their people for what they build not what they destroy. Finally, his concluding analysis of the American character and his call to service showed a powerful understanding and appreciation of this country's people.
The new President clearly loves his daughters. That big smile cracking his stern visage when he greeted them after his speech spoke volumes.
Elizabeth Alexander is reciting her poem. Sorry, but here's a thought, how about we have no more inaugural poems, okay?
Reverend Joseph Lowery's benediction is a poem. That old guy at 87 years old still has what it takes. What a beautiful prayer with coy and delightful final lines. Lowery's prayer was a fitting conclusion to the inauguration's speeches.
The final ritual of the inaugural ceremony is the most practical one and the least public. After the speeches, and as everybody is leaving the inaugural site, the President walks the former President to a helicopter waiting to take the former President out of the capital city. There's a powerful symbolism to that. The new President essentially shows the former President the door as if to say, "there's only room in this town for one President. That's me, not you." It's all very polite and friendly but it is firm, final, and humbling. The formerly most powerful man in the world is now a private citizen with no authority and no place in the capital.
And so now our country moves forward with a new leader freely chosen by us, toward a destiny uncertain, but one we still have the power to shape. May we choose our path wisely.
-tdr
Labels: America, Politics, Religion
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Paying For The Illinois Senate Seat
United States Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has been preventing Roland Burris from taking a Senate seat because the Illinois Secretary of State had not signed Burris's appointment order. Reid's legal position was farcical.
The other day the Illinois Supreme Court helpfully explained to Burris that he could pay to get a copy of his appointment order to the Senate from the Secretary of State. That copy would be affixed with a seal and signed by the Secretary of State, all official-like. It appears that Burris may have taken the court's advice.
-tdr
The other day the Illinois Supreme Court helpfully explained to Burris that he could pay to get a copy of his appointment order to the Senate from the Secretary of State. That copy would be affixed with a seal and signed by the Secretary of State, all official-like. It appears that Burris may have taken the court's advice.
"Yesterday, Burris' lawyers carried to the Senate an additional document bearing a state seal, an affirmation of the appointment and a mass-produced signature of Secretary of State Jesse White. Those documents, combined with the governor's original papers, led the secretary of the Senate to deem Burris' credentials satisfactory. Burris would be eligible to serve through 2010." (Here.)How much was that signature? Who knows? The news story doesn't say. Who cares? Getting to watch Reid's embarrassing failure of leadership on this issue was worth any price.
-tdr
Labels: America, Elections, Politics
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Legal Pay To Play Politics In Illinois.
The Illinois Supreme Court ruled, on January 9, 2009, that Roland Burris's appointment to the United States Senate did not require the signature or seal of the Illinois Secretary of State to be valid. (PDF here.) So Burris's appointment is valid and the Secretary of State's refusal to sign, or affix a seal to, the appointment order has no legal effect.
The legal analysis on the last page of the opinion is entertaining and ironic, especially since Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich is being impeached over "pay to play" politics. It turns out that if Governor Blago and Burris want a copy of the appointment order signed and sealed by the Secretary of State, they can pay for it. So says the Illinois Supreme Court on page 9 of its decision.
The legal analysis on the last page of the opinion is entertaining and ironic, especially since Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich is being impeached over "pay to play" politics. It turns out that if Governor Blago and Burris want a copy of the appointment order signed and sealed by the Secretary of State, they can pay for it. So says the Illinois Supreme Court on page 9 of its decision.
"There is one final point we feel constrained to mention. While the Secretary of State has no duty under Illinois law to sign and affix the state seal to the certificate of appointment issued by the Governor, he does have a duty under section 5(4) of the Secretary of State Act (15 ILCS 305/5(4) (West 2006))-tdr
'to give any person requiring the same paying the lawful fees
therefor, a copy of any law, act, resolution, record or paper in
his office, and attach thereto his certificate, under the seal of
the state.'
"The registration of the appointment of Mr. Burris made by the Secretary of State is a “record or paper” within the meaning of this statute. A copy of it is available from the Secretary of State to anyone who requests it. For payment of the normal fee charged by the Secretary of State in accordance with this statute, Petitioners could obtain a certified copy bearing the state’s seal. Because such relief is possible, no order by this court is necessary or appropriate. See People ex rel. Devine v. Stralka, 226 Ill. 2d 445, 450 (2007) (for mandamus to issue, the petitioner must be without any other adequate remedy)."
Labels: America, Elections, Politics
Saturday, January 03, 2009
Obama's Yes We Can In Space.
Bloomberg.com has published an interesting story about the incoming Obama Administration's plans for America's space programs. That's right, programs not program: the military and the civilian wings.
George W. Bush got lots of grief for militarizing space with his national security emphasis on America's space policy. Undeserved, by the way. But Bush's NASA also moved to expand civilian options for launch vehicle with its competition for a private sector replacement to the shuttle. Also Bush's regulators at the FAA helped to make it possible for Burt Rutan to launch SpaceShipOne into space, and have been very helpful in setting up a favorable regulatory regime for the new private space programs.
Now the incoming Obama administration is considering breaking the barriers between the Pentagon and NASA and having America's two government spacefaring organizations share resources.
At first glance this appears positive. Combining the military and the civilian wings of America's space program instantly increases the resources available to each. Also, if I may, it takes two wings to fly, you know. Ultimately, a serious American government space program will look more like a military organization than it does now.
Space enthusiasts spend enormous energy and time trying to figure out how to get the younger generation more interested in space exploration. Recommendations include making space exploration be about the coolness of astronomy, searching for alien life, saving humanity through space colonization, saving the Earth through space industry, or learning about other planets to better understand and save our own. For example, if we can understand why Venus became a greenhouse hothouse, maybe we can prevent it happening here. If we can understand why Mars lost its magnetic field, maybe we can prevent it happening here. If we can beam clean energy from orbit, maybe we can slow down pollution on Earth. If we can strip mine the asteroids, maybe we can preserve our own planet. Call it Greenspace.
But space enthusiasts have another option for increasing the glamorous allure of space. Make space exploration about something that is part of humanity's soul: nationalism. Make the space program about serving the country, throw in uniforms and ranks, and we'll have no shortage or recruits. Call it Spacefleet.
-tdr
Republished once for editing purposes. No content changed.
George W. Bush got lots of grief for militarizing space with his national security emphasis on America's space policy. Undeserved, by the way. But Bush's NASA also moved to expand civilian options for launch vehicle with its competition for a private sector replacement to the shuttle. Also Bush's regulators at the FAA helped to make it possible for Burt Rutan to launch SpaceShipOne into space, and have been very helpful in setting up a favorable regulatory regime for the new private space programs.
Now the incoming Obama administration is considering breaking the barriers between the Pentagon and NASA and having America's two government spacefaring organizations share resources.
"President-elect Barack Obama will probably tear down long-standing barriers between the U.S.’s civilian and military space programs to speed up a mission to the moon amid the prospect of a new space race with China.
"Obama’s transition team is considering a collaboration between the Defense Department and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration because military rockets may be cheaper and ready sooner than the space agency’s planned launch vehicle, which isn’t slated to fly until 2015, according to people who’ve discussed the idea with the Obama team.
"The potential change comes as Pentagon concerns are rising over China’s space ambitions because of what is perceived as an eventual threat to U.S. defense satellites, the lofty battlefield eyes of the military." (Here.)
At first glance this appears positive. Combining the military and the civilian wings of America's space program instantly increases the resources available to each. Also, if I may, it takes two wings to fly, you know. Ultimately, a serious American government space program will look more like a military organization than it does now.
Space enthusiasts spend enormous energy and time trying to figure out how to get the younger generation more interested in space exploration. Recommendations include making space exploration be about the coolness of astronomy, searching for alien life, saving humanity through space colonization, saving the Earth through space industry, or learning about other planets to better understand and save our own. For example, if we can understand why Venus became a greenhouse hothouse, maybe we can prevent it happening here. If we can understand why Mars lost its magnetic field, maybe we can prevent it happening here. If we can beam clean energy from orbit, maybe we can slow down pollution on Earth. If we can strip mine the asteroids, maybe we can preserve our own planet. Call it Greenspace.
But space enthusiasts have another option for increasing the glamorous allure of space. Make space exploration about something that is part of humanity's soul: nationalism. Make the space program about serving the country, throw in uniforms and ranks, and we'll have no shortage or recruits. Call it Spacefleet.
-tdr
Republished once for editing purposes. No content changed.
Labels: America, NASA, Nationalism, Space Exploration, Space War
Friday, January 02, 2009
Nothing Is More Beautiful Than Rules.
In a story today (here) about the handover of authority from American to Iraqi forces in Baghdad's Green Zone, Haider Mahmoud, an Iraqi guard, said something profound.
-tdr
"Nothing is more beautiful than rules."There's a tendency to see only bad coming out of America's 6 year military involvement in Iraq. Six years ago Iraqi and American soldiers were fighting each other to the death. Now Iraq's soldiers are trained by and fight alongside Americans. Relationships that are developing now between the two armies, especially among the officers, is bound to make a difference. And if Mahmoud's comment is any indication, America's soldiers are providing an example of professionalism and respect for law, that is sinking in.
-tdr
Tuesday, December 02, 2008
Wisdom Of The Over-Educated.
Before 2008, California, much like the rest of the United States, limited marriage to different-sex partners. California followed much of human history in that regard. Marriage may have included multiple partners in some societies but its normative characteristic throughout history has been its heterosexual nature.
But earlier this year four California Supreme Court justices outvoted three other justices and held that it violates the California Constitution to deny same-sex couples the right to marry. Last month, 52 percent of California's voters passed Proposition 8, which overturned the decision of the four justices, and amended the Constitution to reinstate the normative definition of marriage as being a relationship between different-sex partners.
Because of the type of society we live in today, California's voters might not have the last word on the matter. The California Supreme Court will decide a case next year brought by same-sex marriage supporters who believe it violated the California Constitution to let the voters decide what marriage is.
Although California's Supreme Court has not been asked to decide this issue, some believe the vote violated the principle of freedom from the establishment of religion. For instance, University of Chicago law professor Geoffrey Stone:
Rather than seeking to impose their religious views on others, it's more likely that California's voters decided marriage should reflect certain biological facts about human reproduction and childood development. Humans reproduce sexually and children are dependent on their parents for years. Marriage helps to ensure that a child's family will, in most circumstances, include his or her mother and father by binding the parents to each other and their children through a public, legal commitment.
As to whether the decision of California's voters to return marriage to its normative definition is a threat to a free society, Abraham Lincoln's words from 147 years ago about letting the Supreme Court decide certain policy matters have resonance today.
Republished twice (a record!) to fix typos: missing words.
But earlier this year four California Supreme Court justices outvoted three other justices and held that it violates the California Constitution to deny same-sex couples the right to marry. Last month, 52 percent of California's voters passed Proposition 8, which overturned the decision of the four justices, and amended the Constitution to reinstate the normative definition of marriage as being a relationship between different-sex partners.
Because of the type of society we live in today, California's voters might not have the last word on the matter. The California Supreme Court will decide a case next year brought by same-sex marriage supporters who believe it violated the California Constitution to let the voters decide what marriage is.
Although California's Supreme Court has not been asked to decide this issue, some believe the vote violated the principle of freedom from the establishment of religion. For instance, University of Chicago law professor Geoffrey Stone:
"Proposition 8 was enacted by a vote of 52% to 48%. Those identifying themselves as Evangelicals, however, supported Proposition 8 by a margin of 81% to 19%, and those who say they attend church services weekly supported Proposition 8 by a vote of 84% to 16%. Non-Christians, by the way, opposed Proposition 8 by a margin 85% to 15% and those who do not attend church regularly opposed Proposition 8 by a vote of 83% to 17%.That's right. The decision of the voters in California to return marriage to its normative definition as a relationship involving different-sex partners is a threat to a free society. Letting four judges change the definition of marriage for 37 million Californians? No threat to a free society at all. Let's hear it for the wisdom of higher education.
"What this tells us, quite strikingly, is that Proposition 8 was a highly successful effort of a particular religious group to conscript the power of the state to impose their religious beliefs on their fellow citizens, whether or not those citizens share those beliefs. This is a serious threat to a free society committed to the principle of separation of church and state." (Here.)
Rather than seeking to impose their religious views on others, it's more likely that California's voters decided marriage should reflect certain biological facts about human reproduction and childood development. Humans reproduce sexually and children are dependent on their parents for years. Marriage helps to ensure that a child's family will, in most circumstances, include his or her mother and father by binding the parents to each other and their children through a public, legal commitment.
As to whether the decision of California's voters to return marriage to its normative definition is a threat to a free society, Abraham Lincoln's words from 147 years ago about letting the Supreme Court decide certain policy matters have resonance today.
"At the same time, the candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made in ordinary litigation between parties in personal actions the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their Government into the hands of that eminent tribunal." (Here.)-tdr
Republished twice (a record!) to fix typos: missing words.
Labels: America, California, Elections, Law, Sex, Society
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Americans Flunk Civics Test. Again.
The Intercollegiate Studies Institute has an online civics test. Go to its site at americancivicliteracy.org and take the test. (Here.) When you're done read the ISI's depressing press release and compare your score to the scores of your fellow Americans. (PDF Here.)
Apparently, Americans don't know much about their own government. My favorite finding? A college education doesn't help. My second favorite finding? Elected officials scored worse than the general population.
I took the test and scored 32 correct out of 33 questions, for a percentage of 96.97 correct. I answered question 33 incorrectly. My excuse is that I misread the multiple choice answers for that question. Or maybe it was the last question and I saw the open barn door, lost my focus, and broke into a gallop. Whatever, it was still a wrong answer, dammit.
-tdr
Apparently, Americans don't know much about their own government. My favorite finding? A college education doesn't help. My second favorite finding? Elected officials scored worse than the general population.
I took the test and scored 32 correct out of 33 questions, for a percentage of 96.97 correct. I answered question 33 incorrectly. My excuse is that I misread the multiple choice answers for that question. Or maybe it was the last question and I saw the open barn door, lost my focus, and broke into a gallop. Whatever, it was still a wrong answer, dammit.
-tdr
Labels: America, Education, Politics
