More Avian Flu

Taleena comments:

Disaster Planning in this state was recently evaluated by a Representative who is also a National Guard. I was greatly reassured by his assesment of preparedness on a state level.

I have talked to the kid's pediatrician about avian flu and am less unhappy about US preparedness than I was. Whether the avian flu will jump to humans and IF our medications work on it is another ball of wax.

Avian Flu has made the jump to humans in Southeast Asia. The question has become: how contagious and virulent are the strains that have made the jump, and how effective are our current public health treatments and measures.

As to treatments, apparently current antivirals are effective, a vaccination would be much more effective.

As to the public health issues, the reason that I recalled the Swine Flu scare is that it became a metaphor of government incompetence in the late 1970's and helped keep President Ford from re-election.

Recall also the bioterrorism scare in 2002 and the debate about the availability and safety of smallpox vaccine. Was there enough vaccine? Who should be vaccinated? When public health officials and other first-responders began declining to receive vaccination, it was a political death-knell to the program. Again, it made the current administration look incompetent.

Recall last fall when early indicators seemed to show that the prevalent influenza strain of 2004 was going to be especially nasty and that there was not going to be enough vaccine. After a public scare and people scalping non-FDA-approved vaccine doses in grocery stores, the feared pandemic did not occur.

These events are the equivalent to the repeated calls to evacuate the low-lying Gulf coast areas in the face of an approaching hurricane, then having the hurricane swerve or lose severity. Prudent people evacuate with all the attendant costs and risks, then return to find imprudent people have suffered no loss.

The ghosts of the Swine-flu and smallpox campaigns have got to chill the counsels of any administration considering a large-scale vaccination program. Vaccination for any disease is not a zero-risk action. It must be balanced against the probability of infection and the danger of the specific disease.

Public health issues are a thorny problem to libertarian and small-government people like me. It is a case where collective action may be honestly mandated and those that do not cooperate can be honestly compelled. What I demand, though, is that those in charge of public health issues be competent and virtuous. (Which statement has made my inner libertarian put the noose around his neck and kick away the stool.)

What do I propose to do myself? Keep an eye on the news about Avian flu. Become a bit obsessive/compulsive about hygiene and washing my hands after being in public. Worry.

UPDATE: Apparently the Avian Flu lacks the ability to be transmitted from human to human. All cases have so far been from bird to human (hence the name...).

I am not completely comforted by this. Influenza virii change protein coats the way I change my shirt. The ability of Avain Flu to jump human-to-human is just a few seasons away. Its mortality rate is ~50% and the vaccine manufacturers are pounded daily by the groups for giving their children autism.

Worry will continue...

More to worry about--the Avian Flu

People over a certain age remember the Great Swine Flu scare of 1976. On Februray 5th of that year, an Army recruit at Fort Dix, New Jersey said he felt tired and week. The next day he was dead. The public health officials of the time saw good evidence that the disease that killed the recruit was closely related to the "Spanish" flu that killed up to 100 million people worldwide in 1918-1919.

The disconnect between the public health concerns about a new pandemic and the media's response is alarming.

If the scientific complications of the National Influenza Immunization Program (NIIP) were not enough, the media only helped to make the situation worse. First of all, while the program received broad support at its inception, the press was quick to criticize the program once no new incidents of swine flu appeared in the months after the Fort Dix affair, and emphasized the criticisms of people such as Albert Sabin, known for his polio vaccinations, who originally supported the project, but later pushed for a stockpiling of the vaccination. The press did more than just discourage the immunization plan, for they also helped to push the program forward. In August, when the NIIP appeared likely to never get off the ground, an outbreak of a particularly lethal strain of pneumonia occurred at the Pennsylvania State Convention of the American Legion, killing 29 of 182 cases. While it was later discovered that the disease, called Legionnaire's Disease, was caused by a relatively unknown bacteria, and was in no way connected to swine flu, the press had already played its part. Immediately, despite no evidence to support the claim, the connection was made in the media between the Legionnaires' Disease and swine flu. This was enough public agitation to push necessary legislation through congress, allowing the NIIP to go forward. While the press had helped to save the immunization program, it had done so using extravagant claims, and it might have proved useful if the NIIP had not survived at all. Another example of sensationalism in the media occurred when a few days after the beginning of the immunization program three elderly people died at a vaccination station. Once again, while there was no evidence that the deaths were related to the vaccine, the press quickly exaggerated the story, creating an imagined "body-count" of vaccine victims. The hysteria that followed caused nine states to close down their immunization programs until the CDC announced decisively that the deaths were in no way connected to the vaccination. Judging from these incidents, it is not surprising that the press acted little differently when the actual connection between GBS and the vaccine was discovered. While the press can be slighted for its sensationalist portrayals of the immunization program, the leaders of the program should also be held responsible, for not creating a better relationship with the media, and not using this source as a way to educate the public about the program and influenza.

So why is this important to me now? Because we are looking at another possible influenza pandemic and the authorities seem as clueless as ever:

You think Katrina was bad, imagine a bird flu pandemic which will spread from country to country. The UN and WHO will be in the position of the federal government!

You think the Katrina situation was confused, imagine what an avian flu pandemic would be like: poor countries trying to cover-up cases while the outbreak becomes increasingly widespread while the UN/WHO stands by impotently.

A top H5N1 researcher Yi Guan agrees with me

He urged the World Health Organization and Food and Agriculture Organization to take a more direct role to avert the looming pandemic, which he believes will happen if aggressive action is not taken

"The WHO and FAO must set up a joint expert team. They must get into the (affected) countries and compel them to make changes, take drastic action. The U.N. must say that if you don't follow suit, you will be punished," said the scientist.

A plan that included close surveillance, rapid quarantine, stockpiles of antiviral drugs (and hopefully a vaccine) might be enough to halt spread of the virus andprevent a pandemic, but right now it seems unlikely that will happen. The idea of UN punishment as a stick is, unfortunately, almost laughable.

I'd be a lot happier if Congress and the media would focus on what to do about the next predictable crises, not on what went wrong in Katrina. 1,000 dead seems to be the upper limit on the number who died in Katrina. The number who'd die in an epidemic could be 4 or 5 orders of magnitude large.

So my disaster planning needs to include disruption of services due to quarantines.

…And speaking of the Katrina disaster…

…And speaking of the Katrina disaster…

Though the media are focusing on New Orleans, Katrina made landfall in Mississippi and the damage extended well into Alabama. Apparently the state governments there reacted appropriately. I don’t want to trade in stereotypes here, but how bad is your state government when it is less effective than Mississippi and Alabama? I'm an implacable opponent of my Governor Christine Gregoire but she doesn't seem as inept as Governor Blanco.

In any case, the last few nights Mrs. Islander and I started talking about disaster preparedness. While the example of the Superdome is extreme, it does point out the problems of not preparing for and not responding correctly to an emergency.

We seem to be ahead of many of the poor families paraded before the television cameras: we own a minivan and a small pickup truck, we are married with all of our children grown and living on their own, we have some small money in the bank for emergencies.

But. We live on an island, connected to the mainland by two ferry lines and a rather dramatic bridge. Our children (and grandchildren) live on the same island.

Here in the Puget Sound, the dangers of catastrophic weather are rather low, but we do have the full menu of seismic events, including volcanoes, earthquakes, and tsunamis. These events do not generally provide a lot of warning before they hit, but there are exceptions:

He [Harry Truman] became a minor celebrity during the two months of volcanic activity preceding the [Mt. St. Helens] eruption, giving interviews to reporters and expressing his opinion that the danger from the volcano was "overexaggerated". He died in the blast, along with 56 other people, and his body was never found.

So, living on an Island as we do, what considerations must we have for coping with an emergency?

We live (currently) on high ground, so immediate danger from a tsunami is limited. The major volcanoes in the region (Mount Rainier and Mount Baker) are well to the east and downwind. Earthquakes are the ultimate crapshoot. So the most preventable danger seems to not lie in some sudden, overwhelming catastrophe, but from the secondary effect of a disaster. The major danger is disruption of the civic infrastructure and civil disorder.

Remember, most people that died in New Orleans died not from the hurricane, nor even the flooding when the floodwalls gave way, but from heat and dehydration when city utilities stopped and they couldn’t drive to the Piggly-Wiggly.

Way back in 2002, Tom Ridge had the Department of Homeland Security devise a kits that would be provide a three-day bridge from the time of a disaster until help could reasonably arrive. Wizbang Blog gives a list for a kit that costs less than $50, but even I don't care for Dinty Moore beef stew that much.

In the unlikely case that we needed to evacuate the Island:

• This summer Mrs. Islander and I picked up a couple of sturdy ice chests (not the flimsy foamed polystyrene kind). It would take less than five minutes to fill them with food and throw them into one of the vehicles.
• We need to get some water set aside. Quickest and easiest: Safeway and Albertsons are selling gallons of spring water for a buck.
• We have a variety of pet carriers. We plan on taking Selkie the dalmation and Daphnie the old siamese with us. (The other two cats are pretty-nigh uncatchable in an emergency. They are On Their Own.)
  
• I just thought that I need to throw some hard-wearing clothes into a duffle. Fixing a flat in dress pants and shoes doesn't seem smart. Warm coat. Raingear.)
  
• Having emergency contacts out-of-state is very important. The Airedale is using his parents in Tennesee; I am proposing my brother in California. This is not either/or. Redundancy is a feature. We need to make up a call list and get it to everyone.
  
• If an emergency hits during a weekday, it's a good bet that the Geek and I will be in Seattle. We need to plan a possible mainland meeting spot that doesn't require anyone to try to enter the city.
  

For quite a while in the 1970's and 1980's I was an armchair survivalist. I read a lot of Bradford & Veena Angiers and Dean Ing. Now seems to be a good time to review some of these old lessons.

The best part of all this is that we live in a very wealthy country, with truly robust infrastructures. The fragility of the system seems to be in the immediate.

Reading list:

Pulling Through by Dean Ing
At Home in the Woods by Bradford and Vena Angier

More Later....

Jetpacks over New Orleans

Scott Edelman has an editorial over at SciFi.com entitled: The Odds of Being Uneven. It's a thought about how the fruits of science and technology seem to be poorly distributed among the population. He quotes William Gibson's aphorism, "the future is already here—it's just unevenly distributed."

I sent a reply to SciFi.com and to Mr. Edelman that I am adapting for this post.

Certainly the problem of uneven distribution of the fruits of scientific and technological advance is one of great challenges of our age.

However, the challenge needs to be seen in two segments: those who cannot take advantage of those fruits, and those who (for various reasons) choose not take advantage. In the first segment we have those have no access to the "Future," those for whom geographic or cultural isolation bars them from those fruits. These can include indigenous peoples living in the Amazonian rain forest or sub-Sahara Africa. Bringing the future to these peoples seems almost straightforward. Our problem lies with the other segment.

Those that choose not to take advantage of the future include anti-technology groups such as the Amish, various counter-culture “simplicity” advocates, populations living under Sharia law in many Middle-Eastern countries, and regrettably, many inner-city poor.

For those that have seen the “future” and turned away, I can say no more than to promise I won’t fly my jetpack over their compounds and scare the livestock. Yet even these people must come to some accommodation with the future. (Stephenson’s The Diamond Age posits them selling status-bringing craftwork to those whom technology has provided wealth.)

Those whose access to the future is barred by cultural taboos are the subject of a whole ‘nother editorial.

But problem of the American inner-city poor is not that they do not have access to the “Future,” that is, the fruits of science and technology. It is that many of them do not understand how their futures must change how they behave in the present. Poor people have a lot of trouble envisioning the future and then planning for it. One must plan to finish high school, one must plan to take an entry-level job, seeing it as an entrance to to working world, one must plan not to have illegitimate children.

And by poor I do not mean those who do not have money at any particular instant. I have been broke and homeless in a strange city during one of the technology busts of the 1970’s-1980’s. Poverty is a cultural problem that has resisted the best efforts of armies of dedicated social-service workers funded with multiple trillions of dollars over the last three decades.

Edelman writes:

What the despair dredged up last week showed was that those with access to cars and credit cards (all 20th-century inventions) could at least make an attempt to escape, while those without could not.

Cars and credit cards were accessible to almost anyone in New Orleans who behaved in ways that made them available. The problem was not access. The problem was that their behaviors made the fruits unavailable. To cite an gedankenexperiment, if I drive drunk and have my car seized by the police, I will not have a car to evacuate. More commonly, if I cannot (or will not) hold down a paying job, I won’t have a credit card to fund my evacuation. This is not to blame the victims trapped in New Orleans by the flooding, which people included many wealthy tourists who were abandoned in their hotels. These people were failed by their mayor, their police department, their governor and the federal bureaucracy.

Again, Edelman writes:

I still believe in the future. But we must engineer its approach so that its fruits will be shared by all. Humanity has always been separated into the haves and the have-nots. We have just been reminded of the consequences of that. As the promises of science fiction continue to come true, the gap between those two groups will grow even larger. Isn't it about time we spent as much time and energy solving that problem as we're doing on creating cell phones that will download clips from American Idol even faster for those who can afford them?

Because when I finally am flitting through the skies strapped to my personal jetpack, I don't want to be looking down at those living in poverty below.

I want all of us to be flying high together.

I, too, want all of us (who so choose) to revel in the promise of the Future. The problem that we must address is not how to shower (distribute) material things onto the poor, for everyone must have a choice to accept or reject the Future. But rather, how can we develop social safety nets that do not provide a disincentive to the virtues of industry, thrift, and personal responsibility?

Weekly World News

Every time I pass through a supermarket checkout line I see what Hodding Carter III called "The Dark Side of American journalism." No, not National Review, but the tabloids.

I have never spent a penny on these strange papers and never will. I cannot imagine how they stay in business. Not because I think that most people share my scruples (the tabloid's continued success puts paid to that theory), but because as you pass them by you can read the headlines. And from the time or two I've (guiltily) opened the pages and looked inside, the headlines are the publication's best parts.

Years back, Dave Barry supposed that the tabloids composed headlines by reaching into a series of buckets and pulling out a series of names, verbs, and nouns: "Donny and Marie--are--Negros!"*

In the last few years, the old names in tabloids, National Enquirerer and The Star, seemed to have attempted to re-invent themselves as varieties of down-scale People Magazines.

But one paper has bucked the trend. The Weekly World News has apparently walked the Möbius strip of weirdness and met itself. Its new tagline is: "America's only Reliable Newspaper." And in a backhanded way, that may be the only true statement on the page and one of the most true statements in American journalism.

* In that column he announced a contest for the best tabloid headlines. In case you wondered, yes I entered, but lost. I think my entries were too good to win:

• Top Scientists find real-life "Temple of Doom."
• Elizabeth Taylor wants baby; Michael Jackson says, "No!"

Keep in mind this was the early 1980's, before the Space Alien endorsed Ross Perot.

I Hate Ukemi

For those of you unfamiliar with Aikido, ukemi translates as "receiving with the body." What ukemi means is falls and rolls. It is the collection of techniques that allow a person to be on the receiving end of an Aikido technique with the least possible chance of injury.

At the end of each lesson's beginning warm-up period, Sensei calls out, "Two lines for ukemi please!" And all the students answer, "Onegaishimasu!" We then form two lines and proceed to do rolls down the length of the dojo. As we reach the end of the mats, we file back to the head of the line and roll again; once forward on the left, once forward on the right, once backward on the left, once backward on the right, twice jumping over a person kneeling halfway down the mat. That might be all, unless Sensei feels that we need more ukemi practice, and he dispassionately watches as we stagger dutifully back up to the head of the lines.

I hate ukemi.

Apparently I'm not the only one. Here are a few definitions from the Aikido FAQ

Aikido: (1) The art of unity with the ground. (2) The way of blending energy. The Aikidoka (one who practices Aikido) attempts to become one with the mat by being thrown into it repeatedly in the hope that they will merge with the mat. This usually doesn't happen, so the process must be repeated. Frequently.

Ukemi: (1) The art of blending with the mat--part of what Aikidoka study. (2) The art of hurling yourself at the Earth for no good reason.

Nage-waza: The art of helping others to blend with the mat--the other part of what Aikidoka study.

Shodan (male): A male who is so adept at blending (and helping others to blend) that he can wear a skirt to class and nobody in class will laugh at him because he might help them learn to blend with the mat--at high velocity.

One reason that I hate ukemi is that I'm not very good at it. I am such a big guy (6'5", 280 lbs) that I carry a lot of momentum. My forward rolls can scare my Sensei. After two backward rolls I am so dizzy that if I don't sit seiza for a few minutes, I'll loose whatever is in my stomach. So I begin my study of techniques in a state of dizziness and mild nausea.

Why do I continue? As Oscar Medina says:

Ukemi is the actual vehicle through which you learn Aikido. Most Americans have difficulty with this concept, believing that you learn the techniques of Aikido by performing them as nage [one who throws]. Nothing could be farther from the truth. What you receive through your body as uke [one who is thrown] is not the losing end of someone else's execution of an Aikido technique. What you receive is the essence of Aikido itself. Bit by bit, your body and senses are learning the movement and energy of the technique as it is being done to you. You are learning what feels strong and right, and what does not. Aikido is thus transmitted directly from body to body. In order for Aikido to become effective, you must develop within yourself "good one point", "ki extension", the ability to maintain "weight underside" and "remain relaxed" throughout the waza. All four of these items are developed through ukemi rather than through doing the waza. As your skill at ukemi improves, your ability to perform the techniques of Aikido will likewise improve. They are directly linked.

Sigh.

So I continue to hurl myself at the ground, "for no good reason."

Count your blessings--SCOTUS edition

At least the SCOTUS cadidate search didn't turn out like the VP search--with Dick Cheney nominating himself.

Willy Wonka

I really enjoy Roald Dahl's children's stories; I very much enjoy Jonny Depp's quirky movie portayals; and I enjoy Tim Burton's dark humor.

But I won't see Charlie and the Chocolate Factory any time soon.

The trailers shown on television are just too creepy with the aroma of the Michael Jackson trial still stinking up the cultural atmosphere.

Oddly enough Megan Basham enjoyed it more than the 1971 Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.

Wooo Hoo!

Interview next Wednesday. Time to refresh my Java buzzwords.

The Monolo...

...comments on Charlotte Church and Simian Fashions.

Aye, Carumba!

So I go in to my customer's site last week to find that they have reorganized again. They have shifted to Santa Rosa, California the managment responsibility for the product that I was documenting.

Now I am out on the streets again, prowling for a gig.

The economic climate is far better today than it was four years ago, or even last year, so I'm not despondant. Yet, there is the duty of re-examining the resumé, dusting off cover letters, and finding them rather dated, like pleated kahki pants. (Or are pleat fronts back in style? I can't quite keep up.)

I have a couple of months of invoices in the payment pipeline, so no cash crunch, but I do enjoy being with the grown-ups.

I imagine I'll have to eventually post a link to my resumé. Sigh.

2008 = 1968?

Over at TPMCafe, David Gelber looks to 2008 and sees 1968:

I’m beginning to think the Democratic Convention in 2008 could end up looking and sounding a lot like Chicago, 1968. If the leadership of the Democratic Party (other than Ted Kennedy) continues to resist setting a firm date for withdrawal from Iraq, you can be sure that a Gene McCarthy/Bobby Kennedy will emerge to mobilize a peace bloc determined to get us out. And, quite obviously, we’re not talking about a fringe group. You’ve probably heard by now that the Republican Congressman whose district includes Camp Lejeune came out today for setting a withdrawal date. The other day, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer asked its readers if it’s “time to begin the careful but quick withdrawal of American forces from Iraq”. 2,600 readers responded, and more than 90 percent answered in the affirmative. And, of course, polls are already saying that a majority of Americans think the war isn’t worth it. I can’t imagine those numbers turning the other way.

Will Hillary be Hubert?

For those of my readers who weren't alive in 1968, let me recap:

In 1964, civil rights workers from southern states responded to the Jim Crow policies of their state's Democratic parties by forming their own delegations to the 1964 Democratic National Convention. There, they precipitated a crisis by demanding to be seated in place of the delegations selected by the tainted elections process. LBJ, furious that his nomination be overshadowed by what he considered a sideshow, sent his V.P. selection, Hubert Humphrey to deal with the dissidents.

Hubert tried to get the civil rights workers to back off from their challenge and accept a pledge of good faith that the administration would make civil rights a priority. In the end, the delegates were not seated and many felt betrayed.

In 1968 this radicalized segment saw the nomination of Hubert Humphrey as a confirmation of the Democrat's lack of seriousness on civil rights. They joined radical anti-war protestors and filled Chicago's streets with a surging mass of people one step away from riot. The riot was kicked off by Democratic mayor Richard J. Daley when overworked Chicago police charged demonstrators on Michigan avenue and Daley was overheard giving the order, "Shoot to maim."

Chicago was a real landmark of the times, providing a brutal punctuation to the "Summer of Love." It showed a generation of idealistic volunteers how cynical their political bosses were. Young people carried banners that declared, "Keep the Country Hump-free." Nixon won the election.

By 1972, the debacle of Chicago swept in the goo-goo candidacy of George McGovern. Nixon won re-election. But Nixon's own paranoia in that campaign ensured that James Earl Carter would be the next elected president.

So Chicago was something of a "Perfect Storm" of politics. Without 1964 betrayal of the civil rights workers, LBJ would not have placed Humphrey as his vice-presidential choice. Without Humphrey running, the civil right community would not have been so up in arms. Without the civil rights delegates, the anti-war protestors would have stood alone. Without the hard hand of "Boss" Daley, the protests would not have spiraled into a "police riot."

I just don't think that fair-trade mocha-lattes can generate enough energy to get the MoveOn crowd up in arms about Hillary selling them out. I don't think that gay marriage activists will join the black-hood anarchists in a riot. And I don't think that any American mayor will be as stupid as Daley was in that hot August week back in 1968.

Not Really a Michael Jackson Post

I was sitting in the restaurant, a straggler of the lunch crowd. As she brought me my check, my waitress leaned over and confided, "Michael Jackson has just been found innocent on all counts."

Seeing the puzzled look on my face, she nodded her head to the TV set in the bar. CNN was running footage of crowds surging around the courthouse. I shrugged, "There's a mile of difference between 'innocent' and 'not proven guilty.' The people who should have been on trial are the parents who pimped their children for a chance to stand next to wealth and fame."

She nodded in an agreeable way and walked away with my Visa. The reason that I had looked puzzled was that I haven't given two minutes of thought to the Michael Jackson case since it started. At he only got those two minutes because that's the cumulative time I spent switching channels away from television shows that popped his mug on the screen.

So I don't have any opinion of the verdict in the case. Or, rather, my opinion of the verdict has nothing to do with the evidence (I don't know what the evidence is), or the personalities (please God, I'll never meet any of these creepy people) involved. No, my opinion is based on my certain knowledge and experience raising children.

What were these parents thinking? I am the father of two daughters and let me tell you, mister, you wouldn't have gotten within a mile of my girls if you were one-tenth as creepy as the Gloved One. I had a brother in law that would try to sit on the couch with them...very closely on the couch with them. Touching them close. That lasted about two minutes. We weren't insulting, but we made sure that when family came over we knew where everyone was at all times; and we made sure that he sat with his wife, or sat alone.

Now I'm not talking of the parents of the disadvantaged or handicapped kids that were invited to day excursions of Neverland. I'm talking about parents who, knowing the accusations made against Jackson in the early 1990s, allowed them to spend the night with Jackson and to sleep in the same bed as Jackson.

Now, having said all that, perhaps Michael Jackson is innocent of all that he is being accused of. If so, he has been acting in a manner guaranteed to raise eyebrows, if not fists.

Rich famous people are famously surrounded by enabling toadies. God save me from celebrity.

Apple and Intel. Are you too paranoid?

Or not paranoid enough?

Cringley says: Apple and Intel are going to merge, and it's Intel's Idea devised to screw Microsoft!

Shape of Days says: Apple has provided to developers an unlocked, Intel-compiled version of Mac OS 10.4 knowing that it would leak to warz sites to screw Microsoft!

I'm not saying that I believe either of these viewpoints, but they do follow the money trail. In the words of Jake Gittes, "You can follow the action, which gets you good pictures. You can follow your instincts, which'll probably get you in trouble. Or, you can follow the money, which nine times out of ten will get you closer to the truth."

It's remarkable that in a business based on rather cool, abstract logic, passions run so high.

Instant karma's gonna get yah.

Sith Lords are no darker than your average Republicans

Darth Vader: The Exclusive Interview

DV:...The Emperor wasn't an Emperor, the Rebellion wasn't a Rebellion. It was all politics. Palpatine won a closely contested election, and the Jedi got ticked. The Sith may have controlled the Chancellorship and the Senate, but the Jedi had the damned media behind them. And the academics, and they're the ones who write the history books. The truth is, I started out with the Jedi, and Palpatine ultimately converted me to the Sith. The Sith political party, not some scary cult that went around lopping off people's hands....

MY: Wait a minute, wait a minute—are you saying that the Sith and Jedi are only political parties?

Lots of funny. Check it out.

Oww! That's gonna leave a scar...

Know why I laugh when I hear leaders of the Democratic party give stern warnings about how Republicans are goose-stepping in unison to rule the country?

Stuff like this:

Here's Geoffrey Norman in the American Spectator reacting to the nauseating (so to speak) comments by Bush's 'Drug Czar' on Raich:

"You would think a man with $35 billion to spend would have more important things on his agenda than doing an end-zone dance over the bodies of a few cancer patients looking for a little relief from the side-effects of chemo."

Ouch.

It's good to see some attention being focussed on the administration's role in this miserable fiasco. Yes, the court ruled in the way it did, but the case was pursued by Bush's administration, and the president should take responsibility for it. Reduce his efforts to their essence and you are left with two things: (1) a message to the sick that says 'drop dead, painfully'; and (2) the information that federalism is meaningless.

Some compassion. Some conservatism.

If criticism this robust takes place under the aegis of two of the U.S.'s premier conservative political publications, I rest easy.

The Struggle is Ended

The engineer who is creating the GUI for the product I am documenting responded to my questions with, "You not documenting that!? I'm rewriting the interface!"

Time to go home and play with my new grill.

On Buying a New Grill

David Brooks starts a piece on the new Exurbia phenomena with a howlingly funny vingnette:

I DON'T KNOW if you've ever noticed the expression of a man who is about to buy a first-class barbecue grill. He walks into a Home Depot or Lowe's or one of the other mega hardware complexes and his eyes are glistening with a faraway visionary zeal, like one of those old prophets gazing into the promised land. His lips are parted and twitching slightly. Inside the megastore, the grills are just past the racks of affordable-house plan books, in the yard-machinery section. They are arrayed magnificently next to the vehicles that used to be known as rider mowers but are now known as lawn tractors, because to call them rider mowers doesn't really convey the steroid-enhanced M-1 tank power of the things.

The man approaches the barbecue grills and his face bears a trance-like expression, suggesting that he has cast aside all the pains and imperfections of this world and is approaching the gateway to a higher dimension. In front of him are a number of massive steel-coated reactors with names like Broilmaster P3, The Thermidor, and the Weber Genesis, because in America it seems perfectly normal to name a backyard barbecue grill after a book of the Bible.

The items in this cooking arsenal flaunt enough metal to suggest they have been hardened to survive a direct nuclear assault, and Patio Man goes from machine to machine comparing their features--the cast iron/porcelain coated cooking surfaces, the 328,000-Btu heat-generating capacities, the 1,600-degree-tolerance linings, the multiple warming racks, the lava rock containment dishes, the built-in electrical meat thermometers, and so on. Certain profound questions flow through his mind. Is a 542-square-inch grilling surface really enough, considering that he might someday get the urge to roast an uncut buffalo steak? Though the matte steel overcoat resists scratching, doesn't he want a polished steel surface on his grill so he can glance down and admire his reflection as he is performing the suburban manliness rituals, such as brushing tangy sauce on meat slabs with his right hand while clutching a beer can in an NFL foam insulator ring in his left?

Pretty soon a large salesman in an orange vest who looks like a human SUV comes up to him and says, "Howyadoin'," which is, "May I help you?" in Home Depot talk. Patio Man, who has so much lust in his heart it is all he can do to keep from climbing up on one of these machines and whooping rodeo-style with joy, manages to respond appropriately. He grunts inarticulately and nods toward the machines. Careful not to make eye contact at any point, the two manly suburban men have a brief exchange of pseudo-scientific grill argot that neither of them understands, and pretty soon Patio Man has come to the reasoned conclusion that it really does make sense to pay a little extra for a grill with V-shaped metal baffles, ceramic rods, and a side-mounted smoker box. Plus the grill he selects has four insulated drink holders. All major choices of consumer durables these days ultimately come down to which model has the most impressive cup holders.

Last week I had need to go to the Island's new Home Depot. And there they were, the lawn tractors (I pointed out the cup holders to Mrs. Islander) and the gas grills. Now as much as I am weary of pushing my old, chugging lawnmower around the homestead, I really couldn't imagine paying $1.2K$ for the experience of riding. Those grills, however...

I have been using the same old Webber Kettle for over a decade. The aluminum vent controls corroded off a few years ago. 7 years ago, while moving the thing from a second story deck, I placed the lid on the balustrade. Sure enough, when I turned back I knocked it off and it fell 20 feet or so to asphalt. The fall knocked out a divot of the enamel, but it was still mostly round and kind of fit on the kettle, so I have been making do.

I just came back from a lunchtime trip to Costco, where I bought my new first-class grill. It is everything that David Brooks described. Minus the cup holders. I am torn between a wicked case of buyer's regret ("You haven't opened it! You could drive back and get a refund, NO QUESTIONS ASKED!") and sheer desire to cut out of work early, race home, set that thing up in the rain and grill enough food to feed the extended clan.

Stooping to Divisiveness

David Freddoso in National Review Online:

Republicans, Dean said this week in San Francisco, are “pretty much a monolithic party. They all behave the same. They all look the same. It’s pretty much a white Christian party.” If you belong to the GOP, he said in Washington last week, then you “are all about suppressing votes: two voting machines if you live in a black district, ten voting machines if you live in a white district.” If you are a Republican, Dr. Dean says you offer a “dark, difficult and dishonest vision…for America.”

But Dean assures us, “We’re not going to stoop to the kind of divisiveness that the Republicans are doing.” Quite a relief!

There is much legitimate debate over what makes for a good party chairman, but one criterion that nearly everyone can agree on is that he should not be his party’s greatest liability. On that score, Howard Dean is really getting out of hand.

The only questions that I have are:

1. How long until mainstream Democrats say, "Enough is enough," and can Dean?
2. How big a rift will that create with the MoveOn.org wing of the party?
3. Will the Democrats be able to perfume the party enough to make another, more credible play for the center?
4. Will Republican be able to beat the Dean Drum for as long as the Democrats beat the Gingrich Drum? (Unlikely.)
   

The problem with toxic speech like Dean's is that it stinks up the air long after the offender has been shown the door. From fantasy conversations with Evangelicals to crypto-Klan references, Dr. Dean has provided Republican with talking points a-plenty for the next mid-term election.

Thoughts on the failure of the EU Constitution to be ratified by the French

I choose to revise and extend my remarks:

Taleena expresses herself on the stumbles on the road to European Unification:

I have been watching the march to European Unification with an uncomprehending disbelief. The premise seems nice enough, being bound by common goals and needs a partnership to strengthen nations put into writ. The execution turning into a welter of over regulation and bureaucracy that replaces national identity with the faceless form.

If in fact the French and Dutch people reject the bloated nightmare of the EU Constitutional Treaty, how could a governing body ignore them? "It is ok little ducklings," croons Chirac and his cronies, "You must not be allowed to speak. Let us tell you what you really want." If that is what indeed happens the people will not need this they will need the American Method.

For a nation in the EU to rise up in it's hind legs and try "The American Method" (a code word for bloody revolution), several conditions would first be necessary. The first of these would be a re-embracing of the Enlightenment principal that the rights of the individual are building block of human affairs. Or, as it is so eloquently stated, "...Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed."

I was so much provoked that I downloaded the European constitution to compare it with the Constitution of the United States. Sigh. I wonder how old one must be to have been required as a child to memorise the Preamble to the US Constitution?

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

52 words beginning with the statement declaring upon whose authority this constitution is based, "We the People."

So let's look at the first 171 words of the European constitution;

"HIS MAJESTY THE KING OF THE BELGIANS, THE PRESIDENT OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC, HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN OF DENMARK, THE PRESIDENT OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF ESTONIA, THE PRESIDENT OF THE HELLENIC REPUBLIC, HIS MAJESTY THE KING OF SPAIN, THE PRESIDENT OF THE FRENCH REPUBLIC, THE PRESIDENT OF IRELAND, THE PRESIDENT OF THE ITALIAN REPUBLIC, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF CYPRUS, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF LATVIA, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA, HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS THE GRAND DUKE OF LUXEMBOURG, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF HUNGARY, THE PRESIDENT OF MALTA, HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN OF THE NETHERLANDS, THE FEDERAL PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF AUSTRIA, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF POLAND, THE PRESIDENT OF THE PORTUGUESE REPUBLIC, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA, THE PRESIDENT OF THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF FINLAND, THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF SWEDEN, HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND..."

All titles of authority. Forgive the capitals, but they are capped in the original. Almost worse, the vague preamble is concluded with a list of the names of the prime and foreign ministers who signed off on this document.

Now I'm sure that these are all fine people, but, while I enjoy the royalist fantasies of Baroness Orczy and David Webber, I am bone-deep a republican. Were I ever to meet any of these people I would find myself standing, with Chauvelin, ill-clad, and refusing to bow.

Taleena replied:

You are making the assumption that I think Europeans have the gumption and moral clarity to use the American Method, that is in question. I do think that the need it though.

I just love a post that uses the word "gumption." Pure Americana.

And now The Telegraph posts its answer to the Euro constitution, a constitution for a Commonwealth.

An excerpt:

I The European Commonwealth shall be an association of parliamentary democracies that collaborate one with another for mutual benefit.

II The jurisdiction of common European institutions shall be confined to cross-border matters: that is, fields of policy where the actions of one Member State impact directly upon the internal affairs of another. These include: commerce between Member States (but not trade with Third Countries); cross-border environmental pollution; and the maintenance of a free market in goods, services, people and capital.

III For the avoidance of doubt, and as a defence against creative interpretation by European judges, a list of national Reserve Powers shall be drawn up in the Member States' constitutions (or by parliamentary statute in the United Kingdom). Such a list shall include: foreign affairs, defence, asylum and immigration, transport, energy, the powers of regional and local government, agriculture, fisheries, industry, social and employment policy, taxation, health, education, justice and home affairs. In these areas, the supremacy of national parliamentary and legal systems shall be guaranteed.

Common European policies shall come into effect only following a specific implementing decision by the national authorities.

IV Member States shall be free, if they wish, to adopt common policies in these areas. Such initiatives may happen bilaterally or multilaterally, without prejudice to the non-participating members.

While there is more, there is not too much. Nice, terse, and most importantly, it exists to state goals and restrict the power of the government.

Almost American.