Monday, May 09, 2005

I've Got God on My Side

Springsteen rules. He's been waxing poetic since the late 60s and is still writing powerful lyrics. I just picked up the new album, Devil's and Dust - yes, I know, buying hard copies of CD's is so old school now - but I like to feel the disk and turn it over in my hands.

Well, rethinking, I type a new sentence: Here are the lyrics from the whole song (as opposed to the last three verses as I was originally going to filter your way. Is is very salient given the situation our fair government has gotten us into, don't you think?

Got my finger on the trigger
But I don’t know who to trust
I look into your eyes
There’s just devils and dust

We’re a long, long way from home Bob
Home’s a long, long way from us
Feel the dirty winds blowin’
Devils and dust

I got God on my side
I’m just trying to survive
But if what you do to survive
Kills the things you love

Fear is a powerful thing
It can turn your heart black you can trust
It’ll take your God-filled soul
Fill it with devils and dust

Well I dreamed of you last night
In a field of blood and stone
Blood began to dry
And a smell began to rise

Well I dreamed of you last night Mom
In a field of mud and bone
And your blood began to dry
The smell began to rise

Got God on our side
We’re just trying to survive
But if what you do to survive
Kills the things you love

Fear is a powerful thing
It’ll turn your heart black you can trust
It’ll take your God-filled soul
Fill it with devils and dust
It’ll take your God-filled soul
Fill it with devils and dust

Now every woman and every man
They wanna take your right to stand
Find the love with God wills
The faith that He commands

I’ve got my finger on the trigger
Tonight faith just ain’t enough
And I look inside my heart
There’s just devils and dust

But I’ve got God on my side
And I’m just trying to survive
But if what you do to survive
Kills the things you love

Fear is a dangerous thing
It’ll turn your heart black you can trust
It’ll take your God-filled soul
Fill it with devils and dust
It’ll take your God-filled soul
Fill it with devils and dust

Sunday, May 08, 2005

Republicans Admitting Mistakes

"After 9/11, we had to show how committed we were by spending hugely greater amounts of money than ever before, as rapidly as possible. That brought us what we might expect, which is some expensive mistakes. This has been the difficult learning curve of the new discipline known as homeland security." REP. CHRISTOPHER COX, a California Republican who is the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee.

Yeah, like going to Iraq?

Let's see how long the list can get as y'all comment to this post.

Saturday, May 07, 2005

When the President Talks to God

Play this video now.

Soothsaying: Revealing the True Nature of Our Society

Found these two articles on adjacent pages in today's local rag. Just wondering which will get more play over the long term in the news.

RICHMOND - Teachers recognized for outstanding work

SAN JOSE - Teacher arrested in sex-abuse case

My bet is that the one with the most hits will reveal the true nature of our society.

Friday, May 06, 2005

A Prayer for Amercia

This is from Jet over at God Dem! We do need some almighty assistance, don't we?

God, I need your help.

My country has people in it who feel that they can use your name, manipulate your teachings and misrepresent facts in order to influence faithful people for their own ends.

They are bent on changing a nation. They say it is to bring the nation closer to you, but they are dividing people of faith and turning them against each other.

I can't fix this, so I have to give it to you.

Please help me write the truth, care enough to be brave, reform what I can, protect people who need it and find a way to bridge the gaps between people.

Please help us all find the strengths we need to heal our nation and root out those who would destroy her. Help us make her what she should be ... a battered but victorious symbol of the human endeavor.

Thank you for listening, and for all the good stuff in my life. Tell Warren [Zevon] we miss him.
Love, Jet

Giving Darwin the Smack Down - Sub Title: What the *bleep* is "Intelligent Design?"

Well, lookie here. The Kansas School Board is having some more fun at the expense of a dead legend in science and scientific theory, one Charles Darwin.

Ask the religious fringe to explain themselves and they get all a flutter and their tounges tied so much it sounds like they are actaully speaking in tounges.

Here are some nice remarks by Clarence Darrow:

MR. DARROW--Do you think the sun was made on the fourth day?

MR. BRYAN--Yes.

MR. DARROW--And they had evening and morning without the sun?

MR. BRYAN--I am simply saying it is a period.

MR. DARROW--They had evening and morning for four periods without the sun, do you think?

MR. BRYAN--I believe in creation, as there told, and if I am not able to explain it, I will accept it.

MR. DARROW--Then YOU can explain it to suit yourself. And they had the evening and the morning before that time for three days or three periods. All right, that settles it. Now, if you call those periods, they may have been a very long time?

MR. BRYAN--They might have been.

MR. DARROW--The creation might have been going on for a very long time?

MR. BRYAN--It might have continued for millions of years.

End slice:

I may be ignorant, but I had never heard of the "Intelligent Design Netowrk," nor that there was such a philosophy as "intelligent design" before the Mainstream Media Propaganda Machine started reporting the Darwinian battle being fought in Kansas. This begs the question as to what exactly is "intelligent design." It sounds, well, intelligent, as well as something involving thoughtful, very well educated individuals.

Let's let them explain themselves, slice:

The theory of intelligent design (ID) holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause rather than an undirected process such as natural selection. ID is thus a scientific disagreement with the core claim of evolutionary theory that the apparent design of living systems is an illusion.

In a broader sense, Intelligent Design is simply the science of design detection -- how to recognize patterns arranged by an intelligent cause for a purpose. Design detection is used in a number of scientific fields, including anthropology, forensic sciences that seek to explain the cause of events such as a death or fire, cryptanalysis and the search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI). An inference that certain biological information may be the product of an intelligent cause can be tested or evaluated in the same manner as scientists daily test for design in other sciences.

ID is controversial because of the implications of its evidence, rather than the significant weight of its evidence. ID proponents believe science should be conducted objectively, without regard to the implications of its findings. This is particularly necessary in origins science because of its historical (and thus very subjective) nature, and because it is a science that unavoidably impacts religion.

Positive evidence of design in living systems consists of the semantic, meaningful or functional nature of biological information, the lack of any known law that can explain the sequence of symbols that carry the "messages," and statistical and experimental evidence that tends to rule out chance as a plausible explanation. Other evidence challenges the adequacy of natural or material causes to explain both the origin and diversity of life.

Intelligent Design is an intellectual movement that includes a scientific research program for investigating intelligent causes and that challenges naturalistic explanations of origins which currently drive science education and research.

End slice:

Now, I think we can all agree on a solid definition of the word "intelligent." Karl Weick (2001) has an interesting take on "design:"

Design is clearly a process of sensemaking that makes do with whatever materials are at hand...Invariable the resources are less well suited to the exact project than one would prefer but they are all there is...If we take the position that design is often emergent, improvised, locally rational, and built from whatever resources are at hand, then design loses some of its force [to explain].
So, the nice folks at IDN suggest they are deploying a "scientific" research program to debunk a set of longstanding emperical and theoretical arguments in order to specify some kind of "intelligent" design?

Should we pay attention to these folks? As a friend said in a recent email: "Beam me up Scotty, there is no intelligent life down here."


What'd you get?

I am reminded of the Charles Shultz's episode of the Peanuts where Charlie Brown and the crew goes trick-or-treating. Some one quizzes the kids on what they got after each stop. After each child names a wonderful treat, Charlie invariably says, with a grave tone not unlike Eeyore's everyday demeanor, "I got a rock."

When it comes to Abu Ghraib (R-Rated Pics on link), some of the kids involved are getting off scott free, some get demoted, and it remains to be seen who gets the rock.

While all tend to like and sympathize with Charlie Brown, not very many people aspire to be him.

Sanctity

I have posted a simliar thought a while back but got to thinking on the subject one more time as I heard someone on NPR this AM talking, yet again, about the "sanctity of human life." Two Questions:

When a person says that they are working to preserve the "sanctity of human life," what gives them the authority to do so?

Moreover, since when has human life been elevated to the stature of that level of holiness (Warning - R rating on the link - not suitable for young children)?

Round Two of Chemotherapy

Our friend fighting breast cancer underwent the second round of chemo on Wednesday. It was guys night out and the husband was there because his mother was in town to help out (another reason to be thankful for mothers on Sunday).

We met at a local watering hole. He said that he got out the barbershop gear and gave his wife a new Sinead O'Connor look as her hair was falling out anyway. He said, "It's alright, she has a nice head." I suppose not everyone looks good with a a near bald cut. It freaked out their daughter a little as this was not the mom she knows. The kid is getting used to it.

The fetus is doing well, despite it all. They found out the sex - another girl (and no, I am not spilling the beans as they are being very up front and sharing info as they get it). This is good because their near three-year-old daughter was really pulling for a baby sister.

We are up for the next round (3 of 4) in preparing a meal for the family. I am thinking my homemade pizza crust with a serious amount of garlic and flavorful items on top, as people who are taking a course of chemo loose their sense of taste. This should happen in a few weeks.

Half way done...only two to go and the whole family is doing marvelously - Still up beat and strong.

Live Strong everyone.

Just like taking the AM Constitutional, Bombing becomes Ordinary

"It is difficult but you get used to it. It has become part of our daily lives. Just like eating, sleeping, there is bombing." NABA S. HAMID, a professor at Baghdad University.

Just wondering, are there more bombings in Iraq now or before we entered?

Thursday, May 05, 2005

The Death Knell for Tenure

Email from friend:

What professor is going to have time to look at student papers with attached video? Papers will now be spec'd by time? Instead of 1000 words, 5 minutes of the prof's time? Wirelessness reveals what a college always has been, a virtual institution. Goodbye bricks and mortar. They'll be selling courseware, and prof's time and attention instead of room and board, and classroom and lectures.

Link was provided to an article in the NYTimes about Dartmouth College in New Hampshire along the CT river.

My reply:

Re: Dartmouth - Tenure is overrated and soon, very soon, we will see faculty free agency where the students follow the teachers rather than the institution (exept in the case of big time sports clubs). That is, star teachers will be able to teach around the globe and you are right, teachers will be instructing from their virtual home studios and cashing in directly.

Article Slice:

It's not that he doesn't like them or doubts his teaching ability, but Thomas H. Luxon, an English professor at Dartmouth College here, wants to see his students less next semester, hoping they will learn a lot more without having to look at him in a classroom.

...Officials added that the system is secure because the video component is not installed on computers, but instead is downloaded every time it is used. But for right now, faculty and staff like Cynthia Pawlek, associate librarian of the college, are focused on how the network will change teaching and learning here.

"The possibilities are really endless," she said

Fixed Facts v. Facts Fixed

Just been over to Shea's post at Porquoi pas and left a comment. Thought I would pose the same question here in light of my last two posts:

Is it better to for the W, Rove and Co. to have the facts fixed or fixed facts?

Wednesday, May 04, 2005

What would you do if 100 Million of your dollars were missing?

I found this via Yahoo and the AP and then went to the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction.

The official report concludes that "the PCO (Project and Contacting Office) did not fully comply with the requirements described in the memorandum for the Iraqi Interim Governement Minster of Finance...lacked the necessary controls and adequate documentation to effectivley perform its responsibitlites to monitor and administer contracts funded by the DFI (Development Fund for Iraq).

...The audit identified material managment control weaknesses in the accounting for DFI contract libablities and significant deficiencies in contract administration. Consequently, there was no assurance that fraud, waste, and abuse did not occur in the management and administration of contracts funded by the DFI, that DFI funds were used in a transparent manner, of that DFI funds were used for hte purposes mandated by Resolution 1483."

Now, I would have to look for Res 1483, but this whole situation is rather spurious. Because the report is a PDF document, I was not able to cut the chart to this post, but suffice it to stiputlate the totals here in:

Gross Obligations - Validated: $ 327,329,217
GO - Amount Overstated - $ 11,135, 411

Payments - Validated: $ 206,611,818
Payments - (understated): ($ 108,255,875)

Unpaid Obligations - Validated: $ 120,717,398
Unpaid Obligations - Overstated: $ 119,361,286

Here's where folks are going to get lost in the numbers. Look at the one in parentheses. It is actually more than 100 million dollars. Now, I am not an accountant, but both overstated and understated numbers of that size are rather unsettling. Are the republicans up in arms about this? As the conservative party for America, shouldn't they be?


Here's a slice from the AP article:

U.S. civilian authorities in Iraq cannot properly account for nearly $100 million that was supposed to have been spent on reconstruction projects in south-central Iraq, government investigators said Wednesday.

There are indications of fraud in the use of the $96.6 million, according to a report by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction. A separate investigation of possible wrongdoing continues.

More than $7 million of the total is unaccounted for, the report said. An additional $89.4 million in payments do not have the required supporting documents.

The report accused civilian contract managers of "simply washing accounts" to try to make the books balance. Staffing shortages and the quick turnover of those responsible for the cash contributed to the problems, the report said.

Col. Thomas Stefanko, the official now in charge of the program, wrote the investigators that he agreed with their conclusions. Stefanko said his office had corrected or was in the process of fixing or investigating the problems identified in the report.

A congressional critic of U.S. reconstruction spending in Iraq said Wednesday the findings showed "disorganized, sloppy management."

"The U.S. risks fostering a culture of corruption in Iraq," said Sen. Russ Feingold (news, bio, voting record), D-Wis.

...Several of these agents "were under the impression that it was more important to quickly distribute the money to the region than to obtain all necessary documentation," the report said.

"Securing the required documentation should not have been overlooked by those officials specifically charged with safeguarding Iraqi funds," investigators said.

Controls over the cash were so lax that two of the agents hired to distribute the money were allowed to leave Iraq before they had accounted for all of it, the report said. Between them, those two had been given more than $1.4 million in cash which remains unaccounted for, the report said.

A different agent failed to provide proper documentation for more than $12.4 million in spending but had his accounts cleared by his supervisors, the report said.

Yet another agent kept distributing money for three weeks after his authority to handle the funds was revoked, the report said. That agent, told that $1,878,870 was missing from his account, delivered precisely that amount to his supervisors three days later, the report said.

That suggests, the report said, that the agent had a reserve of cash and only turned in enough to make his account balance.

End Slice:

I wouldn't be surprised at all if some of the missing cash was used to buy weapons that in turn were trained on US Troops and Iraqi civilians working to do the very reconstruction that was the original aim of the dollar. Tragically Ironic.

True or Not, the Allegation Alone Should be Troubling to Our Nation's Soul

I found this link via Rock City. The very fact that it is not all together far fetched and quite believable makes it all the more troubling even if it is not true.

Slice:

"INTELLIGENCE AND FACTS WERE BEING FIXED AROUND THE POLICY"....The Times of London has gotten hold of the minutes of a private meeting between Tony Blair and his staff that was held on July 23, 2002 after talks with the Bush administration. An excerpt (emphasis mine):

C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.

End slice:

"...but the intelligence and facts were bing fixed around the policy...."

Many questions remain. Why was W, Rove and Co. so bent on capturing/killing Saddam when Bin Ladin is freely going about his business? Revenge for the Bush Family? Why do so many American lives continue to be sacrificed for this sham? Now that we are there, is there another alternative?

Technology Rots the Brain

Found this in our local rag:


What's more harmful -- taking a hit or hitting the send button?

A study commissioned by Hewlett-Packard has found that excessive day-to- day use of technology -- whether it's sending e-mails or using mobile phones -- can be more distracting and harmful to the IQ than smoking marijuana.

The research conducted for HP by scientists from the Institute of Psychiatry at the University of London warns of the "abuse of always-on technology" in which "workers are literally addicted to checking e-mail and text messages during meetings, in the evening and at weekends."

End Slice:

So, are they saying it is time to legalize marijuana? Or, if they say technology rots the brain, does that mean that blogging is bad for you?

Tuesday, May 03, 2005

Anyone Agree?

"This Republican Party of Lincoln has become a party of theocracy." U.S. Representative Christopher Shays, R-CT, (New York Times, March 23, 2005)

Got this from a link that Jet over at God Dem posted today.

Anyone care to debate the point?

The Ten K Hit Parade

Looks like my hit counter is nearing the 10K mark. This is a bit of a misleading statistic.

I didn't put the counter on until a month or two into blogging. Also, I was using a different one and pitched it in favor or the current one about a month after. And really, there should be a way for us to subtract hits that come from my IP so as not to muddle that with real, unique visitors. So, no doubt, there is no real way to tell if I am well over 10K in legit hits, but hey, this is an interesting blogger milestone, nonetheless.

Look on over to the counter (scroll down on the right hand side of your monitor) and let us all know if you are the 10K visitor to this blog. You will win resounding adolation from near and far in the bolgisphere...or if you post your link, maybe we'll go have a look at your location.

Blog on brothers and sisters.

Everyone Loves a Good Fillabuster, Buster

If it's good enough for the Republicans, it's good enough for the Democrats. No?

Slice:

To justify banning Senate filibusters in judicial nomination debates, Republicans are claiming support from history. Until now, say Republicans such as Sen. John Kyl and former Sen. Bob Dole, no one has used filibusters to block nominees to the federal courts. Because Democrats have broken an unwritten rule, their logic goes, Republicans are forced to change written ones.

But the charge that filibustering judicial appointments is unprecedented is false. Indeed, it's surprising that so few Washington hands seem to recall one of the most consequential filibusters in modern times, particularly because it constituted the first salvo in a war over judicial nominees that has lasted ever since.

Consider: From 1897 to 1968, the Senate rejected only one candidate for the Supreme Court (John J. Parker, in 1930). But since 1968, six candidates have been rejected or withdrawn, and four others have faced major hostility. During Bill Clinton's presidency, the willingness to challenge presidential prerogative spilled down to the level of appellate court nominees as well.

End slice:

Why are the Republicans acting like they are going to be the "majority" in perpetuity?

Here a PAC, There a PAC, Everywhere a PAC, PAC

Hey, if they can do it, why can't I? I need to figure out how to establish my own leadership PAC to pay for the necessary incidentials like educational travel.

Today's Jim Hightower report:

Tuesday, May 03, 2005
"CONGRESSIONAL LIFESTYLE SLUSH FUNDS"

Members of congress like to claim that they're just regular folks. But I don't know many ordinary Americans who have political slush funds to pay for life's little necessities, do you?

These funds called "leadership PACs," are created by various lawmakers ostensibly to collect money to help elect or re-elect other politicians of their particular stripe. Many of the congressional leaders, however, have been doling out big chunks of their PAC money to the politician they favor the most: Themselves!

Take Michael Oxley, of Ohio, who chairs a powerful committee. Corporations needing legislative favors are delighted to shove money into Oxley's leadership PAC, but this "leader" is diverting much of it to pay for his own royal lifestyle. In the past two years alone, for example, his PAC paid for $25,000-worth of chauffered limousine rides around Manhattan. It also covered 47 trips on chartered jets, plus financing his annual ski jaunt out to Vail, as well as golfing trips to Arizona and Florida.

Other members even use their leadership PACs for some of the more mundane purchases that you'd think they'd cover themselves. Tom DeLay, for example, uses his PAC fund to buy cigars, Roy Blunt billed his PAC for tickets to a Fleetwood Mac concert, and Senator Rick Santorum even charges his PAC for the cups of coffee he buys at Starbucks. Note that all of these congress critters are arch-conservatives who're constantly giving speeches about fiscal responsibility and personal integrity.

Both Democrats and Republicans play this self-serving slush-fund game, and both rush to defend their expenditures by saying that the practice is perfectly legal. Well, yes, but guess who wrote the law that makes it legal?

This is Jim Hightower saying... If the managers of, say, a union PAC were caught self-dealing, they'd be indicted. But then, they don't get to write laws to legalize their own immoral behavior.

Monday, May 02, 2005

Killing Social Security

The end run, right round the bowl eventually flushing the whole thing, by W, Rove and Co. is all about killing Social Security, not saving it.

Slice:

...you have to carefully check out any scheme coming from the White House. You can't just accept the administration's version of what it's doing. Remember, these are the people who named a big giveaway to logging interests "Healthy Forests."

Sure enough, a close look at President Bush's proposal for "progressive price indexing" of Social Security puts the lie to claims that it's a plan to increase benefits for the poor and cut them for the wealthy. In fact, it's a plan to slash middle-class benefits; the wealthy would barely feel a thing.

Under current law, low-wage workers receive Social Security benefits equal to 49 percent of their wages before retirement. Under the Bush scheme, that wouldn't change. So benefits for the poor would be maintained, not increased.

The administration and its apologists emphasize the fact that under the Bush plan, workers earning higher wages would face cuts, and they talk as if that makes it a plan that takes from the rich and gives to the poor. But the rich wouldn't feel any pain, because people with high incomes don't depend on Social Security benefits.

Cut an average worker's benefits, and you're imposing real hardship. Cut or even eliminate Dick Cheney's benefits, and only his accountants will notice.

...In short, this would be a gut punch to the middle class, but a fleabite for the truly wealthy.

Beyond that, it's a good bet that benefits for the poor would eventually be cut, too.

...If the Bush scheme goes through, the same thing will eventually happen to Social Security. As Mr. Furman points out, the Bush plan wouldn't just cut benefits. Workers would be encouraged to divert a large fraction of their payroll taxes into private accounts - but this would in effect amount to borrowing against their future benefits, which would be reduced accordingly.

As a result, Social Security as we know it would be phased out for the middle class.

"For millions of workers," Mr. Furman writes, "the amount of the monthly Social Security check would be at or near zero."