Friday, November 30, 2007

The Grim Truth - Republicans face a calamitous political situation

National Review November 2007
by Ramesh Ponnuru & Richard Lowry

"Pessimism can be self-fulfilling, especially in politics. There’s a reason every candidate who has even a slight shot at victory tries to project a serene optimism about its inevitability. Volunteers, donors, voters: No one likes a loser. And there’s so much pessimism about the Republican party’s prospects in 2008 that it’s understandable that some party officials and conservative pundits feel an urge to tilt the other way.

The plain truth is that the party faces a cataclysm, a rout that would give Democrats control of the White House and enhanced majorities in the House and the Senate. Even if the party were in good shape, it would face a daunting task in retaining the White House for a third term in a row. In the past 50 years, a party has won the White House three times in a row only once, when the first George Bush succeeded Reagan. Reagan then had an approval rating in the mid-50s. Bush is stuck some 20 points lower, at about freezing — territory where only Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter have been in recent memory. (David Frum’s forthcoming book Comeback notes that no president has been so unpopular for so long since Hoover.) The other four times a party tried to follow up on two terms, it lost.

An unpopular president isn’t the GOP’s only woe. Pollster Scott Rasmussen has found that the percentage of Americans who consider themselves Republicans declined steadily from 37.1 in the 2004 election to 30.8 in May of this year. It has rebounded slightly since then to 32.6 in September, but Republicans still trail Democrats by about 5 points. Other polls have had more ominous numbers. In a Pew Research Center poll earlier this year that asked people which party they identified with or leaned toward, Democrats led Republicans 50 to 35 percent. Karlyn Bowman of the American Enterprise Institute explains that the Reagan years saw a surge in Republican-party identification, and it has now washed away.

The political calendar and map are also conspiring against Republicans. In the Senate, Republicans have to defend 21 seats and Democrats only 12. They face tough races to retain seats in Minnesota, Maine, Oregon, New Hampshire, Virginia, Colorado, and New Mexico, while vulnerable Democratic seats are hard to find.

In the House, Republicans have to pick up 16 seats, at the same time they are defending 14 seats (so far) where incumbents have retired. According to Rasmussen’s latest poll, taken in early October, Americans prefer Democratic congressional candidates to Republicans 48 to 36 percent. It was the third month in a row that the Democrats enjoyed a double-digit advantage.

Election analyst Stu Rothenberg sees a 2- to 6-seat Republican loss in the Senate, with the House projecting somewhere in a band between a draw and a 12-seat Republican loss. That seems a very reasonable guess. Even a draw would be a serious setback. A lot of freshman Democrats won in squeakers in 2006. Next year is the best chance Republicans will ever have to unseat them. (Even Dick Gephardt’s House Democrats took back a quarter of the seats they lost in 1994 at the next election.) If they do not even make progress in regaining a majority, we may be looking at a Democratic Congress for many years to come.

Democrats will be able to fight on this favorable terrain with more resources than Republicans. The RNC has done well against the DNC, outraising it $63 million to $40.5 million, with a cash-on-hand advantage of $16.5 million to $3.3 million. Otherwise, Democrats are winning the money race going away. Democratic presidential candidates have raised a stunning $200 million, 70 percent more than the Republican candidates. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee leads the National Republican Senatorial Committee 2 to 1. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee had $22.1 million on hand as of August, the National Republican Congressional Committee only $1.6 million (it started the year $16 million in debt).

Throughout the Clinton and Bush years, the Republican campaign committees had a fundraising edge. Money helped Republicans hold on to Congress in difficult years such as 1996, and softened defeat even in 2006. In 2008, House Republicans could have just as many retirements and just as tough a national environment as last year — but with much less cash.

The NRCC is still collecting PAC money, even though business is now hedging its bets. USA Today reports that Democratic presidential candidates have raised nearly twice as much as Republicans among the 20 top-giving industries. "

Thursday, November 29, 2007

With a Little Bit a' Paint

Save a link to this article and return to it at www.savethis.comSave a link to this article and return to it at www.savethis.com Email a link to this articleEmail a link to this article Printer-friendly version of this articlePrinter-friendly version of this article View a list of the most popular articles on our siteView a list of the most popular articles on our site
Subscribe in NewsGator Online Subscribe in Bloglines

In a market glutted with options, waste haulers must compete for the public's attention. And what better way to help create a positive image for your operation than by designing an eye-catching truck or container?

Whether to assert a professional image or to elicit a smile from passers-by, the haulers featured in this year's Design Contest have taken the extra effort to create unique, eye-catching truck and container designs, and add a little pizzazz to the waste business.

For Waste Age's first Design Contest of the new millennium, competition was tight. Judges of this 22nd annual contest based their decisions on whether the designs depicted clean, positive images that did not detract from the company's overall business message.

The following contest winners have managed to set themselves apart from a distinguished group. Waste Age salutes these winners, who have added their personal touch to this colorful industry.

Best Overall Design Marine Salvage Pittsburgh More than 20 years ago, Herb Ritter, president of Marine Salvage, began commissioning graffiti artists to decorate his truck bodies. "There was no place in Pittsburgh for graffiti artists to paint, so I paid them and gave them a place to display their artwork," he says.

Today, all of Ritter's trucks, and at least 30 of his containers, are painted with everything from Pokemon cartoons to tie-dye designs. And customers have taken notice.

"We do a lot of residential collection, and the customer likes it," says Ritter, who's quick to add that not everyone understands his design choices. "If [the customers] aren't artsy, they think I'm nuts," he chuckles.

This year's winner in the Best Overall Design category features a pristine natural landscape spray painted on the side of a Durakan Co., Drifting, Pa., body, which is mounted on an International, Chicago, chassis.

"[Artist Matt Burfield] can spray anything you want," Ritter says. "He did a portrait on the side of one of the dumpsters." In fact, Ritter is so impressed with Burfield's artwork that today, he commissions Burfield exclusively.

As an added benefit to the art, Ritter explains that Burfield's creations prevent vandalism. "With [undecorated] boxes, people will spray them," Ritter says. "But with these painted ones, no one touches them."

Was Ritter surprised that his truck won? Not in the least. "I've been watching your magazine for awhile," he says, "and I knew [Burfield's artwork] would blow everything away."

Best Front Loader City of Santa Fe Solid Waste Division Santa Fe, N.M. The city of Santa Fe Solid Waste Division uses its truck design to reach out to its community.

"We support the Community Youth Mural Program," explains Jerry Monarski, equipment manager for the solid waste division. "The kids do murals all over the city."

Through the mural program, a professional artist selects local children to help him create images on trucks and buildings. Participants learn techniques such as shading and layout, while exploring serious issues concerning Santa Fe.

For example, "The truck that [Waste Age] chose [as a winner] depicts the message that [the city] wants to divert as much from the waste stream as possible," Monarski says. "It shows how much stuff we're just discarding in the landfills."

This winning entry is painted on a Crane Carrier Co., Tulsa, Okla., chassis outfitted with its integrated front loader (IFL) body. The solid waste division chose to paint this truck because the smooth and clean sides of the IFL body provided the perfect canvas for young, aspiring artists, Monarski says.

Since the Community Youth Mural program began in 1994, Santa Fe children have painted more than 172 surfaces around the city, says Mary Ragins, program coordinator. Projects are selected through a request for proposals (RFP).

Because the solid waste division has received such positive community responses to its truck designs, it plans to propose more youth mural projects in the future.

Community members are saying, "they've never seen any trucks like these," Monarski says.

Best Side Loader Lane Garbage/Apex Disposal Service Eugene, Ore. At Lane Garbage/Apex Disposal Service, a flair for design runs in the family. "My dad picked out the colors [for the winning entry] many years ago," says Sam Miller, co-owner. "It's a design that's evolved over the years."

Using a Leach Co., Oshkosh, Wis., body mounted on a Peterbilt, Denton, Texas, chassis as his canvas, Miller created the current design to portray a clean, professional image.

"We like to keep our trucks clean so they stand out," Miller says. "Most of the haulers in our area use darker colors."

When asked about community response to his trucks, Miller says that the design prompts interaction between community members and drivers. And for a father-son operation with a long history in Eugene, Ore., relationships such as these lay the foundation for longevity, he says.

"Customers come out and ask questions." Miller says. "It gives us a chance to strike-up conversations and promotes long-term communication."

Best Sweeper Kieger Enterprises Hugo, Minn. With 12 divisions offering everything from emergency response to snow removal, Kieger Enterprises had its hands full choosing a design for its Schwartze Industries, Huntsville, Ala./GM Corp., Detroit, sweeper fleet. The design had to complement Kieger's overall color scheme, yet set the sweepers apart from the other fleets.

Luckily, Sweeping Supervisor Bob Huberty, known affectionately as Dr. Bob, came to the rescue. "Dr. Bob loves purple so much he painted his cell phone purple. He also owns purple clothes, purple shoes, a purple cape and even a purple hearse," says Pat Iwan, company general manager.

That explains the purple, but what about the flames?

"The flames attract attention," Iwan says. "We're set apart from the competition." The painted flames also can be seen on Kieger's entire fleet. "We even have flames on one of our sewer cleaners," Iwan says.

Community members have responded positively to the truck, Iwan says. "Customers from other divisions call us and comment on [the design]. We get at least one good comment per day. Employees love it, too."

The design also illustrates the company's philosophy. "Having fun is about as important to us as making money," Iwan says. "Can you tell that if we're not having fun, it's time to stop doing the work?"

Best Recycling Vehicle Knoxville Recycling Coalition Knoxville, Tenn. When the Knoxville Recycling Coalition truck needed a new paint job, this nonprofit organization decided to have some fun. "We thought it would be fun to make [the truck] a little bit different," says Karen Anderson, executive director. "So we painted it purple and made the hopper look like a monster mouth. We wanted to generate enthusiasm."

Certainly, the coalition's design generated enthusiasm among Waste Age's design contest judges. But how does the community react?

"We've had people call and say they've seen our truck, and they want to know more about our program," Anderson says about the Dempster Co., Toccoa, Ga./Freightliner, Portland, Ore., Purple Paper Eater. "We've also taken [the truck] to Earth Day and America Recycles Day celebrations and have received a lot of response there."

Generating such response is important for an organization funded primarily through its 10-year-old office paper recycling program, says Anderson, noting that every question represents an opportunity for the coalition to promote and expand its programs. Also, because the Coalition only owns one truck, the Purple Paper Eater is responsible for representing the organization's public image.

Anderson created the design herself and commissioned a graphics person to complete the layout.

"We wanted to make it look simple," she says.

Best Roll-Off City of North Miami Beach Public Services Department North Miami Beach, Fla. When deciding how to paint its fleet of Chagnon, Montreal, tilt frames with Hesco, Miami, roll-offs mouned on Volvo, Greensboro, N.C., chassis, the city of North Miami Beach Public Services Department considered its customers first.

"We feel that it's important to promote what you do best, so we put a lot of emphasis on public relations and getting information out to the community," Director Kelvin Baker explains. "The country as a whole has a negative impression of trash trucks. They want to get their trash off the street, but they hate to see the trucks."

Determined to change its customers' minds about garbage trucks, the city has included local symbols that elicit pride in residents - into its design. "We're showing the native tree, as well as our city name," Baker says. "The design shows that we are in South Florida."

The city also has installed a fully automated truck-washing facility to depict a clean image. "That's the message we promote, even outside of our city at the landfill," Baker says. "When you come to our city, you'll find a clean city. People looking out their windows will get that same message."

Baker hopes this message will reach beyond North Miami Beach and Florida. The face of the solid waste industry is changing, he says, and truck designs must change with it.

"Solid waste has come a long way over the years," Baker adds. "Many years ago, all you talked about was dumping trash into the landfill. Now, chemists and attorneys are involved. It's become a very professional field."

Best Rear Loader Lilac Sunrise Disposal Baileyville, Maine Waste Age judges are not the first to honor the Lilac Sunrise truck with a design award. In 1995, McNeilus Co., Dodge Center, Minn., manufacturer of Lilac Sunrise Disposal's rear loader body, featured the truck in its company calendar. Mounted on an International, Chicago chassis, Lilac's rear loader has been causing a stir ever since.

When Lilac first purchased this rear loader, McNeilus already had painted the white and blue background. Lilac then hired someone to design a clean, appealing image for the company. Today, Lilac owns 10 rear loaders with the same design.

"[Community] feedback has been excellent," says Lilac's owner, Fred Rayner. "[Customers] say it's the nicest looking garbage truck they've ever seen. They can't believe how good it looks."

Best Container Town & Country Disposal Erie, Colo. The refreshing optimism of children's artwork displayed on this Wastequip, Beachwood, Ohio, container caught the attention of Waste Age judges. Town and Country Disposal hopes this design will catch the attention of Boulder County, Colo., residents, too.

"We're a small hauler by today's standards," says Jeffery Debruyne, the company's controller. "We try to portray high-quality customer service at a decent price, and we offer as many services to the community as we can."

For Town and Country, these services extend beyond trash and recycling collection to community activism. Together with an organization called YES, which works with 12- and 13-year-old children, Town & Country provided a clean slate for young artists.

To determine who gets to paint, the YES children submitted design ideas to a committee of adult supervisors. Once the committee approved the ideas, local artists were assigned to guide groups of children through the mural painting process.

Everybody thinks the painting project is a great idea, Debruyne says, adding that the children's project discourages vandalism by providing a city-approved location for young adults' artwork.

"Every so often we get dumpsters that are painted without our permission, so if these kids can do something in a more positive, supervised manner; it helps keep them out of trouble," Debruyne says. Consequently, Town and Country plans to continue its relationship with YES in the future.

Wednesday, November 28, 2007

Scientists Tell Pelosi: No More Ab-only Funding

John Santelli MD MPH's picture

Editor's Note: This following letter was sent to Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi and Senator Harry Reid urging Congressional leaders to reconsider continuing federal investments in abstinence-only funding. The letter was sent by John S Santelli MD, MPH at Columbia University and signed by nine other prominent researchers in the field of adolescent sexual and reproductive health last Wednesday, Nov 21.

Dear Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi and Senator Harry Reid,

As a group of leading scientists who have recently conducted research on adolescents, reproductive health, and abstinence-only education, we are writing to express our strong concern about increasing federal support for abstinence-only education (AOE) programs. This federal support includes monies going to states (Section 510 of the Social Security Act) and those going directly to community and faith-based organizations (the Community-Based Abstinence Education program). Recent reports in professional publications by the authors of this letter have highlighted multiple deficiencies in federal abstinence-only programs. As such, we are surprised and dismayed that the Congress is proposing to extend and even increase funding for these programs. In this letter we identify key problems with abstinence-only education. We also have attached recent scientific reports that are pertinent to the debate over these programs. We note that many of these studies have used nationally-representative data from surveys sponsored by the National Institutes of Health or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The federal programs promoting AOE have prompted multiple scientific and ethical critiques. These critiques were summarized in a January 2006 paper by Santelli, Ott and others. By design, abstinence programs restrict information about condoms and contraception - information that may be critical to protecting the health of young people and to preventing unplanned pregnancy, HIV infection, and infection with other sexually transmitted organisms.

They ignore the health needs of sexually active youth and youth who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered, and questioning for counseling, health care services, and risk reduction education. Withholding lifesaving information from young people is contrary to the standards of medical ethics and to many international human rights conventions. International treaties and human rights statements support the rights of adolescents to seek and receive information vital to their health. Governments have an obligation to provide accurate information to adolescents and adolescents have a right to expect health education provided in public schools to be scientifically accurate and complete.

Rigorous evaluations of AOE programs find little evidence of efficacy for federally-sponsored abstinence education. Several weeks ago Dr. Douglas Kirby, working with the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, released a comprehensive review of prevention programs for youth (Emerging Answers 2007). This review found that none of the well-designed evaluations of abstinence-only programs presented strong evidence of an impact on abstinence behaviors. (By contrast, Kirby finds clear evidence that many comprehensive sexuality education programs, which include information on both abstinence and contraception, do help young people delay initiation of intercourse.) The large-scale Mathematica evaluation of the Section 510 program, released in April 2007, found no measurable impact on increasing abstinence or delaying sexual initiation among participating youth or on other behaviors such as condom use. This well funded and very well conducted evaluation examined four exemplary local programs, tracking youth over four years. One of the few measurable impacts of the programs was a decrease in adolescent confidence regarding the ability of condoms to prevent HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases. Similar results on program efficacy were found by Underhill, who reviewed abstinence-only programs in a spring 2007 systematic review.

Virginity pledging, one aspect of abstinence programming, appears to have little long-term benefit in preventing outcomes such as sexually transmitted infections, although prevention of these infections is a stated goal of the programs. A spring 2005 longitudinal study by Bruckner and Bearman found that abstinence pledgers, when compared to non-pledgers, experienced similar rates of sexually transmitted infection. Pledgers did delay sexual intercourse for a limited period, but when they did start having sex, they were less likely to use condoms. They were also less likely to seek reproductive health care compared to non-pledgers.

Abstinence until marriage is another stated goal of the federal program; however, evidence from the past several decades indicates that establishing abstinence until marriage as normative behavior would be a highly challenging policy goal. Teitler has shown that over the past 40 years, the median age at first intercourse has dropped (and stabilized) to age 17 in most developed countries.

At the same time, the median age at marriage has risen dramatically. Today, sexual intercourse is almost universally initiated during adolescence worldwide. A January 2007 study by Finer found that almost all Americans initiate sexual intercourse before marriage. In fact by age 44, virtually everyone has experienced sexual intercourse but only 3% have remained abstinent until marriage. Moreover this is not a new trend; Finer's data suggest this pattern has been true for much of the second half of the 20th century.

Importantly, the emphasis on abstinence-only programs and policies appears to be undermining critical public health programs in the U.S. and abroad, including comprehensive sexuality education and HIV prevention programs. During the period of increased state and federal emphasis on abstinence, declines have occurred in the percentage of teachers in U.S. public schools who teach about birth control and the number of students who report receiving such education. In December 2006, Lindberg and colleagues found that the percentage of teenagers who had received formal instruction about condoms and contraception declined from 89% in 1995 to 70% in 2002.

We also note that a December 2004 Congressional report on federal abstinence programs from the U.S. House of Representatives' Committee on Government Reform - Minority Staff found that 11 of the 13 most frequently used curricula contained false, misleading or distorted information about reproductive health - including inaccurate information about contraceptive effectiveness, purported health risks of abortion, and other scientific errors. Recent reviews of these abstinence curricula from Santelli and colleagues at Columbia University have found similar inaccuracies, particularly misinformation about the efficacy of condoms and contraception. This was the basis of an ACLU declaration on this topic from Santelli in the spring of this year.

Abstinence-only requirements also appear to be harming our foreign aid efforts. In April 2006, the U.S. Government Accountability Office issued a report titled "Spending Requirement Presents Challenges for Allocating Prevention Funding under the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief" that concluded that the "...requirement that country teams spend at least 33 percent of prevention funding appropriated pursuant to the act on abstinence-until-marriage programs has presented challenges to country teams' ability to adhere to the PEPFAR sexual transmission strategy...[and] challenged their ability to integrate the components of the ABC model and respond to local needs, local epidemiology, and distinctive social and cultural patterns."

We would note that all of the mainstream organizations of health professionals that focus on the health of young people have strongly criticized federal support for current abstinence programs. These include the American Public Health Association, the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychological Association, and the Society for Adolescent Medicine. We have also attached the weblinks to the policy statements from each of these groups.

The recent Congressional testimony of former Surgeon General Richard Carmona underscores these critiques from mainstream health organizations. Dr. Carmona's testimony confirms the political motivations behind abstinence funding and the failure to address issues of efficacy and scientific accuracy. He suggested that ideology and theology have taken priority over women's health in the current administration. Dr. Carmona reported that the Bush administration "did not want to hear the science but wanted to, if you will, ‘preach abstinence,' which I felt was scientifically incorrect."

Given these serious scientific and ethical shortcomings, we strongly urge the U.S. Congress to reconsider federal support for abstinence-only education programs and policies. We would be very willing to advise you on shaping alternatives to the current program.

Tuesday, November 27, 2007

America's Senior Moment
By Paul Krugman

The New York Review of Books
Volume 52, Number 4, March 10, 2005

Review of: The Coming Generational Storm: What You Need to Know About America's Economic Future by Laurence J. Kotlikoff and Scott Burns, MIT Press, 274 pp., $27.95; $16.95 (paper)

Link to actual article: The New York Review of Books: "America's Senior Moment" by Paul Krugman

Note: The key to the discussion is that it's two issues, an aging population and rising spending on health care, not one big issue.

Is the credit crunch finally over?
(An Economics Primer)

It has been a dramatic week on the financial markets, with the US central bank cutting interest rates and the UK government coming to the rescue of savers at the Northern Rock. So is the crisis over, or are there still some big problems remaining?

WHERE'S THE BAD DEBT?

The crisis began when US mortgage companies made hundreds of billions of dollars of inappropriate loans to individuals with poor credit histories.

These debts were then packaged up and sold to financial institutions around the world, who then sold it on to pension funds and hedge funds.

We still don't know where these bad debts are concealed in the financial system.

And until we do, banks will still be reluctant to lend to each other, and investors will be suspicious of the health of the financial sector.

UNFREEZING THE CREDIT CRUNCH

The reluctance by banks and other financial institutions to lend money, because they are not sure how risky it might be, is gumming up the financial system.

Despite the injection of hundreds of billions of dollars and euros, interest rates on inter-bank lending are still unusually high. And banks are tightening up on their lending to individuals and companies, restricting the amount of lending as well as making loans more expensive.

There are also hundreds of billions of dollars worth of short-term debt obligations that will fall due in the next six months, which could further depress the market if no buyers can be found for them.

WILL THE HOUSING MARKET CRASH?

The overhang of bad mortgages is depressing the US housing market. Thousands of people are having their homes repossessed, and with a glut of homes on the market prices are dropping.

Mortgage companies are finding it difficult to raise money even to lend to sound borrowers. So despite a pledge by the US government to help, house building is at a record low.

Although there are far fewer sub-prime mortgages in the UK, mortgage lenders like Northern Rock are also finding it difficult to raise the cash to pay for additional mortgage lending. So it could become harder to get a mortgage, and it could cost more - and both these expectations are lowering house price inflation.

WILL THERE BE A WORLD RECESSION?

A big slowdown in the housing market could have serious economic consequences.

Construction is a big part of the economy, and people who move house are also more likely to buy consumer goods like washing machines. The tightening up of credit and worries about mortgage repayments may make everyone more nervous about borrowing money to buy big-ticket items like cars.

There are already signs of an economic slowdown in the US, the world's biggest economy. And if it deepens, it could dampen down the economic recovery underway in Europe and Japan. The UK, as a major exporting nation, would also be affected.

WILL THE DOLLAR PLUMMET?

The effect on the rest of the world economy could be worse if the US dollar begins to fall in value.

The dollar is already weak because of the huge trade deficit the US runs with the rest of the world - nearly $1 trillion - which has been a big boost to the world economy. But if the US economy slows, and interest rates are cut sharply, the dollar will become a less attractive currency and could fall further.

This in turn would make imports into the US more expensive, and make it harder for exporters like Britain to win orders. A big decline could also force countries like China, which hold $1.3 trillion in currency reserves, mainly in dollars, to diversify their holdings, further depressing the greenback.

WHO'S TO BLAME?

Politicians and financial institutions are trading accusations about who is to blame for the crisis.

In the UK, the governor of the Bank of England is under fire for not intervening earlier to prevent the Northern Rock crisis from getting out of hand.

In the US, the central bank, the Federal Reserve, is under fire in Congress for not regulating sub-prime mortgage lending properly.

And both bankers and politicians have blamed the credit rating agencies for certifying as safe many of the bad debts which had been bundled up and sold. There is a growing move to tighten up international regulation of the financial sector - but worries about whether this can be done without inhibiting financial innovation.

IS THERE A SILVER LINING?

Many economists believe that the crisis is also an opportunity for rebalancing the economy, which has become overly dependent on consumer spending financed by cheap credit and government borrowing.

An increase in household savings, encouraged by higher interest rates for savers, could lead to more long-term investment.

And a mild economic slowdown in the US, coupled with a gradual reduction in the value of the dollar, could help rebalance the world economy, which has become overly dependent on the US as the engine of world economic growth.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/business/7003139.stm
Published: 2007/09/20 06:16:55 GMT

Intel steps up cheap laptop race

The Eee PC
Intel is working on another cheap laptop
Intel has teamed up with the world's largest maker of computer motherboards to produce laptops for the developing world.

The laptop has been dubbed the Eee PC - and will sit alongside Intel's Classmate which is also aimed at the developing world.

The partnership with Asustek is the latest twist in a developing battle between the chipmaker and rival group, the One Laptop per Child foundation.

Banks Gone Wild

By Paul Krugman - The New York Times

Friday 23 November 2007

"What were they smoking?" asks the cover of the current issue of Fortune magazine. Underneath the headline are photos of recently deposed Wall Street titans, captioned with the staggering sums they managed to lose.

The answer, of course, is that they were high on the usual drug - greed. And they were encouraged to make socially destructive decisions by a system of executive compensation that should have been reformed after the Enron and WorldCom scandals, but wasn't.

In a direct sense, the carnage on Wall Street is all about the great housing slump.

This slump was both predictable and predicted. "These days," I wrote in August 2005, "Americans make a living selling each other houses, paid for with money borrowed from the Chinese. Somehow, that doesn't seem like a sustainable lifestyle." It wasn't.

But even as the danger signs multiplied, Wall Street piled into bonds backed by dubious home mortgages. Most of the bad investments now shaking the financial world seem to have been made in the final frenzy of the housing bubble, or even after the bubble began to deflate.

In fact, according to Fortune, Merrill Lynch made its biggest purchases of bad debt in the first half of this year - after the subprime crisis had already become public knowledge.

Now the bill is coming due, and almost everyone - that is, almost everyone except the people responsible - is having to pay.

The losses suffered by shareholders in Merrill, Citigroup, Bear Stearns and so on are the least of it. Far more important in human terms are the hundreds of thousands if not millions of American families lured into mortgage deals they didn't understand, who now face sharp increases in their payments - and, in many cases, the loss of their houses - as their interest rates reset.

And then there's the collateral damage to the economy.

You still hear occasional claims that the subprime fiasco is no big deal. Even though the numbers keep getting bigger - some observers are now talking about $400 billion in losses - these losses are small compared with the total value of financial assets.

But bad housing investments are crippling financial institutions that play a crucial role in providing credit, by wiping out much of their capital. In a recent report, Goldman Sachs suggested that housing-related losses could force banks and other players to cut lending by as much as $2 trillion - enough to trigger a nasty recession, if it happens quickly.

Beyond that, there's a pervasive loss of trust, which is like sand thrown in the gears of the financial system. The crisis of confidence is plainly visible in the market data: there's an almost unprecedented spread between the very low interest rates investors are willing to accept on U.S. government debt - which is still considered safe - and the much higher interest rates at which banks are willing to lend to each other.

How did things go so wrong?

Part of the answer is that people who should have been alert to the dangers, and taken precautionary measures, instead blithely assured Americans that everything was fine, and even encouraged them to take out risky mortgages. Yes, Alan Greenspan, that means you.

But another part of the answer lies in what hasn't happened to the men on that Fortune cover - namely, they haven't been forced to give back any of the huge paychecks they received before the folly of their decisions became apparent.

Around 25 years ago, American business - and the American political system - bought into the idea that greed is good. Executives are lavishly rewarded if the companies they run seem successful: last year the chief executives of Merrill and Citigroup were paid $48 million and $25.6 million, respectively.

But if the success turns out to have been an illusion - well, they still get to keep the money. Heads they win, tails we lose.

Not only is this grossly unfair, it encourages bad risk-taking, and sometimes fraud. If an executive can create the appearance of success, even for a couple of years, he will walk away immensely wealthy. Meanwhile, the subsequent revelation that appearances were deceiving is someone else's problem.

If all this sounds familiar, it should. The huge rewards executives receive if they can fake success are what led to the great corporate scandals of a few years back. There's no indication that any laws were broken this time - but the public's trust was nonetheless betrayed, once again.

The point is that the subprime crisis and the credit crunch are, in an important sense, the result of our failure to effectively reform corporate governance after the last set of scandals.

John Edwards recently came out with a corporate reform plan, but it didn't receive a lot of attention. Corporate governance still isn't regarded as a major political issue. But it should be.

Mayors Warn Worst Of Mortgage Crisis Ahead


By REUTERS -Filed at 6:05 a.m. ET

DETROIT (Reuters) - An escalating mortgage crisis will push another 1.4 million U.S. homes into foreclosure and drive nationwide property values lower by 7 percent next year, according to a report released on Tuesday by a group representing city mayors.

The report, released by the U.S. Conference of Mayors, predicts states and cities will be left scrambling to make up for lost property tax revenue, particularly in markets such as California and Florida where home values had soared.

The forecast, prepared by the economic consulting firm Global Insight, was released as the non-partisan mayors group began a special meeting in Detroit intended to address the foreclosure crisis and its connection to problems such as neighborhood blight and crime.

"Not that long ago economists said housing was the backbone of our economy," Trenton, New Jersey Mayor Douglas Palmer said in a statement. The Global Insight report forecast U.S. homeowners would see property values fall by $1.2 trillion in 2008, with almost half of those overall losses coming in California.

California property values are expected to drop by 16 percent in 2008, the report said, costing the most populous state almost $3 billion in property taxes.

The report said the weakening U.S. property market would have knocked some $676 billion from home values, but another $519 billion in losses could be tied directly to the financial problems facing borrowers unable to meet escalating monthly mortgage payments.

In Detroit, home to the depressed U.S. auto industry and the venue of Tuesday's conference, residential foreclosure rates have been running at almost five times the national average.

That has further depressed property values in an already poverty-torn city that has lost more than half its population in the past 30 years, leaving whole blocks abandoned.

As similar problems spread, the report forecast that the U.S. economy would grow by just 1.9 percent in 2008 with hiring and consumer spending both curtailed.

At a news conference scheduled for Tuesday, representatives of the Conference of Mayors were expected to join calls for mortgage investors and loan servicing companies to make a collective effort to work out new payment terms with borrowers to try to contain the number of foreclosures.

Thursday, November 22, 2007

Why Iowa Doesn’t Matter

Michael J. Ring - The Tech Online - Volume 119 >> Issue 69: Wed, Jan 26, 2000

...how much should the rest of the nation draw from the Iowa caucuses? Not much.

Except for weeding out the weakest of the weak candidates ... the Iowa caucuses prove and predict little. They are an exercise in political curiosity and not much more. Iowa’s track record of predicting future presidents is poor. In 1980, Iowa Republicans chose George Bush in their caucus; Ronald Reagan won the White House. In 1988 Dick Gephardt and Bob Dole won the Iowa caucuses; Michael Dukakis and George Bush were the party nominees.

Next week’s vote in New Hampshire will also be overplayed, but not to the extent to which Iowa’s caucuses were overcovered. New Hampshire does matter more. The Granite State’s primary process allows Independents to vote and offers a secret ballot, thus allowing all voters to feel comfortable exercising their right. And since 1952, only one person -- Bill Clinton -- has been elected president without winning the New Hampshire primary.

(Note: Clinton placed second.)

Nov. 24, 2007 - Final Game of Regular Season



at

Day:
Saturday
Date:
Nov. 24, 2007
Location:
Gainesville, Fla.
<------------------------------------->
Notes: Final Score: FSU 27 - Florida 24 - (Remember you saw it here first)


Tribbles - Don't Take One Home Today
Dr. McCoy estimates their sole life functions are to eat (50%) and reproduce (50%)

10 Great Snake-Oil Gadgets

By Rob Beschizza EmailNovember 17, 2007 | 8:41:32 PM

Ten Tips to Boost Your Interview IQ

by Carole Martin
Monster Contributing Writer

Even the smartest and most qualified job seekers need to prepare for job interviews. Why, you ask? Interviewing is a learned skill, and there are no second chances to make a great first impression. So study these 10 strategies and caveats to enhance your interview IQ.

Practice Good Nonverbal Communication

It's about demonstrating confidence: standing straight, making eye contact and connecting with a good, firm handshake. That first impression can be a great beginning - or quick ending - to your interview.

Dress for the Job or Company

Today's casual dress codes do not give you permission to dress as "they" do when you interview. It is important to look professional and well groomed. Whether you wear a suit or something less formal depends on the company culture and the position you are seeking. If possible, call to find out about the company dress code before the interview.

Listen

From the very beginning of the interview, your interviewer is giving you information, either directly or indirectly. If you are not hearing it, you are missing a major opportunity. Good communication skills include listening and letting the person know you heard what he said. Observe your interviewer, and match that style and pace.

Don't Talk Too Much

Telling the interviewer more than he needs to know could be a fatal mistake. When you have not prepared ahead of time, you may tend to ramble, sometimes talking yourself right out of the job. Prepare for the interview by reading through the job posting, matching your skills with the position's requirements and relating only that information.

Don't Be Too Familiar

The interview is a professional meeting to talk business. This is not about making a new friend. Your level of familiarity should mimic the interviewer's demeanor. It is important to bring energy and enthusiasm to the interview and to ask questions, but do not overstep your place as a candidate looking for a job.

Use Appropriate Language

It's a given that you should use professional language during the interview. Be aware of any inappropriate slang words or references to age, race, religion, politics or sexual orientation - these topics could send you out the door very quickly.

Don't Be Cocky

Attitude plays a key role in your interview success. There is a fine balance between confidence, professionalism and modesty. Even if you're putting on a performance to demonstrate your ability, overconfidence is as bad, if not worse, as being too reserved.

Take Care to Answer the Questions

When an interviewer asks for an example of a time when you did something, he is seeking a sample of your past behavior. If you fail to relate a specific example, you not only don't answer the question, but you also miss an opportunity to prove your ability and talk about your skills.

Ask Questions

When asked if they have any questions, most candidates answer, "No." Wrong answer. It is extremely important to ask questions to demonstrate an interest in what goes on in the company. Asking questions also gives you the opportunity to find out if this is the right place for you. The best questions come from listening to what is asked during the interview and asking for additional information.

Don't Appear Desperate

When you interview with the "please, please hire me" approach, you appear desperate and less confident. Maintain the three C's during the interview: cool, calm and confident. You know you can do the job; make sure the interviewer believes you can, too.

This article originally appeared on Monster Career Advice: http://content.monster.com.

Monday, November 19, 2007

'Final Warning To Humanity'

"[T]he world's scientists have spoken, clearly and in one voice," said U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, on the most recent report of the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). After a rigorous multi-stage review process that includes 2,500 scientific expert reviewers, 800 contributing authors, and 450 lead authors representing 130 countries, the IPCC warns that "all countries" will be affected by climate change if carbon emissions continue to spiral. By 2100, global average surface temperatures could rise by between 1.1 and 6.4 degrees celsius, and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could lead to an eventual rise in sea levels of up to 1.40 meters. With "strikingly" blunt language, the report reads like "a final warning to humanity," notes Time magazine. "What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment," declared IPCC chairman Dr. Rajendra Pachauri.

Wednesday, November 14, 2007

Car Thieves Using VIN Numbers to Obtain Duplicate Keys
Netlore Archive: Email flier warns automobile owners to cover the VIN # on their dashboard with tape to prevent car thieves from writing it down and using it to obtain duplicate keys from a dealership

Note: Well finally there's a "public service" email broadcast that while overblown, is none the less true.

On Getting Older.
Courtesy of Virginia Sheppard: Nov. 14, 2007

1.) Just before the funeral services, the undertaker came up to the very elderly widow and asked, "How old was your husband?" "98," she replied. "Two years older than me." "So you're 96," the undertaker commented. She responded, "Hardly worth going home, is it?

2.) Reporters interviewing a 104-year-old woman: "And what do you think is the best thing about being 104?" the reporter asked. She simply replied, "No peer pressure."

3.) The nice thing about being senile is you can hide your own Easter eggs.

4.) I've sure gotten old! I've had two bypass surgeries, a hip replacement, new knees, Fought prostate cancer and diabetes. I'm half blind, can't hear anything quieter than a jet engine, take 40 different medications that make me dizzy, winded, and subject to blackouts. Have bouts with dementia. Have poor circulation; hardly feel my hands and feet anymore. Can't remember if I'm 85 or 92. Have lost all my friends. But, thank God, I still have my driver's license.

5.) I feel like my body has gotten totally out of shape, so I got my doctor's permission to join a fitness club and start exercising. I decided to take an aerobics class for seniors. I bent, twisted, gyrated, jumped up and down, and perspired for an hour. But, by the time I got my leotards on, the class was over.

6.) An elderly woman decided to prepare her will and told her preacher she had two final requests. First, she wanted to be cremated, and second, she wanted her ashes scattered over Wal-Mart. "Wal-Mart?" the preacher exclaimed. "Why Wal-Mart?" "Then I'll be sure my daughters visit me twice a week "

7.) My memory's not as sharp as it used to be. Also, my memory's not as sharp as it used to be.

8.) Know how to prevent sagging? Just eat till the wrinkles fill out.

9.) It's scary when you start making the same noises as your coffeemaker.

10.) These days about half the stuff in my shopping cart says, "For fast relief."

11.) Remember: You don't stop laughing because you grow old, You grow old because you stop laughing.

12.) The Senility Prayer: Grant me the senility to forget the people I never liked anyway, the good fortune to run into the ones I do, and the eyesight to tell the difference.

Tuesday, November 13, 2007

Rainy Day In Georgia?



Reining in Forfeiture: Common Sense Reform in the War on Drugs by Kyla Dunn
- - - - - - - - -
Frontline Special Report.

Monday, November 12, 2007

The Economic Consequences of Mr. Bush

The next president will have to deal with yet another crippling legacy of George W. Bush: the economy. A Nobel laureate, Joseph E. Stiglitz, sees a generation-long struggle to recoup.

by Joseph E. Stiglitz December 2007 - Vanity Fair Magazine

From Robert Reich's Blog:

Monday, November 12, 2007

After the Next Recession

All signs point to a recession: Home prices dropping, the dollar falling, more mortgages foreclosed, more credit cards delinquent or in default, consumer confidence down, retail sales the worst in a dozen years. We may pull out of it, yet. Bernanke and company may make bigger cuts in interest rates. Congress may enact a payroll tax holiday on the first fifteen thousand of income, as I’ve urged.

But look beyond the business cycle and the consequences may be larger. For years now, America's middle class has lived beyond its paycheck. Middle-class lifestyles have flourished even though median wages have barely budged.

The reason is we’ve been able to borrow so much so easily. With housing prices rising, home equity loans have financed renovations and home improvements. With credit cards raining down like manna from heaven, we’ve bought plasma TVs, new appliances, vacations. With dollars artificially high because foreigners have held them even as the nation sank deeper into debt, we could summon cheap goods and services from the rest of the world.

But now, the era of easy money is over. The housing bubble is bursting, and home equity is drying up. Credit card debt is next. Personal bankruptcies rose 48 percent in first half of 2007, likely even more in the second half – which means a wave of credit-card defaults. If you think the trillion dollars in sub-prime mortgage debt carried by big banks is large, think of the record nine hundred fifteen billion dollars Americans hold in credit-card debt.

Meanwhile, as foreigners begin shifting out of dollars, we’ll no longer have access to cheap foreign goods and services. For starters, you can forget that long-awaited European vacation.

The splurge is over, folks. As the days of easy money come to an end, what will America look like? Maybe we’ll see a recession in the short term, but more importantly over the long term: the American middle class will have a truer understanding of what it can and cannot afford; a truer sense of what’s really happened to its paychecks; and a more realistic view of where and to whom the economic gains of the last dozen years have actually gone.


One learning child. One connected child. One laptop at a time.

The mission of One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) is to empower the children of developing countries to learn by providing one connected laptop to every school-age child. In order to accomplish our goal, we need people who believe in what we’re doing and want to help make education for the world’s children a priority, not a privilege. Between November 12 and November 26, OLPC is offering a Give One Get One program in the United States and Canada. During this time, you can donate the revolutionary XO laptop to a child in a developing nation, and also receive one for the child in your life in recognition of your contribution.

Find out more about:

Give one get one The XO Laptop
Want to learn more about OLPC? Click Here | Send To A Friend | Privacy Policy | FAQ | Terms & Conditions

Call to give: 1-877-70-LAPTOP (1-877-705-2786)

Banking on Becoming President
Democratic Candidates
Candidate ↓Home State ↓Q3 Raised ↓Q3 Spent ↓Total Raised ↓Total Spent ↓Cash on Hand ↓Debts ↓

Clinton, Hillary

NY

$27,859,861

$22,623,680

$90,935,788

$40,472,775

$50,463,013

$2,347,486

Obama, Barack

IL

$21,343,292

$21,519,790

$80,256,427

$44,169,236

$36,087,191

$1,409,740

Edwards, John

NC

$7,157,233

$8,271,938

$30,329,152

$17,932,103

$12,397,048

$0

Richardson, Bill

NM

$5,358,585

$6,666,681

$18,699,937

$12,878,349

$5,821,588

$75,222

Dodd, Chris

CT

$1,522,061

$4,025,458

$13,598,152

$9,723,278

$3,874,874

$0

Biden, Joe

DE

$1,757,394

$2,635,896

$8,215,739

$6,329,324

$1,886,340

$128,210

Kucinich, Dennis

OH

$1,011,696

$888,774

$2,130,200

$1,803,576

$327,094

$0

Gravel, Mike

AK

$130,510

$99,866

$238,745

$207,604

$31,141

$64,716



Republican Candidates
Candidate ↓Home State ↓Q3 Raised ↓Q3 Spent ↓Raised ↓Spent ↓Cash on Hand ↓Debts ↓

Romney, Mitt

MA

$18,396,719

$21,301,756

$62,829,069

$53,612,552

$9,216,517

$17,350,000

Giuliani, Rudy

NY

$11,624,255

$13,300,650

$47,253,521

$30,603,695

$16,649,826

$169,256

McCain, John

AZ

$5,734,478

$5,470,277

$32,124,785

$28,636,157

$3,488,628

$1,730,691

Thompson, Fred

TN

$12,828,111

$5,706,367

$12,828,111

$5,706,367

$7,121,744

$678,432

Paul, Ron

TX

$5,258,456

$2,169,644

$8,268,453

$2,824,786

$5,443,667

$0

Brownback, Sam

KS

$925,745

$1,278,856

$4,235,333

$4,140,660

$94,654

$0

Tancredo, Tom

CO

$767,152

$1,209,583

$3,538,244

$3,458,130

$110,079

$295,603

Huckabee, Mike

AR

$1,034,486

$819,376

$2,345,798

$1,694,497

$651,301

$47,810

Hunter, Duncan

CA

$536,357

$618,117

$1,890,873

$1,758,132

$132,742

$50,000

Largest IBM Deal Ever: $5B for Cognos
By BRIAN BERGSTEIN
AP Technology Writer
Latest News
Largest IBM Deal Ever: $5B for Cognos


BOSTON (AP) -- IBM Corp. is making its largest acquisition ever, a deal announced Monday to buy Cognos Inc. for $5 billion in cash in hopes of keeping up with rivals in "business intelligence" software.

The acquisition would follow similar moves in the same market this year. SAP AG recently linked up with Business Objects SA for $7 billion and Oracle Corp. grabbed Hyperion Solutions Corp. for $3.3 billion. Cognos shares had soared recently on expectations that it, too, would be acquired. They leaped another 8 percent on Monday's news.

IBM is offering $58 per share for Ottawa-based Cognos, a 9 percent premium over the U.S.-listed company's $52.98 closing price on Friday. Cognos was trading in the mid-$40s before SAP's bid for Business Objects was announced in October, accelerating expectations for consolidation in business-intelligence software.

Cognos shares rose $4.17, or 7.9 percent, to close at $57.15 Monday. IBM shares rose 1.2 percent, or $1.20, to end at $101.45.

Founded in 1969, Cognos has 4,000 employees worldwide and U.S. headquarters in Burlington, Mass. It earned $116 million on $979 million in revenue in its last full fiscal year.

Note: hmm...$5b in cash for a thirty-eight year old company that generated approx $1b in sales; and $116m in earnings. At present earnings...only 43 YEARS to regain the $5b with static money. WTF !!

Thursday, November 08, 2007

MarketBlast is dead?

Note: I've used MarketBlast, a PC/Mac Seller Mgt tool for use on eBay, for a few years, and was quite pleased with it's feature set, and robust abilities. However, on Nov 1st, my installation quit working correctly. In the ERROR LOG was an entry saying "Demo limit has been reached". I've paid for the program, initially on version 1.4, and at each time it has been enhanced: for versions 1.17 and 2.0


We have sent a total of seven email messages since Nov 1st, (there is no phone contact info available), and aside from an auto reply saying Acclivity received it, I have heard nothing from them.


So I have a program that I've paid a couple hundred dollars for suddenly going dead in the water - with no prospect of revival.


So now, it's onto Turbo Lister and Auctiva - both freebies, and useful apps; but like the demise of the original Sellers Assistant, the loss of MarketBlast is a pain in the butt.


If you have an alternative that you are happy with, please let me know about it.
Thanks - rwp -

An Economist Goes to a Bar And solves the mysteries of dating.


When economists began broadly applying their theories of rational choice-making, love and marriage were among the first areas they colonized. Nobel Prize winner Gary Becker laid the foundations back in 1973 with his two-part article "A Theory of Marriage." Becker imagined society as an immense cocktail party with rational-minded daters searching for the most desirable partner who would have them. His analysis predicted a pattern of "positive assortative matching," where men and women of similar desirability would partner with one another.

While models of dating have proliferated in the years since Becker's pioneering work, we have not progressed very much in testing his theories, or even answering the most basic dating question, for Becker or anyone else: What, exactly, makes someone desirable? There are, of course, the answers that get regular reinforcement: Men value looks; women value brains, money, and success. But do these old-fashioned stereotypes continue to hold today (if they were true to begin with)?

To figure this out, you could do "field work" at a local bar to observe the choices people make in real dating situations or sift through archived marriage announcements to see who chooses whom. But observed dating and marriage choices are at least as much a result of whom we meet as what we prefer. Doctors marry doctors, lawyers marry lawyers, and economists marry economists, probably not because they actually prefer to do so, but because those are the people they meet in daily life. The same may be true of the tendency to marry someone of one's own race or religion.

To really understand what people prefer, you need to pair men and women randomly in an experimental dating service and document the decisions they make. And so for a couple of years at a local bar just off the Columbia campus, I ran a speed-dating experiment with two psychologists, Sheena Iyengar and Itamar Simonson, and fellow economist Emir Kamenica. Some of our findings confirm well-worn clichés. But others surprised us.

Speed dating is matchmaking on, well, speed—each male-female pair (we stuck to heterosexual couples) meets for four minutes to size each other up, at which point a whistle blows, signaling the men to get up and move on to the next woman. After each "date," participants decide if they'd like to see their partner again. For our study, we also asked them to rate their partners' intelligence, looks, and ambition after each meeting. Each event had between 10 and 20 daters of each gender, and in the course of the evening, every man met every woman and vice versa.

After two years of serving as academic love brokers, we had data on thousands of decisions made by more than 400 daters from Columbia University's various graduate and professional schools. By combining all of our choice and ratings data with separately collected background information on the daters, we could figure out what made someone desirable by comparing the attributes of daters that attracted a lot of interest for future dates with those that were less popular.

With the obvious qualification that we're talking here about a four-minute version of love and dating, we found that men did put significantly more weight on their assessment of a partner's beauty, when choosing, than women did. We also found that women got more dates when they won high marks for looks from research assistants, who were hired for the much sought-after position of hanging out in a bar to rate the dater's level of attractiveness on a scale of one to 10.

By contrast, intelligence ratings were more than twice as important in predicting women's choices as men's. It isn't exactly that smarts were a complete turnoff for men: They preferred women whom they rated as smarter—but only up to a point. In a survey we did before the speed dating began, participants rated their own intelligence levels, and it turns out that men avoided women whom they perceived to be smarter than themselves. The same held true for measures of career ambition—a woman could be ambitious, just not more ambitious than the man considering her for a date.

When women were the ones choosing, the more intelligence and ambition the men had, the better. So, yes, the stereotypes appear to be true: We males are a gender of fragile egos in search of a pretty face and are threatened by brains or success that exceeds our own. Women, on the other hand, care more about how men think and perform, and they don't mind being outdone on those scores.

Another clear gender divide, this one less expected, emerged in our findings on racial preferences, reported in a forthcoming article in the Review of Economic Studies. Women of all the races we studied revealed a strong preference for men of their own race: White women were more likely to choose white men; black women preferred black men; East Asian women preferred East Asian men; Hispanic women preferred Hispanic men. But men don't seem to discriminate based on race when it comes to dating. A woman's race had no effect on the men's choices.

Two wrinkles on this: We found no evidence of the stereotype of a white male preference for East Asian women. However, we also found that East Asian women did not discriminate against white men (only against black and Hispanic men). As a result, the white man-Asian woman pairing was the most common form of interracial dating—but because of the women's neutrality, not the men's pronounced preference. We also found that regional differences mattered. Daters of both sexes from south of the Mason-Dixon Line revealed much stronger same-race preferences than Northern daters.

Does all of this rational-choice stuff take the romance and mystery out of romance (just as some have accused my fellow economist Joel Waldfogel of taking the Christmas spirit out of Christmas)? I hope not. Our purpose is to understand how life-long relationships are formed. The first step in helping people find love and happiness is to figure out what they're really looking for in the first place.


Just under two months to go to the Iowa caucus...

Ah come on folks...get real
The Obama Flag photo/email whatzit


Kara Walker Artwork at the Whitney

The Breast and the Brightest - Does nursing really affect your kid's IQ?


Gun-Toting Ground Robots See Action in Iraqi Streets
National Defense Website: Sept 2007
By Stew Magnuson

The U.S. Army quietly entered a new era earlier this summer when it sent the first armed ground robots into action in Iraq.

So far, the robot army’s entry into the war has been a trickle rather than an invasion. Only three of the special weapons observation remote reconnaissance direct action system (SWORDS) have been deployed so far.

The Army has authorized the purchase of 80 more robots — which are being touted as a potentially life-saving technology — but acquisition officials have not come forth with the funding.

“As [soldiers] use them and like them, I’ve heard positive feedback, they want 20 more immediately. It’s a shame we can’t get them to them,” said Michael Zecca, former SWORDS program manager and chief of weapons safety and health physics branch at the Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center, Picatinny Arsenal, N.J.

Whether SWORDS and other armed robots become effective weapons remains to be seen. Meanwhile, the U.S. military is moving forward with dozens of other robotics programs — from the now ubiquitous surveillance drones to ground robots that perform security and logistics duties. SWORDS could be the first step leading to a larger “robot army.”

The three SWORDS robots, which tote M249 light machine guns and are remotely controlled by a soldier through a terminal, are with the 3rd Infantry Division’s 3rd Brigade. After three years of development at ARDEC, the robots were formally approved for combat use in June. Their exact whereabouts and missions are classified, but Zecca confirmed that they have been used in reconnaissance tasks and street patrols. He didn’t know if their weapons had been fired.

SWORDS is designed to take on “high risk combat missions,” said an ARDEC press release. A specialist controlling the robot may send it into a crowded neighborhood infested with snipers to seek targets and take them out before a foot patrol follows.

“Anytime you utilize technology to take a U.S. service member out of harm’s way, it is worth every penny,” said John Saitta, a consultant with Smart Business Advisory and Consulting and a major in the Marine Corps reserves, who has been trained as a weapons and tactics instructor.

“These armed robots can be used as a force multiplier to augment an already significant force in the battle space,” he added.

The 80 robots were approved under an urgent equipment request, which is a mechanism designed to speed potentially life-saving technologies to the battlefield. They are being held up “due to limited funding in fiscal years” 2006 and 2007, said Lt. Col. William Wiggins, a spokesman for the office of the assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics and technology.

“While SWORDS is currently not a program of record, the Army has initiated a memorandum of agreement between ARDEC and Robotic System-Joint Project Office to expedite establishing a funded program to meet Army needs,” Wiggins said in a written statement.

The three robots currently in Iraq were developed and purchased with $2.5 million from the congressional rapid prototyping science and technology fund, Wiggins said.

Each system costs about $250,000, but the manufacturer, Foster-Miller Inc. of Waltham, Mass., said the price tag will go down to $115,000 if an order reaches 100 or more robots, Zecca said.

In addition to the 83 robots already built or approved for funding, there is a request for 20 more from the 3rd Brigade, Zecca said.

The introduction of a new weapon during a shooting war, followed by a relatively rapid development cycle means that concepts of operation and tactics, techniques and procedures have also been put on an accelerated pace, Zecca said.

Early versions of the documents that explain to soldiers and officers the rules of engagement, and how and when the weapon can be used, were written up at the Army Infantry Center at Fort Benning, Ga., where operational training also took place.

The documents will be a baseline, Zecca said. “We didn’t have the luxury of being in peacetime and developing [tactics, techniques and procedures] in country before shipping it overseas.

“They’re going to fine tune the operational use while in theater, which is not ideal, but that’s the way it’s going to be done,” he added. Formal documents will be derived from scenarios the robots and their operators encounter in Iraq.

Seventy-one of the 80 unfunded robots are allocated to Stryker brigades, he added.

Saitta, who also served in the Marines as an armor officer, said armed robots and their operators need to become organically part of a unit to be effective. Just as a TOW missile crew supports tanks, the robots and their operators should be fully integrated into Stryker brigades.

The robots could prove their worth in urban areas with blind corners or curves and little intelligence of what lies beyond, he said.

One skeptic knowledgeable about military robots questioned whether this new weapon would make a long-term impact.

Insurgents will attempt to defeat them just as they have with the military’s new counter-roadside bomb technology. The three robots could last weeks rather than months in the field, said the source, who declined to be named because he is still involved in the military robot community.

James Canton, chief executive officer of the Institute for Global Futures and an expert on military technologies, said SWORDS is a relatively simple machine and just the cusp of where the military is going with robots. The coming robot army will change the military world both tactically and strategically, he predicted.

SWORDS, unmanned aerial vehicles, and other such systems are “tele-robotics,” in other words, a human is somewhere else controlling the machine. But autonomy, even for armed robots, is coming, he said. That includes a machine that will hunt, identify, authenticate and possibly kill a target without a human in the decision loop.

Instead of units with 2,000 soldiers and 150 robots, that equation might be turned around within a decade. “Imagine a detachment of 150 humans and 2,000 robots,” Canton said. That won’t happen overnight, but the technology is advancing quickly, he said.

Robotics technology is now like “Moore’s law on steroids,” Canton said, referring to the observation that computer chip technology doubles in capacity every 18 to 24 months.

This evolution will be the result of several rapidly developing fields, including advanced robotics, sensors and network-centric communications, Canton said.

“You’re changing the entire conversation about war,” he added. For one, it will be easier for the military to become engaged in multiple flashpoints around the world. And just as tactical nuclear weapons served as a deterrent during the Cold War, so will the U.S. military’s advanced robotics. Canton challenged critics who say that would make the United States “trigger happy” because the nation will not be risking lives. “That’s a disturbing scenario,” he said. But robot armies don’t come cheap, he noted, and going to war with one would still be a tough decision, and some soldiers would still be at risk.

The robots will perform many tasks, and take several forms and shapes, including those of humans, he predicted. “The biomechanics of humanoids are pretty efficient,” he said. They will be able to run, dodge, leap, and ping facial recognition databases to identify targets.

The ability to fight wars is based on recruiting, training and arming humans, he said. Placing autonomous lethal robots into battles will be controversial, “but it won’t be as controversial as it will be putting Americans in harm’s way.”

Saitta said until the day artificial intelligence can accurately identify targets, the military can’t take the human out of the equation. “There are times in a combat environment — particularly urban areas where not everyone is a bad guy — there should be someone making the decision to pull that trigger.”

Despite the lack of funding to fully field SWORDS, the program is working on the next steps that may one day lead to Canton’s vision of a robot army. SWORDS 1.5 will carry 400 rounds instead of 200, and include a round-counter to tell operators how much ammunition is left.

ARDEC is working on installing a speaker for two-way communications so an operator can tell targets to “halt” or “drop your weapons.” Other improvements may include algorithms that will allow it to conduct waypoint navigation and an “autohome” feature that will command the robot to return to its operators with one push of a button.

Upgrades for the optics and night-vision sensors are being planned as well as the mounting of other weapons on the robots.

SWORDS 1.5 is also a test bed for anti-tampering devices that would use pyrotechnics to prevent enemies from disarming or disabling any remote controlled system. An improved, lighter chassis that allows for a second battery and for operators to swap them out with greater ease is also in the works, Zecca said.

Meanwhile, the program has caught the attention of U.S. Special Operations Command, which is providing funding to ARDEC to develop a SWORDS 2.0 robot.

“They want to have the latest and greatest and [a robot] unique to them,” Zecca said. Among the improvements SOCOM would like to see is a turret that rotates 360 degrees rather than the 30 degrees to each side on SWORDS 1.0.

ARDEC continues to work on other remotely controlled weapon systems that are mounted on platforms other than robots. Guns can be placed in guard towers, on tripods or humvees, he said.

“Several people have contacted us for lessons learned to see how we did this, because you’re going to be seeing more of these systems out there,” Zecca said.

Besides the special operations community, military police are interested in mounting non-lethal weapons on robots. The Army’s Future Combat Systems program, which has concepts for armed robots, has also contacted ARDEC, Zecca said.

“We’re the first ones and we took a lot of scrutiny going through tests — for valid reasons — so other offices are going to be looking to us on how it can be done,” Zecca said.

Guinness Ad: The Tipping Point
The extensible domino effect...

Wednesday, November 07, 2007

Wobbled by Wealth?
By Paul Krugman
The New York Times
- Monday 05 October 2007

At just about every stop I've made so far on my book tour, what I've come to think of as The Question comes up. I talk about the origins of the long right-wing dominance of American politics, and the reasons I believe that dominance is coming to an end. Then someone asks, "How can you be optimistic about the prospects for progressive change, when big money has so much influence on politics?"

It's a good question.

The public wants change. "If Americans have ever been angrier with the state of the country," begins a new strategy memo from the polling organization Democracy Corps, "we have not witnessed it."

Nor is the demand for change solely about Iraq: there has been a strong revival of economic populism. Democracy Corps asked those who believe America is on the wrong track to choose phrases that best described their views of what's gone wrong. The most commonly chosen were "Big businesses get whatever they want in Washington" and "Leaders have forgotten the middle class."

So much, by the way, for pundits who claim that Americans don't care about economic inequality.

Longer-term studies of public opinion suggest a substantial leftward shift. James Stimson, a political scientist who uses data from many polls to construct an index of the overall liberalism or conservatism of the electorate, finds that America is now more liberal than it has been since the early 1960s. And the tactics the right has historically used to distract voters from economic issues, above all the exploitation of racial tensions, have been losing their effectiveness.

But the Democracy Corps memo warns that "Democrats have not yet found their voice as agents of change." Indeed. What the memo doesn't say, but is all too obvious, is that one big reason the Democrats are having trouble finding their voice is the influence of big money.

The most conspicuous example of this influence right now is the way Senate Democrats are dithering over whether to close the hedge fund tax loophole - which allows executives at private equity firms and hedge funds to pay a tax rate of only 15 percent on most of their income.

Only a handful of very wealthy people benefit from this loophole, while closing the loophole would yield billions of dollars each year in revenue. Retrieving this revenue is a key ingredient in legislation approved by the House Ways and Means Committee to reform the alternative minimum tax, something that must be done to avoid a de facto tax increase for millions of middle-class Americans.

A handful of superwealthy hedge fund managers versus millions of middle-class Americans - it sounds like a no-brainer.

But as The Financial Times reports, "Key votes have been delayed and time bought after the investment industry hired some of Washington's most prominent lobbyists to influence lawmakers and spread largesse through campaign donations." It goes on to describe how Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader, was "toasted by industry lobbyists" (and serenaded by Barry Manilow) at a money-raising party for his special fund to help Democrats get elected next year.

Is this the shape of things to come? My questioners fear that it is.

Fears of betrayal are often focused on Hillary Clinton. Some people who raise The Question cite an article in The Nation from last summer, which suggested that Hillary Clinton's commitment to change is suspect. "Not only is Hillary more reliant on large donations and corporate money than her Democratic rivals," warned the article, "but advisers in her inner circle are closely affiliated with unionbusters, G.O.P. operatives, conservative media and other Democratic Party antagonists."

O.K., some perspective. I sometimes hear people say that there's no difference between Democrats and Republicans; that's foolish. Look at the fight over children's health insurance, and you can see how different the parties' philosophies and priorities really are. All of the leading Democratic candidates are offering strongly progressive policy proposals; the Republicans are, if anything, running to the right of the Bush administration.

Also, even history's greatest progressives had to make compromises to win their victories. F.D.R.'s New Deal depended on the support of Southern segregationists. Compared with that, Senator Clinton's acceptance of lots of corporate donations doesn't look so bad - though I'd be reassured if she made her views on tax reform clearer, and matched John Edwards's focus on corporate reform.

Still, I am worried.

One of the saddest stories I tell in my book is that of Al Smith, the great reformist governor of New York, who gradually turned into a narrow-minded economic conservative and bitter critic of F.D.R. H. L. Mencken explained it thusly: "His association with the rich has apparently wobbled him and changed him. He has become a golf player."

So, how wobbled are today's Democrats? I guess we'll find out.

<------------------------------------->

Note: Ok Paul...I'll give you the Al Smith quote based on goods delivered over the past few years; but playing golf is not a sign of wealth. As evidence I point to the typical cost of a round of golf compared to the cost of a Pop Musical concert, a Stage Play, the Symphony, or a night out on the town. It's even more dramatic when considered on a cost-per-hour basis: a round of golf takes about five hours for about $40 - the last concert I went to cost $65 for less than a two hour performance, and a night out lasting less than three hours can easily exceed $100. Your mileage may vary, especially when a spouse is included. Regardless, golf is still relatively cheap exercise/entertainment when compared with other options.

Iraq - (Update)

2007 Is Deadliest Year for US in Iraq
By Lauren Frayer - The Associated Press
Tuesday 06 November 2007

Baghdad - The U.S. military on Tuesday announced the deaths of five more soldiers, making 2007 the deadliest year for U.S. troops despite a recent downturn, according to an Associated Press count. At least 852 American military personnel have died in Iraq so far this year the highest annual toll since the war began in March 2003, according to AP figures.

<------------------------------------->
Number of Displaced Iraqis Has Soared, Aid Group Says
By Amit R. Paley
The Washington Post - Tuesday 06 November 2007

Baghdad - The number of Iraqis fleeing their homes has more than quadrupled since the U.S. troop buildup began in February, leaving 2.3 million Iraqis displaced and further dividing the country along sectarian lines, according to a new report from the Iraqi Red Crescent Society.

The figures, which measured the number of internally displaced people at the end of September, present a grim accounting of the humanitarian crisis unfolding as Shiite militias and Sunni insurgent groups drive civilians, usually from the opposite sect, out of their homes, neighborhoods and cities.

More than 83 percent of those displaced were women and children, and most children were younger than 12, the report found. Most lived in Baghdad. Many lack adequate health services, cannot transfer their children to new schools and cannot find jobs.

The number of internally displaced Iraqis at the end of September represented a 16 percent increase since the end of August, and was more than 40 times higher than March 2006, when sectarian fighting accelerated following the bombing of the Golden Mosque in Sammara, a Shiite shrine, according to the report.

Georgia Plans Service to Pray for Rain


By SHANNON McCAFFREY, Associated Press Writer

Wednesday, November 7, 2007

(11-07) 17:29 PST ATLANTA (AP) --

What to do when the rain won't come? If you're Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue, you pray.

The governor will host a prayer service next week to ask for relief from the drought gripping the Southeast.

"The only solution is rain, and the only place we get that is from a higher power," Perdue spokesman Bert Brantley said on Wednesday.

Perdue's office has sent out invitations to leaders from several faiths for the service, set for Tuesday.

Perdue has several times mentioned the need for prayer — along with water conservation — as the state's drought crisis has worsened. Over the summer, he participated in day of prayer for agriculture at a gathering of the Georgia Farm Bureau in Macon, Ga.

Perdue, a Baptist, has enjoyed strong support from Georgia's Christian conservatives.

The Southeast has been suffering from an intense drought in recent months that has threatened supplies of drinking water. Georgia has been locked in a battle with Alabama and Florida over how much water should be sent downstream from the state's dwindling reservoirs.

Governors from the three states reached a temporary agreement after meeting with Bush administration officials in Washington.

The prayer service will be held outside the state Capitol on Tuesday. Unless, of course, it rains.

Note: Perhaps Gov. Purdue does not understand he is the CEO of the Georgia State Government; and as such can exert his authority during the drought toward conservation and water use measures that are based in pragmatism, science, and technology. I don't have a problem with pastors, or individuals, concentrating their efforts toward prayer to address the water shortfall; but I do have with a Governor who does the same, especially when his effort is seen globally by the media. (The above AP article appeared first in the San Francisco Chronicle.)

It's as if the last several hundred years of human history is ignored in favor of petitioning favors from a deity, as humans did several thousand years ago. As has been shown in numerous scientific studies - prayer does not effect outcomes; but it does affect those who pray - by making the outcomes more palatable.

Another way of putting this is to say: Perdue's effort will not address the underlying issue; but it will 'seem' as if something is being done by his office.

<------------------------------------->

How to Do a Rain Dance
How To A Rain Dance

1. Never do a rain dance on a hill.
2. Make sure you have a lot of room so you
don't run into anything.
3. Spin around in clockwise circles.
4. Make up your own rain chant. It should be rhythmical and easy to say fast.
5. Yell your rain chant while spinning around in circles.
6. If you are trying to get rid of rain, spin in
counterclockwise circles and say your chant backwards.
Links to:
Native American Rain Dances



World Energy Outlook 2007

Grassley Probes Televangelists' Finances

Tuesday, November 06, 2007

By JUSTIN JUOZAPAVICIUS, Associated Press Writer

Acting on tips about preachers who ride in Rolls Royces and have purportedly paid $30,000 for a conference table, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee said Tuesday he's investigating the finances of six well-known TV ministers.

Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa said those under scrutiny include faith healer Benny Hinn, Georgia megachurch pastor Creflo Dollar and one of the nation's best known female preachers, Joyce Meyer.

Grassley sent letters to the half-dozen Christian media ministries earlier this week requesting answers by Dec. 6 about their expenses, executive compensation and amenities, including use of fancy cars and private jets.

In a statement, Grassley said he was acting on complaints from the public and news coverage of the organizations.

"The allegations involve governing boards that aren't independent and allow generous salaries and housing allowances and amenities such as private jets and Rolls Royces," Grassley said.

"I don't want to conclude that there's a problem, but I have an obligation to donors and the taxpayers to find out more. People who donated should have their money spent as intended and in adherence with the tax code."

Those ministries that responded Tuesday either said they were cooperating or committed to financial transparency and following the law.

The investigation promises to shine new light on the kind of TV ministries that were crippled by sex and money scandals in the 1980s. Experts also say it stands out as an unusual case of the government probing the inner workings of religious organizations.

Most of those under investigation preach a variation of the "prosperity gospel," the teaching that God will shower faithful followers with material riches.

Grassley's letters went to:

_ Kenneth and Gloria Copeland of Kenneth Copeland Ministries of Newark, Texas, a $20 million organization and prosperity gospel pioneer. Questions were raised about the transfer of church assets to a for-profit company, Security Patrol Inc., a $1 million loan from Gloria Copeland to the group, and a "personal gift" of more than $2 million given to Kenneth Copeland to mark the ministry's 40th anniversary.

A Copeland spokeswoman released a statement saying the ministry is working on a response to Grassley's letter, follows all laws and best practices governing churches and religious nonprofit groups, and "will continue to do so."

_ Creflo and Taffi Dollar of World Changers Church International and Creflo Dollar Ministries of College Park, Ga. Grassley's letter asks for records on private planes, board makeup, compensation and donations and "love offerings" to visiting ministers. In a statement, Dollar called his ministry an "open book" and said he would cooperate. He also questioned whether the investigation could "affect the privacy of every community church in America."

_ Benny Hinn of World Healing Center Church Inc. and Benny Hinn Ministries of Grapevine, Texas, is asked about use of a private jet, a home in Dana Point, Calif. and "layover trips" while traveling on ministry business. Hinn did not respond to requests for comment.

_ Bishop Eddie Long of New Birth Missionary Baptist Church and Bishop Eddie Long Ministries of Lithonia, Ga., was questioned about his salary, a $1.4 million real estate transaction and whether he, and not the board, holds sole authority over the organization. Long plans to fully comply with the Senate's request, and his church has "several safeguards" to ensure transactions comply with laws governing churches, according to a statement from Long's spokesman.

_ Joyce and David Meyer of Joyce Meyer Ministries of Fenton, Mo., who were quizzed about receiving donations of money and jewelry and the handling of cash from overseas crusades. They also were asked about expenditures at ministry headquarters, including a $30,000 conference table and a $23,000 "commode with marble top."

The ministry's lawyer released a statement describing the ministry's work and public release of several years' worth of audits. He also said the IRS found in October that the group continues to qualify for tax-exempt status.

_ Randy and Paula White of the multiracial Without Walls International Church and Paula White Ministries of Tampa, Fla. are asked about home purchases in San Antonio, Texas, Malibu, Calif., and New York, credit card charges for clothing and cosmetic surgery and the reported purchase of a Bentley convertible as a gift for Bishop T.D. Jakes, a prominent Texas preacher and televangelist. An e-mail to a spokeswoman for Jakes was not immediately returned.

In a statement, Randy and Paula White declined to comment on specifics, saying they needed time to review the letter with their lawyers. But the Whites called the Grassley letter "unusual, since the IRS has separate powers to investigate religious organizations if they think it's necessary."

Hinn, Kenneth Copeland and Creflo Dollar all sit on the board of regents for Oral Roberts University, which is mired in a financial scandal of its own.

The Senate Finance Committee has chided secular nonprofits for governance and compensation problems in the past, but this level of scrutiny for what are basically "non-pulpit churches" is unprecedented, said Ken Behr, president of the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability.

Because the groups have tax status as churches, they are not required to file tax forms open to public inspection.

Tuesday, November 06, 2007

The Cocktail Creationist

The man behind Grey Goose vodka understood that Americans want to pay more—You just have to give them a good story. Now he has a new tale to tell. it’s about a tequila called Corazón.



At 5:20 on a Sunday morning in the summer of 1996, Sidney Frank—liquor baron extraordinaire, dapper elderly gent, CEO of the Sidney Frank Importing Co.—picked up his phone in a fit of inspiration. He dialed up his No. 2 executive, who listened in a groggy daze as Frank proclaimed, “I figured out the name! It’s Grey Goose!”

And so was born one of the most astonishing brands in the history of distilled spirits. Grey Goose vodka, invented from thin air that summer morning, had as yet no distillery, no bottle, and—perhaps the most pressing order of business—no vodka. Yet this past June, almost exactly eight years after Sidney Frank gave name to this nonexistent liquor, Grey Goose was sold to Bacardi for more than $2 billion. Cash. (To understand how much that is, consider that IBM’s personal computer business, nurtured, honed, and advertised since 1981, recently sold for $1.75 billion.)

After the Grey Goose sale, everyone at Sidney Frank Importing Co. got a hefty bonus. Longtime SFIC secretaries were handed checks for more than $100,000 apiece. Grey Goose was a spectacular success. And now the ride was over. The only question left: What’s next?

But when Goose got sold to Bacardi, SFIC signed a stringent noncompete clause: It can’t launch a new brand of vodka or gin for the next four years. So tequila it is. SFIC will spend at least $3 million on Corazón marketing in 2005 and make it available to all sorts of influential crowds—at a VIP tailgate party at the Super Bowl, at the victory dinner for the Indy 500, and at the Junior League’s Winter Ball in New York. As the product becomes known, says Frank, “some idea will come to me that will push it forward.”

The odds against any new spirits brand are long. Some say the Grey Goose explosion was a fluke, a miraculous confluence of timing and trends. And whatever marketing tricks SFIC had up its sleeve last time—all the guerrilla promotions that Sidney Frank is famous for—everyone else is onto them by now. Given the fierce competition, can Sidney Frank, now 85, do it again? Of course he can. He’s done it not once but twice before.

Born in 1919, Sidney Frank grew up poor in rural Connecticut, a farm boy who harbored a Gatsby-esque drive for social transformation. He wiggled his way into Brown University. Frank had to drop out of Brown after one year because he couldn’t afford tuition. (When Grey Goose was sold, he gave $100 million to Brown to provide financial aid for poor students.)

In an interview with the Brown Alumni Magazine, on the heels of his massive donation, Frank was asked if he had any advice for the young Brown student. “If you meet any important people,” he said, “keep in touch with them . . . And marry a rich girl. It’s easier to marry a million than to make a million.” Through Brown friends, Sidney Frank met, and, in 1945, married, Louise “Skippy” Rosenstiel, whose father was chief of Schenley Distilleries (at the time a spirits-industry powerhouse). Frank went to work for the company, made his way up the corporate ladder, and then (after a family falling-out, and Louise’s death) branched out to start his own liquor business in 1972.

SFIC was no overnight success. Frank was forced to sell off personal assets (fine art, property in Antigua) to keep the company running. Early on, during the tough times, he would stroll around New York neighborhoods to see who was drinking what in the bars. Once, during a jaunt through Yorkville, he saw German immigrants downing something called Jagermeister, a 70-proof, odd-tasting liqueur from the Fatherland. It was no big seller, but the drink seemed to have a steady fan base, so Frank took a chance and secured the U.S. importing rights. Nothing much happened for the next decade.

Then, in 1985, for no clear reason at all, college kids in Baton Rouge and New Orleans decided Jager was cool. Just one of those things that happen sometimes. Kids being funny. It’s likely they chose Jager precisely because its taste was so horrific. The whole thing might have easily been forgotten by the next semester. But that’s not what happened.

Bill Goldring is chairman of Magnolia Marketing Co., which was SFIC’s distributor in Louisiana when Jager first hit. “Brands are a funny thing,” he says. “Corona beer started at the University of Texas, where kids were putting a lime in it. Then Jimmy Buffett was drinking it. Then it was the hottest beer in America. With Jager, we saw we were getting large orders because the LSU kids were drinking it. Then there was the newspaper story in the Baton Rouge Advocate.”



The story, at the height of LSU’s Jager boomlet, quotes kids calling the herb- infused drink “liquid Valium,” and theorizing that Jager was an aphrodisiac. When Sidney Frank saw this, he flew into action, assembling a team of hot chicks, dubbed Jagerettes, and dispatching them to New Orleans bars to hand out photocopies of the story. Frank also slapped up eight new Jagermeister billboards in the area. They displayed a wincing man and the words SO SMOOTH, playing on Jager’s ironic appeal. (I remember, back in high school, a friend’s college-age big brother had a T-shirt with the SO SMOOTH guy on it. We thought this was the pinnacle of cool.)

All over the country, Jager shots became a revered symbol of buck-wild partying, and the brand remains one of the hottest in the industry, growing at 40 percent a year. Yet not a single spirits expert I spoke with could explain the Jager phenomenon, beyond shrugging and calling Sidney Frank a “promotional genius.”

“It’s a liqueur with an unpronounceable name,” says Ted Wright of Liquid Intelligence, a beverage-marketing firm. “It’s drunk by older, blue-collar Germans as an after-dinner digestive aid. It’s a drink that on a good day is an acquired taste. If Sidney Frank can make that drink synonymous with ‘party’—which he has—he can pretty much do anything.”

To the business at hand. The year is now 1996, and, flush with Jager’s success, you’re ready to invent a new vodka from scratch. Why? Because the microbrewed-beer craze is giving way to a new age of sophisticated cocktails. Dot-com dollars are begging to be spent ostentatiously, at expensive nightclubs. Herein lies opportunity.

As you lean back in your golf cart, watching another perfect chip shot bounce up onto the green, you ponder the fact that the premium vodka right now (in 1996) is a brand called Absolut. When it was first introduced, Absolut’s high price was considered outrageous. But it’s had great success (with its iconic, artsy ad campaign), and it now sells for the steep, steep price of about $17 a bottle.

So, to steal away Absolut’s market share, your unborn new vodka should undercut this price, correct? No. Why don’t I price my vodka extravagantly higher than Absolut, at wildly more profitable margins . . . and steal Absolut’s market share that way? This was the great insight of Sidney Frank (and not only him: The makers of Ketel One vodka had the same basic idea).

Frank could see that there was a product missing from the shelves. Here were all these vodkas, in the $15-to-$17 range, vying to be the premium brand (with Absolut mostly winning). Frank just sidestepped the fray altogether and charged an unheard-of $30 a bottle. The markup amount was pure profit. “He was the first person to see,” says an executive at rival Bacardi, “that there was a superpremium category above Absolut, if you had a good product story.”

In this story, the name came first—as it so often does when image is the paramount concern.

Frank recalled he’d once sold a Liebfraumilch named Grey Goose back in the seventies. These were German white wines that were briefly hip but faded into oblivion. “I remember there was always something in the name that had magic with the consumer,” says Frank. (It may also be that Frank liked the name because he already owned the worldwide rights to it.) Frank gathered his lieutenants at the company’s New Rochelle headquarters. “Go to France and come back with a vodka,” he said. So they met with cognac distillers, whose business had slowed. The stills were switched to vodka, and at last there was an actual product.

But why France? Doesn’t vodka come from Russia, or perhaps, in a pinch, Scandinavia? “People are always looking for something new,” says Frank. It’s all about brand differentiation. If you’re going to charge twice as much for a vodka, you need to give people a reason.

“Nietzsche explains that human beings are looking for the ‘why’ in their lives,” says Wright. “Here at Liquid Intelligence, we refer to this ‘why’ as ‘the Great Story.’ The Great Story must be enticing, memorable, easily repeatable, and about what you want your brand to be about.”

For Grey Goose, the brand was about unrivaled quality. Grey Goose’s Great Story hinged on the following key points: It comes from France, where all the best luxury products come from. It’s not another rough-hewn Russian vodka—it’s a masterpiece crafted by French vodka artisans.

It uses water from pristine French springs, filtered through Champagne limestone.

It’s got a distinctive, carefully designed bottle, with smoked glass and a silhouette of flying geese. It looks fantastic up behind the bar, the way it catches the light (and Frank made sure to give the bars big, 1.75-liter bottles, to grab attention). It sure looks expensive.

It was shipped in wood crates, like a fine wine, not in cardboard boxes like Joe Schmo’s vodka. This catches the bartender’s eye and reinforces the aura of quality. Never forget the influence of the bartender.

It was named the best-tasting vodka in the world by the Beverage Testing Institute in 1998. (Granted, this pronouncement can and will be doubted. But it was nonetheless touted relentlessly in a series of Wall Street Journal ads.)

And now the most important piece of the story—the twist that brings it all together: Grey Goose costs way more than other vodkas. Waaaaaaay more. So it must be the best.

Pause for a reality assessment: Certainly, Grey Goose is a very good vodka. But is it really “the best”? Pace the Beverage Testing Institute, I’d venture that the answer is, ehhhhh, maybe. Of course, when I suggest to an SFIC vice-president that vodka is by definition odorless and tasteless, and thus one vodka couldn’t be much better than the next, his face goes tight. “That is a dinosaur statement,” he says, speaking slowly, then lectures me on water- filtration processes and Champagne limestone and special grains and such.

“Yes, some people may taste a difference,” says Wright of Liquid Intelligence. “But you’re talking about a grain-neutral spirit. The FDA definition is pretty narrow. At an elemental level, there is no difference. And anyway, you can’t possibly taste it when it’s in a Cosmopolitan. Grey Goose is about quality because Sidney Frank said it was about quality.”

And said it to the right people. Those ads were placed in the Wall Street Journal, not Newsday. Even more important to the campaign was event marketing—getting Grey Goose into the hottest clubs on the hottest nights, in the hands of the hottest people.

“You need to influence the influencers,” says Wright. These are the obsessive arbiters of taste who like to tell their friends what to buy. When they have a Great Story to tell, they’ll tell it convincingly and often. In the classic flowchart, Influencers talk to Early Adopters (“Want to be cool but don’t have the time,” as Wright describes them), who talk to the Early Majority (“Suburbs”), who talk to the Late Majority (“Middle America”), who talk to the Laggards (“Just now buying a CD player”).

As the Influencers peddled the Grey Goose tale far and wide and people began to call for it in bars, a great thing happened—the characters on Sex and the City pointedly called for Grey Goose Cosmos. In the battle for vodka supremacy, this was the atom bomb. The war was over. Grey Goose had won.

Though Grey Goose is a product of Sidney Frank, spirits savant, it’s also a product of its age. We live in an era of luxury. The word luxury—in this context—refers not to our standard of living but rather to a highly successful sales concept.

Luxury, in a consumer sense, means spending much more than you have to. Your reason for doing this could be that you demand the absolute highest quality, because you can genuinely tell the difference. As Cornell economics professor Robert H. Frank (no relation to Sidney) points out, “You can buy a car that does zero to 60 in 3.9 seconds. Or you can spend $445,000 to buy a Porsche that does zero to 60 in 3.7 seconds. It’s a real difference, and some people will pay for it.”

But small quality differences like this are not why most people buy a luxury product. Frank, author of the book Luxury Fever, observes that the thirst for luxury trickles down to those who can’t really afford it. Frank calls this the “expenditure cascade.” We all spend more in an effort to keep up with the guy who’s one rung above us. This means we buy bigger houses to keep up with the neighbor’s mansion. It also means we buy superpremium vodkas, to keep up with the guy who’s next to us at the bar.

This is what SFIC is banking on. The company’s decided its interests lie solely in the superpremium categories—where margins are higher and volumes lower. (Even Jagermeister is technically superpremium, despite its blue-collar image. It’s priced above its competitors in the liqueurs category, such as Bailey’s and Kahlua.)

But SFIC will never again have the niche to itself. These days, every spirits marketer is diving headfirst into superpremiums. Absolut just launched Level, a new superpremium vodka, only to see the simultaneous launch of Stolichnaya Elit (which will sell for a dizzying $60 a bottle). You might wonder where the price escalation will stop or if it will stop at all. People don’t seem to blink at paying high prices for a cocktail in a bar (as opposed to in the liquor store, where they tend to be more price-conscious). As long as your high-end brand has a credible story behind it, you can keep hiking its margins, and consumers will follow. The trend is known in the industry as “trading up.”

“Consumers are drinking less, but drinking better,” says Michael J. Branca, a beverage-industry analyst at Lehman Brothers. The evidence is that volume sales of spirits have been flat, while dollar revenues have soared. According to Branca, this stems from a worldwide trend toward health and wellness, as well as a growing consumer demand for “everyday luxuries,” which includes things like Starbucks Frappuccinos.

The best thing about the everyday luxury business is that an awful lot of Americans can afford a $15 cocktail, whereas real luxuries, like a $3,500 Rolex, have a much smaller market. And the margins for superpremium spirits are fantastic. Remember, these high-status luxury products are more than half water.

It’s possible the trading-up trend could reverse, and we’ll all drink Joe Schmo’s vodka as some sort of trucker-hat statement. But liquor experts think the superpremium category is pretty safe. The reason is that Grey Goose and its ilk do not rely on mere “coolness,” which is fleeting and hard to pin down. They’re chasing after “bestness”—a consistent target even if it’s hard to hit. There will always be a large subset of drinkers who want to be drinking “the best,” because bars and nightclubs are places to be seen. Places to prove you’re a player. “Spirits is an image-driven category,” says Branca. “We’re acutely aware of what we’re drinking in the presence of others. That’s why it’s so important to have strong on-premise promotions with influential consumers.”

Thus we’re out on this freezing winter night, hawking Corazón at a club on the Bowery. The scene is clearly rife with Influencers. On my way in, I brush past Ethan Hawke.

Over in a corner, the SFIC team has set up a bar serving free Corazón tequila. There’s a Corazón ice sculpture and several babe-alicious Corazón girls flitting about with margaritas. The whole thing’s a $2,000 outlay from the marketing budget.

Though tequila has a strong frat-boy affiliation, as a salt/lime/bodyshot-off-drunken-coed’s-clavicle kind of item, it too has been caught in the trading-up trend. Sales have nearly doubled in volume since 1990, and the margarita is frequently identified by bar and restaurant owners as the most popular cocktail in America.

Corazón began outside the Sidney Frank empire, in the mind of one Frank Arcella, sole proprietor of Arcella Premium Brands. Arcella knew his one-man outfit couldn’t compete in the high-stakes vodka category. But in superpremium tequila, he had a fighting chance.

Arcella toured tequila plants in Mexico and settled on one in the highlands of Jalisco. It owned its own agave fields (a major consideration, as agave supply can fluctuate wildly) and aged its tequila in dedicated, tequila-only barrels—not reused sherry and bourbon barrels, as is often done. The product was good, and the management was reliable. So Arcella struck a deal.

He then brainstormed names and decided on Corazón de Agave (Heart of Agave) because it suggested high-quality ingredients, and because the word heart might offer good marketing angles. At the plant, Arcella was shown hundreds of existing bottle prototypes and chose one with a distinctive skinny neck. “You save half a million dollars you would have given to a bottle designer,” he says.

It’s the sort of gut decision Sidney Frank made his fortune with. To me, it’s astonishingly cavalier. (I’ve seen Coca-Cola execs give PowerPoint presentations about how they hire naming agencies and focus-group every single design decision.) But Arcella is no fool or hayseed. He spent 29 years at Seagram’s, reaching executive vice-president. He says brand creation is simple: product, package, name, marketing plan. “This is not rocket science,” he claims. Perhaps in the fickle world of luxury liquor, it’s better that one man make all the decisions. It results in a more distinctive, memorable product—one that feels less like a product for the masses.

Arcella actually went to Frank early on in the Corazón time line, to see if Frank had any interest. But it wasn’t until a few years later, in 2002, that Frank decided to buy Corazón. It’s not hard to see why. The Corazón brand blueprint looks exactly like the one for Grey Goose. Corazón can claim, with a modicum of credibility, that it’s the best product out there (it also got superlative marks from the Beverage Testing Institute, which will soon be touted in an ad campaign). It’s got distinctive packaging. It’s priced above most competitors.

And so here we are tonight, out on the town, influencing the Influencers. At one bar, we get “bottle service,” buying an entire bottle of Corazón for a mere $310—plus mixers for free!—and displaying it prominently on our table.

Even with all this, it’s hard to foresee the sequence of events that might turn Corazón into a real competitor to Patrón. But the industry knows better than to bet against Sidney Frank. “Patrón has good imagery, it’s a strong brand, and it’s set up nicely,” says Michel Roux, the liquor exec who crafted Absolut’s long reign. “Of course, you could have said the same thing about Ketel One, back before Grey Goose took off.”

If Corazón fails to overtake Patrón, Frank has fallbacks, like a new line of cognacs, which will come in flavors like pear and apple, aimed at what analysts term the “urban” or “hip-hop” market. Frank has some experience with this market—he backs a side project with rapper Lil’ John, marketing an energy drink called “Crunk!!!” It’s also a market where conspicuous luxury consumption is on the rise, and the prices are high. The best cognacs are often three to six times more expensive than anything else behind the bar.

A new line of rums is also in the offing. Rums are widely believed to be the next vodka, as they’re also adept at soaking up flavors and acting as the base for a wide range of cocktails. SFIC plans to import its rums from Australia, to break from the herd of Caribbean rums. Tentative name for the line of rums: White Pelican. “It’s an endangered species,” says Frank, “and my wife likes the sound of it.”

When I asked a Bacardi executive, he said that rum doesn’t really have a superpremium category. That’s probably what Absolut would have said about superpremium vodka back in 1996.

RFID Guardian, open hardware/software to firewall your RFID tags


The RFID Guardian project has released the hardware and software schematics for the latest version of its personal RFID firewall. The RFID Guardian is a device that detects all the RFID tags on your person (passport, transit pass, bank-card, toll-card, car keys, etc), and interdicts them so that they can't answer queries anymore. The Guardian can clone all of these tags, and emit their signal on demand, but unlike a dumb tag, the Guardian only emits when you tell it to, and gives you a central way to set and enforce policy about when you will be identified and by whom.

The new version is completely open, and the relaunched RFID Guardian site includes a wiki, source code repository and bug-tracker. Link (Thanks, Melanie!)

Turning the Chips Around

November 2, 2007
Reporting by Roddy Scheer

IBM’s recovered silicon could help drive down costs for solar panel production.
© Gety Images
Computer maker IBM has found a way to save money, reduce waste, and contribute to the development of the solar power industry with just one smart innovation —recycling defective semiconductor chips and sending the recovered refined silicon to manufacturers of photovoltaic solar cells. A worldwide shortage of refined silicon, the key ingredient in both semiconductors and solar cells, has kept prices for solar power artificially high in recent years, and photovoltaic producers welcome the news of IBM’s breakthrough in processing its wasted chips for them.

“It reduces our cost and it reduces our carbon footprint,” says Thomas Jagielski, who heads up environmental operations at IBM’s chip factory in Burlington, Vermont. “And it provides resources to the solar industry.”

Currently IBM discards upwards of three percent of the semiconductor chips it produces due to flaws that could impact the quality and performance of the computers it helps to create. By recycling these chips, the company expects to save about $1.5 million a year, while getting credit for helping make solar power more affordable for both producers and consumers.

“One of the challenges facing the solar industry is a severe shortage of silicon, which threatens to stall its rapid growth,” says Charles Bai of the Chinese solar company ReneSola, which has agreed to purchase some of IBM’s recycled silicon. “This is why we’ve turned to reclaimed silicon materials sourced primarily from the semiconductor industry to supply the raw material our company needs.”

Across the computer industry, as many as three million silicon wafers are discarded every year. IBM analysts say that the amount of refined silicon they could harvest from such chips would generate about 13.5 megawatts of energy annually if used in solar cells—enough to power about 6,000 typical American homes.

Monday, November 05, 2007

The Ranch Hand
Courtesy of Steve Wade - Nov. 2007

A successful rancher died and left everything to his devoted wife. She was a very good-looking woman and determined to keep the ranch, but knew very little about ranching, so she decided to place an ad in the
Newspaper for a ranch hand.

Two cowboys applied for the job. One was gay and the other a drunk. She thought long and hard about it, and when no one else applied she decided to hire the gay guy, figuring it would be safer to have him
Around the house than the drunk. He proved to be a hard worker who put in long hours every day and knew a lot about ranching.

For weeks, the two of them worked, and the ranch was doing very well. Then one day, the rancher's widow said to the hired hand, "You have done a reall y good job, and the ranch looks great. You should go into
Town and kick up your heels."

The hired hand readily agreed and went into town one Saturday night. One o'clock came, however, and he didn't return. Two o'clock and no hired hand.

Finally he returned around two-thirty, and upon entering the room, he found the rancher's widow sitting by the fireplace with a glass of wine,
Waiting for him.

She quietly called him over to her. "Unbutton my blouse and take it off," she said. Trembling, he did as she directed. "Now take off my boots." He did as she asked, ever so slowly. "Now take off my socks." He removed each gently and placed them neatly by her boots. "Now take off my skirt." He slowly unbuttoned it, constantly watching her eyes in the fire light. "Now take off my bra." Again, with trembling hands, he did as he was told and dropped it to the floor.

Then she looked at him and said, "If you ever wear my clothes into town again, you're fired."

(P.S. I didn't see it coming, either.)


A trip to Italy...
Courtesy of Mary Kay Blair - Nov. 2007

Yo Mamma
Courtesy of Mactechworks


Little Carol came into the kitchen where her mother was making dinner.

Her birthday was coming up and she thought this was a good time to tell her mother what she wanted. "Mom, I want a bike for my birthday."

Now, Little Carol was a bit of a troublemaker. She had gotten into trouble at school and at home. Carol's mother asked her if she thought she deserved to get a bike for her birthday. Little Carol, of course, thought she did.

Carol's mother, being a Christian woman, wanted her to reflect on her behavior over the last year, and write a letter to God and tell him why she deserved a bike for her birthday. Little Carol stomped up the steps to her room and sat down to write God a letter.

LETTER 1:
Dear God:
I have been a very good girl this year and I would like a bike for my birthday. I want a red one.
Your friend,
Carol

Carol knew this wasn't true. She had not been a very good girl this year, so she tore up the letter and started over.

LETTER 2:
Dear God:
This is your friend Carol. I have been a pretty good girl this year, and I would like a red bike for my birthday.
Thank you,
Carol

Carol knew this wasn't true either. She tore up the letter and started again.

LETTER 3:
Dear God:
I know I haven't been a good girl this year. I am very sorry. I will be a good girl if you just send me a red bike for my birthday.
Thank you,
Carol

Carol knew, even if it was true, this letter was not going to get her a bike. By now, she was very upset. She went downstairs and told her mother she wanted to go to church. Carol's mother thought her plan had worked because Carol looked very sad.

"Just be home in time for dinner," her mother said.

Carol walked down the street to the church and up to the altar. She looked around to see if anyone was there. She picked up a statue of the Virgin Mary, slipped it under her jacket and ran out of the church, down the street, into her house, and up to her room. She shut the door and sat down and wrote her letter to God.

LETTER 4:
I GOT YOUR MAMA.
IF YOU WANT TO SEE HER AGAIN, SEND THE BIKE.
Signed,
YOU KNOW WHO


Sunday, November 04, 2007

Revolutionary Laser Technique Destroys Viruses And Bacteria Without Damaging Human Cells


Femtosecond laser. (Credit: Image courtesy of Institute of Physics)

ScienceDaily (Nov. 2, 2007) — Physicists in Arizona State University have designed a revolutionary laser technique which can destroy viruses and bacteria such as AIDS without damaging human cells and may also help reduce the spread of hospital infections such as MRSA.

The research, published on Thursday November 1 in the Institute of Physics' Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter, discusses how pulses from an infrared laser can be fine-tuned to discriminate between problem microorganisms and human cells.

Current laser treatments such as UV are indiscriminate and can cause ageing of the skin, damage to the DNA or, at worst, skin cancer, and are far from 100 per cent effective.

Femtosecond laser pulses, through a process called Impulsive Stimulated Raman Scattering (ISRS), produces lethal vibrations in the protein coat of microorganisms, thereby destroying them. The effect of the vibrations is similar to that of high-pitched noise shattering glass.

The physicists in Arizona have undertaken experiments to show that the coherent vibrations excited by infrared lasers with carefully selected wavelengths and pulse widths do no damage to human cells, most likely because of the different structural compositions in the protein coats of human cells vis a vis bacteria and viruses.

Professor K. T. Tsen from Arizona State University said, "Although it is not clear at the moment why there is a large difference in laser intensity for inactivation between human cells and microorganisms such as bacteria and viruses, the research so far suggests that ISRS will be ready for use in disinfection and could provide treatments against some of the worst, often drug-resistant, bacterial and viral pathogens."

Femtosecond lasers could find immediate application in hospitals as a way to disinfect blood supply or biomaterials and for the treatment of blood-borne diseases such as AIDS and Hepatitis.

War, fear and truth

Orwell reminds us that the fear produced by war and terrorism allows those in power to create their own truth.
By Mark Danner - LA Times
November 4, 2007
Perhaps it would have surprised George Orwell, poet laureate of the Cold War, to find himself so much in our thoughts in this second decade of the post-Cold War age. The Soviet Union is 15 years dead, its imperium in the East long since ended. China has entered into a peculiar economic symbiosis with the American capitalist juggernaut. And yet, in this new post-ideological world, no writer is more vital than Orwell, not least because he helps us see how deeply that earlier struggle has marked us, helps us read the signs it has inscribed on the body of our politics.

Gazing at the solemn White House ceremony on Dec. 14, 2004, watching in inarticulate wonder as the newly reelected president placed the Medal of Freedom around the necks of three high officials, I began to perceive, dancing deep in my memory, a line of Orwell's that I could not quite grasp.

Before me on the television screen, neck bent for the president, stood retired Gen. Tommy Franks, who had led the initial "combat phase" of the war in Iraq, that "combat phase" that had never ended. Beside him was L. Paul Bremer III, the bold and bumbling proconsul under whose regency the insurgency had taken root and flourished. And beside Bremer, finally, stood George Tenet, the director of Central Intelligence whose long tenure will be known to history as twice distinguished -- by the failure to detect the coming 9/11 attacks and by the certainty about Saddam Hussein's bristling arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, those magical objects that, having provided the casus belli for the Iraq war, turned out not to exist.

The three men, dedicated public servants all, had been coauthors of failures quite monumental in their implications, a truth that by December 2004 was quite incontestable, whatever your politics. Now they were receiving from the leader's hands the country's highest civilian honor.

That their failures were incontestable did not matter. The ceremony served not to proclaim truth but rather to assert and embody a proposition that has been central to the current administration: Truth is subservient to power. Power, rightly applied, makes truth. As I watched the television screen, the fragment of Orwell that had been dancing just beyond the grasp of my consciousness finally took shape: "History is something to be created rather than learned."

In a few moments, I found the full quotation:

"From the totalitarian point of view, history is something to be created rather than learned. A totalitarian state is in effect a theocracy, and its ruling caste, in order to keep its position, has to be thought of as infallible. But since, in practice, no one is infallible, it is frequently necessary to rearrange past events in order to show that this or that mistake was not made, or that this or that imaginary triumph actually happened."

These words, written in 1946, are imbued with the anti-totalitarian struggle, the one just ended and the one about to begin. Six decades later, the United States is far from a totalitarian state. But we have seen, during these last half a dozen years of perpetual war, more than a little of "the totalitarian point of view" and more than a few attempts to "rearrange past events in order to show that this or that mistake was not made, or that this or that imaginary triumph actually happened."

Indeed, after the missing weapons and the aircraft-carrier victory celebrations and the denials of torture, Orwell's words might serve as a succinct and elegant description of much of our politics -- or, better yet, they might be taken as a caption and placed beneath a photograph of Messrs. Frank, Bremer and Tenet receiving their medals from a grateful sovereign.

George Orwell would not have been surprised by any of this. It was Orwell, after all, who nearly six decades ago created the perpetual world war between the super-states of Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia that booms away in the background of "1984" -- a never-ending, shape-shifting struggle that, Orwell said, "helps to preserve the special mental atmosphere that a hierarchical society needs." Orwell's virtual war, unlike our war today, was nearly bloodless. The great grinding mechanism of modern industrial warfare had been stripped of all its material attributes: armies, fighting, even death -- all but "the special mental atmosphere" that wars produce. War, in his conception, had been reduced down to its most valuable political ore.

That glittering precious ore that remains is the politician's lodestone, for glowing at its heart is that most lucrative of political emotions: fear. War produces fear. But so too does the rhetoric of war. This leads to the central lesson Orwell brings us about our own perpetual war: What terrorists ultimately produce is not death or mayhem but fear, and in an endless War on Terror, the rich political benefits of that most lucrative emotion will inevitably be shared -- between the terrorists themselves and the political leaders who lead the fight against them. Fear bolsters power, and power makes truth -- if, of course, we stand aside and let it.

Mark Danner, the author of "The Secret Way to War," is a professor of journalism at UC Berkeley and at Bard College.

DARPA Urban Challenge Race


Finishers

The three other cars that were out on the DARPA Urban Challenge course when the three front runners came in have now crossed the finish line. That makes 6 cars that completed the 60-mile course, out of 11 starters.

The Ben Franklin Racing Team's Toyota Prius came in at 2:50, about an hour after the three leaders, followed by MIT at 3:35, and then Cornell a minute or so later.

It's just possible, given the different start times for the cars and the various off-the-clock pauses, each lasting a few minutes, that Ben Franklin might still be in the running for a prize. But it seems unlikely that either MIT or Cornell could take one home.

Of the top three finishers, Carnegie Mellon looks like a good candidate first-place, since the team's Chevy Tahoe appeared to have completed the race with no traffic infractions or other mishaps within the 6-hour time limit for the race.

Saturday, November 03, 2007

Be honest about gas gouging

By ROBERT WEINER AND JOHN LARMETT
GUEST COLUMNISTS

Seattle Post Intelligencer: Oct. 30th, 2007

Gasoline prices are poised to explode again. Oil companies are setting up the framework for higher prices because of fears of a Turkish invasion of Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq and administration saber rattling about Iran. Crude oil, at $29.59 a barrel when President Bush took office in January 2001, is now pushing toward $100. Washington state's current gasoline cost of $3.09 per gallon, double Seattle's 2001 price of $1.52, is now second only to California in the 48 contiguous states.

Jay Leno joked on "The Tonight Show" Oct. 17, "The Nobel Prize for economics was awarded to three people -- the CEOs of Exxon, Texaco, and Shell for figuring out how to quadruple the price of oil over a seven-year period without an actual shortage."

He's right; there is no actual shortage. And even if something happened, Kurdish oil production is less than one-fourth of 1 percent of the world's oil, and all of Iraq generates under 3 percent. Iran's share of world production is falling, 5 percent last year compared with 8 percent in 1974. The oil industry uses the unrealized potential of small disruptions to implement huge price fluctuations. They are using the fear factor and war profiteering to repeat and increase what they had last year, the highest profits for any industry in U.S. history.

Further, home heating oil bills are up a third from a year ago, and double six years ago -- a $1,700 annual household increase, seven times inflation. Home heating bills are the silent economic killer to families -- the spotlight has been on car gas prices.

As former House Energy Committee Chairman Joe Barton, R-Texas, said, "No federal statute prohibits price gouging." Leading Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is demanding a new Federal Trade Commission oil price investigation. Oil companies raised gas prices 24 cents a gallon in the 24 hours after Katrina. The FTC reported increases "not substantially attributable to increased costs." It was pure fear mongering.

Congress is enacting laws specifically aimed at price gouging, sort of. In May, the House passed groundbreaking legislation making gouging by oil and gas companies a federal crime. The bill calls for jail time and fines of up to $150 million a day for charging "unconscionably excessive prices" and taking "unfair advantage" of consumers during a presidentially declared emergency. The president has indefinitely continued drug trafficking and national security emergencies and could do the same on oil prices strangling consumers.

However, there is no "violation" if the price charged is "substantially attributable to local, regional, national, or international market conditions." The House is saying it is not gouging if the public will bear it. The oil companies could still charge whatever they want -- a loophole big enough for a gas-guzzling Mack truck.

In the Senate, Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., has introduced legislation that defines gouging as "charging an unconscionably excessive price" and adds a critical "prohibition on market manipulation," regardless of "emergency" timing. Cantwell has been pushing for its enactment for more than two years and missed the 60-vote debate "cloture" by just three votes in 2005. With the new Democratic majority, Cantwell succeeded in including this provision in the Senate energy bill now before a House-Senate conference. Cantwell's ban on market manipulation regardless of "emergencies" could have enormous impact on stopping price spikes.

Congress needs to rise above special interest relationships, protect Americans from oil-company gouging, and define the term so it means what it really is.

Robert Weiner worked six years as a communications director in the Clinton White House. John Larmett, senior policy analyst at Robert Weiner Associates, worked on energy-related issues as press secretary to Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Seattle.

Friday, November 02, 2007

Great Discussion on US - England Healthcare
...and Hizzoner's lies about it...

Thursday, November 01, 2007

Simple Way to Insert Your Ebay Auctions into your website or blog: