Unheeded Predictions

In February 2003, the U.S. Army War College issued a 60-page report, "Reconstructing Iraq: Insights, Challenges and Missions for Military Forces in a Post-Conflict Scenario," warning of possible pitfalls. Among its specific cautions: " ... Thus, a small number of terrorists could reasonably choose to attack U.S. forces in the hope that they can incite an action-reaction cycle that will enhance their cause and increase their numbers. ..." "... Without an overwhelming effort to prepare for occupation, the United States may find itself in a radically different world over the next few years, a world in which the threat of Saddam Hussein seems like a pale shadow of new problems of America's own making. ..." "The longer a U.S. occupation of Iraq continues, the more danger exists that elements of the Iraqi population will become impatient and take violent measures to hasten the departure of U.S. forces. At the same time, a premature withdrawal from Iraq could lead to instability and perhaps even civil war. ..." " ... To tear apart the Army in the war's aftermath could lead to the destruction of one of the only forces for unity within the society. Breaking up large elements of the army also raises the possibility that demobilized soldiers could affiliate with ethnic or tribal militias. ..." " ... However, a withdrawal from Iraq under the wrong circumstances could leave it an unstable failed state, serving as a haven for terrorism and a center of regional insecurity or danger to its neighbors. The premature departure of U.S. troops could also result in civil war. ..."

From the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, online edition, January 29, 2007.

I Hope I'm Right About This

Why is there nothing in the news about what Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, et alia think about Iraq?

Why does the the Bush Administration refuse to consider talking to Syria and Iran about Iraq?

Why did the Iraq Study Group recommendation that regional talks were a necessary component of any plan to "solve" the Iraq problem, arrive still-born?

My hope in answering these questions is that:

Behind the scenes, the countries in the Middle East are involved in plans to stabilize Iraq.

We are talking to Syria and Iran, or communicating with them through third parties.

The study group recommendation is not still-born. It's in an incubator in the critical care unit being nurtured back to health by all of the above named players.

If these things are not happening, Iraq and maybe the Middle East, will be toast soon after we leave. Is it too much to hope that President Bush, lover of secrecy that he is, is in fact taking steps to achieve in-country and regional stability?

Who Are All These People?

A couple of times a week I log on to Sitemeter.com. The site tracks visitors to my blog. Among the information it gives is the "referring" URL when the visitor came as the result of a search on a search engine.

A couple of months ago I did a short post with a link to "The Federal Judge Song" on fairjudiciary.com. It's a funny bit along the lines of the songs done by The Capitol Steps. Since then, for some strange reason, scores of people are doing Google searches for "federal judge song" on Google. I am the second result, which I don't understand. When people come to my blog as a result of this search, they then go to fairjudiciary.com. That being the case, why doesn't that site come up as a top result for the search? Regardless, who are all of these people doing the search?

The wonders of the Internet.

It's Almost Too Easy...

to take shots at the Justice Department for the positions it takes in defending cases concerning domestic surveillance.

From an article by Adam Liptak in today's online edition of The New York Times:

"Plaintiffs and judges' clerks cannot see [the Justice Department's] secret filings. Judges have to make appointments to review them and are not allowed to keep copies. Judges have even been instructed to use computers provided by the Justice Department to compose their decisions….Justice Department lawyers have been submitting legal papers not by filing them in court but by placing them in a room at the department. They have filed papers, in other words, with themselves….[A] government lawyer refused to disclose whether he had a certain security clearance, saying information about the clearance was itself classified….[The government accused plaintiffs in one case of misconduct by 'mishandling] information contained in [a] classified document' by, among other actions, preparing filings on their own computers."

It doesn't seem necessary for me to say anything about any of this. To steal from numerous comedians over the years, "you can't make this stuff up."

Almost A Plan

Media reports of the State of the Union address indicate that it was a clunker. Don't know, didn't watch.

About a third of the way through, the President said:

"Extending hope and opportunity in our country requires an immigration system worthy of America — with laws that are fair and borders that are secure. When laws and borders are routinely violated, this harms the interests of our country. To secure our border, we are doubling the size of the Border Patrol and funding new infrastructure and technology. Yet even with all these steps, we cannot fully secure the border unless we take pressure off the border, and that requires a temporary worker program. We should establish a legal and orderly path for foreign workers to enter our country to work on a temporary basis. As a result, they won’t have to try to sneak in, and that will leave border agents free to chase down drug smugglers, and criminals and terrorists. We will enforce our immigration laws at the worksite and give employers the tools to verify the legal status of their workers, so there is no excuse left for violating the law. We need to uphold the great tradition of the melting pot that welcomes and assimilates new arrivals. And we need to resolve the status of the illegal immigrants who are already in our country — without animosity and without amnesty." (Emphasis added.)

Seemed like a plan to me, until he got to the most contentious issue, what to do with those illegals that are already here. Having no solution that will appeal to the anti-immigration groups on the last issue, probably makes any "comprehensive reform" DOA.

My thought would be to ignore the last issue. If the rest of the legislation were passed, current illegals would either be caught and deported or leave on their own if they couldn't keep or get work under the new law. There would then be an orderly line (?) to re-enter as temporary workers.

A Scary Statistic

"In New Orleans, before the storm, about 4 out of 10 men in the working-age population were out of a job or not looking for one, compared with less than 3 in 10 nationally." Quoted from an article by Adam Nossiter in The New York Times online edition, January 21, 2007.

The four out of ten in New Orleans is not the scary statistic. Think about it, 30% of men of working age in the country aren't working. However you juggle the numbers, there are a bunch of people being supported by the rest of us.

The unemployment rate for December 2006 was 4.5% according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The rate for white and black men, respectively was 3.5% and 8.3%. "Unemployed," as I understand the term means not working but looking for work. Putting these numbers together means that more than 21.5% of men of working age aren't looking for work. (The percentage would be higher using a blended white/black rate, which I couldn't find.)

I'm not an economist. I'm not great at math; and, I'm even worse at statistics. But, an economy where at least twenty percent of the available male work force is "sitting it out" is not healthy.

Posting Failure

It is Sunday morning. I've been working on a post dealing with the controversy surrounding music and movie downloads and my thought that the controversy will die out once law catches up with technology.

Having stated the premise, I am scrapping what is currently four or five pages of meandering discussion. Try as I did to get from the premise, through the discussion, to the conclusion, I have failed. I'm going to stop now and try to think of some interesting issue that I can expound on for a page or two without boring even me.

Torture: Kind Of Bad. Coercion: OK.

The Pentagon announced yesterday that it is implementing new rules for upcoming Guantanamo trials.

It will not use statements obtained by torture. It will use physical evidence obtained by torture.

Coercion? No problem, coerce away, the statements and evidence obtained are admissible.

Class assignment: Re-read Alice In Wonderland.

Who's Story Is It?

Yesterday I wrote the words "[n]icely written. Your words gave me your experience" as a comment to a post on hedysblog.blogspot.com. Stiff. Inarticulate. Here's what I meant to say.

You may think I'm wrong; but, reading is better than watching a story. Hedy wrote about going to breakfast at a diner last Saturday with her husband. In her post, she took me with them.

I've been to diners. After the fact, thinking about what I saw, smelled and tasted in them is one story. Reading someone else's description, results in a different story, one I helped to "write."

When I was in college, I saw a performance of Shakespeare's The Tempest. They did it wrong. I know they did because I had read, and in the process, cast, staged and directed the play, in my head. As the performance unfolded, I felt I and Shakespeare were being badly wronged. Bill had created a wonderful world that I could populate while reading. Those people on the stage had done it differently.

Without belaboring differences in art and craft, good writing engages your imagination. Even the best stage or film production does little to ignite your imagination.

When I went to the diner with Hedy and her husband the "narrow green doorway" was on the right of the building as you faced it. The "seven stools at the curvy counter" were along the back wall, in front of the grill. The "maybe ten tables, tops" were along the front wall. Kathy, the proprietor, "with her salt and pepper hair [and] warm smiling eyes" was wearing a red sweater. Hedy by her descriptions, gave me the basics with which to cast and stage the play.

Had I not read Hedy's story, and gone to see her or someone else's production of it, their interpretation would be limiting. They might put the door on the left, the counter could be on the side wall and Kathy could be wearing an apron. I'm then stuck with their interpretation whether good or bad. I could like it, or not. In either case, I can't participate. Reading good writing trumps watching even the best play or movie.

Headline

The following is from a January 16, 2007 New York Times online article about a judge's efforts to enjoin further distribution of documents online. The documents had been "sealed" in connection with a lawsuit; but, had made their way to several people and organizations (including the NY Times) who published them. The judge's order told the people who got them to tell the people who got them from them to destroy them and tell the people getting them from them to..... You get the idea.

"On his TortsProf blog (snipurl.com/Torts), William G. Childs, an assistant professor at Western New England School of Law in Springfield, Mass., put it this way in a headline: 'Judge Tries to Unring Bell Hanging Around Neck of Horse Already Out of Barn Being Carried on Ship That Has Sailed.'”

Well put.

Screwed Up Again

Ten minutes ago I realized that my brother, Tim, celebrated his birthday, drumroll, three days ago. I am always forgetting these things. My excuse, lame as it is, is that my former secretary used to keep a diary and give me a sheet of paper a week ahead, four days ahead and the day before. I usually ended up patronizing FedEx or UPS the day before.

Happy Birthday Tim!!!

Feel free to wish him well by way of a comment below.

What Hath TiVo Wrought?

If you've read this blog before, or talked to me in person, you know I love TiVo.

Three stories on the influence of TiVo:

First. I've been in a hotels (being male, the remote is always near). While watching TV, I miss something or want to see it again. Reach for the remote. Damn, no TiVo. Timeshifting becomes part of watching TV when you have TiVo.

Second. I'm driving down the road, half listening to the radio. Something catches my ear and I have the same reaction as I had in the hotel room. Damn again. I think XM or Sirius or both are starting to sell receivers that have a mini-DVR in them so you can back-up while listening.

Third. And the best. I think I'm glad this wasn't me. A friend was in his office which has a TV and a security camera monitor. Thus, there are remotes on his desk. Several people were having a discussion that he wasn't paying much attention to. Yes, for a moment he started to reach for the remote to play back what he had missed while zoning out.

Maybe I Should Rejoin The ACLU

Back when George H.W. Bush was the President he made a snide comment about "card carrying members of the ACLU." It pissed me off, so I joined and became a card carrying member.

I let my membership lapse somewhere in the '90's because I thought the organization was too strident. Maybe some stridency is needed in this century.

Back in 2002 a guy named John Gilmore went to the Oakland, California airport and then to the San Francisco airport with the intent to get on planes to Washington, D.C. As we all are, he was asked for identification. He refused. No boarding. He was told that he could board without showing ID if he submitted to a search which was more intrusive than normal. He again refused.

He investigated and found out that the TSA issues directives about what ID and searches are required of passengers at different airports. These directives varied by airport and were changed, sometimes weekly. He was told they were given orally, not in writing. Thus, he could not see them.

He filed suit. He lost in the U.S. District Court. He appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court which issued a twenty-five page opinion which dismissed his claims. As it always is with law, the Court looked at a bunch of different legal issues. One of the issues raised was that his constitutional right to due process had been violated because he was penalized for failing to comply with a law that he had never seen.

I don't have any problem with a legal requirement to show identification or submit to a search prior to boarding an airplane. On the whole, I think Gilmore, who was trying to get rid of airport security, was, to put it mildly, misguided. But, here's what bugs me. Recall that Gilmore tried to fly in 2002. He filed suit in 2004. Not until 2005, and then on appeal, did It turn out that there was indeed a written directive. Until the appeal to the Ninth Circuit, the government wouldn't even admit that it had a policy. The District Court had decided the case based on the "assumed truth of the content of the identification policy" as alleged by Gilmore. How could such a policy get so far without the public knowing what it was? Congress exempted the TSA from providing notice and the opportunity for public comment because the policy related to security. Given that exemption, no one outside of government knew that the policy was being formulated or what what it was.

Even in the Ninth Circuit, Gilmore wasn't allowed to look at it because the TSA had classified it as "sensitive security information." The Ninth Circuit looked at the Directive in camera and ex parte. That means it was turned over to the Court by the government, only when ordered to by the Court, which read it in private and without the parties' input. Gilmore couldn't look at it and neither could his lawyer. The Court decided that the Directive did not violate due process protections because whatever was in it that Gilmore, you and I can't see "articulates clear standards. It notifies airline security personnel of the identification requirement and gives them detailed instructions on how to implement the policy." The Court reasoned that the signs at the airport that said he must show ID notified him of the policy and that that was enough. Since the TSA and the implementing airline employees know what they are supposed to do, whether or not they do it, and whether or not they do it correctly, no one can challenge them.

It is sometimes said that bad facts make bad law. Gilmore's case may be an example of that bromide. Gilmore tried to fly to set out a test case to argue that the government cannot impose restrictions on airplane travel, specifically requiring ID and searches, without violating a host of constitutional provisions. On the merits, the government probably had the better case. But,the way it went about establishing its policy in secret, defending its position by refusing to even acknowledge that it had a policy and the fawning deference the courts gave to its obscuring tactics are much more important in the long run than the obvious point that reasonable levels of security don't violate the Constitution.

On Monday the U.S. Supreme Court issued an Order denying certiori. Thus, the Ninth Circuit's opinion, for most purposes, is the law of the land. The government is now free to classify pretty much any law, regulation, rule or policy (and do it behind closed doors without the knowledge of or participation by citizens), and put up signs or take out an ad in a newspaper on on TV saying what it is you must do or not do. Four or five years down the road a court may review the piece of paper, again behind closed doors, and vote yea or nay. That's "process;" but, I'm not sure it is that which is "due."

With Apologies to Trekkies

I stopped last night at a bar to meet with some friends. There were a bunch of big plasma screens scattered around the room. Usually they show sports and news. For some reason, one was airing an episode from Star Trek: Whatever It's Called Now.

I would occasionally glance at it. It struck me that in the original series, the bad guys were always aliens. Romulans and that other species that I can't ever remember, that invented the cloaking device? Hah, remembered, Klingons. Romulans had bumps on their heads. The Klingons had distorted faces. Vulcans had pointy ears..Then I remembered that Spock was half Vulcan, half human. Nice guy, torn by his mixed planet heritage. Pure bred Vulcans were good people, if a little rigid. So too when Michael Dorn became a character. Good guy. So it can't be that alien equals bad.

Alien does equal lack of variation among a species. One facial type per as evidenced by the aforementioned Romulans, Klingons and Vulcans Having gone to Wikipedia, I've confirmed this: Ferengi, all one type. Cardassian and Borg, same. I assume this is budget. Squiggly, tentacled creatures cost money.

But how come all aliens breath air? They do, except for some I remember on the original series that were a sort of low budget Northern Lights. They are always on the bridge on the Enterprise. No helmets. If you want squiggly and methane breathers, you have to go to Mars Attacks. There they had long necks with little bubbles over their little heads. But again, this is big budget movie versus smaller budget TV.

But then there are Tribbles. Easy on the budget, with lots of colors. They may not need air. As I recall they spent most of their time in overhead compartments and utility ducts. Maybe they were anaerobic.

All this is in contrast to the humans on the shows. United Nations. Rainbows. You have your Uhuras, Scotties, Chekovs and Sulus (though we didn't know it back then, your straights and gays). Then came Whoopies (and a little person Whoopie, if I remember correctly), Geordis and Data (I don't want hear about android v. human). The episode last night had some people with wires around their heads. Human or alien? Over the years all of these characters had an episode or two when they were out of character. Good and bad. Maybe, just human.

I guess all you can really conclude from all this is that Gene Roddenberry's future and maybe our present have enough problems without complicating them with racial divisions.

I'm Pissed

A few minutes ago I was midway through doing a post. Google told me it was unable to establish a connection with Blogger and that I should test the connection. Blogger said it was down for maintenance. Result: post lost. Moral of the story: compose in Word, then copy and paste.

The Death of Privacy

Several of my recent posts have been about the Bush Administration's, in my view, obsession with trampling civil liberties in its quest to increase national security.

On reflection, I don't think President Bush is the biggest threat to privacy that we face. To paraphrase Pogo (because I'm too lazy to look it up): we have met the enemy and it is us.

Being relatively ancient, I didn't get a social security card until I was sixteen. Now they are passed out with the birth certificate. My first driver's license was filled out on a typewriter. My current driver's license has a digital representation of my thumbprint on the back.

Kroger knows what I eat and drink because I let them swipe the little key-chain card so I get the "discounts." Kroger also knows that I didn't completely fill out the form to get the card because the register periodically spits out a note to me saying that I could get even more savings by mail and Email if I would give my addresses. If I use a coupon, the register spits out another coupon for me tailored to my purchases.

Netflix knows that I have rented Naughty Nurses: Vol. 23, six times (ah, poor old Judge Bork, who got "borked" in part because the clerk at his local video rental place gave out his rental list). Netflix also knows if I am, in its view, a rental hog and slows down delivery if I am. DIRECTV and Tivo know what I've watched on television and when I watched it. (When I went to DIRECTV's website to confirm how its name is spelled, at the top of the screen, it greeted me with "Welcome back, David.")

I go to a restaurant here in Atlanta on fairly regular basis. It uses a POS (point of sale) computer system. Even if the person at the podium has worked there for an hour, when I give my name, he or she knows where I like to sit and what I have eaten in the past. The screen has a code on it, giving me a customer rating (though I'm sure they call it something else).

In the good old days, Joe, the VP at the bank, was happy to give a signature loan. He knew where you lived and worked, he passed them every day on his way to work. Now, HAL the computer, in the server room at Ditech or ELoan, whirs for a second or two and says yea or nay to your loan request.

Microsoft knows everything about you. What it doesn't know, Google does. Microsoft over the years gained a reputation as the Evil Empire. Google, though slipping, still engenders warm feelings among the populous. Both have "privacy policies" that I am willing to bet are very similar and which don't protect you against any of the stuff talked about above.

Each of these "invasions" of my privacy (except the social security card and thumbprint) was agreed to by me. I gave "them" the information. No one was pointing a gun at me. For the most part, I knew that these companies were keeping track of me. I submitted anyway.

My point? We the people have given up our privacy. It isn't coming back. We have come to rely on the benefits of transparancy of lives and habits. President Bush is only taking our complacency over the past few decades and using it to his (he would say our) benefit just like all of the companies mentioned above.

Privacy is on its deathbed and you and I will be found complicit in its murder.

Lost Opportunity

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported that Hank Johnson, the newly elected representative for Georgia's fourth congressional district, walked up the steps to the House of Representatives yesterday and a guard stepped in front of him. Mr. Johnson, not taking advantage of this opportunity to wap the guard upside the head, smiled and said that his name was Hank Johnson, one of the the new congressmen. The guard smiled and Mr. Johnson went on his way. To date, Cynthia McKinney, his predecessor, has issued no comment.

Postscript To Neither Rain...

First, if you haven't read the previous post, read it before you read this.

After finishing the "exigent" post, I realized I had missed a point about Bush's anti-privacy bent: it's stupid and unnecessary.

Search warrants, especially those sought by federal law enforcement in connection with suspected terrorist activity, are ridiculously easy to get. In a case where it is suspected that a piece of mail contains evidence relevant to a criminal or national security investigation, and it isn't thought that there is a bomb, anthrax, etc. in the piece of mail, the officer can hold the piece and go to a judge, set out facts that indicate that the officer has "probable cause" to believe that the evidence is relevant, and the judge will give the officer a search warrant for the piece of mail. Under this system, the government has full ability to investigate and prosecute crime and terrorism; but, individual citizens are afforded some degree of protection from unwarranted invasion of their privacy.

Where the suspected activity is related suspected terrorism, the government has even more leeway. Some years ago the Foreign Intelligence and Security Act (FISA) was enacted. Under FISA, a special court (FISC) was set up that operates in secret and hears warrant applications. Officers can even get a warrant after the fact in many cases. The warrant is almost never made public, even to a defendant charged based on evidence obtained under the warrant. In 2005 the government applied for 2072 warrants to the FISC court. A total of NONE were denied.

With such a rubber stamp process available, why in the world does President Bush need even more leeway?

Through Rain or Sleet or Dead of Night...

nothing will keep us from our appointed rounds. Except us. Us, the Federal Government.

President Bush has a neat trick he often uses when he signs bills, to try to subvert their purpose. When he signs the bill he also issues a "signing statement." In the statement he sets out how he "interprets" the bill. White often becomes black, sunshine can become rain.

On December 20th he signed the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act. According to an article in the New York Daily News the bill "deals with mundane reform measures." It also "explicitly reinforced protections of first-class mail from searches without a court's approval.'' In his signing statement President Bush said he will "'construe' an exception, 'which provides for opening of an item of a class of mail otherwise sealed against inspection [read first-class mail] in a manner consistent...with the need to conduct searches in exigent circumstances.'"

Not to go legal on you, but, exigent circumstances permit law enforcement to search without prior warrant. Ticking bombs are exigent. Fresh blood leading up the porch to the door of a house allows the police to enter to find the leaking body without going to get a warrant first. Exigent "EK-suh-juhnt\, adjective: 1. Requiring immediate aid or action; pressing; critical." (Google online dictionary) This time constraint on action begets the exception to requiring a warrant.

"Exigent" first-class mail has a bomb in it or some anthrax.

Emily Lawrimore, according to the article, a White House spokeswoman "denied Bush was claiming any new authority." She went on to talk about exigency and warrants.

She and President Bush doth protest too much. If current law lets you open first class mail to neutralize the bomb and anthrax and doesn't let you open it to find evidence of a non-exigent crime or hazard and you aren't "claiming any new authority" you don't need a signing statement. You need a signing statement to try to fudge existing law.

President Bush, I've read, did well at Yale. I have to believe he was exposed to the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the Constitution. I have difficulty believing that he doesn't understand them. So, I am left with the conclusion that somewhere along the line he developed a deep-seated antipathy for what they mean and guarantee. He has two more years to continue trying to gut them. Maybe one thing the new majority in Congress can do is slow him down; but, I'm not holding my breath.

Misdirected Money

Advertising confuses me.

Take drugs. (I guess you can read that sentence two ways.) I would never think to "ask [my] doctor" about some drug which was the subject of a 30 second TV spot. Especially since I often am not sure that the spot was actually for a drug. And almost all of the time, I don't know what the drug is for. "Doc. Here's a list of TV ads that I think are for drugs. I don't know what they are for; but, could you check me out see if I can take any of these? Please, please?"

Actually, Viagra and Cialis are exceptions to this. Few men would have gone to their doctor seven or eight years ago and raised the subject of erectile dysfunction. Physicians didn't have the "disorder" high on their screening radar. The drug companies had to create a demand for a product that no one admitted to needing. Consumer advertising made sense. (While on the subject of male enhancement - isn't that a great phrase - the ad agency that turned the legal disclaimer into advertising gold, should get a lifetime achievement award. "If your erection lasts more than four hours, see your doctor immediately." Insert your own jokes here.)

I suppose I'm wrong about drug ads in general. The ads keep coming at a cost of tens of millions of dollars a year. They must work. Physicians must long for the simple days of "detail men (now pretty women)" with their pens, scratch pads and free staff lunches.

Now BASF. What's up with that. Raise your hand if you ever bought anything because it contained a BASF product. No hands. Purchasing Agents - when was the last time you poured over the BASF catalogue the morning after seeing one of its commercials? Hands?

McDonalds. I understand advertising Happy Meals and Ronald McDonald to kids. There is a valuable whine factor created. But McDonalds spends millions on, for wont of a better phrase, presence advertising. I know it's there. I'd be much more likely to respond to advertising that trumpeted that McDonalds' food now tasted good. I guess they can't do that without violating truth in advertising laws.

The Internet. I have three or four programs running on my computer that fight pop-ups, -overs and -unders. Are you like me and have subconsciously learned to scan a web page without actually seeing the ads? When using Google to shop, I almost never click on one of the blue results. For some reason, I'll click on the real result for the same site that usually is there, or just enter the URL for the advertising site. I think it's because I feel guilty for costing the company money when I am only window shopping.

I suspect that a lot of advertising spending is done on if "it ain't broke, don't fix it" and "we have money in the budget" bases. What would happen if we didn't advertise? CEO's get fired for cooking books, not spending ad dollars.

Finally, Tivo. Proof that God loves us and one big reason that advertising will change rapidly in the near future. In the past three or so years that I've had Tivo I've watched almost no TV advertising. Did you know that there is a rythmn to fast forwarding? I can half watch the commercials speed by and pick up visual cues that the program is about to come back on. I'm usually within a few seconds of the restart of the show. I shouldn't have written that since the channels will change their rythmns to fool me more often. I'm kidding guys. I can't really do that.

Technology Overload

Yesterday I found out I was getting a DVD with multiple thousands of documents scanned on it. When I bought my current office computer about four years ago, I skimped on two things. The RAM (do they still call it that?) is 256k. That has worked out OK since all I do on the computer is create and edit documents, get and send Emails and surf and research on line. Until yesterday, not getting the, then fairly new, option of a DVD player/burner wasn't a problem.

When I was buying the player/burner, I realized I was out of USB ports on the tower; so, I had to buy a hub.

Surrounding me on the desk, floor and credenza are the DVD device, its various wires,cables, the USB hub with its spagetti and styrofoam, plastic and cardboard detrious from both electronic pieces. I forgot the twist ties.

Various parts of both devices are plugged into each other, the walls and other devices. Having not thought through the process, I am at an impass. I am out of electricity. I have four outlets in the office. One is useless because I covered it with book shelves. Another is useless because it is on an exterior wall and not near anything electrical. Two are now full up, one of which has a powerstrip plugged into it. Until I go get another powerstip, technology is on hold. Rather than do a paragraph or two on the charms of dial telephones and mimeograph machines, I'm off to Target.

There's A Fine Line

between done and over-done.

I usually cook dinner, such as it is. It can range from a sandwich to a real meal. A couple of weeks ago I decided I was going to make potato pancakes. The problem was my only exposure to the process was many many years ago, not really watching my mother make them.

When I asked friends about it they mostly said it was kind of like making hash browns. Did you know if you type the words potato pancakes into Google it returns "about 1,380,00 English pages" for the two words "(in .20 seconds)"? The first result is Cooks.com. It has 12 pages containing 395 recipes. They boil down to the following. Finely grate potatoes. Press liquid out of them. Lightly beat eggs. Add salt and pepper to egg mixture "to taste." (As an aside, what kind of instruction is that? You can't taste it till you're done.) Add flour to mixture. Combine with potatoes. Mix well. Plop a spoon-full into oil in pan. Fry till done. This recipe also results in latkes. Who'd of known?

Tasting at the end uncovered the fact that they were a bit under-done and needed a bit more frying. Add sour cream and applesauce. Pretty good.

Last weekend, I decided to make home fries, without the aid of Google. I cubed potatoes. Added salt and pepper. Threw them in oil in a pan. I tossed the cubes as they spit oil at me. Given my lack of cooking skill, after tasting a cube which turned out to be under-done, I kept frying, just past the point I should have. Lucky for me, I fried two small potatoes and picked out and ate the cubes that I hadn't over done. Not cost effective but serviceable cooking.

You're looking for the moral of this story aren't you? Well, under-do what you're doing. It's correctable. When I'm in lawyer mode, there's a temptation to ask that one last question. I'm much better off when I don't do it. When I'm playing golf, I'm better if I don't over swing. When I'm writing a post, going for that irresistible turn of phrase that takes it over the top is not a good idea.

My motto for 2007 - under-do.

Help Wanted

I read the ingredients listed on food packages. Not because I am concerned about health or have an allergy to peanuts. Because they are there and, at that particular moment, I have nothing else to read.

Rarely, I'll not read at night for an hour or so before bed. But usually, I have three or four books in line for reading.

Lately, I've been on a jag. Reading to exclusion of doing things that I should be doing. To the exclusion of doing anything else. I realized that I only have one book waiting in line.

I went to my local used book store late last week. I walked out without getting anything. I went on Amazon yesterday. I couldn't find anything that I had not read and actually wanted to read. This just doesn't happen.

So, your help is wanted. Give me titles. Give me authors. Skip the overly-serious. I do serious for a living. I've read the masters both classic and modern. Think Richard Russo. John Irving. Enlighten me. Entertain me. If you have a book that made you stop and re-read sentences or paragraphs to savor them, I want to know.

Rainy Night In Georgia

Under a drizzling sky in Atlanta, I hope you, your family and your friends enjoy a very merry Christmas and rewarding blogging in the New Year.

There's A Sucker Born...

My political views are informed (skewed?) usually by two competing mindsets.

I grew up in a conservative household. We went to church where there was a God of Fire who pointed you to a Saviour who, despite your basic cussedness, could redeem you. I took away the thought that people were basically bad and needed rules to follow and some one or thing to enforce the rules. Mix in my parents' Depression era, big government backround influencing me and you have government as your rule giver and enforcer to protect us from ourselves.

Then I read Heinlein, Rand, and others, discovering the charm of the rugged individualist. In the books, unfettered by messy reality, the individualist prevailed against the collective. We were all good. Rules and Rulers should be kept to a minimum.

Yesterday morning I had to drive south of Atlanta to McDonough in Henry County, Georgia for a hearing on a motion. Nice little town with a square on which the Courthouse sat. Gridlocked traffic for a mile around the square evidenced McDonough's inclusion in Metro Atlanta's problems.

In Georgia courts, motions are heard by the Judge on periodic "non-jury trial calendars." Anything and everything that doesn't involve a jury appears on these cattle-call mornings. As a result of my attendance at these events over the years, I am fully qualified to practice all kinds of law that I wouldn't touch on my worst day. Divorce, restraining orders, arraignments for non-payment of child support. I once saw a guy banished from all counties in Georgia but one (a fascinating Georgia practice for discussion in another post).

Yesterday, though my case was in the second position, I wasn't excused until about an hour and a half into the session. While there, I saw five hearings on motions to "Confirm Settlement." In Georgia in some cases, when a person gets a structured settlement (payout over time) of a judgment, the settlement has to be approved by a judge. Any change to the settlement later also has to be approved. These people had "sold" their income streams under the settlements to an investor. Kind of like taking an annuity when you win the lottery and selling it, after another discount for a lump sum later.

But here's the twist.

The amounts they were getting for their annuities ranged from a high of 75% to a low of 20% of the current, already discounted, present value. Without laying out all the math, this is a terrible deal. The people doing it were stupid. They needed someone to beat up the side of their head and knock some sense into them.

Instead, in turn, they marched up to the podium in front of the Judge with the lawyer who represented the investor buying the annuity. The lawyer asked them "questions." Did you read the agreement. Of course they did. Did you understand the agreement. Ditto. Did you consult with a lawyer or understand that you have a right to consult with a lawyer and decided not to. Why yes, I did. Is that your signature on the agreement. Yep.

The Judge then asked them two questions. What is your educational backround? It ranged from GED to college degree. Do you have any mental problems? None admitted to any.

The Judge then signed the Consent Order and wished them luck. Yes, to each he said "good luck."

So, am I P.T. Barnum, with a smile pointing them to the "egress" and wishing them luck like the Judge? Or Heinlein, Rand or anyone of a bunch of current talk show hosts? Or, do I lobby for laws to protect the idiots? If so, what kind of laws?

I got in my car, shaking my head, and drove back to the City.

The Big Lie

Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents raided Swift & Co. plants in six states, arresting a bit over 1,200 people this week after a ten month investigation.

The Company was aware of the impending raids and sought an injunction against them saying they would cause "substantial and irreparable injury." It said that the raid would remove up to 40% of its 13,000 workers.

After the raid Swift & Co. president Sam Rovit said that the Company has never knowingly hired illegal workers.

My considered legal opinion: Liar Liar, Pants on Fire.

FOX IS Fair and Balanced - It Reports, We Decide

Last night FOX News, during Brit Humes' segment, reported two stories that caught my eye.

FOX reported that President Bush will not speak to the Nation before Christmas as previously thought. He will rather wait until the first of the year to unveil his plans in Iraq so as to give him more time for more input. Coupled with this announcement, it was reported that there may be a 20,000 troop increase in Baghdad.

Straight forward reporting. Fair in my eyes. Took about 2 or 3 minutes.

Before, during and after this segment, FOX teased a story about a shocking announcement by Angelina Jolie. When the segment finally aired, I learned that Jolie has met Jennifer Aniston! Moreover, Jolie would like to have a "long sit-down" with Aniston to talk about Brad Pitt!!! (There are three exclamation points used to reflect the tone of FOX's revelation.)

Again straight forward, albeit hard hitting reportage. Quite fair to all three of the stars. Again, not counting the teaser time, it took 2 or 3 minutes.

Those folks at Fox live up to their tag lines!!!

The More Things Change...

"Why should Pennsylvania, founded by the English, become a colony of aliens, who will shortly be so numerous as to Germanize us, instead of our Anglifying them." Ben Franklin, 1751, as quoted in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, December 11, 2006.

Cherokee County, Georgia is about 35 miles North of the City of Atlanta. It is one of the newest bedroom communities in Metro Atlanta and suffers all the woes associated with that status. Schools, roads, sewers are needed. Long time residents clash with the city refugees building McMansions on what was pasture land when their taxes rise to pay for new infrastructure.

Over the past month the old and new guards have put aside their differences to focus on what is really important, attacking the "damn Mexicans." (In North Georgia all Hispanic people, if referred to derogatorily, are Mexicans. Guatemalan just doesn't roll off the tongue. And they all look alike you know.) The County Commission has enacted two ordinances. First, it is now a crime for a landlord to rent to anyone who hasn't proved that they are a citizen or have resident alien status. Second, the County cannot spend any money to communicate to anyone in a foreign language unless the communication is mandated by state or federal law or is regarding a major government function: education, courts and health care. Both measures are largely symbolic given facts on the ground. Most rental units in the County are in its two cities, Canton and Woodstock, neither of which is bound by the County ordinance. Most government communication in foreign languages is the result of state or federal laws or involves education, courts or health care.

Cherokee's message to Mexicans by passage of the ordinances seems to be "you're welcome to plant and harvest our fields. Framing, drywalling and landscaping McMansions is OK too. You can maintain what you build. But make sure you're out of town by sundown. Oh, while you're here, keep your mouth shut. None of that jibber-jabber allowed among the polite folk in the County."

There's of course nothing new here as demonstrated by the quote of one of our Founding Fathers at the top of the post. African slaves, Irish potato famine refugees, Chinese railroad laborers, Okies, southern migrants in northern factories during World War II. They are all "Mexicans" to those that get somewhere first.

Jane, You Ignorant Slut

Dueling political commentators got their start before Saturday Night Live. Dan Ackroyd (or was it Chevy Chase?) and Jane Curtin parodied James Kilpatrick and Shana Alexander who took rightist and leftist views on a news topic in a 60 Minutes segment called "Point/Counterpoint" which began in 1970. As I recall the feature, it was pretty civilized.

Firing Line, hosted by William F. Buckley, Jr., began a year earlier. It more closely resembled a traditional debate. More than civilized, it was the definition of urbane. The show was best watched with an open copy of the Oxford English Dictionary on the coffee table given Mr. Buckley's vocabulary.

Civility gave way to free-for-all with Crossfire on CNN in 1982. Original conservative host Pat Buchanan yelled at, interupted and talked over liberal host Tom Braden, who returned the invective.

With the advent of cable and its 24 hour appetite, talking heads from remote locations vie with the hosts on all the channels to see who can be the most abusive and derisive. FOX News' Hannity and Colmes, is typical of the breed. On occassion, by accident, a fact is spoken or an objective opinion is aired.

I think it all started going wrong about midnight on a Saturday in the 70's with the use of the modifier ignorant slut. Someone in a news department realized you could entertain viewers with adjectives. News and discourse became by-products.

To steal a phrase, I have a modest proposal. News talk shows should declare a modifier free week. No adjectives. No perjorative language. The speaker gets to finish what he or she is saying. Questioners must ask a real question rather than pontificating their viewpoint. The person answering a question must actually answer it, rather than using it as an invitation to say whatever it is that they want to say. All shows would be on tape delay. An objectivity censor in the engineering booth would bleep all offenses. A month or so of this might be necessary for the players to get the rules down. Early on, the entertainment would be in trying to read people's lips during the bleeps.

Or, we could get the old Not Ready For Prime Time Players to host the news talk shows. They'd show 'em how to do it right.

Borrower Beware

If you carry a balance on your credit card account from month to month, you might be interested in this new way banks have devised to separate you from your money:

I have friend who is a lawyer for a federal agency that deals with banks. He said that Bank of America has changed the way it calculates the "average daily balance" upon which it charges you interest.

The old less expensive way was, in simple terms, to add the daily balances each day in the billing period and divide by the number of days in the period. You paid interest on the result.

BOA now averages two billing periods rather than one. This change means you will pay more interest. An example:

On the first day of your billing period you buy $1,000.00 worth of stuff on credit. When the bill comes you pay $500.00 of the $1,000.00 you owe. Under the old calculation, you would pay interest the next month on the $500.00 balance in the new billing period (500 x 30 = 15,000/30 = 500). But now, BOA goes back sixty days. You pay interest not on the $500.00 you averaged as a balance in the new month, but on the average balance for two months which is $1,250 (1,000 x 30 + 500 x 30 = 75,000/60 = 1,250). If your card has an interest rate of 10%, this works out to $7.50 more in interest over the two month period. BOA is charging you interest on money you have already paid back to it.

According to my friend the fed, as long as the bank "discloses" this (the mice type you don't read) it is legal.

Special for Moral Turpitude

MT - Here it is with poor quality. But here none-the-less. For the rest of you, the Atlanta-Journal Constitution has an item on Sundays that talks about the Web. It highlighted a blog called By the Seat of My Skirt this week. Check it out, it's link is to the right under Recommended.

Can You Go Home Again?

I remember lying on the floor next to our Christmas tree when I was five or six. The main ornament for the tree was a collection of colored balls. Red, green, gold, blue, silver. Though I don't remember the specifics of the daydream, the balls were planets which I visited. Whatever the daydream, it was vivid, intensely pleasing.

The next year, I laid down next to the tree, beckoning the experience. At the time, I am sure I remembered the specifics of the daydream; but, I could not conjure the vividness, the pleasure. It was one of my earliest disappointing experiences.

I grew up Lutheran. Each Christmas season we went to Wednesday Advent services. At the end of the services, the main lights in the church were turned off and the congregation sang Abide With Me a cappella. I anticipated that moment all week. I heard the song recently. Though the feeling returned, it was not as intense. Again disappointment.

Thomas Wolfe wrote Look Homeward Angel. I read it in college and was taken by his language, the story and the characters. Some years later, I re-read it. It obviously hadn't changed; but, the book did not deliver the anticipated transportment. I brought a different viewpoint to it and could not recreate my first experience.

Can you duplicate specific pleasure? From my experience, no. But, we try to. We all take pictures when on vacation and pull them out to reminisce. We sit with family and friends - "Do you remember when….?" Should we? Why not. As long as we don't close ourselves to new experience, remembering past pleasure for its own sake seems, well, pleasurable. I just have to remember not to judge the recollection against the original and find it wanting.

Newly Recommended

Try R World at http://rwrld.blogspot.com/.

Mostly serious stuff. Some interesting takes on a variety of subjects.

Killing By Any Other Name

As I start this post, I'm not sure if I am going to attack the Administration, the Media or both.

The Media is agog at NBC's announcement that "[a]fter careful consideration [it] has decided a change in terminology is warranted." Henceforth, whatever is going on in Iraq will be called a "civil war" by NBC.

Tony Snow says, not so fast, what we have is "sectarian violence that seems to be less aimed at gaining full control over an area than expressing differences and also destabilizing a democracy, which is different from civil war, where two sides are clashing for territory and supremacy."

President Bush: "[W]e've been in this phase for a while....It's tough, no question about it." In his opinion, it was "sectarian violence" by people seeking reprisal for attacks by al-Qa'eda. Poor aim by those people.

Ok. Now we have it straight. If the Sunnis and Shiia were slugging it out (which last I heard, they were) for supremacy (which I thought was their purpose) and for territory, rather than mis-guided reprisal against the wrong people, we would have ourselves a civil war. No battles for territory, no civil war. Nope, what you got is your garden-variety sectarian violence. Been there. Done that. Just something we have to expect in "this phase." It's tough. Yeah, your killing always is.

Annoying Add-ons

I travelled to the not so frigid north for Thanksgiving. I was happy to see that they still have stars in the sky out in the country.

When I got back to Atlanta I had to bail my car out of the off-airport parking lot. The bill came to $31.00 which seemed to be an odd amount since the lot doesn't have hourly charges - if you park over 24 hours you pay for the full next day.

When I got home and looked at the receipt, I found out that I had the privilege of paying a $1.00 "fuel surcharge." I guess it makes some sense given the fleet of shuttle buses eating gas; but, it's still annoying.

A year or so ago I got hit with a daily $1.15 "security fee" at a Myrtle Beach La Quinta. When I asked the clerk what that was for I was told it was for the safe that I didn't know was in my room.

This spring I went to Tucson for a weekend of golf at Loews Ventana Ranch Resort. Each day I was charged $12.00 for "resort services."

A number of years ago there was a steak place in Atlanta that gave the customer the task of grilling their own steak. If you wanted the steak delivered to your table ready to eat, they charged an extra $2.00.

I'm waiting for McDonalds to add a quarter to the price of a Big Mac for "wrapping services."

Tryptophan and Thanksgiving

From Snopes.com:

"Does turkey contain a natural sedative that makes you feel sleepy after eating a lot of it?

In this instance, lore almost intersects with science. Turkey does contain tryptophan, an amino acid which is a natural sedative. But tryptophan doesn't act on the brain unless it is taken on an empty stomach with no protein present, and the amount gobbled even during a holiday feast is generally too small to have an appreciable effect.

That lazy, lethargic feeling so many are overcome by at the conclusion of a festive season meal is most likely due to the combination drinking alcohol,...overeating a [solid-food] carbohydrate-rich repast, [and] increased blood flow to the gastrointestinal tract."

I have been to many Thanksgiving family feasts over the years. With or without the aid of Tryptophan, they invoke a warm, lazy, comfortable memory.

In the early years they rotated among my parents', an uncle's and an aunt's house. In the pecking order of cousins and brothers I was mid-level. Four older, two younger, plus my two younger brothers. In my childhood and teen years I never graduated to the big people table. There were just too many people with seniority.

Just before family started arriving, or just before we got to the relatives' house, my father would lecture us on proper behavior. In my young world there was no functional difference between a father or mother and an aunt or uncle. Any adult trumped any child. Woe to the child that didn't understand that. We were not to run, there was no yelling. You could not ask for anything. If offered, you could say yes. As a sullen teen I fantasized during the lecture, still given for the benefit of my younger brothers, about the permissability of asking for emergency life-saving treatment if I had a run-in with the carving knife.

While sitting on the front porch, a cousin taught me to tie my shoes on Thanksgiving Day. I went to my first non-drive-in movie, The Old Man and the Sea, on Thanksgiving day. I was introduced to the wonders of Kool Whip (the look on my mother's face told me all I needed to know about asking my Aunt for another dollop). White meat turkey slices with salt and mayo on white bread (a starch source I have out-grown) and cold stuffing, mid-evening is actually better than the feast during the day. Choking down a teaspoon of yellow or green Jello with stuff in it is an acceptable price for the rest of the day, though no one should have to eat canned cranberry sauce.

My generation is somewhat scattered over the Country. Me in Atlanta. A brother in Phoenix. A cousin in Florida. My youngest brother and some of my cousins are still close enough to each other to carry on the tradition.

My last family feast was in 1999 when I traveled not for the holiday but to attend my mother's funeral a couple of days before Thanksgiving. Thanksgiving was held that year at one of my cousin's son's house. Tradition was turning full circle. My brothers had daughters. They had cousins. I was disappointed to see that the kids were not at card tables. Long tables had been borrowed from the church and everyone sat together. At least I got to sit at the big people table.

I'm going back this year to my youngest brother's house. There are a few more kids and no more of the original generation. I plan on eating dark meat, lots of mashed potatoes, stuffing, gravy and pumpkin pie. I'm going to dollop on all the Kool Whip I want, which won't be much. I am not going to eat any Jello or cranberries, sauce or whole. I plan on smiling more than I did when I was sullen teen.

This Guy Can Write

Surfing blogs results in a lot more chaff than wheat. Here's a whole acre of wheat:

http://posolxstvo1.blogspot.com/

The name of the blog is Niagaran Pebbles. Well worth your time.

Me and My Computer

Back in the mid-eighties I bought my first computer, an Osborne, one of the first "portables." It was about the size of an overnight suitcase. It had a four inch screen and two 64k floppy drives. It was loaded with WordStar, dBase III, SuperCalc and Space Invaders.

One day I had composed a letter and told the computer to tell the printer (dot matrix) to print it. It did; but, it added a little gift. On the bottom right of the page it printed an *. I went back to the file. There was no asterick on the screen. I printed again. My letter with its asterick printed out.

I did a lot of things, none of which got rid of my new friend. I resorted to reading the manual. No luck.

Finally, I moved the cursor to the right of my name on the screen and hit enter maybe ten times. I printed the letter and it and the asterisk appeared; but, now the little bugger was safely by itself on a second sheet of paper. Mission accomplished.

I have upgraded my computer equipment substantially since then. My current system cost less than a third of what I paid for the Osborne and has what, a million times the capacity?

Yesterday, I was doing some research on-line. I told the computer to tell the printer to print a .pdf file I had found on a website. The computer and/or the printer decided that the old way of fulfilling my wish was boring. They decided to involve a friend of theirs.

A couple of months ago I bought a scanner. A wonderful invention. Mine, a Xerox Documate 510, comes with Paperport software which apparently had been cozying up to Windows and the HP printer software since it had moved in.

The three of them got together and decided that Windows would hand off the print job not to HP as it had been doing for the three and a half years I've had this system. Yesterday morning Windows woke up Paperport. Paperport stretched and "scanned" the .pdf file into its temporary file. There was my .pdf on the screen.

I asked Windows again to print the .pdf file which was still in my browser. Paperport, now awake, quite quickly told me the .pdf was resident in its temporary memory, why should it scan it again? What to do, what to do?

I hit "file" in Paperport. The drop down menu, like most others, had a print option, which I exercised. Pleased, Paperport told Windows to display a print dialogue box, just like it had been doing for the last three and a half years. I hit the print button. HP printed my .pdf.

Not having time to mess with the new division of labor established by my software friends, I continued working. A bit later, I need to print another file from the Web. Same result. Windows woke up Paperport, .....

Last night I got to thinking about the new full employment plan my software had enacted and remembered my problem with the asterisk.

This morning, I enlisted the aid of another piece of software. I called up Windows' Wayback Machine. You may know it as System Restore. I told it to go way back to Sunday.

System Restore then restarted the computer. I told Windows to print a web page. It left Paperport snoozing and got HP on the job, nicely printing the web page.

Somethings don't change.

Greeting Protocol

Walmart has announced that it will use the phrase "Merry Christmas" in its advertising this year. Though I can't verify it, I heard a caller on a radio talk show say that the leader of some group had decried this position as violating constitutional separation of church and state doctrine (this makes some sense as I recently read that Walmart is the fifth largest exporter of Chinese goods, with those above it on the list being countries).

Sovereignty aside, the following is my proposed protocol (who would have thought one was needed till recently) for year end greetings:

"Merry Christmas" to those I know to be Christian.

"Happy Hanukkah" to those I know to be Jewish.

"Happy Kwanza," actually, I've never said this though I probably would if I knew someone who would appreciate it or would be offended by another greeting.

"Happy Holidays" to everyone else.

On second thought, I'll probably avoid using any of these phrases and go with my usual "hey" or "what's up" upon seeing someone and "see ya," "take care" or "later" when departing.

And to all of you, Happy Thanksgiving and an early Happy New Year!

I've Been Linked

The pressure is on. While definitely not working, I went to wholinkstome.com to find that two, if I may say, fine bloggers have linked to me.

For a good time try:

hedyblog.blogspot.com (distinctly styled, somewhat oddly structured posts that often loop within themselves to make a point)

damnwastebasket.com (the continuing saga of a group of wayward wastebaskets)

While I'm at it, I also recommend:

lifehiker.blogspot.com (mostly political, well written)

bytheseatofmyskirt.blogspot.com (usually pithy one panel cartoons)

joyfulminestries.blogspot.com (irreverent, twenty-something, usually funny)

graceundressed.blogspot.com (adult-themed stripper stories as vehicle for pretty good writing)

Enjoy.

Which Lie Is Worse?

"I did not sleep with that woman."

"[T]hey're going to stay on."

President Clinton went on to quibble about the meaning of the word "is."

President Bush yesterday was much more forthcoming when he announced Secretary Rumsfeld's resignation: "I didn't want to inject a major decision about this war in the final days of a campaign. And so the only way to answer that question and get you to move on to another question was to give you that answer."

Both Presidents lied for political gain. Clinton, to hide his sexual escapades which would not have gone over very well in the heartland. Bush, in an inept attempt to save Republican seats in the House and Senate.

So, is either lie worse? Are they equally culpable?

I hate when people lie. I'm not talking about "Oh, what a beautiful baby." I am talking about a lie that is intended to deceive the listener for the benefit of the liar (though I know at a low level my example of a benign lie does that).

From a practical point of view, for the most part, lying is counter-productive. I 'm a lawyer. Most people are not very good at lying. Try this. Ask a person you think isn't telling the truth the same question three different ways. Only a consummate liar won't trip themselves up. In a trial I love for an adverse witness to lie. When the witness is found out, it is very damaging in the eyes of the judge and jury. Lying to friends and family creates distrust, cheapening and eroding the relationship.

Don't lie. If you must, do it well. Or, follow the advise of Henry Ford (I think the Second): Never complain, never explain.

Blog Surfing Tip

Though Blogger/Blogspot (I've never figured out why there are two domain names) has tons of blogs to randomly surf, the incidence of quality blogs per click of the Next Blog icon is awfully low, especially given my inability to read foreign languages, other than Spanish at a snail's pace.

I have discovered Blogmad.net. It is at heart a blog link exchange. Downside: it is non-intuitive, clunky and it doesn't follow through, at least so far, on its promise to refer a surfer to your blog for each blog you surf on it. Upside: more of the blogs you are sent to randomly are pretty good.

I have surfed on it a couple of times over the last week and found four or five blogs worthy of my blog favorites list. It's worth a try.

Loss

Having scanned the title, and given the date of this post, you think it will be about yesterday's elections. Nope.

A friend's grandmother died on Saturday. Another friend's father died yesterday.

Both people were in their late eighties. That predicates the cliche that they led long and full lives. From all I know, that is true. Both were members of the shrinking "great generation." One was a World War II naval veteran. The other was the wife of a WWII naval veteran. One left a spouse. The other has gone to join a spouse. Both left large, extended families.

To mark the first passing, I and friends sent flowers. For the second, contributions to a church's building fund were requested. Now I go back to my life. My friends, more slowly, return to theirs.

Fair and Balanced?

I've had an idea for a post for a while and decided to do some research last night.

For the most part, I can't stand watching either the CNN or Fox evening news shows as both don't seem to me to be "fair and balanced." Each tends to spin a lot of the news their own way.

So, last night I started watching both at 6:00 p.m. I switched between them when a commercial came on. I didn't count bias when commentary was clearly being presented, only when it was shown by an anchor or reporter.

Here are my notes:

CNN reporter: "out of control corporate interest" in story about minimum wage debate.

Lou Dobbs (CNN): "anti-Republican sentiment running wild" when describing Senate race in Ohio.

Dobbs: "with as much integrity as can be managed" referring to election workers in Ohio when talking about a piece on problems with electronic voting.

Dobbs: "we wish the Nation the best" in a sarcastic tone when wrapping up the electronic voting story.

All of these quotes came in the first 45 minutes of the 6:00 p.m. CNN news show. I couldn't find any bias during the same period on Fox (Britt Hume).

I decided that changing at the commercials might have resulted in me watching more CNN than Fox, so I stayed on Fox for the rest of the hour. No bias; but, most of the time was devoted to Fox's "Panel" giving commentary on various issues.

At 7:00 p.m. Wolf Blitzer came on CNN and Sheppard Smith took over on Fox. I lasted another half hour and found only one marginally biased statement on Fox by Smith: "this election is about the GOP holding ground rather than gaining."

Asides: Jack Cafferty on CNN is quite biased but also quite funny. I saw Al Gore on Fox, he's getting a little fat.

The research is admittedly not objective or scientific; but, my current conclusion is that Lou Dobbs is a biased, bitter non-journalist.

Next step, O'Reilly and Hannity and Colmes. I figure they will even out with Dobbs.

Wedding Blues

I went to a wedding this weekend. Twice.

Saturday, I went to the office for awhile, met a friend for golf and stopped off with him for a drink. Had to leave early to get ready for the wedding.

On the way, I stopped off to get a card to go with the present and allowed too much time, arriving about 20 minutes early. The wedding was at a very nice country club. I told the man at the gate that I was there for the "Smith/Jones" wedding. He smiled and lifted the gate.

I parked and sat in the car. As I sat I saw no one going in other than people who had been playing golf. I sat. I saw no one I know. I finally looked at the invitation I had put in the car. I was a day early. Who gets married on a Sunday?

On Sunday the nice man at the gate didn't ask me why I was there. He lifted the gate and directed me to the valet. The club was every bit as nice as it was the day before.

Stolen Humor

The following is stolen from an online magazine, The Spark, I think. Best line "you will not be allowed to talk to him."

In the days before the geek squads
11/01/2006
(Matt note: I'm knee deep editing the restaurant guide, and you probably just want to skip to Holly's column about being married, so here's one from the column vaults. And as they used to say on summer TV -- it's new to you, anyway.)

I used to remember people's addresses and telephone numbers. Now I have the Blackberry. I used to leave my house to go shopping. Now I have the Internet. As soon as they invent a device with a sense of humor, I'll have no reason to use my brain anymore.

Computers run our lives. But unless you have a degree in computer science, you probably have no idea how they work. Gerbils on treadmills could be powering the thing, for all you know.
So how does it make sense that the computer is the only appliance in the house where, when something goes wrong, you have to dial an 800 number to get people who will try to diagnose your problem over the telephone and tell you how to fix it yourself?

Can you imagine if plumbing worked this way? "You say it's leaking? OK, so just where is the leak? Is it a slow leak, or a fast leak? OK, unscrew the whatzits to the right of the widget. How much water is coming out now? Hold on a minute, let me talk to my supervisor. Try the backstroke."

My problems started Monday night when we tried to install the new version of a popular Internet program on our computer. The installation went perfectly. Everything else on the computer immediately stopped working.

I called the technical help line. It is important to remember that there is someone on the other end of the technical help line who can solve all of your problems. You will not be allowed to talk to him.
Instead, you get a guy named John whose job it is to tell you, over and over again, to restart your computer.

Now, I understand where these tech folks are coming from. There are entire Web sites, designed by disgruntled techies, devoted to the people who call tech support in the middle of the night because they can't find the ANY key. Telling these people to restart the computer is like the plumber suggesting you start working on the problems with your toilet by flushing.
For some people, that's helpful advice.

I got past John, and the next techie couldn't understand why I was bothering him.

"So the installation worked properly?" he asked.

"Yes."

"Then what's the problem?"

"Everything else stopped working."

"So that sounds like there's a problem with the rest of the computer."

"But it started right after I loaded your software! I have a cable modem and ..."

"Oh, you have a cable modem? You need to be talking to our high-speed people. Hold on."

The high-speed people told me to restart my computer and then said I would have to call the tech support folks who run my cable connection.

The cable tech support folks told me to restart my computer and then told me that the problem was beyond their ability to fix over the telephone because the people who know what they're doing leave at 11 p.m. I don't blame them. If I knew what I was doing, I wouldn't be on the telephone after 11 p.m. either.

Two hours later, I gave up. One last time, on a whim, I restarted my computer.

It did nothing. But at least I know how to flush.