Sherman's March to the Sea, staring Paul Ryan and the GOP

Quote of the Day, from Taegan Goddard:

"I spoke to seven different Republican Senators, who said, `Joe, I'm not going to be able to help you on anything. The way it was characterized to me was: `For the next two years, we can't let you succeed in anything. That's our ticket to coming back.'"
-- Vice President Joe Biden, quoted by Greg Sargent from Michael Grunwald's new book,The New New Deal.

The politics of slash-and-burn have really become part of the GOP's 'best practices' platform even when challenging supposed RINOs in their respective primaries. I think it's revealing that the conservative elite are either willing to tolerate the almost total separation of the party platforms from reality in the name of electoral victory, or so terrified of being 'Frumed' that they rarely even second guess the madness.

By this point I think any democrat or independent pol still trying for serious bipartisan compromise is deluding themselves. To use a war analogy, once you develop nuclear weapons there isn't any sound strategical way to ever get rid of them. When any tacit 'rule of war' is broken, it's difficult to put the cat back in the bag until either the current war reaches a conclusion or both sides suffer catastrophic defeats. I don't like this status quo, in fact I hate it and worry that we have little idea how bad it can get.   Unfortunately I  don't see how it can be changed in the near to medium future. The best option for the left, and for the remaining sane moderates and conservatives is to fight the war we're in and hope some of the saner leaders can outlast it.

The demographic trends give me hope for the Democrats and more importantly for a more moderate electorate in the long term. But unless the economy kicks off very quickly and stays that way I foresee continually increasing radicalization on the right, inevitably causing radicalization on the left. For the Democrats to do otherwise, from a game-theory point of view would be to simply surrender their goals again and again until there is no field left to play on. What we've seen in the maneuvering on the debt-ceiling extensions seems like a text-book example of chicken only the damage grows worse even before the government shut-down. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't we going to hit the debt-ceiling again come January? AND the Bush Tax cuts will expire AND the sequestration cuts are all looming...

It's going to be a rocky couple of months for sure....

(Hat tip Collin, from FB)

Climate Change is the New Holocaust

Hyperbole?  Perhaps.  But the simple idea that my (doubtlessly) overly-provocative title may not be an exaggeration should be food for thought.  In that mindset, this is a draft of my most recent letter to every congressperson whose email I can find.  Any feed back would be appreciated; I am trying to be sincere, but it's hard to be forceful without going overboard.

Esteemed Senators, Congressmen and Congress Women,

Congress has been unable to react at all to address what will probably be the biggest issue facing our children, our country and our planet in the next hundred years: Climate Change. 

We all know it is happening.  Everyone who gives any credence to scientific study and expertise knows that we are causing it.  I believe the problem is clear: ff we do not do something to alleviate our carbon and greenhouse gas emissions in a strong and significant way, our children's children will look back at this congress and generation in horror.  Horror in the same way that we look back at any Genocide, or political failure to save human lives and preserve freedom and equality. 

You may think I am being overly dramatic, but I doubt any of us will think differently if we do not change course.  Change does not need to be overly painful, but it needs to be swift and decisive.  

A carbon tax or cap-and-trade is the most obvious remedy.  But as you are certainly aware, our political system is paralyzed by fear, partisan gridlock, and a failure on the part of Republican leaders to take any responsibility for the future of the country. 

Much of that will not change tomorrow or in the near future.  But because of this, especially because of it, we must do everything possible to work for the long term, for the next 7 generations.  It is not only in our power, it is within our reach to achieve some change and that change we should make.   

I urge and beg you; please do whatever you can.  Support green energy wherever possible.  Push for stronger EPA powers and regulations.  Support taxes and caps on carbon emissions whenever possible.  Give as much funding and support to green energy.    

As cliche as it may sound, we forget that this phrase has real, terrible meaning; think of our children.  Please consider this, and spare as much effort as you can muster to make our world better. 

With my most sincere respect,
Renny Young 

Finding God in Small Things

(C) Copyright 2012 Renny Young

We found the Goddamn particle!


This is a happy day for particle science and physics in general; the various Theories of Everything are looking slightly less insane, or at least insane-but-with-some-proof!

I have no idea what the larger connotations are, but I suspect we'll be able to learn them in the next few days; I've been shocked at the quantity of media that this result has gotten.


Here's the data from Google Trends for the search occurance for "higgs boson" in the last 30 days:




I do feel a little bittersweet about this whole matter; until very recently, almost every major discovery of this type used to be Made in America(C) by American scientists.  29 years and 1 day ago the Tevatron Particle Accelerator was activated in Batavia Illinois and was the most powerful Accelerator for over twenty years.  It was shut down this last September because of budget cuts, and stands a powerful illustration of the changing field in Science.  No longer are the major papers dominated by American scientists, and the only research that has any strong chance of getting funded here are projects that can justify a health or medicinal aspect, or kill many people quickly, effectively, and expe.  Most of our research dollars these days go into outlandish military projects, the details of which can remain classified for decades meaning that the public sees little to no benefit (other than a handful more dead terrorists).

Maybe this is just another result of our dysfunctional budging system.  Perhaps science, like every expenditure, must be cut.  But I can't help but feel that when it comes to our government, useful spending is cut first, while research into ways to kill goats with ones' mind blossoms.  The National Science Foundation loses funding year after year, while the Department of Defense "loses" billions of dollars.

One benefit of Science is that whenever someone learns something and shares it, the whole world learns it to.  Science is not a zero-sum game, and we should applaud discover wherever it happens because it usually ends up benefiting us as well.  But on this Day of Independence, it's hard not to look at the declining lead of America in funding research and wonder how our priorities became so messed up.

Copyright 2012 Renny Young

Egypt's Pandora Box

The delayed results of the Egyptian election have been released and as expected the Muslim Brotherhood's candidate Mohammed Morsi won with 51.7% of the vote - a 3.4% lead over Ahmad Shafiq.  It bodes well that the vote did not come down to a closer race; the Bush v. Gore election almost split America, and we've been doing this for 200+ years.  If the race had been closer and more easily contested Egypt's stability would be in probably be in immediate jeopardy.

How much power Morsi will have, if any, still remains to be seen.  The Egyptian military and Supreme court have pushed back very strongly against the initial conditions of the power transfer; the Supreme Court invalidated quite a few of the major presidential candidates and in a more drastic decision, dissolved the recently formed Egyptian parliament, forcing new elections.  The NYT notes that the military closed parliment the morning after the ruling which strongly indicates collusion, if not outright control of the Supreme Court by the military generals (the Supreme Court members were all been nominated by Mubarak).  Even more radical was the announcement by the military that effectively castrated the president's powers, which has been called a 'military coup' in all but name.


If Ahmad Shafiq, the disposed-dictator Hosi Muburak's prime minister was elected, Egypt would have essentially reverted back to the old status-quo of an authoritarian leader backed by a military oligarchy.  The military has argued that it is the only force able to guaranteeing security in post-revolutionary Egypt, but it begs the question of whether there ever was a successful revolution, or simply a massive public uprising mitigated by a regime change of only the very top slice of Egyptian governance.  


If Mohammed Morsi can garner sufficient support beyond the Muslim Brotherhood he may be able to stunt the Military's power to some degree.  If he cannot win support from the Egyptian Left, the youth activities and other disparate opposition groups I think the military will be able to consolidate its power - at least in the short term.  I was originally still hopeful when the Supreme Court overturned parliment; I didn't understand the implications of such a drastic action it was and how far the status quo would go to blunt the constitutional and democratic reforms. In hindsight it seems a lot more sinister. 


My general dogma for progress in Egypt (or any authoritarian country) is the building of significant institutions with power to check one another; if the Muslim Brotherhood can establish itself and counter the power of the military this could provide an opening for more reform and other institutions to grow and moderate the control of any single faction to undo the democratic reforms.


This state of affairs is so tenuous and quickly evolving that no one has a complete grasp on where Egypt stands, much less where it will go.  As always my best wishes go to the Egyptians; they have the opportunity to make historic reforms for their country, and set an example for the middle-east which could alter the political paradigm more than George W. Bush's wildest dreams of democratic reform.

Security Theater and the Shortsighted Push-back

BoingBoing rounds up the latest abuses of the TSA:

Cue up the Yakity Sax! In case you missed it, there have been a number of Boing Boing posts of late documenting outrageous TSA incidents:
• A terminal in Newark airport was evacuated because the TSA forgot to screen a tiny baby.
• TSA agents discovered an "anomaly in the crotchital area" of a 79-year-old woman.
• TSA agents at JFK harassed the family of a 7-year-old girl with cerebral palsy and developmental disability.
• TSA screeners in LA ran a drug ring and took bribes from drug dealers.
• The TSA's anti-hugging squad caught a terrorist masquerading as a 4-year-old girl who loves her grandma.
• A 95-year-old US Air Force veteran from World War II and his 85-year-old friend were humiliated, searched and robbed at a San Diego TSA checkpoint. 

In the last seven times I have flown, I have had no bad experiences with TSA, and encountered several genuinely helpful people.  One TSA agent personally took my suitcase (which turned out to be 3 inches too wide to fit the X-ray) back to the counter and got it registered and put on my plane, after observing that I was running late for my plane (my fault for getting distracted at the book store).  

I have never seen anyone having trouble with TSA in the past few years.  In the immediate time after 9-11, things were awful, but this is probably to be expected.  However I keep hearing these reports and wondering exactly how much of a problem this is.  I understand the plural of my anecdotes are not "data", but neither is this selective gathering of the most egregious, headline grabbing transgressions of a massive government agency.
Now I completely agree that the majority of the newer security measures are wasteful, time-consuming, invasive and almost certainly ineffective.  If I were Dictator for a Day, I would roll back the vast majority, cut and retool the TSA down to a more sensible yet effective system in whatever ways possible.   But this situation seems the classic security dilemma in action: no matter what consequences politicians and bureaucrats face in setting security measures: all the bad press, complaints, ethics violations and examples of small-scale tyranny that these security measures cause, the incentive will ALWAYS be stronger to never roll these measures back.  One genuinely hostile terrorist or even backwater malcontent who makes it past security with a weapon, harmful object, or simply an oversize quilting needle?  That is enough to instantly end or ruin the career of a TSA official, airport official, or associated politician.  "WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE?" will be the public outcry, with huge media coverage and resulting outrage.  "WHO cut corners or judged that the latest million-dollar-machine wasn't cost effective?  These are our children's lives you risked, and our national security!"  

Stupid, short-sighted and irrational as this is, we live in America; a country so self-traumatized by fear and injury that it has invaded numerous countries in the past decade, sent assassins mechanical and human into others to wreck vengeance and preemptively kill those who have any intentions to hurt us, no matter how ineffective those enemies may be.  Where is the public outcry over the drones in Yemen?  Where are the Senators and Congress-members standing up and actually pressing the Administration and bloated security apparatus?  As far as I can tell our Senate and House have essentially forfeited their Constitutional duty to decide when this country should go to war, and they have done it out of fear and cowardice that they may be blamed as being "soft" on our enemies.  That *Obama*, a president who has authorize unprecedented measures of covert and unconstrained attacks against (the admittedly non-traditional, guerrilla style) enemies of the US is STILL attacked by the Republican Party should give us pause at how little our public officials are pressured otherwise.  It took Nixon to go to China, but I doubt even Ron Paul could muster the political capital and support in Congress to roll back this idiocy.

I know that few will care or listen to my comment, but I don't really find any of this outrage very important or useful.  I completely understand the various motivations BoingBoing has to prioritize this subject, but aren't we missing a chance to discuss the underlining problems that cause this clusterf#$% of security and invasive government?  These "shock-and-outrage" articles may be effective to marshal public attention, but this seems like just fighting a single symptom of a much  larger problem: our Constitutional limits are so outdated that instead of guaranteeing our rights, the public as a whole implicitly allows them to be ignored rather than modified in a rational manner.  How long has it been since the 4th Amendment was seriously upheld?  How long since "due process" has been a serious consideration in the trials of suspected terrorists, or drug offenders, or protesters, or anyone without a few thousand dollars of discretionary money to hire a competent lawyer? How long since there was any serious push to cut the largest defense budget in all of history?

Perhaps this "shock and outrage the privileged and tech-savy" strategy is more politically effective; I am certainly not equipped to know either way.  But I believe it is inherently dishonest, short-sighted, myopic and downright dogmatic. I like BoingBoing, and respect its writers and authors.  But this ideological attitude does a disservice to their integrity.

I wouldn't be surprised if AIPAC and the Israeli right come to regret their part in goading the GOP to such ridiculous rhetoric. It's completely understandable why they've taken such a path; it's been incredibly helpful in handicapping Obama's ability to spur concession from Israel in the peace talks. The best example of this is Netanyahu's farcical rant on the 1967 peace lines; ignoring the fact that every US president in the last quarter century has supported a two-state solution based on the 1967 lines with land swaps, Bibi *himself* took the position not that long ago. So the 'manufactured outrage' as a commenter below mentioned, was actually a creation of the right and of Netanyahu; the right wanted to smear Obama as betraying Israel, and Netanyahu wanted to preempt any pressure from Obama to make a peace deal Bibi's parliamentary coalition wouldn't like. The fact that Obama was simply repeating what has been US policy for decades didn't prevent this smear from being dismayingly effective.

Netanyahu, thus preempting an push from the US towards peace, has repeated this tactic when necessary, showing the Obama administration for the patsy it has become. Israel, like most countries (mine included), is often prone to near-sighted thinking. As the West Bank's population grows and Israeli settlements become more mired into it, the ability of Israel to reach a two state consensus becomes less and less realistic. That leaves it with two options: A) give citizenship to the millions of Arab-Palestinians living within Israel's new borders and effectively lose it's identity as a Jewish state, or B) Permanently enclose the West Bank within Israel's spiderweb of settlements, wall it off, and run the worlds newest, most explosive apartheid state.

Everyone who talks of how 'Palestinians doesn't want peace' and 'The Arabs will accept peace when Israel is run into the sea" are missing the point: even if 95% percent of Palestinians would rather Israel cease existing, it won't change the fact that Israel must still make peace, lose it's democracy, or lose it's identity. Or purge all the Palestinians. However that last option sounds a bit too much like a 'final solution' for it to go over well with the rest of the world.

If you don't believe me, then go read Goldblog or Megan McArdle; both of whom are far smarter than I and considerably less liberal. Israel is in the terrible situation of being surrounded by enemies, and unless it plans on fighting till judgement day, it must start making some hard decisions.

I would wager these decisions will become harder in the near future as a result of picking sides in American politics. It's one thing to lobby its main Ally to continue supporting it, it's quite another to seemingly court the favor of the most unbalanced set of presidential candidates in recent history at the risk of alienating a generation of young Americans, Jews among them. How do you think it makes Israel look in the eyes of it's expats and Jewish diaspora when reactionaries like Gingrich and Perry vie to be the first to sacrifice American interests in the Middle-East for Israel?

Pakistani nanny government

So what I assume is a translation or English version of the Pakistani SMS censorship list is going around. You'd like to send a text? You won't be able to get these words through.

No "backdoor man"? Aww, that's like my favorite Howlin' Wolf song ever.

Also; 'Bazongas'. Wow, these guys are more hip than most censors. But "GOT JESUS'? 'HOSTAGE'? I don't understand those. Also they apparently don't want to admit the existence of famous serial killers?

One of the more interesting terms is "YELLOW MAN" or "YELLOMAN" (at the very bottom). I had no idea what this way, but according to Urban Dictionary, it has an Asian-aimed racist connotation. Why would the Pakistani government/military agency responsible for this list censor an anti-Asian racial slur? Important or developing allies?

The is all a lot of vague hand waving and gesturing on my part, but it doesn't seem an excessively detailed list, so the number of people submitting words for censorship probably wasn't that massive. A significant portion of the terms are sexual or defamatory words that aren't racial. I haven't read the whole thing, so please point out if there is additional Politically Incorrect material.