Nob Central

On the public option

2009-09-09T07:52:00.002-05:00

I haven't really gotten Kevin's idea that it would be ok to drop the public option as long as other things are done. I think that argument just misses the larger issue. Any health reform fails without a public option because the public option is the first step to fundamentally changing our health care system from the free market, monopolized morass of the status quo to a single payer, Canada style system. Absent the public option, we basically have tinkering on our way to unaffordability. Or, to put more clearly, offering the subsidy and no public option is acceptance of the status quo - an admission that things aren't that bad and that we just need to massage the monopolized system to fix its ills.

A mandate and subsidies don't freak out the GOP because they know that these are minor repairs that they can fight against and whittle away. What the GOP fears is that Obama will actually get angry and use his rhetorical power to actually do some monopoly busting. That's why they say death panels and all that other nonsense. They fear the long term, psychological changes that will be brought on by a well functioning, easy to use public option.

Perhaps people who have not lived in a universal health care system can't truly grasp this concept but it is the ease of use that wins the day for single payer. You walk into the hospital, you get service, you pay nothing. No special cards, no long forms, no hassle, no foul looks when you say you don't have insurance. If you think about the nightmare of private insurance, where most people don't even understand what is covered, what to do in case of an emergency, or how much they'll be paying in situation X, Y, and Z and you compare that fear to how the same person feels in a public health insurance system, the status quo loses every time. No one, given the choice between a monopolistic or hybrid system and a public option, single payer system would chose the former. That's why the GOP is freaked. And that's why we need to hold out for the public option. It's not even about getting those 45 million insurance (although that will happen and it's a great necessity). It's about fundamentally altering health care in America and putting us on the road to a Canada style system. That won't happen with the subsidies mess.

(Aside: It's never been about cost. The USFG can spend whatever it wants. That's why we just pissed a trillion or two down the drain fighting wars that didn't need to be fought. It's about values. Do we value American lives more than we do filling corporate coffers and defense contractors pockets? Other countries have made clear that they value their citizen's lives first. Somehow, anytime someone suggests that we might value our citizen's lives, the Right screams bloody murder about budget deficits. Notice they don't blink twice when asked to spend a trillion dollars developing a weapon system that doesn't work or to invade a foreign country.)

Man can not live on barbeque and burritos alone

2009-09-01T21:22:00.003-05:00

I've been back in the US for just over a month and this would be a good time to restart blogging. The time I spent in DC was well spent and a net negative for my desire to continue to slim down, but who's getting out the scale anyway.

Returning to Atlanta was like returning to a foreign city. The town itself has changed so dramatically in the intervening nine years that I have been away as to be almost unrecognizable. Change, as one would expect, occurs on dual, linear paths arcing in opposite directions, which is to say, that the "new" downtown is much better than the old downtown, but the "new" Buckhead is a giant nightmare that I continue to avoid as much as possible.

Changes or not, Atlanta is a city that perfectly illustrates my sense of cultural dislocation: the city is engineered, designed to get people in during the day and out during the night. For reasons that are not entirely clear to me, we tend to value living outside of the city in gated communities that resemble defensible fortresses of private security. It's odd really, the rest of the world tends to value living in cities. Johannesburg real estate, for example, is much pricier in the city than out (although there are specific racial issues that explain that case). My point being, that our culture, and specifically that which dominates in Atlanta, is not a culture that values public space and that makes me rather uncomfortable.

Good news, barbeque and burritos haven't gotten worse over the last five years. Atlanta has seen a proliferation of burrito joints, most of them rather plain, but Chipotle continues to shine. In terms of barbeque, the South has to be famous for something and being famous for generational knowledge for slow cooking delicious pork isn't bad. Fat Mat's continues to reign although I have yet to find a place that has great beef brisket.

The graduate program is a mixed bag. On the one hand, I feel quite comfortable to be back in the walls of academia, but on the other, I'm not entirely comfortable with the department. That should come in time but there are certain things that I'll just never get over. Smart people sound stupid when they have thick southern accents, for one. (Imagine, "Remember Cicero, y'all!")

And the discipline I have selected has a tendency, like most disciplines, to appeal to notions of sophistication in unpleasant and unnecessary ways. There is a particular jargon, for example, that is almost used as an entry barrier, or, to put more succinctly, one needs to become familiar with an advanced and rarely understood typology that is divorced from one's ontological disposition to be able to re-remember the things that we have forgotten from our ahistorical discursive space. (Note: Previous sentence was not intended to make sense or be intelligible.)

I'll put it this way, earlier today I watched another graduate student from the Moving Images program (essentially Film Studies) and I quite literally understood nothing. The presenter used a series of vocabulary that was progressively less understandable. Now, I'm not needing to actually understand what she was talking about. It's not part of my field, but it is illustrative of the phenomenon that I'm dealing with on a daily basis. This discipline has a tendency to use language that essentially doesn't exist. The most mind blasting word that the presenter used that I can remember was "indexology". No, you will not find that in any dictionary.

That being said, I do feel that I shall be able to do what I want to do and carve out my little niche. The university has been extremely supportive and encouraging and the professors for the most part appear to be willing to help in whatever way that they can. I also can't really complain about my deal, the work part is good and it gives me the flexibility I need.

What does concern me is that I am not entirely convinced that I have put myself in place to be successful, or, as successful as I would like to be. I have entered a world that is almost entirely unfamiliar and while I am doing the work, there is much more that I don't understand than I do. It's rather disconcerting, for example, to read the assigned articles and not be able to clearly identify the main arguments afterwards. To some extent that is because I'm used to reading extremely straight forward arguments. I also think that the authors we have been reading have a rather opaque writing style that is not particularly conducive to being understood. I'm trying not to worry about it too much at the moment (and have been told to, essentially, chill the f*ck out) but it is concerning that the major ongoing debate about a central tenet of the discipline seems to be not only entirely irrelevant but also utterly incomprehensible. Maybe it's just me.

In my master's program, every participant had a distinct character. In this space, I well documented the trials and tribulations. That will not be repeated this time around for two reasons. One, there is a certain politics of academia that must be respected. That is to say, I'm not really interested in insulting people that are likely to be colleagues in the long run. I'd rather learn how to interact with them in positive ways and then use those relationships when the time comes. The other reason I won't be repeating London's storytelling is that I'm mixed in with a crowd of a mostly higher caliber. Pretty much anyone can get into a master's program and manage to do reasonably well. The admission filters just aren't that strong. At the doctorate level, the quality of the applicant goes up and those who make it through generally can contribute and hold their own.

That being said, I'm taking a political science class on Latin America that at least promises to provide a bit of humor. This class is a graduate level course with a mixed population - half the class are political science PhD students, the other half are either masters or PhD students from various fields. So, there are some people who are rather lacking in context, shall we say. The best example, and someone I'm fairly sure will be making a repeat appearance on this blog, is a rather young lad who claims he has travelled extensively in Latin America. I can only imagine when he travels, he goes 5-stars for in the first class session he argued that Latin America doesn't have much income inequality. Best not to open up the stupid at your first class.

In his second class, he argued that uneducated people shouldn't be allowed to vote. Best not to continue the stupid in your second class. Both times the professor dealt with the issue rather diplomatically but I can't express to you just how awful something sounds when it's not only utterly stupid (and an argument derived from the racist, sexist past) and it's spoken with a pronounced southern accent. I'll try to record exact quotes from now on.

I'll end this little missive in a moment but I wanted to make a comment about what I have seen to be university-wide technophobia. I am, unapologetically, a child of the high tech revolution. I like having my tech and, all things being even, I much prefer to take notes on a laptop, email in assignments, and at least attempt to be all digital. Unfortunately, the professors are a bit behind in the times. Not only will they generally not receive assignments by email, they also tend to look at you funny if you crack open a laptop and use that instead of an actual notebook. I'm wondering if they just suspect we are doing other things or if they don't understand the vast benefits of being able to search and find through every note you take during your doctorate program. Either way, they just need to get over it. I'm not putting the laptop away. In fact, the extended MacBook Pro battery has proved terribly awesome.

Finally, I have to say, District 9 was so utterly awesome that if you haven't seen it, you should immediately go see it. As in right now. Unless you have an aversion to violence, because it gets rather sizzling in the second half. I haven't seen any other movies of late, but District 9 will hold me over for another couple weeks.

Initial observations

2009-07-31T08:28:00.002-05:00

1. People are still rather fat. It's not just a stereotype, it's a problem. In my extended stay at the Orlando airport (a total of 7.5 hours) I watched a family of four consume their weight in high fat, high sugar, high calorie foods. The father was the only one who didn't really eat and he was also, not coincidentally, the only one who wasn't pushing the portly-to-obese barrier. We need to think about what we are putting into our mouths.

2. Cars have gotten boxier and uglier. It's no wonder why American car companies are in the crapper. No only do they produce inferior, poorly engineered products, they also products butt ugly machines. The new "box on wheels" design has got to go.

3. On my flight to DC, there was a youngish man with his presumed girlfriend who had a problem with the flight crew and eventually go kicked off the flight. The police were called. He was utterly ridiculous and a jerk. Now, I can't verify this, but I have a very sneaky suspicion that he plays for one of DC's sports teams. I won't name any names, but I can say that this individual had the physique, body art, attitude, and wispy beard to match a particular individual in the DC sports scene.

4. It's weird responding to people in public in english. I guess after 3.5 years, my natural inclination is to say something in spanish. I'm sure I'll get used to it soon enough as I revert back to my original culture but it is a little odd to hear english all around me.

5. The US is perfect, much as they say in Colombia. The roads are perfectly paved with all the correct markings, the stop lights are well defined (and seem long), the distance is vast. These are the things that Colombians say about the US and they're right. Compared to where I've been, we present an appearance of perfection. I'm not complaining about it, just saying that I have a heightened appreciation for that which we do right. And we do roads right.

6. Chipotle, thankfully, has done nothing to degrade the quality of their pork. Still as succulent and delicious as ever. I shall soon become reacquainted with their other meat options.

7. The MacBook Pro is easily the coolest computer I have ever owned. More than that, however, it suits my needs. I don't want to have to worry about maintenance and hassle and viruses and all the other crap that goes with Windows. With Mac, my PC concerns are essentially over. Now, if Google would only release Chrome for Mac.

8. After living in Colombia, I find that I don't like my air conditioning so cold anymore. Maybe it's because I prefer fans and the air circulation that they provide or maybe it's just after living for so long without, I am not so addicted to artificially cooled air. (Note: There is no A/C in Bogota because the average temp in the city is between the 50s and 60s. This comment only refers to A/C in the hot lands or times when I was traveling with my wife who doesn't like a lot of A/C.)

9. If there's anything about DC it's the consistent nature of things. The politicians still think they're hot shit, the people are always in a hurry, and hope springs eternal for Redskins Nation in July and August. My mother's house is about 5 minutes from Redskins park and while tempted, I'm not going to make it to a training camp session. But that won't stop the thousands of other who will as we saw yesterday when we passed them on the road, all lined up to park.

10. All things considered, it's good to be back. I have to confess I was quite nervous about coming back and not knowing what to expect. I shouldn't have been. The US is still here, as always, with good, decent people who are largely ignorant of what their political leaders are doing. I don't say that to denigrate Americans - most people around the world are mostly ignorant of what their governments do in their names. No, I say that because often, living abroad, one only gets the most narcissistic view of America - the political view - and that's a bit depressing. It's reassuring to see with my own eyes that people are people - whether Colombian or American, we all want the same things. No matter how nihilistic and depraved our leaders become.

Making eggshells from eggs

2009-07-27T08:22:00.002-05:00

The other night I went out to a pub with some friends to celebrate my imminent departure. We had a jovial time until, at the end of the night, unpleasantness struck. Without getting too specific, one friend started a fight in the street and the other friend came to his defense. Both ended up with bloodly lips (multiple taxi drivers came to the defense of the other guy) and the three of us were forced to explain the situation to the police (well, I didn't have to explain anything other than that I wasn't part of the fisticuffs).

This event put a damper on the evening and really pissed me off. There is almost no situation where violence is called for and the contretemps certainly could have been avoided with a dash of prudence. Unfortunately, there's no reasoning with drunken stupor.

When I talked to the implicated the following day, they both had varying explanations for the unfortunate event. The friend who started it claims he remembers everything except who threw the first punch. His lack of memory a convenient form of ego protection since, without any physical provocation at all, he started the blowup with a full on, open hand slap to the other guy's face and then chased after the dude swinging wildly, hitting mostly air, and falling flat on his drunk ass at least three times. A small part of me, a very small part, was in hysterics with his clown show of brawling.

The conclusion of this event was anti-climactic. The police didn't do anything aside from annoy us. The other guy took off. And the one taxi driver who claimed that my friend had damaged his cab during the fight refused to produce the taxi or any witnesses and was eventually ignored by the police.

The emotional after effect is more long lasting. I'm still pissed off at my friend. But I'm reserving my anger for an appropriate moment mostly because he's in a downward, depressive cycle that has no clear end in sight. His alcoholism is on the verge of being converted into a chronic disease, a symptom of obvious psychological trauma which I'll not theorize about in this space. Unfortunately, this friend suffers from an advanced case of pride and that makes broaching the subject extremely difficult to impossible. Another friend did talk to this individual about a year ago and that created so much huffing and puffing that the two didn't speak for a solid year.

A part of me would like to judge my friend, speak harsh words, explode with righteous outrage. But I won't do that and not just for pragmatic reasons. No, I won't judge him because I tend to think that when we look at others and see things we do not like, things that we judge, things that are revolting to us, that our revulsion, judgements, and dislikes are a form of ego protection. The things that provoke strong dislikes in others are things that are usually reflected in some part of our own being. Or, to put is more squarely, we tend to judge others for things that are or could be present in ourselves.

For the last several days, I have thought about the event, my friend, and the subsequent going away party we had on Saturday night (in which I drank nothing stronger than orange juice and my friend got tanked again). And while a small part of me continues to be angry with him, most of me just feels sad for him. I think I have a pretty good handle on his emotional situation, I think if he was willing to open up to me I could help him by listening and offering some small advice. Yet, I know that he'll never let me in because to do so would be to admit weakness and he is too proud to do so.

Instead, I'm leaving the country with only a tiny bit of hope that he will right his ship and begin to address that which ails him. I have no great confidence in that hope and I know that I will continue to think of creative ways in which I can deliver the messages I need to deliver. But for now, I feel more useless than useful. I feel as if a friend is drowning in the ocean and ignoring every lifejacket thrown his way. As I learned much earlier in life, I can't jump down the rabbit hole with him even though the alternative is to do nothing.

Here's another bad "study" from Foreign Policy

2009-07-22T10:09:00.003-05:00

I don't generally have a very good opinion of Foreign Policy magazine. They're kind of like Foreign Policy-lite and I have a feeling they try to say provocative things in the hopes of ratcheting up page clicks or subscriptions. Unfortunately, these types of things often make them rather clownish.

Enter today's offer: Foreign Policy's 5th annual failed states index. These sorts of indices are rather useless since they paint broad strokes and therefore wouldn't actually be useful to foreign policy practioners but for some reason, they keep pumping them out like they're foreign policy's answer to US News's annual College Rankings. Back in grad school, I remember reading the index then and thinking that it had been rather foolishly produced (with a rather poor methodology). Apparently, things haven't gotten any better.

One thing I know for certain - only someone who has never visited and knows very little about Colombia could suggest the country is in danger of being a failed state. Security wise the government controls the vast majority of the country although the guerilla still manages to attack population centers from time to time (but not in any of the big cities). The suggestion that the guerilla represents, today, a viable threat to the functioning or longevity of the government is laughable. Economically, Colombia has largely been unaffected by the global economic crisis. Growth is still over 5% and foreign investment continues to rise. Politically, the country faces no crises of government or legitimacy, the president continues to be the most popular president in South America, and democratic processes are well respected (although politically motivated violence continues).

Looking at the list, Foreign Policy has decided that Bolivia is more stable or less at risk than Colombia. Curious since they continue to face a serious political crisis that threatens to tear the country in two. I'm sure there are others, like Venezuela or Honduras, that are much lower than Colombia that could be debated out.

I think that, behind all the fancy sounding explanations of why their methodology is oh-so sophisticated, Foreign Policy suffers in this compilation by giving equal merit to the 12 social, political, economic, and military variables that they use to evaluate state stability. Some factors matter more than others. In the case of Colombia, a booming economy, military control of the vast majority of the country, and political legitimacy matter much, much more in determining if the country is at risk of being a failed state than, say, the number of internally displaced persons (IDPs). Yet, Foreign Policy makes no attempt to evaluate which factors are the most important. Thus, Colombia's high rankings in IDPs, for example, bumps it way up above Honduras or Venezuela, countries that don't really have IDP problems but do have a host of other problems that more directly challenge the legitimacy or ability of the state to funtion.

Well, I won't quibble any further on a "study" that, aside from mass consumption, is utterly useless. Instead, I'll just conclude that again, Foreign Policy has generated page views by producing faux scholarship and I'll wonder if they did it on purpose.

A totally shocking report

2009-07-21T19:02:00.003-05:00

Could it be that Bush's abstinence only education not only failed to reduce teen sex but also increased teen pregnancies and STDs? CDC says yes with the worst impact in the South where the religious message is generally more impactful. I know, this comes as a real shocker.

The End of an Adventure

2009-07-15T15:38:00.004-05:00

Two weeks from today, I fly back to the US and the Great Colombian Adventure officially comes to a close. I have very mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I'm very excited to be going back to the US, to see my family, to begin the next step in my professional development, and to become reaquainted with my culture. On the other, I'm a bit sad to leave Colombia's good parts, I'm a little concerned about what I'm going to find, and I certainly don't want to leave my wife behind for the 4 month period that we are planning to be apart.

Of course, Colombia will never really be in the rear view mirror. I married a Colombian and my kids will be half Colombian. We will visit as often as we can and we shall raise our kids to be aware of their dual, equally valuable heritage. But the days of living in Colombia, those are over. I seriously doubt I'll ever come back to live and if I did, it would be as a very old man in search of easy retirement. That is a really weighty statement and it's one that I'm not entirely sure if my wife has thought through. In fact, I'm fairly convinced that she is actively avoiding thinking of all the implications of our decision, as would most of us, I imagine.

As I mentioned above, I'm a bit concerned about what I'm going to find in the US. I married a Latina and in my country, race matters (unfortunately). On top of that, we're going to Atlanta, a modern city in the hub of the South, America's traditional racist core. It's very likely that I have little to be concerned with. Atlanta is, after all, a modern city with modern ideas, not to mention a huge Latino population (over 15,000 Colombians alone). But I still worry. I don't want my wife or my kids to be subjected to America's racial politics.

More than my petty worries, however, is the irrepresable conclusion that one chapter of my life is closing as another opens. This chapter was of falling in love, getting married, meeting and immersing myself in a new language and culture, and strengthening the bonds of the most important relationship in my life. In a sense, this was a chapter of growing up, of preparation of what is to come. The next chapter is one of adulthood. It involves me finally having taken a decision about my career and future. It will involve the arrival of children and everything that goes with that. It is, in a certain sense, a huge step, but a step that I am overeager to take. And ultimately, I believe it is a step we could not have taken in Colombia.

I'll sum up with a final thought. I'm big on symmetry. When everything balances out I'm happy. So how's this for balance:

When we left London, my wife went to Colombia while I stayed in the US for 4 months.

Now I'm going to the US while my wife will stay in Colombia for 4 months.

Our roles have officially juxtaposed.

Making sense of stupid

2009-07-08T13:53:00.003-05:00

I have a feeling that sometimes politicians make utterly stupid remarks intentionally. I think they know that stupid remarks don't really come back to hurt them and that by saying such things, they distract attention from other, more important, and more complex issues because it's just so easy to attack stupid. A great example of this is the ongoing bruhaha about House Minority Leader John Boehner's (R-Ohio) claim that no stimulus funds have gone to help Ohio. You can read about the embruglio here.

The short version is that Boehner claimed over the weekend that no stimulus infrastructure dollars have been spent/contracted in Ohio and thus the stimulus is no good. This claim was kind of like dropping a pocketfull of change at a political fundraiser - it got everyone scrambling. In fact, the DNC has gone nuts over trying to capitilize on stupid. Never mind that one stupid claim from Boehner masks the fact that he's an utter buffoon, it's just a lot easier to show that he doesn't know what he's talking about on a relatively substanceless gaffe than it is to show that he doesn't know what he's talking about on health care, foreign policy, et al.

I think strategically, the Dems kind of fall into this trap of pointing out stupid when they should be rolling the GOP on the issues. At the end of the day, 90% of the people paying attention aren't going to remember or care that Boehner said something factually inaccurate and stupid. And the 10% that do care are hardened partisans who can't be wooed either way. I suspect the DNC capitalizes on these types of gaffes for short term funding more than anything but I think they're making a colossal error.

We face two significant domestic issues which need urgent attention and to which the GOP is playing an obstructionist role: the economy and health care. I wonder how much mileage the DNC could make by attacking the GOP on their foolish, obstructionist, and utterly awful arguments that we don't need stimulus, that the economy is fine, and that we have the best health care system in the world.

Now, you may say, but the DNC is attacking Boehner because he tried to argue that the stimulus failed. True, but only reactively. We obviously need more stimulus to avert a jobless recovery that leaves the US with over 10% unemployment for a half decade. In politics, as in life, it's not so much about what you did, it's about what you're going to do. The DNC should be proactively attacking the GOP and their ideas and proposing their own solutions. There is an entire war to be fought over Health Care and yet the DNC doesn't seem to realize that and are doing as little as possible, all the while the Dems in Congress talk about bipartisanship.

Here it is: F*ck bipartisanship. We won, remember. We got to 60 (sort of). We got the Presidency. The GOP lost both chambers of Congress and the White House because their ideas failed. Is it really time, when we have huge majorities and the public is behind us, to turn around and give creedence to failed ideas? I think not.

As a final note, it's so galling to see politicians not realize the simple reasons why Obama won and Kerry didn't. There's the microanalysis which suggests that Kerry got killed by attack ads, etc. And then there's the macroanalysis which should come as a slap in the face to all those overpriced political consultants: Obama won because he proposed change (whatever the hell that means) and Kerry lost because he spent most of his time criticizing Bush. I still don't know what Kerry stood for and I was a supporter.

This same dynamic, a dynamic we've seen repeated over and over again (Reagan, Clinton, Bush II, Obama) is, for some reason, only replicated at the presidential election. It shouldn't be so limited. Obama's big argument, his explanations for change, of the liberal philosophy, those are the types of things that need to be used to push the US into a much more effective and economical health care system. Yet instead, we're left with, "Haha, John Boehner said something stupid! He has no ideas! Nanananabooboo!" These ads, of course, raise the question: What are your ideas then, DNC?

Honduras update

2009-07-03T18:45:00.002-05:00

Where journalism fails: The Honduran Supreme Court has issued an arrest warrant for ex-President Zelaya yet the AP reporters didn't seek to clarify what he is to be charged with? They didn't attempt to obtain a copy of the warrant?

Funny, the Spanish language press has no trouble sorting that out. According to this article he is being charged with "betraying the motherland" and "abuse of power". Still no copy of the actual warrant. Maybe tomorrow.

To summarize the latest: The President of the Organization of American States (OAS), Jose Miguel Insulza, has concluded his mission unsuccessfuly. Honduras is not going to allow Zelaya back as President and the arrest warrant remains in place. Insulza placed a Saturday morning deadline on ceding power back to Zelaya which current Honduran president Micheletti has stated will be ignored. The OAS, knowing that their polite request was to be ignored, has called an emergency session Saturday afternoon to discuss and perhaps vote on suspending Honduras from the organization. Zelaya has pledged to return to Honduras Sunday. Micheletti has pledged to have him arrested.

Things are getting toxic for the current Honduran regime. Honduras is a poor country and greatly depends on the economic support of foreign nations and international organizations like the World Bank. While most of that support has been placed "on hold" a vote at the OAS to suspend the Central American nation from the group would likely mean longer "suspensions" of foreign aid and greater economic dislocation. As we have seen in the past, economic upheaval in Latin America tends to accompany violence. It would be of no surprise if the coming weeks see violent clashes between government forces and the "peasant class".

On the other hand, there is now no scenario in which Zelaya returns to the office of the Presidency. Were the current leaders to allow that, Zelaya would surely have the military leaders fired and/or tried for the charge of treason which clearly would never be accepted.

Equally, it appears that Micheletti is unlikely to last as president. If for no other reason, he doesn't appear legitimate to the world and the only way to maintain support for the "coup" is to improve conditions in Honduras, something he won't be able to do if economic aid remains frozen. I fully expect that Micheletti is going to seek early elections as a remedy. Elections would be palatable for the international community and under Honduran law neither Micheletti nor Zelaya would be eligble to run. This step could go hand in hand with a promise from the next president (or the current one) to pardon Zelaya.

As a final note, I think it's important that the world's leaders understand that the worst possible step is to isolate Honduras. This is a poor nation with poor politics and few options. Isolating Honduras means greater misery for those who had nothing to do with these events. It would also likely frustrate our efforts to control the drug trade among other interests. The end game for this must be a diplomatic solution that allows the country to continue to survive. An extended embargo of foreign assistance only risks fragmentation and disaster.

Palin quits

2009-07-03T17:45:00.003-05:00

Rambles incoherently, uses sports analogies no one understands.

Morning Revolution/Coup Update

2009-07-03T10:17:00.004-05:00

Things in Iran continue to spiral out of control. Now the Iranian government seeks to prosecute British Embassy officials. Read more about that here.

Also, here's an unbelievably good story in the Nation about Iran's Green Wave and why the hardline regime is under fire at home (and lost the election). H/T Washington Note.

Unfortunately, with the media blackout, there's a lot more we don't know about what's going on in Iran than what we do. Increasingly, that is becoming the case in Honduras as well.

Here's a relatively balanced take on the situation in Honduras that raises more questions than it answers. Specifically, if Zelaya was so unpopular (supposed 25%) then why would the Congress, Supreme Court, and military fear his reelection scheme? It seems the most appropriate remedy would have been to wait out the remaining months on his term, not oust him with force.

Interesting solution being proposed by de facto President Micheletti: Early elections.

One thing not mentioned in this article or any other article I've seen: The Honduran constitution prohibits presidents from running again. This means that neither Zelaya nor Micheletti would be eligible in November. A clever move for Micheletti, no?

In the realm of ridiculously, stupidly, dangerously foolish comes Sen DeMint (R-SC) who defends the coup as a good idea and castigates Obama for standing with the likes of Chavez. Jesse Helms goes away, gets replaced by DeMint. H/T Washington Monthly.

While the legal wrangling over what is allowed and not allowed based on the Honduran constitution will continue to be discussed by non-experts and pundits, at least one top Honduran military lawyer doesn't equivocate: We broke the law.

This is the first article I've seen that speaks directly to the motivations of the military as well as explaining that the Attorney General ordered Zelaya's arrest. This is important because the Honduran constitution contains no articles of impeachment and is quite ambigious as to how the country would remove a rogue president.

And I would be remiss if I failed to mention that coups and things of that nature have traditionally been seen as investment opportunities for disaster capitalists. Interested parties should watch this stock as an example.

Infidelity

2009-06-25T09:15:00.003-05:00

South Carolina's Governor, Mark Sanford, has reminded us that the world in which we live is as imperfect as ever and the players in that world, more imperfect than not. While I can't say I respect Sanford's politics (he thought President Clinton should resign for Lewsinky, yet he continues on as Governor), I do respect that the man came to the podium, faced the media and his voters, and didn't drag his wife and kids out there like so many often do.

This event, while fascinating (Governor's don't just disappear), highlights and issue that I would like to spend some time discussing. Like most networks, CNN had two people on last night to comment on the Sanford issue. First came the softball of all softballs, Candy Crowley, who blathered on for a few minutes about how in America people love a redemption story and Sanford might yet rise from the dead. Never mind that the affair isn't the issue - it's the abdication of his responsibilities as Governor and potential abuse of state funds that dooms him forever on the national stage. Crowley, while likeable enough, just doesn't like to stake out too much ground. She was, after all, still saying that McCain had a chance to win the thing on November 3rd.

The second guest, and infinitely more interesting, was Dr. Drew the famous sex/relationship therapist who has a show on MTV or some such trash channel. Of course CNN wanted Drew to comment on the state of the Sanford marraige and if it could be "saved". Drew, always one to please, suggested that the marraige had "likely" been under threat for quite some time but that it could be saved. He also encouraged other couples with marraiges in trouble to try to save their marraiges through counseling (rather indirectly).

There are two issues here I will comment on. First is the issue of the affair.

My wife, being Colombian and used to a macho society where the vast majority of men cheat, have girlfriends on the side, and lie about it constantly, has told me on several occassions that sometimes in relationships people "slip up" and that doesn't necessarily mean the end of the relationship. She's right in a sense. There is a possibility for "slip ups", especially in a country like Colombia where if you are foreign and married, you're almost more attractive to the legion of single, attractive, and aggressive women out there. I could see a situation where one is drunk, alone (maybe after a fight), and falls into bed with someone who is not your wife.

Of course, I don't think any of those things are excusable. Philisophically, I have always thought that alcohol just enables us to do things that we really want when sober anyway. So even in a "slip up" situation, I think it reveals terrible fissures in the relationship which may or may not be solveable.

An affair is totally different and a thousand times worse. An affair is an active emotional, mental, and sexual replacement of the person to which you are married. It is something that has a beginning, middle, and more often than not, an ending. It has a life of its own, like all relationships, and as such, an affair is often the culmination of a failed marriage. One doesn't just fall into an affair. They grow over time and they grow because one is unhappy or unsatisfied with their significant other. So when Dr. Drew said it probably indicated that their marraige had been in trouble for quite some time, he was vastly understating the significance of this revelation.

The second issue relates to "saving the marraige". This is a common response to affairs and whatnot. Indeed, Dr. Drew said that going into counseling he encourages couples to stay together by thinking of their kids and the lives they have built. Essentially, he suggests that the material things in life value more than happiness. (Obviously children aren't material, but in this context he equates them to possessions.)

I really can't express just how much I disagree with this point of view. Fundamentally, I don't believe that counselors and therapists should enter into marriage counseling with the pre-conceived goal of "saving the marriage". The goals should start at a much more basic level - reestablishing communication, understanding the other, etc. If, after a period of reconciliation and communication, both partners decide to continue in the marriage, so be it. But "successful" marraige counseling doesn't always end in marriage. Sometimes, it ends in divorce.

Marraige is the great fetish of Western civilization. In America, we tend to worship at the alter of marriage. There is a consistent social value that suggests that marriage is sacred and should be preserved at all costs. I call bullshit. Marriage is a legal process which enables us to enjoy certain benefits and privledges. In my case, my wife gets the legal authorization to live and work in my country just as I got the legal authorization to live in hers. We also got a social blessing - marriage is more acceptable in Colombian society than just living together. The church ceremony, blessedly, was in a language I didn't understand at the time, and in the tiniest church around, another blessing because any larger and I would have suffocated. I certainly didn't need a bunch of stodgy old men who have never been married to lecture me on what to expect, on how I should never use birth control and have as many babies as "God" gives me, and on and on.

Don't get me wrong. I love being married to my wife. Every day I know that I have someone who will love and support me no matter what (excluding baby killing cannabalism). And I married her because I knew that I wanted to spend the rest of my life with her laughter and tears, her hopes and fears, adventuring and growing, and on. But, if, God forbid, we reached a point where I no longer wanted those things, I would not want to stay with her just to preserve a man made institution.

The truth is, some marraiges just aren't worth saving. Or, more pointedly, some marraiges can't be "saved". Oh, they can be preserved. Two people can make a rational decision to stay together for the "sake of the kids". They can go through the motions of mechanical sex, put on a show for friends and neighbors, and bury the truth. But it's a sham. And it's a terrible lie to foist upon your children.

It turns out, children are rather savvy. They learn stuff without even realizing it. And when kids see an example of their parents, they internalize it, it becomes part of them. Living a lie, each and every day, imprints a very specific message on children - it's ok to lie about really big stuff. It's ok to be unhappy as long as appearances are maintained. And we wonder why we have drug and alcohol problems.

I don't pay homage to the unholy fetish of marraige. And I wouldn't hesitate to walk away if that was the right thing to do. I won't begrudge others their choices. I can't walk in their shoes. But I do know that we need to take marriage off the pedestal and treat it as it should be treated. When we hear about the 50% divorce rate in the US, we hear a chorus of voices of concern. We should be concerned...about the other 10-15% that maintain unhealthy, sham marraiges and the types of messages that our children learn from those examples.

Conservative Circles and Race

2009-06-18T07:39:00.003-05:00

Living abroad, I've been pretty well insulated from rabid conservatism and its followers. In London, most of the Americans that I met were either politically unformed (young, study abroad students) or were well to the left. That makes a good bit of sense as those who choose to live abroad, in a country that is well left of center by our standards, generally do so with open, accepting eyes. The one exception to the rule is military personnel and dependents stationed abroad. Military personnel tend to be more conservative anyway and they don't really integrate with the population of the host nation. But I didn't mix with those types anyway.

In Colombia, I have met far fewer Americans. There are just less of us down here and the ones that are here, don't generally look to hang out with other Americans. That being said, the few Americans I have met have been disproportionately conservative, as in, hard core George Bush, kool aid drinking, intellectually bankrupt but holding onto that dogma like it's their last grip to reality types. I have certainly tried to avoid these individuals because I definitely have no interest in engaging in unproductive political debate with them and I don't want my reputation tarnished by their presence. The Colombian people that know me, know that I'm reasonable, thoughtful, considerate, and willing to listen to arguments from both sides. Unfortunately, the increasingly dogmatic and bitter right is none of those things and I don't wished to be tarnished by their presence. (I've actually had Colombian people introduce me to others with something like, "He's a gringo, but he's a good gringo, not like the others.")

The reason I recount this brief history is that recently I have made an acquaintance who perfectly fits into the category described above. And, to be honest, he gives me the heebie-jeebies. The first time I realized this was when he went off on an extended monologue about the "merit based society". Short version: We have it, Colombia doesn't and that's why we're rich and they're poor.

I found the entire discussion offensive. The "merit based society" argument is a foundation of republican philosophy which argues we are all equal when we are born and those who rise to the top are those who worked hardest and thus earned it. This quaint view, of course, completely ignores that some people attend $20,000/year exclusive private schools while others attend public high schools with textbooks written in the 60s and no sinks in the science labs meaning you can't ever do an experiment (these things I have seen first hand). Or that some children are raised with parents who know the value of education and hard work while others are raised by drug addicts and crack hos. Or that some people have parents that are well connected and wealthy and have doors magically open for them while others have parents who are teachers and military officers and have to struggle just to get their foot in the door. If there ever was a true level playing field, then perhaps the "merit based society" would be relevant. But since that's a pipe dream, it's essentially, in a word, racism.

I don't like it when people speak pejoratively about foreign countries. We all do it from time to time ('Those Norks are crazy biatches!") but I'd like to think that we say those things more for humor or out of frustration than because we really mean it. But what I have seen, circulating among self-described conservatives living abroad (a "subjugated minority group" according to them) is that they routinely employ pejorative terms to describe why the foreign culture is less valuable than our own. This is especially true in Colombia. In short, instead of looking at the myriad of diverse reasons why Colombia is a developing country with an almost overwhelming load of challenges (and the US role in creating a "developing Colombia", it's just easier to say, "they're culturally less developed than we are because they don't have a merit based system." Or, language less cloaked with sophistication, "Poor people are poor because they don't work hard."

Racism has become a subtle, insidious, and devious disease. Whereas in previous generations, it was culturally acceptable to assert that blacks and women weren't smart enough to vote, it is now necessary to express cultural, racial, and sexual bias with more sophistication and class. "Poor nations are poor because they can't manage their own affairs" tends to mean, "brown and black people around the globe aren't good managers". "Poor people are poor because they didn't work hard enough to rise to the top of society" tends to mean "Brown and black people are lazy."

South Africa is an excellent example of this. Under white rule, the country was "booming", an economic power, a model for the rest of Africa, right? Then, under black rule, South Africa virtually collapsed and everything is worse. The blacks didn't know how to run a country and that's why they're in this mess. This is, quite literally, a summary of a speech I heard a white South African give to me once upon a time. It's a lovely narrative except for the fact that it's utter horseshit and racist to the core. White South Africa wasn't a model of anything for anyone aside from the Ku Klux Klan. Their economy was based on the white population extracting all the riches from the black population. Whites lived well, blacks, not so much. Then, with the power transition, two things happened. First, a group of white economics ministers wrote a economic development blueprint which the black government was forced to accept in order to receive power. This blueprint, written hand in hand with the World Bank/IMF, established a completely independent monetary authority, akin to the US Federal Reserve, that had complete control over economic policy. Then they moved all the white economists from the previous government into that new authority. The second thing they did was the World Bank demanded a series of "structural adjustments" which meant selling of state owned enterprises. The people, of course, who had the money to buy those enterprises, were the very white rulers who were evicted from power. So, not only did the blacks lose control over central economic planning, but they also had to transfer public wealth to a white, elite, minority.

This, my friends, is the merit based system in action. South Africa. A perfect example of how rich, white bastards can screw over poor, inexperienced people of color. For more on this and other unbelievable events, see Naomi Klein, The Shock Doctrine.

Ahem. This isn't to say that ALL conservatives express these concepts as overtly as the two individuals I have described. Nor is it to suggest that the person I know here in Colombia would consider himself racist (although, to be fair, most racists don't consider themselves as such). He is, after all, married to a Colombian woman and that does suggest that whatever racism lives on within his psyche is certainly not strong enough to rule the day.

But it is to say that one of the core foundations of conservative thought is rooted in a concept that is racist to the core. To suggest that we live in an equal society, where everyone has equal opportunity from the time they are born, can ONLY mean that the racial minorities which continue to live in poverty are stupid, lazy, and incapable of bettering themselves. And make no mistake, this is what conservatives are saying when they say we live in a "merit based society" and it's one of the central reasons why long ago I shed my conservative roots. Sometimes, you just gotta call bullshit.

Of course, the very idea that I am proposing is so controversial that I would be ridiculed as a left wing radical for even writing it and who knows, maybe I am a left wing radical. What I do know is that you can't neutrally present a concept like the "merit based society" to explain away poverty without stepping on a racial landmine. Yet, in America's "race debates", you very rarely see anyone make this argument.

As a last note, and tangentially related, is the way that conservatives use the word "homosexual" instead of "gay". My associate did that yesterday and I think a little part of me died. Just so we all know, it's "gay" not "homosexual". We are not Victorian era scientists who see being gay as a sexual disease or disorder, ergo, we don't need to represent their language choices to our gay brothers and sisters.

Iran Thoughts

2009-06-16T09:54:00.004-05:00

As is usually the case, it's kind of difficult to really tell what is happening on the ground in Tehran and around the country. What we do know is limited due to our own ignorance about Iranian politics and structure, limited foreign news media, and the opaqueness of the Iranian ruling power.

That being said, the facts on the ground seem clear: There was an election for the presidency that was a total sham. We know it was a sham because the attempt to defraud the Iranian public wasn't particularly subtle or well thought out (exactly matching voting patterns across the country, the loser losing his own home district, etc) to the point that one has to wonder if the ruling religious dictatorship was utterly suprised by the result. They shouldn't have been. There was limited polling data indicating that the "moderate" Mousavi was a sure winner as well as an estimated 8 million new voters, most of whom were Mousavi-ites.

But this is really getting into the weeds as far as I'm concerned because I'm simply not expert enough to authoritatively comment on Iranian politics. If you're interested in that sort of thing, the Washington Note is doing banner work in reporting what's going on. Or the Huffington Post, which is going beyond the pale in its efforts to get accurate on the ground information.

What I want to talk about is the impact on US foriegn policy. First, a bit of a primer on Iran's government. Then how this event impacts our interests and approach.

Iran, like a lot of virtual dictatorships, uses the guise of "democracy" as a way to placate its population. People feel good about voting, feel like they have a role in the development of their country, and generally don't riot in the streets as long as their voice gets heard. This is an important point in Iran in particular as the last time the students took to the streets it ended with a new, anti-West, radically Muslim regime. So I would expect the Ayatollah to have a bit of indigestion at seeing a new generation of students marching in the streets.

At any rate, Iran is functionally ruled by the Ayatollah and his twelve wise men (and his 86 member Assembly of Experts, but who's counting). In a word, dictatorship. This matters because no matter the final outcome of the current "green revolution", the US will still be dealing with a radicalized, anti-Western government that would only marginally moderate its tone internationally with Mousavi as its president. So, Mousavi wins, no more speeches at the UN about the how the Holocaust never happened.

From the perspective of US interests, Iran only matters in two, perhaps three, issues. The first is nuclear policy. Since George Bush's famous "Axis of Evil" speech, Iran has been in the forefront of US national consciousness. This is mostly because of their rather clandestine nuclear program. The Bush policy on Iran was one of indirect threats and diplomatic ignorance or shunning (as in, just ignore the problem, not stupidity). Obama has taken a more direct approach, suggesting high level talks, the establishment of diplomatic relations, and perhaps even the removal from the State Department's Terrorist list. (While he may not have directly said that, eventual removal from the List would be the logical result of what Obama has proposed). All of this was predicated on Ahmadinejad winning reelection.

Now that there is greater uncertainty, US foreign policy makers are in abuzz about what this all means for the US negotiating tactic vis-a-vis the nuclear program. This article in Time makes the argument that Iran Czar Dennis Ross and others actually hope that Ahmadinejad remains president because it's easier to negotiate with a hardliner that a reformer. I know, it seems counterintuitive. And, well, it is. But their argument is that if negotiations fail, which they probably will since the Ayatollah is calling the shots at the end of the day, it's easier to levy foreign policy "sticks" against a hardliner than a reformer. Essentially, a "reformer" presents a PR problem for Western diplomats while the continued presence of a hardliner clears the path for aggressive sanctions.

While I understand this argument, I find it to be a fairly bad one. On the one hand, a "moderate" Iranian president is fairly far outside of our understanding of what the word "moderate" means. There will be no rapproachment with the west if Mousavi is the ultimate victor. Nor will there likely be an end to the nuclear program. Iranian moderation occurs in inches, not miles and to expect otherwise is to invite folly.

But there is an advantage to having a more moderate Iranian president. At the moment, the US has basically no leverage over Iran. The much talked about sanctions have no support from Russia and others. Sanctions regimes are like leaky dams; first a leak, then a flood. For all the hard work that Dennis Ross and his crew have put in, there is essentially no chance that an effective, enforceable sanctions regime gets enacted.

Further, as much as Obama would like to engage in diplomatic rapproachment, there's very little chance that that happens with Ahmadinejad for the very reason I mentioned above: he's a Holocaust denier and if anything is ananthema in US politics, it's that. For all Obama's talk during the election, Hillary Clinton is calling the shots on this one and she's not about to jeopardize Obama's political standing by allowing him to buddy up with Israeli Public Enemy Number 1.

So I fail to see how Ahmadinejad winning would be a good thing for US foreign policy unless you're a radical neocon who actually wants to invade another country.

On the other hand, a Mousavi win would enable some level of diplomatic engagement and could, perhaps, open Iran up to US oil investment, our number 2 strategic interest. Again, I don't propose that this could or would happen overnight. These sorts of things take time. But the one policy area that the Iranian president does have significant influence over is economic policy and I could see a world in which Mousavi argues for opening up to the West as a means to improving a rather dismal domestic economy. I have no real evidence to back up this claim but, on balance, it's an awful lot more likely with Mousavi than Ahmadinejad, no?

This is also the type of policy that I believe the US would jump at. Obviously, from our perspective, business is first and foremost at all times. But even beyond that, the upper echelons of Clinton's State Department are staffed with Clinton era loyalists - that is - those who believe that engagement with China had a moderating effect on the country and helped to bring it into the community of nations. While that may be in some dispute (China hasn't moderated much and it frustrates our efforts to promote freedom, human rights, and democracy across the globe), there is certainly a belief that China is no longer our enemy because of its huge vested interest in our economic well being. (Of course, the Chinese are savvy realists and know that their huge investment in our economy has given them more leverage over us than it has given us over them, but that's another story altogether.)

Now, faced with an opportunity to replicate engagement in Iran, it seems to me that the US foreign policy establishment would (or should) prefer Mousavi to Ahmadinejad simply because we know that engagement yeilds more positive results than containment (see Iraq, Hussein, etc). Or, to put it more succinctly, after the first Gulf War, the entire world backed the idea of sanctioning Saddam Hussein's Iraq and yet, he repeatedly defied the UN levied regime, oppressed his own people, and created a greater PR disaster for the West by promoting images of poor Iraqis suffering because of the sanctions. If that sanctions regime failed so spectacularly when it had global support, then why is it rational to suggest a new regime leveled against Iran with much more uneven support would work?

In the end, I believe that Obama and Clinton are as on top of these issues as one can be. As responsible leaders, they've withheld all but the most innocuous statements so as to limit the regime's ability to accuse them (or every dictator's favorite bogeyman, the CIA) of playing a role in the protests. And as responsible adults, they seem to be waiting this out much like world leaders waited out the sham election of George Bush in 2000. At the end of the day, there is very little the US can do at the moment aside from monitor the situation and plan out the various scenarios that could come to fore.

As foreign policy practitioners, Obama and Clinton undoubtedly see both sides of the coin: If Ahmadinejad wins, they can roll with their targeted sanctions strategy. If Mousavi wins, they can roll with their engagement/rapproachment strategy. In fact, the only risk of screwing this up is by doing what John McCain suggests and that's acting too quickly with less than clear measures (he always was a rash, old chap, wasn't he). At the end of the day, though, I think, given the choice, it's much, much more rational to prefer a moderate than a hardline, Holocaust denying radical.

(The third US interest in Iran, which is much less attainable, is Iranian support for terrorism. I don't include this because the US has shown, repeatedly, that this is only a marginal interest. Our longstanding friendship with Saudi Arabia is the best example. The Kingdom is the world's biggest state sponsor of terror, yet we continually and convienantly ignore that fact because they got lots of black gold. The same could be true of Iran, especially if oil becomes scarce and/or prices continue to rise.)

Psycho-Physiological?

2009-06-06T10:09:00.007-05:00

I've always suffered from headaches. From the time I was a wee lad to now, headaches have been an ever constant companion on the road of life. Over time, I have managed their appearances with aspirin, tylenol, advil, excedrin, excedrin migraine, dolex, dolex strong, and most recently, for the really horrid migraines that are so debilitating that I lose an entire day lying down in a dark place if un-medicated, Imigran (which is a totally amazing medicine).

As I have had these experiences, I have done some research over the years to get at the root of why I suffer from periodic (weekly) headaches or migraines (monthly). The short answer is, there is no answer. Oh, the doctors got some theories, few of them sufficiently comprehensive, but for the most part, we just don't have a really good explanation for why someone wakes up with a migraine or a headache.

Several factors have been compounding over the past several years. First, in my mid-to-late 20s, the headaches became more severe and the medicine less effective. This marked the appearance of occasional migraines as well as my transition to excedrin migraine. And second, in the last 2-3 years, I have developed what can only be described is a hyper-sensitivity to alcohol. This is very odd. In London, I drank like a fish, consuming my weight in beer on a bi-weekly schedule. I, of course, had hangovers, but they were all very manageable with late night kabobs and water.

Now, I am finding it very difficult to have even a few drinks without waking up to a really horrid hangover. Last night is a good case in point. As part of an ongoing self test, I drank two beers (Aguila in a can) over a course of four hours. The second beer accompanied half a pizza. That's 24 oz of beer in 4 hours with food. I never felt a buzz. This morning I woke with a mild headache and nausea. After eating a banana, a dolex, a glass of water, and a glass of orange juice, I'm feeling much better. But the question lingers: How could I possibly have a hangover from 24 oz of beer?

Hangover literature is not particularly helpful. Most of it includes "remedies" more suited for storybooks than reality. Even the scientific lit has very little to offer that one would term "solid". This is perhaps because alcohol is poison and human phisiology reacts to poisons differently and thus studies are complicated by poorly understood biological variation. It could also be that much of the science into the hangover is driven by pharmaceutical companies looking for a magic pill that prevents hangovers. I don't really know. But what is clear is that there is very little hard data on why hangovers persist in some people and not in others. I won't speak to that point as it is rather imprecise. Instead, I will speak to the one factor that stands out in the literature that might just be relevant.

When I was a lad of eight or nine, I had the misfortune of being placed into a 3rd grade class with a horrible witch of a teacher named Ms. Manners (no joke there - that was her real name). My father, as a naval officer, had been transferred to Newport, Rhode Island for a year, which meant I had to integrate into a new school, make new friends, etc. The social part wasn't problematic. I quickly made friends with another lad on my block as well as with a really obese kid in school (I've always loved fat people). But the classroom was different.

In Virginia Beach they taught cursive writing in the 3rd grade (don't get me started on how useless cursive is). In Rhode Island, they taught it in the 2nd grade. So when Ms. Manners discovered that I knew nothing of cursive (and thankfully, still no nothing), she immediately tagged me idiot and began to treat me like yesterday's garbage. This had a profound effect on me. Every day, I was walking into a hostile work environment and before long, I became ill. That entire school year, the only year I spent in Rhode Island, I was sick. It was the only year of my life that I was consistently sick and missed considerable time. And it wasn't because that fresh wintery air was germ filled either. It was simply a psychological reaction to a hostile environment. Fortunately, my mother is a teacher and she sorted me out with the cursive and then we moved on to Idaho and Japan, but that's a whole 'nuther story.

I relate this narrative because I believe that more than any other factor, my physical well being is quite closely related to my psychological well being. Anyone who reads this blog or knows me well knows that I'm not particularly happy in Colombia. In fact, I feel limited and out of options, so to speak and that has had a huge effect on me. While this stagnant period is coming to a close in less than 2 months, I do wonder if my inability to metabolize alcohol is related to my underlying dissatisfaction with my current state of being.

Over the past months, I have run basically ever self test possible. I have compared: domestic beer versus foreign beer, beer in a bottle vs in a can vs on tap, rum vs vodka vs wine, and every combination therein. The results have been universally consistent with only two exceptions. On my birthday, we had a part in the country where we played Tejo and gorged ourselves on steaks and all the goodies that go with that. I drank a sizeable amount of beer over the course of the day and don't remember any hangover the next morning. Similarly, 2 weeks ago we had the grandparents and some others over for lunch on a Sunday. I cooked a Lomo Al Trapo with mashed potato stuffed tomatoes on the side. While I didn't drink a great deal, I did drink beer and no hangover the next day. These two events support my psychological theory. Obviously, playing Tejo in the sun and eating gorgeous amounts of meat is a high point. At the same time, I love to cook and offer delicious food to guests.

In sum, my recent alcohol consumption has resulted in a typical hangover symptoms, no matter the type or amount of alcohol consumed. Further, these hangovers have had a duration and intensity greater than previous hangovers. Shortly, I shall find myself in different circumstances which will necessitate more tests. If the symptoms continue, then the problem must be considered physiological. If not, then the psychological explanation has salience.

Update: In addition to the comment below, my mother sent me this link. She is gluten intolerant although not full blown Celiac's apparently (I'm going to pretend like I know the difference). And to be fair, I can't remember the last time I drank vodka but the last time I drank rum it was a 12 hour session, which could explain the extended hangover (and there was some scotch on the tail end). At any rate, for the next 30 days, I'm on a gluten free diet which will hopefully provide some answers one way or another.

Almost 5 months in

2009-06-03T21:03:00.008-05:00

You know, I dig Obama. Pretty much everyone that knows me knows that I dig Obama. He was the right choice then and he's the right choice now and I don't expect that to change. In the coming months we're going to get our first Latina Supreme Court justice and we might, if Congress gets it's ass in gear, we might just get a national health insurance plan that would be much like Medicare but for everyone not just the crinkly and wrinkly.

These are good things. Neither of these things would have a snowball's chance in hell of passing in any other circumstance. GOPers don't like non-whites that much (if their leadership is to be believed) and they sure as hell don't put much stock in government doing anything right.

Of course, only the GOP could so cleverly make the self fullfilling prophecy of "government is shit, private better" come true by coming to power and then spending the next 8 years guaranteeing that government is shit by appointing unqualified partisan hacks into positions of power and sending marching orders to all agencies that basically say "go eff yourself" if you're involved in anything related to oversight, regulation, or, well, really anything that has anything to do with the word "governance". Not to mention slashing the budget of every investigative and enforcement office in every agency and privatizing as much as possible, including large portions of the US military. But I digress...

I still like Obama. I like that he's over there, chatting up world leaders, leaders that actually appear to look him in the eye and think, "Hey, I better pay attention, this guy ain't no fool like the last one". He's done wonders for our reputation abroad (I can only judge from personal experience and the shittified AP) and at home, where people from all walks of life are actually starting to think that the American dream is true, not just something for rich, white, connected, sons-of-bitches. No offense to all those rich, white, connected, non-sons-of-bitches. I found it particularly telling that even hackolas like Ruben Navarrette, who, from what I can tell, likens himself the conservative mouthpiece of latinos everywhere, and clearly makes a definite effort to be as nobbish as possible with virtually everything he writes, actually wrote an editorial style article for CNN praising Obama's choice of Sotomayer, expressing how proud he was of that moment, and even going so far as to tell his 5-year old that it was a groundbreaking day in America.

Obama did that. He did that simply by having the guts to stand up and say, what the shit, we've got tons of qualified people in this country that didn't go to Country-club U and rub assholes with the Dick Cheney's and George Bush's of the world. Clinton didn't do it. Obviously Bush didn't do it. Instead, he offered up the least qualified person to ever be nominated for the Supreme Court which is really beyond the pale since, you know, we already have that deaf mute Clarence Thomas who seems to just click "copy all" and "paste" when Scalia sends him his decision. Again, I digress.

Anyway, we now seem to have a government that functions (as in, doing oversight, not continuing to privitize everything down to the last toilet bowl washer, actually trying to do something to fix the financial crisis, health care, etc). We have a government that more accurately reflects America as it is. Our government is not just some frat boy club of chubblys who get the shits out of ill-advised, poorly planned foreign adventures or botched natural disaster response. The gubnent sure as hell ain't perfect, but it's more perfect when you actually try to make it work. So we can all be thankful for that.

BUT...

(You knew there was a "but" right?)

But, Obama hasn't scored like LeBron in the 4th quarter of Game 5. And I'm getting pretty pissed off about it because as this blogger more or less said, we got all kinds of shitstorms circling our globe and there's one issue that is as simple as Sopa de Tortilla, an issue that Obama is sitting out of, an issue that is THE defining civil rights issue of our time.

And that's Gay Rights.

Did you know that in most of the US, not to mention the world, you can be fired for just being gay? How shit ass insane is that? I practically soiled my daintees when I saw Milk because as much as shit changes, it stays the same. By the way, the makers really missed out on a powerful opportunity at the end of that movie. I mean, wouldn't it have been pretty damn impactful to have put up something like, "Even today, 20 years later, gays and lesbians can be fired for just being who they are...blah, blah, blah." I mean, bloody hell, the reason I wrote "blah, blah, blah" is because I literally am not educated enough about this issue to write a full sentence about it!

Anyway, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act or ENDA, as it is fondly known as by the few policy wonks that engage in regular gay friendly wonkery, is languishing on the floor of the Congress, where it has sat for what, 15 years? I mean, what the shit is that? A very simple law that says you can't fire someone because of their race, sex, gender, religion and some other shit that ain't controversial AT ALL. Is it just institutional laziness? Is that why they haven't gotten up off their lobbyist fed asses and gotten that shit passed? I know, I know, there's this whole issue of adding in "transgendered" as well. Well slap my ass and call me bitch, we shouldn't be discriminating against transgendered people either because we shouldn't be discriminating against ANYONE. That's, you know, FUNDAMENTALLY EVIL, and the kind of shit that we're supposed to be getting over.

If ENDA wasn't bad enough, the military continues to kick openly gays and lesbians out just for the hell of it. Now, maybe, and this is the quite literally the biggest damn "maybe" in the history of all maybes everywhere and in every language, but maybe in times of peace you could make an argument for a "go slow" approach to changing Don't Ask, Don't Tell. But bloody hell, we're in 2 damn wars and we're kicking out openly gay men who speak Arabic and are experts in the Middle East! There is no logic or reason to that and makes me wonder if Robert Gates sits around saying, "we're just a bunch of sticky pricks that can't have those queers running around us because we don't know what we'd do!"

And let's not even get into Gay Marraige or we'll be here all night. But I just gotta ask all the fundamentalist, sick bastard, wacko, wanna be party of Reagan, really be party of Falwell asshats out there: Given that the world is falling apart about us, with animal flus to one side, terrorism and piracy to the other, and the giant bloody elephant in the room that is Global warming about to trample the entire shebang, do we really, I mean really, do we really need to be going to the mat over this issue? Nobody's proposing that you marry gays and lesbians in your hovels of God where you do crazy shit like pretend to speak in tongues and other creepy scary shit that I don't even want to know about. Are you really so hyper-sensitive that you think that the mere presence of married gays and lesbians is going to undercut the foundation of your ever so "sacred and sanct holy matrimony" as described in your book of the dead which we all call the Bible? Because if you are, then you gotta a whole little bit of faith and you should be ashamed of yourself.

This topic reminds me of the sheer stupidity of the radically conservative Christian movement and its spokesman and de facto leader James Dobson, Dr in what, who the hell knows. The stupid bastard has said on various occassions that "the gays" are why the Roman empire collapsed which has just about got to be the biggest misreading of history of all time. It's such a stupid proposition that it should be automatic disqualification from putrifying our public airwaves ever again. I mean, think about it. If you were to write something like that in a History 101 class, you would not only fail, you would become an instant assclown for the rest of your college career. Because only someone who is fundamentally deficient in the brains department could suggest something as idiotic.

Guess Dobson ain't got a PhD in History. But that's how bad the arguments from the Religo-Fascists have to be because they can't really come out and say, "we just hate all them faggots and their kissing and hand holding," and be considered good Christian folk, now can they?

Well, I'm well good and off course now, aren't I.

Obama. The man can do this. He can tell the military: finish this, now. With a short, simple executive order, he can stop the military from kicking out people we desperately need. And with the strength of his voice, his rhetoric, and his near universal respect across the parts of America that really matter (you know, the relatively rational, sane human beings that don't believe the utter horse shit that spews forth from the Triumverate of Unholy Evil that is Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Bill O' I sexually harassed my assistant Reilly).

My point is, Obama is the most powerful orator in my lifetime. He has changed attitudes and ideas simply for being. He can push us forward on the most salient and important civil right and human rights issue of our time. I know he's got a rather full plate right now, but he can do this. It just takes a little courage. So please, White House overlords, please Obama, get on it. If they can discriminate against "the gays" then they can discriminate against us all. And I don't want to live in a country like that. Nor do I want my children, who will be called "Latinos", to grow up in a country that is one step away from deciding that there are certain inalienable rights that we can just take away when we good and damn feel like it.

ENDA, the end of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, and Gay Marraige now. American values demand it.

Good article in the post

2009-05-21T19:36:00.002-05:00

The definitive answer to the conservative nonsense about the Flat (Fair) Tax.

Short version: The poor pay more for basically everything, ergo, they'll pay more on a national sales tax and continue to be poor.

And the decision is...

2009-05-15T13:31:00.002-05:00

...Moving to the US. It became really simple and easy when they didn't offer me the job. But I think I would have turned it down anyway. Now I need to earn some money between now and August. A PhD salary is not liveable by itself.

(Note: If you sent me email and have not seen a reply, check your junk mail.)

Where we stand

2009-05-13T11:17:00.003-05:00

My life is on the brink of upheaval. Over the past several weeks, after an uninterrupted string of rejection, I was accepted at a PhD program and passed to the final round with an NGO for a job here in Bogota. While I have not yet received an answer from the NGO, having both opportunities before me represents a potentially serious difficulty. First the background.

After getting rejected from three PhD programs in Political Science I contacted a former mentor in search of some basic advice. At this point, every single job application I had submitted had either been ignored or responded with rejection and I was becoming fairly despondent about my short term future. This mentor immediately suggested that I look to join a PhD program in Public (Political) Communication. Surprisingly, that sounded really good to me. So I got in touch with the relevant people (most of whom I know fairly well) and began the process.

Prior to being accepted and offered a fellowship, I was contacted by a British NGO that is looking to begin operations in Colombia. They have nothing on the ground and this job is to be their Colombia Director, legal representative, etc. I had applied for this job some time back and having not heard back, had assumed that I would never hear. So I was fairly surprised but agreed to a phone interview. The interview went very well but I finished it concluding that I really don't have the experience necessary for the job and that they would realize that and move on to other candidates. I was fairly surprised when they moved me into the second round. The second round consisted of a test and an interview with the higher ups. Still not having heard from the university, I agreed to continue in the process, however, prior to the exam, I was informed by the university that I had been accepted with a tuition waiver and a generous fellowship. This was good news.

At this point, I concluded that while I preferred the university option (I have been delaying the PhD and do want to return to the US), that I would follow through with the 2nd round. On the one hand, I had made a commitment to the organization, while on the other, I know my wife isn't entirely ready to leave Colombia and this would give us some extra time were I to be offered the job.

The test was fairly challenging but I felt like I did a pretty good job on it. It also seemed even more clear that I am lacking in the necessary experience for the position. Most of my answers were more instinctual than experiential and while I do believe I have good instincts, I have to wonder if a large, important NGO would empower someone with meager experience. It's a huge responsibility and a huge investment on their part and I assumed that they would want to go with someone who they could more reliably trust.

The second interview was on Monday. It also went well. Almost too well because it left me with the feeling that they are going to offer me the job. Obviously they have other candidates to interview (or have already interviewed) and there's no telling how I stand in the order of things. But I finished that interview with the definite impression that their choice is going to come down to the following factor: Selecting someone who knows Colombia but doesn't have all the experience necessary for the job or selecting someone who is well qualified for the job but doesn't know Colombia.

Now I find myself in the situation of needing to make a decision about what is best for me and my wife. It may be the case that they offer the job to someone else, but as the decision is rather important, I can't sit on my arse and not think about how I would choose if given the option. Over the last week or so I have spent an enormous amount of time thinking about this all. The following are the various angles:

A week ago, I was fully convinced that I was going to accept the PhD option and if I am honest with myself, that is the option I want the most. I feel like going back to grad school will grant me the opportunity to conduct the research and writing I want to conduct and with the level of support offered in this university (in terms of academic support mainly), I know that I will be successful. Further, I have spent three mostly excellent years in Colombia but I want to leave. There are a variety of reasons for this but I think the strongest is that I've been living outside of my country for almost 5 years and I miss it.

The advantages of accepting the job (if offered) are that it would be huge for my resume. This organization is the leader in its field, it's well known, and director level leadership on my resume would be a huge jump that would nicely set me up for things in the future (albeit those might be things I don't particularly want). It also pays very well and given my wife's salary, most of that money would go straight into our savings. Financially speaking, accepting the job is the only viable option.

The disadvantages of accepting the job are that I don't know if I can perform to the expectations of the organization, it would mean staying in Colombia one more year (and whatever risk that carries for my wife's residence visa to the US - that's a whole crapshoot that I barely understand and don't really know how to manage), and it would delay my target professional development one more year.

There are residual factors as well. We do want to start a family at some point in the nearish future and I can't see how that's possible here in Colombia. My wife works too many hours and has too much stress to take a step back and have a baby. On the flip side, entering a PhD program means less income for me and my wife would need time to find a job in the US and integrate herself into a new country and culture before she would be comfortable starting a family. No easy answers there.

So, this is where I stand. This may all become irrelevant within the next 24-48 hours (when they make their decision) and I may look back on these 2 weeks of uncertainty and laugh. Or, on the other hand, I might quite literally have to make the most difficult choice I've ever had to make related to my professional and family life.

My wife, in the ultimate cop out of love, has stated that she wants me to make the decision because she knows that I have sacrificed over the last several years so that we could be in Colombia. She doesn't want me to sacrifice any more at her wish. While loving, this is not particularly helpful.

At the moment, I have to question if I could turn down the money. The PhD can be delayed 6 months or a year without trouble (it appears). And in the current economy, earning a nice salary and saving the majority of it looks like the most logical step. But from an emotional point of view I'm pining away at the opportunity to become reaquianted with my country and to get back into academia. Of course, I can't ignore the irony of all of this. Temptation is the way of the world and I'm now being tempted with the idea of money and responsibility over a rather less financially rewarding option. Or, to put it in more plain terms, my choice comes down to: money or happiness.

Addendum: I have come up with an appropriate analogy to describe how I feel about this job possibility. I am a fairly good cook. And I really like cooking. But if someone wanted me to be the head chef in their new restaurant, I would feel completely overwhelmed by the possibility because it's so far outside of my experience range. Taking the job would mean a steep learning curve on various things that most candidates wouldn't have to learn. Could I do it? Definitely. But there is something to be said about going through the proper steps.

Movie Reviews

2009-04-26T10:43:00.003-05:00

I had the great misfortune of watching 10,000 BC the other day. Let me just suggest that I am now dumber for having watched such a travesty. It's almost like the writer/director got drunk with Mel Gibson one day and then engaged in a little Hollywood style wagering about who could make the worst and most historically inaccurate movie about "civilizations" long lost. Mel went the Central American route, Roland Emmerich went the "location unknown but close enough to walk to an Egyptian civilization that didn't exist" route.

Ah, the travesty. I must say I was totally startled when, after clearly establishing that the story was set in 10,000 BC (the title kind of gave it away, just a little), that there was a sudden appearence of men on horseback (domestication of horses, 4,000 BC) with swords and iron (3500 BC) and things of that nature. Alas, our poor primitive english speaking natives had nothing but spears and gaunt faces with which to fight back. So the race begins. Our hero, who manages to express himself with at least two distinct accents throughout the film, races after these civilized enslaving barbarians only to find that they have giant ass boats (1100 BC) that take them to Egypt (3150 BC) where they are using slaves and wooly mammoths to build the pyramids (3000 BC). Oh, did I mention that on the way they ran into something that looked very much like a velociraptor (85-80 milllion BC)?

I'll stop there. It's apparantly blasé to point out the historical inaccuracies of this film. The producers did issue a blanket cover of "it's not supposed to be historically accurate" so that apparently gets them out of the "god this movie is crap" jail. It doesn't cover up the fact the story is laughably bad, the acting is a joke, and the plot twists are more arduous and droll than interesting. Here's a little suggestion to any future director. When casting a role, don't hire one of the guys that took Ferris Bueller's porsche for a joy ride to play a major part. Also, if your lead actor can't decide on an accent, just tell him to drop all attempts at any accent. Oh, and if you have $75 million to burn, I'm always here.

My Score: 0 out of 50 million stars

Rotten Tomatos: 9%

American Gangster

Apparently, this movie is based on a true story. I had no idea until the very end. That being said Ridley Scott just didn't do a great job with this one. I think it's because he hired two famous and great actors and felt he had to give them equal screen time. The movie should have struck a balance like Catch Me If You Can because it had aspersions of being that type of movie. Unfortunately, the cops' personal life (Russell Crowe) detracts from the plot, is rather dull, and extends the movie into unpleasant length (157 minutes).

Denzel, of course, turns in his usual tour de force, but then, Denzel almost never has a bad performance. I just wish there had been more Denzel and less Crowe. That being said, it's a violent gangster movie that relates a truish tale about heroin and New York City from the late 60s to early 70s. If you're into that sort of thing, you'll probably like it. Just make sure you have a good 2.5 hours to kill.

My grade: 7 of 10

Rotten Tomatoes: 79%

Did IQs suddenly drop while I was away?

2009-04-26T10:30:00.002-05:00

Texas can secede? Create four new states and alter the balance of power in the Senate?

Lordy, I had no idea that our execution happy redneck cousins had such power. Too bad for us it's not true. I'd almost be happy if Texas no longer was a part of the Union. Then maybe Puerto Rico could get in and we wouldn't have to be an odd number of states union.

Key graph:

"Although the provisions of the Texas Annexation document allowing for the creation of four additional states are popularly regarded as a unique curiosity today, they were largely superfluous. Article IV, Section 3 of the US Constitution already specifically provided for the formation of new states through the junction or division of existing states:

New states may be admitted by the Congress into this union; but no new states shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state; nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without consent of the legislature of the states concerned as well as of the Congress.

Another Texas-related legend holds that the Texans negotiated an annexation treaty which reserved to them the right to secede from the Union without the consent of the US Congress, but the terms of Texas’ annexation contain no such provision." (Italics mine)

Anyway, while we're on the subject of Texan inspired stupidity, here's a lovely little thought one would expect from a toddler, not a Representative to the Congress (unless he's a Texan Republican and then all bets are off since stupidity is the price of admission).

Obama

2009-04-03T08:40:00.000-05:00

This is what happens when adults occupy the Oval Office. The key graphs:

"China tends to have a problem endorsing the documents of organizations like the OECD that they're not a party to," the senior administration official said.

But Mr. Obama, according to this account, stepped between the two men, urging them to try to find consensus, and giving them a "pep talk" about the importance of working together.
The senior adminstration official said that Mr. Obama pulled Mr. Sarkozy aside, took him to a corner, "and discussed possible alternatives," the senior official said.

Once they arrived at one, President Obama "sent a message to the Chinese" that a counter-offer was on the table. The Chinese spent some time considering the offer. But they took a few minutes.

So Mr. Obama, with the assistance of translators, suggested that he and Mr. Hu have a conversation as well. They, too went to the corner to talk. After a few minutes, Mr. Obama called upon Mr. Sarkozy to join them.

"Translators and sherpas in tow, they reached an agreement," the official said. "There was a multiple shaking of hands."

The coming resurgence of guerrilla warfare in Colombia's cities.

2009-03-17T12:17:00.000-05:00

Since it's inception, the Uribe administration has focused the military strategy against the FARC in one direction: pushing the guerrilla group out of major population centers and into isolated, hard to control jungle areas. This strategy has proven highly effective. Conventional wisdom suggests that the reasons Uribe's plan has worked is that military excellence, focus, and training can be highly effective at pushing insurgents outside of any particular zone. This is essentially the "clear and hold" strategy undertaken by the US military in Iraq.

The problem, obviously, with this type of strategy is that territory is largely irrelevant to insurgent forces, it's easy to hide and wait out the "clearing", and that the assumption that insurgents want to take on better trained and better equiped forces is faulty. So why has Uribe's strategy been effective? I suggest that the FARC essentially went along with Uribe's game, to its detriment.

Manuel Marulanda, the founder of the FARC, was always more comfortable in the jungle. It was where the FARC began, where it lived and grew, and ultimately why it adopted the label "people's army". Fortunately for the millions who live in Colombia's cities, Marulanda's reaction to the new offensive launched shortly after Uribe took the reins was to retreat into his comfort zone. Indeed, that had proven effective in the late 90s when the FARC used the provision of a Demilitarized Zone to reconstitute his army's strength (which is also the reason why the current administration ardently refuses to consider another DMZ as a precondition to peace talks).

This new turn proved disaster. The FARC became almost forgotton in the big cities. They were an afterthought, a failing movement relegated to the margins of visible Colombian society. Indeed, the public debate changed fundamentally over the course of five years. Security was replaced with concerns for the kidnapped. And the FARC lost the most important element of any guerrilla war: the war of public relations. The Uribe administration did its part, portraying the FARC as a human rights violating, terrorist group with no respect for human life and little agenda or philosophy on which to stand. This voice would have been stronger had Uribe cleaned up the military's human rights record, but as it, it turned vast sections of the country against the FARC. How could they stand for the people when they kidnapped both combatants and non-combatants and held them in perpetuity in jungle jails, often times chained about the neck.

Just six months ago, there was open discussion suggesting that the FARC may be nearing it's end. I was not so optimistic. Insurgencies don't just die out. They sputter and weaken and resurge and generally go through the pronounced throes of death that can last a generation.

Now, nearing the 1-year anniversary of Marulanda's death from natural causes, the FARC is resurging. The new head of the FARC, Alfonso Cano, is no Marulanda. He isn't wedded to the jungle and he seems to be slowly grasping the lessons from Iraq, Afghanistan, and other insurgencies. Attacking cities gets you noticed. Attacking cities gets you in the paper, in the public eye, and, if you believe in these sorts of things, gets the government to respond to your demands.

Since January 1 of this year, the FARC has launched terror attacks in Cali, Neiva (twice), Bogota, and Villavicencio. This is just the beginning. Over the next several months we shall see the FARC 2.0 and whether they continue targeting infrastructure and military (police) assets or they revert to some of the more daring attacks on the country's wealthy elite, foreigners, and diplomats remains to be seen. I don't expect Bogota, in particular, to revert to a war zone. But I do suggest that violence is coming back, the security which we have enjoyed is temporary, and that the FARC are far from finished.

An unusual morning

2009-02-19T11:09:00.002-05:00

I went to bed with a splitting headache last night which eventually converted itself into a full blown migraine as I found out at 3:30 AM. I tried to fend it off with just water (I'm generally averse to taking meds if I can avoid it), but the pain became increasingly severe until I finally took the new meds that I got prescribed just a couple weeks ago. I´m supposed to take the meds at the onset of the migraine but I was stubborn. Fortunately, the new meds work wonders and I now feel nothing but a rather dull emptiness where previously there was pain. I wouldn't say I'm 100% but I definitely am not in pain and that is good enough for the moment.

Anyway, when I finally got up for good and went off to work, I discovered that there was a protest blocking the Transmilenio which meant there were no buses. I waited awhile and was on the point of giving up and "working from home" when finally an onslaught of buses invaded the station. The protest seemed to have finished.

When I got to the Candelaria I started off toward the office as normal. There was nothing particularly different about the walk until, when I was relatively close, I came up behind a young lady that was walking quite awkwardly. I took note of it and then wondered, almost immediately, if she was actually a man. I gave her a sideways glance when I passed her and really, I can't be sure if she was male or shemale. With plastic surgery and makeup and only giving her a glance, it could have gone either way. Perhaps the only way to answer the question would be to give her the Crocodile Dundee.

Finally arriving at the office I found that, yet again, my boss was not present, and the translation she had asked me to do was likewise nowhere to be found. It's now 11:15 and neither the boss nor the translation has shown up. So, I ask, why, exactly, did I bother showing up for work today?

Mini-Restaurant Guide

2009-02-18T08:29:00.003-05:00

While this is by no means comprehensive, I decided to present a mini-restaurant guide for some of Bogota's finer restaurants. Keep in mind, the following list is not the Poor Man's Guide to Eating Out in Bogota. Good food costs money and Bogota isn't cheap. If you want the under $5,000 peso guide, look elsewhere because I don't like eating crap and the bottom line is that any meal you buy in Bogota that costs under $5,000 pesos (or $2.50 US) is likely going to be suspect in quality and freshness and has a high probability of inducing gut wrenching illness. Now, the list:

Meat
Patagonia, Calle 117 #7-54 and Carrera 6 #10-01

The Patagonia is a traditional Argentinean grill. It’s a rustic, well apportioned joint with somewhat unusual décor and a very limited menu. Vegetarians need not apply.
This was the clear favorite for a good bit of time but of late the product hasn’t been as consistently good as expected. Still, the Bife de Chorizo is outstanding and when they’re on, it’s the best meat in Bogota. Don’t miss the grilled provolone starter. It’s to die for.

La Biferia, Zona G and Calle 79B #8-79

A bit more upscale but still an excellent product. Falls in the same price range as the Patagonia, which is to say, a bit expensive by Bogota standards, but not terribly so like Andres Carne de Res. The service is good, the décor rather classic, and one would feel most comfortable wearing semi-formal attire.

La Bonga del Sinu, Calle 116 #19-89, Parque 93

Meat eating should be casual and at the Bonga you don’t have to worry about putting on your blue suede shoes or any other such nonsense. Instead you get all your basic meat cuts, cooked to order, with a choice of sides that includes coconut rice. Plus, they offer an extensive list of fresh fruit juices and desserts which always look nice but which there is never any room for at the end of the meal.

El Humero, Avenida Prada #5-05, Chia

El Humero is very much like Andres Carne de Res except that it is smaller, cheaper, and not made out to resemble the set of Dusk Til Dawn. Legend has it that the owner used to be the head chef at Andres which probably explains some of the similarities. Recently relocated to a much bigger site, El Humero offers a variety of meat, chicken, pork, and everything in between. Be sure to order the Lomo al Chile (not the precise name, mind you), which is a weighty knuckle of beef stuffed with pickled jalapenos and grilled to order. While it might give you the hot diarrhea the next morning, some prices are worth paying. For a starter, try a traditional dish from Cali. The name escapes me, but it’s a deep fried plantain stuffed with cheese and bocadilla which is a type of sugar made from fruit. Probably better as a dessert.

The only unfortunate thing with El Humero is that it is in Chia.

Typical food

Sopas de la Mama y Postres de la Abuela, various locations

Sopas y Postres is the place to go for typical Colombian food in Bogota. There are those who would recommend other eateries, but with Sopas you get an expansive menu, that is reliantly consistent, of a good quality, and won’t eat a hole in your wallet. Sopas is the kind of joint that has something for everyone – soups, meat, fish, chicken, etc. Try the Fried Ice Cream for dessert and definitely order a giant fruit juice (Strawberry being my preferred selection).

Costal food

La Vitualla, 9th with 106 or so

La Vitualla is a nice little joint that offers coastal classics like Fried Red Snapper and Bluegill, Sancocho de Pescado (a lovely fish soup), and other mains along with coconut rice and white corn patties with suero (which is like sour cream). It’s relatively economical, the fish is always fresh, and the service reasonable for Colombia. Potential diners beware: Several stories have been floating around that the restaurant staff plays it fast and loose with the credit cards – like swiping it twice and delivering only one bill. It’s recommended to only use cash or, if using credit, to verify that you don’t get double charged.

El Rincon Barranquillero, 94 with 16 or so

In spite of its rather unfortunate location and being a second story restaurant, El Rincon Barranquillero provides authentic, costal food at a reasonable price with exceedingly high quality. It has a more expansive menu than La Vitualla, allowing diners to get a taste of coastal traditions not normally found in Bogota. I recommend the Cazuelo de Mariscos which comes at the right temperature (a rarity in my experience) and is overflowing with shrimp, prawns, fish, octopus, and who knows what else. I don’t normally eat one of my favorite animals, but for this dish, I make an exception.

Italian

Luna, Calle 82 #11, Zona Rosa

Bogota doesn’t have a wealth of good Italian food but Luna is the kind of place that would be memorable in most big cities. The service is to be desired, but the menu is full of traditional pasta favorites as well as more esoteric or Italian inspired cuisine. I had chicken in a mushroom sauce that was beyond good. Be sure to try the Fried Mozzarella. They make their own batter, the mozzarella is fresh, and the tomato sauce is certainly the best I have ever tasted.

Archie’s Pizza, Various locations

I mention Archie’s under the Italian category because I find their pizzas to be rather pedestrian. But their pasta dishes are extremely palatable and make a more economical alternative to a classy joint like Luna or others. The lasagna in particular is heartily apportioned and overflowing with melted mozzarella.

Chinese/Asian

China Club, Calle 82 #11-91, El Retiro Shopping Mall

Bogota is not a place to go in search of Chinese food. That being said, China Club is spot on. They offer a host of traditional appetizers accompanied with tangy sauces and the General Tso's Chicken is very good. Plus, the restaurant is very popular with Colombia's rich and famous and makes a good spot to do some people watching.

Wok, Various locations

Wok offers a pan asian variety with dishes from Japan, Korea, China, Thailand, Cambodia, and Vietnam. The quality is extremely high and the price reasonable. Since Colombian people generally don't have palates for spicy food, most dishes, even the ones that warn of being a bit spicy, are really not too spicy at all. Try the spring rolls with black pepper sauce for starters.

Mexican

El Techo, Calle 82 #11-91, El Retiro Shopping Mall

Mexican food too is catching on in Bogota with El Techo the expensive flagship of the movement. While it will dent your wallet, El Techo offers authentic mexican cuisine in a classy atmosphere that transports diners to a different place and time. Fresh made tortillas, slow cooked spicy beef, and uncountable tequila based cocktails ensure a fine dining experience. Be prepared to pay.

La Taqueria, Calle 82 #12-80 and Calle 116 with the 15

La Taqueria is a more economical mexican option and it offers extremely good fare. The Sopa de Tortilla is to die for and the enchiladas are as good as you'll get anywhere. Plus the price is much more reasonable and the atmosphere relaxed. La Taqueria is perfect for any occassion, be it business or pleasure, and offers a full bar service as well.

Pizza

1969, Various locations

Pizza in Colombia, I am sure, has come a long way. Still, it could be argued that it has a long way to go. The traditional pizza houses like Jeno’s, Pizza Pizza, and the American brands (Pizza Hut, Dominos) are serviceable but they certainly don’t leave a lasting impression and are likely to make your next trip to the toilet rather unpleasant.

1969, on the other hand, comes with a thick crust, well made pasta sauce, and real American style pepperoni. It’s a good pie, mostly up to US standards of what makes good pizza. The only drawbacks are that they don’t take credit and they only have Pepsi products.

Bakery

Pan Pa Ya, Various locations

This is a Bogota standard and should not be missed. Try the Caldo de papa for breakfast. It’s divine, an especially good hangover remedy. They also make very good bread and pastries, a decent pizza, and a very serviceable and economical Calzone.

Hamburger

La Bonga Express, Carrera 19 #118-57

This used to be a too good to be true hamburger joint. For about $18,000 ($9 US) one could get a double bacon cheeseburger with fries and a drink. The quality is far beyond that of El Corral, which seems to be the most popular hamburger option in Colombia, and came at a more economical price than the $23,000 peso Todoterreno. Unfortunately, La Bonga released a new menu in December which jacked up the price of this gloriously gluttonous hamburger to a less than reasonable $27,000 pesos. Now this chain aspires to compete with El Corral Gourmet and is priced accordingly. This is disappointing as the Bonga Express does not offer the same type of atmosphere as the El Corral Gourmet and is now increasingly hard to justify.

NBA Playoff Predictions: Back to the Future

2009-02-12T10:59:00.000-05:00

It’s All-Star break time and that means it’s time to make some predictions. I haven’t watched as much NBA as I would like this year but I’ve seen enough to know what’s up. The following is my final four:

LA Lakers, San Antonio Spurs, Cleveland Cavs, Boston Celtics.

Ok, so no surprises there. One could argue that Orlando will be in the mix but I don’t like their lack of experience and that Jameer Nelson is injured. I think they come up short again.

Now, onto the good stuff.

Why the Lakers won’t win the NBA Championship:

The Lakers are everybody’s favorite. They have the “best player” (not really, but they say it), they have the best record, and they have been virtually unstoppable. But at some level, the Lakers play an emotionally violent style of basketball that is not only aesthetically displeasing from time to time but also leads to a lack of emotional stability in times of crisis.

Last night is a good example. On the road, in Utah, and tired after a long road trip. These are the moments when potential NBA champions are tested. By all measures, the Lakers failed miserably. When the game started to get away from them in the 3rd quarter, their offense collapsed and Kobe started chucking up junk from everywhere to no avail. If Kobe’s on, maybe nobody notices. But he wasn’t on last night and this is not the first time that this team has resorted to the “chuck and duck” strategy when the going gets tough. As we saw in last year’s Finals, Kobe ain’t Jordan and when he tries to be his teammates lay around doing very little. This will hurt them again before it’s all said and done.

(Aside, I loved Okur’s little girly dance after he hit that big 3 pointer. I’m wondering if he was mocking Kobe’s attempt to steal Sam Cassell’s “Big Balls” dance or if Okur naturally dances like a little girl.)

The Lakers also have structural troubles. Their best offensive point guard (Jordan Farmer, who led the 3rd quarter comeback) is a disaster on the defensive end, like most of the 2nd unit. Farmer’s not good enough to put in the starting rotation and Derek Fisher, point guard by default, isn’t really a point guard (more a small shooting guard). Case in point: Fisher averages less than 4 assists a game. This will hurt them before it’s all said and done.

Further, the Pau Gasol addition isn’t going to put them over the top. Gasol is what he is – a skinny, tall guy, with great basketball IQ, a penchant for Soccer style whining, and a feathery touch. That all makes the Lakers better. But there’s no world in which Gasol strikes fear in the Spurs, Celtics, Cavs, or Magic. And when push comes to shove, Gasol gets frozen out of the offense more times than not because Kobe knows this. He knows that Gasol ain’t Shak. He can’t enforce his will on a game, they can’t ride him in the post when they need easy buckets to stop another team’s run, and against big, strong guys, he’s virtually useless in the post. Kobe is smart enough to know this.

Really though, all things being even, the Lakers have been the best team this year. So why won’t the best team so far win the championship? Two reasons: Schedule and Fatigue. Seventeen of their thirty remaining games are on the road. Seventeen of the remaining thirty are against teams with a winning record. And they’ve got a 7 game road trip at the end of March that will be brutal.

This shouldn’t matter, right? Good, professional teams are accustomed to tough schedules. Champions win, right? Maybe in any other year yes. But let’s not forget that the Lakers played a brutal schedule last season, going all the way to the Finals, and then their two key pieces, Gasol and Kobe, went on to play in the Olympics before having about a two month break and starting this NBA season. That’s 111 intense games for two of their most important players. The simple fact is, these guys are tired and are only going to get increasingly tired as the season drags on. That’s why Odom’s insertion into the starting lineup has been so good for them. He’s the only good player they have who is well rested and eager to impact the game.

Perhaps Odom is the one who can carry the load down the stretch, you say. Perhaps. But let’s not forget that Odom is a basketcase with a penchant for marijuana smoking and/or erratic behavior. In other words, I wouldn’t bet on Odom in any situation other than, “Most likely to get caught on Hollywood Boulevard with a half smoked blunt”. Plus, Kobe is an egomaniac who can’t stand it when others on his team have a bigger impact than he does and at the end of the day, he’s taking those shots for better or worse. I, for one, think things end in disappointment for Lakers fans this year.

Why the Celtics won’t win the Championship this year:

The Celtics have played great basketball for about three-quarters of the season and really average basketball for the other part. Normally average is good enough. But this team just reminds me of the Pistons team that, after winning the 2004 championship, thought they could turn it into high gear and ended up coming up short. Like that team, the Celtics lost at least one key bench player in the offseason. And, like that team, the Celts got a bit arrogant to start the season (Pierce: I am the best player in the NBA). This doesn’t mean they won’t make the finals. But something tells me they’re short a piece or two to repeat. Plus, it’s just damn hard to repeat. The competition is too good and the Celtics big 3 isn’t getting any younger.

Why the Cavs won’t win the Championship this year:

Basketball, perhaps more than any other sport, is about matchups. If it’s a Lakers-Cavs Finals, I like the Cavs for a number of reasons (LeBron is a better player than Kobe but Kobe will spend all his energy trying to prove he is the man and that will torpedo team play). But if it’s a Spurs-Cavs Finals, I can’t see the Cavs winning. I won’t go into it in any more detail than the following: We’ve seen this movie and it turned out badly for the Cavs.

Why the Spurs will win the Championship this year:

The Spurs are rested, healthy, experienced, and have Tim Duncan. Need there be any more reason? Oh, and Duncan wins Championships in odd years in the Double-aughts (1999, 2003, 2005, 2007).

Beyond that though, Duncan is playing as well as he ever has, Parker is playing better than ever, and Manu is, well, Manu. Plus they’re getting extremely healthy contributions from Roger Mason (45% on 3 pointers) and dare I say Matt Bonner (49% on 3 pointers). While they don’t play defense as well as they did in the past, I still think this year is their last championship, but I think they get there.

Finals Prediction: Spurs over Cavs in 6

What Obama Time means to me

2009-01-21T11:05:00.002-05:00

I have been struggling with the appropriate means to express what I feel about Obama’s ascension to the presidency. It’s something that has been on my mind since November, more so in the last few days. And I think that after extensive reflection my malaise is a result of two factors:

First, I’m brought back to the days after 9/11. Like many Americans I felt both helpless and motivated by the tragedy. I wanted to do something, I wanted to serve my country, probably for the first time in my life. Unfortunately, short of joining up with the Army, there just wasn’t that much that I could do. And, with the Bush administration, that feeling of service got drained away with each subsequent misstep and the eventual prosecution of his radical neo-con agenda.

But it is important to note that my post 9/11 reaction was a strong motivation if not deciding factor in my decision to get an MA in International Relations instead of going to law school. (For the record, prior to 9/11, I had a general feeling that I would go to law school, I took the LSAT, and considered my options.) Frustrated by what I saw as extremely high entry barriers in DC (gotta know the right people to get anywhere, and it simply isn´t possible to take a pay nothing job or internship when you have student loans) I concluded that higher education would serve me better than continued toil. Plus, studying in London was something I had always wanted to do and sounded like a pretty good idea (which it undoubtedly was).

So I packed up and shipped out and reestablished myself abroad, got a master’s degree, mixed with the world, met someone special, and eventually decided to move to Colombia. That also seemed like a good move for a variety of reasons both professional and personal. But I can’t say I was ever excited about the prospect of working in Colombia. Really, I was never particularly interested in Latin America and although that has changed to some extent, I still feel somewhat blocked by language and culture and, to be totally honest, disinterest in the microcosm of the developing world.

The second conclusion is directly related to the first. Now that Obama is running things I feel an intense desire to return to the US and get to work at maturing our nation. I really got what Obama said yesterday when he mentioned that we were a young nation. It resonated with me. As a young nation we responded to challenge like an adolescent would, with overreaction, frustration, and violence and, importantly, we can do better.

I now find myself living in a wonderful country, a country I truly enjoy in my leisure time, but also a country which simply can not offer me what I need professionally. I need to go back. I need to find my way to contribute to the development of my nation. And as much as I respect those that dedicate themselves to the development of poorer, needier nations, that’s not the path for me. I can see that now, more clearly than ever.

This, of course, complicates things. We are not ready to leave and I have nothing to go to. I have ideas, hopes, and dreams of things that I want to do. But I can’t very well pay the bills on hopes and dreams alone and soon, I’m guessing, the bills will get bigger as two will become three. Nor can I very well justify sitting around the house writing, reading, or whatever without specific direction.

I should add that this is a particularly more relevant and pressing concern as my job situation has gone from bad to worse. An explanation will have to follow in a separate post but it’s sufficient to say for now that not only am I not getting paid with any frequency, I’m also not really doing anything that would help further my professional development.

So, here I sit, on Day 1 of Obama’s presidency, inspired by his example, encouraged by possibility, overflowing with ideas. I am doing my best to access these emotions appropriately while I slog through the day-to-day of part time work and job searching. And I am hopeful that my efforts will not be in vain. If there is a final message that I take from Obama it’s this: with hard work, all things are possible.

Proud again

2009-01-20T12:49:00.001-05:00

I'm more proud of my country today than at any time in the last 8 years if not my entire life. Now, to work.

A new dawn

2009-01-20T08:44:00.002-05:00

I'm not alone in thinking that this election mattered more than any other in my lifetime. It's not just that Barack Obama more closely represents my personal politics than any other previous president, it's not just that he's a thoughtful, rational, and pragmatic person who will make an excellent govenor no matter your politics, it's not just what he represents to minorities and immigrants, it's that he's replacing the worst president in the history of the United States.

Think about that for a second. We've had some bad ones. Most of the bad ones pre-20th century are hardly remembered. And for the last 30 years or so the standard for defining a bad president was Richard Nixon. To be so bad as to vastly exceed Nixon's failures is to truly achieve to great badness. And to Bush's credit, he pulled off the task with as much excellence as any proud father could hope for.

(Note to self: When telling my kids they can be anything they want to be as long as they are excellent at what they choose, be sure to tell them the story of George Bush II and the ruin of the American empire.)

So today, as TV reporters both local and (inter)national struggle to find poignant words, needlessly point out that Michele and Barack Obama are walking into a church, and desperately try to maintain objectivity, I'll be doing something else. Yes, I'll be watching. I'm not going to work, I'm not going to do anything else. But I won't be looking for steroids infused poignance or smart, snappy words that put the turnover into context. No, I'll just be sighing in relief. Relief that it's over. Relief that we have a new president that will work his hide off trying to right the ship and redirect our country toward the future. And relief that that son of a bitch Bush didn't suspend the constitution and appoint himself President for Life like some Hugo Chavez wanna be.

I'll also be hoping. I'll be hoping that Obama makes it out of there today alive (seriously). I'll be hoping that Obama is just as savvy as I think he is. I'll be hoping that America will be converted into a place where I want to live again and where I would want to raise my children. And I'll be hoping that I can find my way back and a place where I can contribute in my own way to a more progressive, Euro-style America that reflects our values of kindness, charity, good will to others both at home and abroad, all of which would help restore America as a shining example to the world of how democracy, freedom, and humanity can manifest in something truly good.

The Picks

2009-01-18T07:38:00.003-05:00

I was going to write a much longer post with my picks for Championship weekend but somehow I'm out of time. So this will have to do. As an aside, I really should have done this from the start of the playoffs as I've been fairly accurate (I was utterly convinced that Carolina -10 was absurd last week). At any rate, the picks.

Ravens (+6) over Steelers

I was really leaning towards the Ravens winning outright, if for no other reason than because it's extremely difficult to beat a good team 3 times in the NFL and the Steelers were exceedingly lucky to beat the Ravens twice. But then I started to hear a bit about Baltimore's injury situation and that, combined with a relatively healthy Steelers teams suggests that Baltimore just doesn't have the horses to get to the Super Bowl.

That being said, the Steelers won the first two games 23-20 and 13-9, that's to say, by an average of 3.5 points. So I don't see how they're covering this one. Final score: 16-13 Steelers.

Cardinals (+4) over Eagles

Arizona has had the perfect storm in these playoffs and it continues today. At home versus Arizona, on the road against a Carolina team that they should have beaten in September and with weather more resembling September than January, and now at home versus the Eagles. It would not have been possible for the Cards to advance this far had they started on the road or had they had to play in NY last week for the simple reason that this team does not play well in bad weather.

Now, however, they're playing in a dome, with friskiness and confidence on both sides of the ball, against an Eagles team that is fundamentally the exact same team that lost to the Redskins 10-3 back in week 16. The Eagles too, have had the perfect storm. On the road against Tavaris Jackson (a gift that they almost didn't capitalize on - had it not been for a 70 screen pass TD...) and then on the road against a very pedestrian Eli Manning (who, I might add, has been extremely pedestrian for the majority of his career, except that after last season's Super Bowl run, most people decided to forget that fact and just ignore that he's a terribly inaccurate QB who just wilts when there is any hint of wind).

So I'm not buying that this Eagles team is any good. In fact, I think the NFC Championship teams are probably the weakest two potential Super Bowl teams in recent memory and the winner will surely be dismantled in two weeks by their betters.

At any rate, I think the Cards shut down the run and force the Eagles to pass like 70% of the time (which is kind of like forcing a glutton to the dinner table) and McNabb throws at least one critical INT. On the other side of the ball, I don't see the Iggles stopping Fitzgerald/Boldin.

Bottom line, if the Eagles want to win, they got to put up more than 20 and I don't see that happening. Not with an anemic, one-dimensional offense. Of course, I would have said the same thing last week and looking at their 3-game run makes me wonder what kind of deal Andy Reid struck with the devil after the Redskins game. But no matter, I'll stick with God and Puppies over deals with the Devil.

Cardinals 27-Eagles 20

(And yes, it's utterly galling that the Redskins are 3-0 against the NFC finalists and don't have the opportunity to be come the NFC's sacrificial lamb.)

Back from Santa Marta

2009-01-07T11:31:00.002-05:00

We returned to Bogota late Saturday night after a delightful little week in Santa Marta. It's a bit off the beaten path in terms of tourism, but Santa Marta is definitely worth a trip. While it lacks the glorious historical achitecture of Cartagena, the city makes up for with its calm, its tranquility, and its ease. For us, it was exactly what we needed.

We traveled with the Grandparents, in fact, we paid their way. It was a nice thing to do, a sort of thank you for the many things they have done for the wifecita over the years. But, traveling with the Grandparents isn't always the easiest thing to do. I may not have mentioned it in this space before, but Grandfather has Alzheimers. He is in an intermediate stage, not terribly grave, but significant that one notices. Grandmother was paranoid that he was going to be uncomfortable traveling to a new environment since he tends to forget where he is at times. Fortunately, it was a fear that needn't have concerned anyone. Grandfather was quite comfortable, although, over the course of the week he probably asked where we were ten times a day.

Of course, Grandfather was doing so well that Grandmother stubbornly decided to not give him his night medicine, a clear liquid that helps with memory. So, one night we were sitting in their hotel room having a chat and Grandfather stood up and just left the room without a word. This was disconcerting. We quickly chased him down and this was when I saw the truth of Alzheimer's on his face. He had no idea where he was. He only knew that he was hungry. And that must have been terrifying. It was a brief vision into the future, a future that is not terribly far away. Fortunately, after administrating the medicine he seemed to calm down. And he was great the rest of the week.

Santa Marta is not the typical caribbean city. Due to its unique geographic position, wedged between the foothills of the Sierra Nevada, there is a near constant breeze that manages the heat, making the climate delightful. The water is much the same. Snow from the Sierra Nevada melts, forming rivers and underground streams that flow to the sea. Thus, the ocean is much colder than one would expect. When we went scuba diving we had to use wetsuits for otherwise we would have frozen and been quite uncomfortable. Of course, scuba diving in Santa Marta is a bit more challenging than in Cartagena. Not only is the water a good bit colder but the current is a good bit stronger so much so than an inexperienced diver will spend more time fighting to maintain position or follow the leader than seeing the wildlife of flora and fauna that populate the ocean floor.

We didn't want to return, truth be told. Coming back to the cold, dreary climate in Bogota was depressing. Of course, this is where the life is, so this is where we are. But we have Santa Marta in mind. It is the kind of place one goes to relax and as such would be perfect for retirement. Maybe someday we shall find ourselves there more permanently.

Holiday thoughts

2008-12-24T10:20:00.002-05:00

Another year has come and gone. Faster than it would have seemed yet in some ways I still feel as if I am running in quicksand. Perhaps 2009 will see some changes.

Christmas time it is in Bogota but it doesn't really feel like it to me. Likely the root of the problem is that when one lives in a place with no seasons, every day feels like the previous. Seasons are important. They mark the passage of time, the onset of holidays, and, more pressingly, when to alter one's wardrobe. But living in the seasonless Bogota, which has been drenched in rain for most of December and wholly unpleasant and miserable at that, leaves one rudderless as the sands of time slip by and less appreciative of beautiful spring days, scalding summer afternoons, crisp fall evenings, and frigid winter nights. Which, I should add, we seem to have every single day here in Bogota. Indeed, it is a common joke. Bogota doesn't have seasons, it has four seasons every day.

The turkey is brining, the tree is set, the lights aflickering, and Bing and Frank are offering Christmas songs which could only come from a northern climate. Soon I shall make cranberry bread (imagine finding cranberries in Colombia - yes, somethings are possible) and then the turkey will go in the oven and we shall busy ourselves with preparations. "Christmas Day" in Colombia is always the 24th and we have some family coming to share the evening with us. This is my 3rd Christmas in Colombia but the first with an American ensemble of good eats. It is what I must do to at least feel slightly connected to my world. Buñelos and tamales are not Christmas food.

On saturday we head for Santa Marta. It's a city on the caribbean coast and it shall be hot, sunny, and glorious. We need the heat. We need it to soak into our bones, open the pores of our skin, and rejuvenate our vigor. After so many dismal days and damp, cool air, a salty, ocean breeze sounds just about right. Life presents many challenges and stresses but at least for a week, we shall disconnect and recharge, so that we may return to the rigors of our normal lives with a fresh perspective and enthusiasm.

So on this Christmas eve, I send out my greetings and best wishes to both friends and family. Be it that they celebrate Navidad, Kwanza, or other rituals that I can not spell properly, let them rejoice in the moments they have with family and friends. And let them engorge themselves on delicious holiday eats.

A little holiday present

2008-12-23T15:19:00.002-05:00

A stunning article that clearly shows that the racial divide in the US is an open sore that will never be healed until white supremisist bastards get the bloody end they deserve.

Soñar no cuesta nada

2008-11-28T12:08:00.002-05:00

So I had some nice dreams last night. In the first one, we got a Weimeraner puppy that was so totally adorable. But he didn't want to be called "Snoop" and preferred "Sal" instead and well, we had to respect his wishes. Things went swimmingly well after the name change.

Then I dreamed about the Redskins-Giants game this sunday. At the end of regulation the score was 19-19 and the Giants won the toss in OT. I was pretty worried about that and sure enough, they marched down the field and got into easy field goal position. But then something went awry and the kick was either muffed or blocked and we got the ball back. On our first play Campbell threw a 5-yard crossing route to Randle-El who took it to the house for a 70-yard TD and the Skins won, 25-19.

So, I'm a good mood today and will be as long as I can revel in the fiction of my own mind.

Anyway, we're off to Girardot for the weekend. It's hot little town a couple hours away. The wifecita organized the trip with all of her ex-colleagues from the old company. So many people said yes that we had to rent 2 houses and tomorrow I'm going to barbeque for 22 people. Should be fun. And yeah, this counts as my "Thanksgiving".

Anyone else think that Thanksgiving is the most useless of holidays? I mean, I love a good excuse to gorge myself on good eats, but I really fail to see the need for a four day weekend a month before Christmas. Can't the reprogram it for June?

Lazy blogging

2008-11-13T11:27:00.002-05:00

I've been a pretty lazy blogger. It's true. It's more a feature of me thinking up most of my posts on the bus on the way to work and then being immediately detoured upon arrival to the point that I never get around to posting what I was thinking. Oh well.

Anyway, overjoyed about Obama's win. It's going to be great to have a calm, rational, and normal head running the country. Even beyond the policy issues I think most people just wanted a return to normalcy.

On to the real business of the day: MOVIE REVIEWS.

Saw the new Bond, Quantum of Solace, last friday. Not sure why it premiered here before the US, but whatever. Aside from having a stupid name, it's another great Bond flick and I heartily recommend it. Casino Royale was probably marginally better (there was a huge shock value with how the series changed and all) but this is still a great, great action movie. The key angle of the "New" Bond is realism and the plot is utterly believable. In fact, I found myself wondering afterwards how many times the events in the movie have happened in the world. Spoiler alert: Interested parties would do well to read this book. I'm guessing the screenwriters did.

My grade: A-, Rotten Tomatos: 75%

(Incredibly, at least one reviewer thinks it's one of the worst Bond films. I'm guessing he just skipped the entire Pierce Brosnan period. Comparatively, Brosnan's Bond films received: 60%, 51%, 56%, and, 79%. Only Goldeneye graded out well and that's more because it was the first film after the Timothy Dalton era, not because it was any good.)

Transformers was kinda average if you ask me. I knew from the start that this was a Michael Bay film. His angles, the music, and the general plot development was identical to every movie he's ever made and frankly I'm a bit bored by it all. I mean this seriously, you could have taken out all the parts with the Transformers and replaced them with Asteroids and you would have had Armageddon. Anyway, the effects were cool, there were some laughs, and I enjoyed it. Just was expecting much more. And no, I am not looking forward to the sequel.

My grade: B-, Rotten Tomatos: 57%

Finally got around to seeing Iron Man as well. It was pretty interesting the way they tried to integrate the plot into the world that we live in, so I give them credit for that. And it was shocking to see Robert Downey Jr as a believable action hero. And through the first 3/4's of the movie, I was digging it. The problem, of course, is that the end just blew large sized chunks of open ass. Really, really disappointing conclusion.

My grade: B, Rotten Tomatos: 93%

(I was shocked by this grade as well as the comment that Robert Downey Jr is the best actor to ever play a super hero. Apparently, some reviewers aren't familiar with the new Batman or Christian Bale who makes that franchise go.)

We also saw The Bucket List with Jack Nicholson and Morgan Freeman. It's a sad-funny movie that is quite well done and enjoyable. I recommend it for people that like normal movies.

My grade: B, Rotten Tomatos: 41%

(Surprised by this rating as well, although most reviewers stated something to the effect that the ending was sentimental, which is was, but I hardly think that should drag it down so far when the end of Iron Man was comparatively more asstastic.)

And last but not least, The Savages, a clever little film starring Philip Seymour Hoffman and Laura Linney. Full disclosure: I'd pretty much see any movie starring Philip Seymour Hoffman. He's an excellent actor and deserves all the acclaim in the world. That being said, this is a very odd movie that centers more on Laura Linney, who is also excellent. Not for the light hearted, this movie is about a brother and sister who, after many years without any contact, have to care for their dementia inflicted father. It's serious, it's real, and it taps into an almost unexplainable dynamic that suggests that even through great extrangement, the father-child relationship is unbreakable. I heartily recommend it.

My grade: A, Rotten Tomatos: 89%

Obama Time

2008-11-04T22:12:00.001-05:00

Now that the outcome is clear.

And, of course:

Yes we did.

Understanding “American Values” and the Culture of Stupid

2008-10-29T14:06:00.001-05:00

From its origins, the United States has suggested that it is a unique, exceptional country that can serve as a beacon of truth for other nations aspiring for greatness. This concept of “exceptionalism” began with our example of democracy yet over time has converted into a general ethic or idea that everything “American” is great and everything outside of America is less so. Frequently, from politicians both on the left and right, we hear about how America is the best country on earth (or in history) and how said politician will restore America’s greatness.

How so, then, can it be true that the US ranks 37th in the world in health care, behind the likes of Costa Rica, Chili, and Colombia? How can we rank 15th in the world in reading literacy, 19th in mathematical literacy, and 14th in scientific literacy? How is it that the whole concept of the “American dream” is no longer American at all since upward mobility in the US is essentially impossible? How is it that we just took down the global economy through our own gambling, no regulation ways? How can it be possible that we are anything BUT exceptionally bad at most of our core endeavors?

The answers to all of these questions is easier than one would think. In short, we, as a culture, glorify stupidity. Turn on MTV (likely the dominant influence on adolescent and young adult minds) and you will see show after show where stupidity is rewarded. In fact, as a culture, we worship those who drink the most, shag the most, cheat the most, hit the hardest, run the fastest, act the best, sing the best, or some combination of all rather than those who work the hardest, invent amazing things, or write great works of literature. For better or worse, our culture has developed into one enormous drunk, violent, fucking orgasm that looks good at all times and lies about its behavior at all times. These are the values we worship, these are the values we inculcate, these are the values that the world sees. And one wonders why we are falling behind.

Take the issue of France as an example. France has, beyond any reasonable shadow of a doubt, the best health care system in the world. They also live longer, have a 35-hour work week, 6 weeks mandatory vacation for all employees, low pollution, low cost and high quality internet and other public services, among other benefits. Yet instead of looking to their example, we criticize, castigate, and ridicule. To be “French” is an insult in the US.

And it’s not just France. There are many countries which do things much better than we do and instead of learning from those examples, we ignore them or scorn them. This is the culture of stupid. It is a culture that will spell the doom of the United States as a world leader. And it is a culture that must change.

Education is a policy issue which receives great attention and money and yet we seem to slip further and further behind. Back In the 90s we had the computer generation of expenditures. Billions of dollars spent to modernize our classrooms. Didn’t matter. We continued to slide. Then Bush came in and said we need more standardized testing and achievable benchmarks. Nope, that didn’t work either. Now, with an election a week away and both candidates essentially repeating the same spiel about education, we’re likely to see the “Train Teachers Better” movement. Here’s a little prediction that shouldn’t shock anyone (but just might): That ain’t gonna work either.

This whole “Stupid is Better” movement culminated with the election of George Bush as president. No, I don’t think he’s a moron. I think he’s willfully uninformed and undereducated. And when you have someone who is not only uninformed and uneducated about critical issues (like National Security and Foreign policy) you have a tendency to act on what sounds good but may or may not be good. In essence, the entire Bush Doctrine and the last 8 years of foreign policy lies at the feet of the slick sales job Bush got from the neocons around him and his own inability or reluctance to seek alternate views, sift through the bullshit, or use a shred of common sense.

Unless and until we address the culture of stupid that dominates America’s airwaves (MTV, Fox News, this means you), unless and until we provide role models and heroes to America’s youth that can be examples of how hard work and an education can pay off (no Charles Barkley, you don’t count since you didn’t finish school but you are right and have always been right about the role model issue), and unless and until parents imprint upon their children the value of hard work, discipline, and intellectual achievement, we will continue on down the path of ignorance and irrationality and the hatred, racism, and bigotry that usually follows such things.
This essay, in essence, is one of the reasons why I support Barack Obama for President. He’s thoughtful, he’s smart as a whip, and he’s prone to listening to various views on complex subjects during crisis. All of these traits are the kinds of things you want in a president.

None of these things are possessed by the dogmatic, reactionary, and ultimately quick tempered John McCain. The latest Socialism screed is the most telling example of an appeal to stupid. The most “socialist” part of the tax code, the part that directly redistributes wealth from the rich to the poor is the Earned Income Credit which was introduced by…drum roll…Ronald Reagan. Sarah Palin herself, the loudest speaker 0n the corner, directly benefits from wealth redistribution every year when her windfall oil dividend is deposited in her bank account courtesy of the State of Alaska. Yet the media doesn’t want to talk about that. The media seems to like it when stupid is as stupid does. They seem to prefer a world in which a litany of lies can replace facts and never be challenged. And it’s not just Fox News. It’s CNN and others who give credence to this climate of dishonesty when, instead of directly attacking and disproving each and every lie, they merely report the “facts” that Palin accused Obama of being a socialist.

And after 8 years of irrational, insane, and idiotic politics, I think America has learned its lesson. At least for now. The pundits haven’t put their finger on this (perhaps they can’t), but I do think that Obama’s meta-narrative of new politics, of intelligent, reasoned policy, and of stoicism in crisis has resonated with the vast majority of the country – and – that’s why he’s going to win this thing going away.

Plus, he makes a hell of a great role model.

Yet another reason why I love me some Barack Obama

2008-10-24T10:16:00.002-05:00

This will only really make sense for big football fans...like me. But man does the thought of a basketball playing, fantasy football playing, sports fanatic in the Oval Office warm my heart.

My vote is in

2008-10-23T20:05:00.002-05:00

Had to vote in Maryland this year unfortunately for I would have preferred to cast my ballot in the "swing state" of Virginia like in 2004. But I lived in Maryland for about 4 months between 05 and 06 and that was enough to establish residency (renewed my driver's license as well to cement my status as a Maryland resident). Fortunately it looks like Virginia is going strongly for Obama so maybe my vote there wasn't as critical as it was in 04.

Anyway, the Maryland ballot is very long and has a bunch of choices that I know nothing about (judges, board of education, etc). I tried doing some research on those choices but there wasn't much info available online so I went with random stuff. For example, I voted for one dude who has a tendency to speak in the 3rd person. I just think it's funny to say things like, "Henry Le doesn't like it when you speak bad about Henry Le." I also voted for one woman because she was in the Peace Corp and I figure someone who does that can't be too bad.

At any rate, Maryland has a couple ballot measures that are interesting. The first is a measure to authorize early voting and absentee voting. I heartly voted for this one. Early voting is a great idea as far as I'm concerned because it gives people more time to vote. There was a time when I didn't participate in the voting process and to some extent having to vote on a Tuesday was a factor. So I'm all in on early voting.

I voted no on the gambling provision. Apparently the state wants to authorize slot machines which would generate revenue for education. I'm not a fan of gambling provisions because I think that sort of thing is essentially a 2nd tax (or 3rd after the lottery) on the poor who have a tendency to gamble more than the rich and have more to lose by pissing away their hard earned coin. But even beyond that I read somewhere today that for the state to actually see revenue significant enough to impact education the slot "casinos" would have to rake in a billion dollars a year and that's just absurd from where I'm sitting. Bottom line, you wanna gamble in the US, go to Atlantic City, Vegas, or a Native American reservation.

The other two measures were incredibly hard to discipher and I can't say that I really figured them out. One seemed like a procedural measure and the other wanted to guarantee that any change to property tax rates was only passed by unanimous consent (9 out of 9 votes on the County Council) instead of 7 of 9 votes. I voted against that. There are legitimate reasons why counties may need to raise taxes and in my experience there's always one asshole in any machine. Requiring 9 of 9 votes to raise property taxes just risks giving too much power to that one asshole and I really don't see why it's necessary to do that. Of course, I could have misread the entire bit because it wasn't terribly straightforward but that's my version and I'm sticking to it.

One vote for Obama down, 50 million to go.

Where stupid found a home

2008-10-22T08:56:00.002-05:00

There is a broken link that is preventing me from linking directly to the post in question but if you read the Washington Monthly Blog you will find an October 21, 2008 entry titled, "NewsMax: Not Aware Of All Internet Traditions". The post references an article in Newsmax (a publication which I can only imagine is best used for wiping ass) that explains that an "analysis" of Obama's contributions turns up a lot of odd donations - donations like $20.01 or $50.22, etc, and then goes on to suggest that these are donations in foreign currency and as such are illegal.

Unfortunately for the braintrust that published this article, Washington Monthly points out that when one makes (or made) contributions via websites like Dailykos, Talking Points Memo, and many others, those websites added a certain number of cents to identify where the donation came from. So Dailykos would add .01, Talking Points Memo 0.22, Eschaton 0.18, etc, thus explaining the odd looking donations. A simple internet search could have revealed the great big secret but apparently Kenneth Timmerman was too busy preparing his next hit piece or his next fictional book about WMDs.

Had Timmerman been rather more dedicated to his trade he would have realized an even more basic flaw in his "analysis". Donations accepted via Barak Obama's website or any other website HAVE TO BE IN DOLLARS. I know this because I have made two small contributions in the last 9 months. I didn't pay them in pesos, I paid in dollars, meaning that the fundamental premise of Timmerman's screed is baseless, idiotic, and so 1980s (you know, pre-internet donations). I'll state this again to be as clear as possible: There was no option to charge donations in foreign currency. Foreign currency is not accepted by the Obama campaign. There is no way that any odd looking donation with pennies attached on the end is a donation that originated in foreign currency. In fact, had I used my Colombian credit card, the US Dollar amount would not have changed. What would have changed would have been the amount debited to my card based on the exchange rate at the moment of transaction.

Further, 2 weeks ago I got a call from the Obama campaign. They explained that they needed to confirm my citizenship or they would have to refund my money. To confirm my citizenship, they sent me an email which required me to put my relevant data in and my passport number. The campaign apparently has a huge database with this information and are working hard to make sure every dollar received is legitimate. I was called on a Sunday morning and could hear tons of other people making calls in the background. The campaign is serious about this.

But hey, why do a little reporting (or even critical thinking) when you can just publish smut and get away with it. It's been working for Timmerman all his life, so no need to start worrying about little things like facts, common sense, or you know, journalism.

An incredibly insightful peice about Afghanistan

2008-10-17T14:42:00.002-05:00

Rolling Stone does it again. Don't know how they get the best stories but they always do. This time it's a peice from Nir Rosen that has some rather startling conclusions. Very reminiscent of the Failing Drug War peice from a while back. It's pretty long (12 pages), but a quick read and I would say a must read for anyone who wants to know why we have no chance of winning in Afghanistan ever.

Here's the link.

One reason I love me some Obama

2008-10-17T10:41:00.002-05:00

From the New York Times Magazine:

"I am convinced that if there were no Fox News, I might be two or three points higher in the polls," Obama told me. "If I were watching Fox News, I wouldn’t vote for me, right? Because the way I’m portrayed 24/7 is as a freak! I am the latte-sipping, New York Times-reading, Volvo-driving, no-gun-owning, effete, politically correct, arrogant liberal. Who wants somebody like that?

"I guess the point I’m making," he went on, "is that there is an entire industry now, an entire apparatus, designed to perpetuate this cultural schism, and it’s powerful. People want to know that you’re fighting for them, that you get them. And I actually think I do. But you know, if people are just seeing me in sound bites, they’re not going to discover that. That’s why I say that some of that may have to happen after the election, when they get to know you."

Originally from Daily Kos.

I have to be honest here. I watched me some Fox News the other night after the debate because CNN International cut off the post-game show a little early. It's pretty evident that Fox News has never been and never will be "News". It's also pretty evident that they employ a gang of morons who are only good at telling lies. I can only hope there is a special place in hell reserved for them.

But even beyond that, is Karl Rove really that stupid? It was the first time I'd seen him live and wow. Craven, amoral, and filthy he is. Intelligent, he is not. Same for Dick Morris (who I know very little about but who was entirely incoherent amidst the spittle). And frankly, former VP Nominee Geraldine Ferraro should be ashamed of herself. By going on Fox, she helps legitimize the organization. If I could, I would dedicate every moment I have to destroying Fox News. Anyone who wants to write me a grant to establish an NGO called "Destroy Fox News", let me know.

Hey, lookie here...

2008-10-17T08:34:00.004-05:00

...this year's Nobel Prize winner in Economics says that now is not the time to freeze spending, it's actually time to jack it up. Go figure. Here are some of the money quotes:

"It’s politically fashionable to rant against government spending and demand fiscal responsibility. But right now, increased government spending is just what the doctor ordered, and concerns about the budget deficit should be put on hold......

....On the other hand, there’s a lot the federal government can do for the economy. It can provide extended benefits to the unemployed, which will both help distressed families cope and put money in the hands of people likely to spend it. It can provide emergency aid to state and local governments, so that they aren’t forced into steep spending cuts that both degrade public services and destroy jobs. It can buy up mortgages (but not at face value, as John McCain has proposed) and restructure the terms to help families stay in their homes.

And this is also a good time to engage in some serious infrastructure spending, which the country badly needs in any case. The usual argument against public works as economic stimulus is that they take too long: by the time you get around to repairing that bridge and upgrading that rail line, the slump is over and the stimulus isn’t needed. Well, that argument has no force now, since the chances that this slump will be over anytime soon are virtually nil. So let’s get those projects rolling."

The merciful end to the presidential debate season

2008-10-16T08:52:00.004-05:00

The debates are over and Obama went 3 for 3. Last night wasn't pretty, but at least it was more lively than the previous two. That's largely because McCain came out foaming at the mouth and went on the attack. Obviously his handlers decided that he needed to paint Obama as a tax-and-spend liberal who wants to take your hard earned dollars and redistribute it to the lazy poor. In other words, back to the future time. That might have worked a few months ago, but I think it's too little too late now. And every single snap poll after the debate showed Obama winning decisively. This thing is a done deal.

That being said, I think that McCain kinda shot himself in his own foot a couple times. Not only did he come across as nasty, angry, and utterly partisan, but he also proposed a number of incredibly stupid things. The icing on the cake, however, was the spending freeze. I'm only going to talk about this because it is utterly ridiculous and shows a contemptous disinterest in history, economic policy, and ultimately, politics.

(Note: To read more about spending in recessions, see this excellent post by Robert Reich.)

Politics: I don't know why McCain thinks a spending freeze would be popular. When Clinton was under fire in the 90s, every State of the Union Address was a laundry list of things he wanted to do, i.e., he wanted to spend money. And Clinton was hugely popular. So on its face, I don't undedrstand this argument.

But more than that, it hamstrings McCain on other issues that he thinks are vital. When McCain said he wanted to "solve autism", Obama hit back with, that will cost money and you're already committed to a spending freeze. Ooops. Frankly, Obama was being polite. He could have said that line a dozen times on pretty much every issue.

Economics: I'm no economist but I'm probably more qualified to "fix" the nation's economic trouble than McCain is. That's because I know what I don't know, I'm open to suggestions in a non-partisan way, and I think we have to look back to see what's worked in the past as a suggestion to what would work now. In that sense, I think I'm quite similar to Obama. So when McCain said "spending freeze" not only did I cringe but I was hoping that Obama would take the Frankenstonian Senator from Arizona to task. Sadly, he did not.

Here's what I've learned over the last couple days by simply reading the internets. First, you can't compare todays deficit to the deficit of 1992. In 92, when Clinton took office, the deficit was about 5% of GDP - in other words, a huge effing problem. But, Clinton sorted it out and GDP contined to rise. Now, even with a higher deficit in absolute dollars, it represents about 3.3% of GDP. This deficit problem we have is not as significant as 92 and that certainly suggests that a spending freeze is not urgent.

Moreover, the US economy is headed into recession (or depression) not out of one. That's another critical difference between 92 and 08. When you come out of recession, you need to control for inflation and deficits are a huge issue. But when you go into recession, governments need to spend money. And I'm really shocked that Obama didn't make this argument. I was expecting him to say that the US government spent its way out of the Great Depression on public works and infrastructure projects and use that as an attack on McCain's spending freeze argument and as a segway to his green jobs and infrastructure proposals. I'm guessing that given McCain's tax-and-spend strategy, Obama didn't want to give any credence to the portrait and held back.

I was going to vote for Obama anyway. Nothing could change that now. But I have to say that McCain's spending freeze argument was, for me, the worst possible thing he could have said. It appeals to the rigid nature of Bushian politics - create an ideology and stand by it no matter what. And I don't think that's what we need now (or probably ever). I expect that this subtle undercurrent, that of Obama appearing thoughtful and open to ideas with McCain coming across as stubborn, beligerent, and hostile to change is one of the reasons why McCain is going down in flames come November.

Hail to the Redskins

2008-10-07T10:49:00.002-05:00

In back to back weeks, the Redskins have gone on the road against NFC East rivals, as underdogs, and won in convincing fashion. I got to see most of the Dallas game (power outtage notwithstanding) and all of the Philly game and more than anything, one thing stands out: this team fights hard to win.

After the opening day debacle (thanks schedulers for giving us the Giants, in NY, with a rookie head coach, on the day that the Giants celebrate their Super Bowl victory - really helped us out there), I confess to being fairly pessimistic. But Coach Zorn has turned this around and we have won 4 in a row. We should stretch that winning streak to 7 in a row since our next 3 opponents have a combined record of 1-10 (and the one win coming when the then winless Cleveland defeated the still winless Bengals). Going 7-1 to start the season would essentially guarantee us a playoff spot and would put us in the conversation for home field advantage throughout the playoffs.

That being said, I have several lingering concerns:

1. We seem to start slow. After 1 quarter of play in Philly, we were down 14-0. Never mind that the refs gifted Philly 7 points on a punt return that should have been called back. Those things happen in the NFL and we should never have given up that return in the first place. Teams that are serious about winning a championship don't go down 14-0 under any circumstance. And it looks like to me that we are a slow starting team (albeit that I didn't see the Saints or Zona games).

2. Our defensive philosophy has changed and I'm not yet sold on it. We used to blitz and awful lot. Those blitzes resulted in sacks and pressure on the QB. This year, we're playing more of a "prevent the big play" type of defense. That means less blitzing, more coverage, and more containment. It's worked fairly well. The only big plays that we've really given up in the last 4 games have been as a result of mistakes (with rookie safety Horton responsible for 2 of the most visible errors). And we have more or less shut down the run. But in the process, we are giving opposing QBs too much time. Now this should change a bit once Jason Taylor returns from injury, but I worry that our inability to get pressure is going to bite us down the line.

3. Special teams. We've given up 2 punt returns for TDs. We've got a rookie punter who has, so far, been more erratic than Eli Manning. We've gotta get that fixed and now because as we saw last night with Reggie Bush's 2 punt return TDs, teams that have weaknesses on special teams pay a heavy price.

Like I said above, I love the character of this team. They fight to win and it's working. Prior to last week, the Eagles were the top ranked team against the rush, giving up an average of 53 yards a game. We went for 200 (with Portis racking up 145 by himself). They were also the top sack team. Jason Campbell was only sacked once. And, aside from that first drive, we shut down the Eagles attack (one Field Goal the rest of the way by the offense). These things all speak to the character and resilience of this team. And I think these things are going to take us far. But I still worry, more than anything, about our ability to get to the QB.

Looking ahead, I'm not particularly worried about Dallas and Philly at home. I mean, sure, we could lose those games, but I already know that we can beat those teams on the road and being at home should give us some advantages (you just never know in the NFC East). I'm also not worried about St. Louis, Cleveland, Detroit, Seattle, Cincy, or San Fran. Really, we should beat all 6 of those teams since they're a combined "Not very good" and we're one of the best teams in the league right now.

I'm also not particularly concerned about our matchup against Baltimore. Yeah, they got a great defense, and yeah, we could lose, but it's not a team I really fear since they've got a rookie QB and suspect players at the skill positions (quick, name their top WR). And as Washington Defensive Coordinator Greg Blache said, falling in love with a rookie is like falling in love with a stripper - eventually, you'll get your heart broken. I'm pretty confident that if we scheme appropriately against that offense, we'll come out ahead in the end (like Tennessee).

No, I'm mostly worried about Pittsburgh and NY. Both teams are extremely physical. Both teams get after the quarterback. Both teams have great skill players. And both teams have shown a particular resilience that makes them tough to beat. Both games are in Washington, so that should help, but I don't know how much. That being said, here's a quickie breakdown:

Pittsburgh - Their defense is great. No question about that. But this team goes where the QB leads it and he's been incredibly good this year, even with injuries. Right now, I think Pittsburgh is probably the third best team in the league behind the Giants and Titans (although the Titans QB situation will eventually hurt them). To beat Pittsburgh, even at home, it's going to take a total effort with minimal mistakes. We can get it done, but I'm very concerned about this game.

NY - The Giants, to some surprise, are without a doubt the best team in the league right now. More than anything it's the combination of their bruising running game, their incredibly effective defensive line, and their cupcake schedule. It also looks like Eli Manning signed the same deal with the devil that his brother did because not only did he win a Super Bowl in a somewhat miracle fashion, but inexplicably, defenses are dropping his erratic passes that in previous years would have been intercepted. And, on top of that, they're deep at both WR and RB and are just pounding on teams. We'll learn a lot more about this team when they start their run against Pitt, Dallas, Philly, and Baltimore, but for right now, this is the team I see as most likely to stop the Skins from getting home field advantage in the playoffs (not that I'm getting ahead of myself or anything).

Home field advantage is huge this year because whatever team gets it is going to get an extra week off and then face the weakest remaining team at home. And all things being even, I'd rather face the Bears than the Panthers. (I'm predicting the playoff teams from the NFC will be: NY, Washington, Dallas, Chicago, Carolina, and Arizona.)

So, while we don't want to get ahead of ourselves (we gotta get out there and win), I think that as of right now, Washington has shown itself to be one of the elite teams. That means that we need to get locked in, beat the crap out of the bad teams (would give us a minimum of 10 wins), and be in position to win the division. If we do that, I'm going to consider this a successful season.

Two Debate Thoughts and some predictions

2008-10-03T10:14:00.004-05:00

I know that the "pundits" think that America is the land of stupid, but I think there are 2 things that they should have discussed and pointedly ignored last night. For me, these were the 2 most relevant things I saw:

1. Palin barely answered any questions. Instead, she had little paragraphs about energy, taxes, and main street, etc which she tried to apply to questions that were not related in any way. I'd have to look up the specifics, but from memory, her answer to the Pakistan issue was utterly nonsensical and unrelated. On the substance, I thought she was a total failure, especially on foreign policy issues. Of course, you didn't see anyone say that on CNN last night because apparently the only thing they care about is how she looked, her body language, and her folksiness. But I think that America is actually paying attention to the issues and I think her evasions and lack of specifics hurts her more than her "regular gal" persona helps. If you watched the "support meter" at the bottom of the screen during the debate, every time either candidate got high tech on an issue, the meter's spiked up. And when the candidates were overly generic or evaded specifics, the meter plummeted. And it was plummeting a lot for Sarah Palin last night.

2. Palin talked a lot about principles and values - about helping the middle class - without speaking in specifics. The obvious reason for that is that the vast majority of the McCain/Palin platform directly contradicts the values that she was espousing. I'm utterly shocked that none of the pundits pointed this out. I know that the new McCain line is that he's a reformer and he'll fight for the little guy. Palin repeated it over and over again. But at some point you have to call bullshit and the media is consistenly failing in its job. The whole reason why the issue of lobbyists employed by his campaign matters, the reason why his vote for the 99 banking deregulation bill that was sponsored by his chief economic advisor Lindsay Graham and which is largely responsible for this crisis matters, the reason why his support of the bankruptcy bill which has created huge economic problems for millions of middle-classers matters, among many other policy positions - the reason why they matter is that they are proof positive that McCain has *consistently* voted against the little guy. So for the 12 person CNN panel to just ignore that was a disgrace.

Here's my theory: when Palin talked about the values she supported, the philosophy of supporting the middle class, I began to wonder just how much she supports McCain's platform. I don't think this woman is an idiot by any means (although she doesn't know jack shit about foreign policy). In fact, I think that she has very different ideas about how to govern than McCain does and that inherent tension makes her job almost impossible. When an interviewer or a moderater asks her about her views on any given issue, she is hamstrung by an inability to express her own views because they conflict with so much of what McCain stands for. I seriously wonder how different that debate would have been if it had been Biden-Palin straight up for the presidency.

None of this suggests that I agree with Palin. In fact, I know most of the philosophy stuff coming out of her mouth is utter bullshit. Or, to put it more palitably, it's easier to support certain things when you are the governer of an oil rich state and don't have to worry about the problems of a nation. And I think that's the crux of the public's disastisfaction with the Palin selection. It's not that she's an idiot. It's that she's woefully underprepared to be president, woefully underprepared to run a nation and given McCain's long history with cancer, his increasingly erratic behavior, and his lack of transparency about his medical history, her ability to lead the nation has become a salient issue.

Anyway, I thought I'd end this post with a few fearless predictions.

1. I think Obama is gonna win this thing with more than 300 electoral votes. In other words, I think we're about to see a landslide. Not only have the polls radically trended toward him over the last 10 days, I don't think that McCain can overturn the fundamental dynamics of a failing economy that he helped cause (the GOP as a whole is taking a huge hit on this one).

2. I think Obama wins Nevada, New Mex, Colorado, and Virginia in addition to all of the Kerry states. That would put him at 291, I believe (although I think he wins Omaha also which is good for 1, so call it 292).

3. I think there's about a 50% chance he's going to win North Carolina as well, which would be utterly shocking. Democrats just don't win the Carolinas. But things are trending toward him and against the GOP in NC (look at Dole, she's losing as of today) and that bodes well for Obama.

4. I have a bad feeling about Ohio. Don't know why really. Just feel like somehow McCain is gonna pull it out there.

5. I also think McCain will pull it out in Indiana although that's going to be hotly contested. To give a bit of a backstory, the McCain campaign has repeatedly made arrogant statements about winning Indiana, they don't have much of a ground game, and they don't appear to be paying much attention to it. On the other hand, Obama has been extremely agressive and is closing the gap. Indiana is definitely "in play" although I don't know if the McCain campaign has realized it. I put Obama's chances at 40% as of today but it's one of the races that I think has great potential for movement.

6. Missouri is another. Obama can win it. It's getting tighter. We'll have to watch and see what happens there in the next 2 weeks.

7. I think Obama is going to win Florida. A lot of retirees down there and it's certain that a great number of them have watched their 401k's go up in smoke over the last weeks. The economic dynamics really help Obama down there and I don't see how McCain recovers. He just doesn't have a grasp of economics in general and his team has yet to produce an economic plan to solve this crisis. Obama's got a 4-point plan and whether it works or not, I think people want to see that the candidates have at least an idea of what to do. And up to now, it's pretty evident that McCain is totally out of it on the biggest issue in this election.

In conclusion, my range for Obama is a low of 292 to a high of 344. That's of today. A lot can change in the next 4 weeks but barring anything truly shocking (Bill Clinton style), I can't see Obama losing this thing.

F the GRE

2008-09-30T16:58:00.004-05:00

I've spent probably 10 hours a day studying for the GRE over the last week. Before that I probably devoted a minimum of 2 hours a day for a month. I've been carrying little flashcards of words to memorize for 3 months. And after all that, I got the EXACT same score that I got 6 years ago.

What does that score mean: Not much. The ratio was different. Better verbal this time, worse math. Which is more evidence that anyone would ever need to demonstrate that the GRE (and its ilk) mean less than zero. I didn't do as well on the math this time around for one reason: I couldn't get a GRE General Math practice book like I had last time. Does that mean I have a lower aptitude for Math? Nope. It just means I didn't get enough practice honing up my Geometry and Algebra II/Trig skills - which I might add, I'm never going to need again unless I have a child that needs help with their homework. I'm certainly not going to use all that bullshit in my PhD program (assuming I'm fortunate enough to be admitted).

In fact, this whole thing just pisses me off. Not only was it a great deal of work and effort to achieve the exact same score, but the thought that an inability to figure out crappy analogies or the appropriate opposite to words that I knew the definition of or the area of two slivers of a circle when I was running out of time...you get the point....the fact that that kind of bullshit could keep me out of my preferred PhD program is just infuriating. Is the ability to figure out the following analogy an accurate predictor of an individual's ability to graduate level work?

Cock is to balls as Suck is to...

No I'm not bitter. I just forked over $170 (plus the cost of 2 practice books, weeks of study, and a half day of my life that I'll never get back) because someone, somewhere convinced admissions boards that bullshit tests were an appropriate measure of an individuals inherent abilities.

Here's an idea ETS fuckwags: The 90s saw this wonderful invention of something called the Internets. On the Internets there is a webpage called www.dictionary.com. If I need to know what a word means, I'll go there. If I want a synonym or antonym, I'll go there. And, if I want to know how to figure out the area of a 4 slivers of a circle, I'll call my friend Matthew and he'll tell me.

So please, ETS, if you're reading this, please go fuck yourself. Now. Do not delay. Immediately. I'm serious. Fuck. Yourself. And when you're done. Die. May the stock market crash take you with it and all of your ilk too. You deserve nothing less.

Debate reaction

2008-09-26T21:47:00.002-05:00

Well, obviously, Obama won that debate. McCain kept pushing the "olden days" etc. Anyway, no surprise that I think Obama won.

What I do tihnk was surprising was that it really appears that McCain thinks that Obama is a niave fool who is going to run the country into the ground. I mean, that's really buying into your own bullshit, no?

Upon further review, she IS an idiot

2008-09-26T08:49:00.003-05:00

Quick, which one is running for Vice President? Is it this one:

Or perhaps this one:

I give up...

2008-09-25T08:31:00.000-05:00

...Is John McCain running for president or not?

Dems = Economic growth, Repubs not so much

2008-09-24T08:48:00.001-05:00

The charts and graphs here are shocking evidence of why it is an a-priori necessity to vote democrat every year.

At least one reason why this bailout is stupid

2008-09-23T20:11:00.003-05:00

There appear to be a great number of reasons, but at least one that seems to be barely talked about is the following.

The $700 billion that Bush and Friends want to spend to bail out their Wall Street Buddies is $700 billion we don't have. That means we either borrow this money (bad) or print it (worse). Either way, the bailout further devalues the dollar and, since oil is traded on the dollar, artificially inflate the price of oil (more dollars to buy the same thing). In fact, just the possibility of the bailout had this very effect just the other day.

I'm no economist, but it looks like a $700 billion bailout is not only the government asking every tax paying American to lend a helping hand (and like $1000 each) to pay for Wall Street's blunders in taxes alone, but also a double tax on every single American once higher prices at the pump are factored in. I repeat Markos' question: Just why are we rushing in to "fix" this?

Update: From the always reliable and utterly badass Robert Reich. A point that I've been making in my mind only and that seems to be a huge fly in the ointment: Mortgage defaults are still growing and that means that bad debts are growing too.

John McCain fights Warshington and Washington Wins

2008-09-22T15:52:00.007-05:00

In spirit of the most important factor in voter decision making, the following is a fictional account of what watching the Redskins beat on the Cardinals with John McCain might have been like:

Nobcentral (NC): Welcome Senator. I'm Nobcentral. Please, have a seat.

John McCain (JM): WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING YOU WHIPPERSNAPPER???"

NC: What? I'm sitting down to watch the game.

JM: NO ONE SEES THE LEFT SIDE OF MY FACE YOU MORON!!!!! NOW TAKE YOUR PLACE ON MY RIGHT!

(Now sitting to JMs left.)

NC: Ok, ok. Don't lose it on me man.

JM: DON'T TELL ME TO RELAX!!! I WAS A POW!!! I GET TO CHOOSE WHICH SIDE I WANT TO SIT ON BECAUSE I MADE THE GREATEST SACRIFICE EVER FOR THIS GREAT NATION OF OURS!!!!

NC: Ok, sorry. Look, the game is about to start. You want to put a wager on the outcome? Say $5?

JM: See, this is the problem with America - the gambling culture...

(5 minutes pass)

...By the way, do you work in Wall Street?

NC: It's just 5 bucks.

JM: Just five bucks! Let me tell you, you young whippersnapper. Back in Vietnam...

(20 minutes later)

JM: ...And that's how I invented the Blackberry by voting for NAFTA and deregulating the banking sector.

NC: Uh, right. Look, I'm gonna order some food. You want Chinese or Pizza?

JM: WHAT KIND OF COCK-EYED SON OF A BITCH ARE YOU!!!!! I WAS A POW AND YOU'RE TRYING TO SERVE ME GOOK FOOD!!! DON'T YOU KNOW I GOT MY FILL WHILE BEING TORTURED BY THE RED CHINESE!!!! YOU BETTER ORDER THAT GODDAMN PIZZA YOU AMERICAN HATING COMMIE BASTARD!!!!

NC: ....(dumbfounded)....

JM: Besides, I only eat American food. So, how about pepperoni and onions?

NC: Pizza is from Italy.

JM: YOU GODDAMN LIBERALS AND YOUR REVISIONIST HISTORY!!!! PIZZA NEVER GAME FROM THE LAND OF MUSSOLINI!!!! PIZZA NEVER CAME FROM ITALY! IT'S 100% 'MERICAN!!!!! I WAS THERE WHEN IT WAS INVENTED BY A RED BLOODED AMERICAN YOU NEW COME JOHNNY ROBIN!!!!!

NC: Uh, ok then.

JM: So be a good fellow and call down to the local Pizza Shack.

NC: It's called Pizza Hut and I already ordered it with my Blackberry.

JM: Ah, let me tell you about how I invented this newfangled technology called WiFi and the Purpleberry...

(20 minutes later)

JM: So what's the score?

NC: It's right there on the screen.

JM: Well if you had a screen big enough to see I wouldn't have to ask.

NC: It's a 42" LCD and we're sitting like 5 feet away.

JM: THAT'S THE TROUBLE WITH YOU WHIPPERSNAPPERS!!!! SPEAK ENGLISH!!! YOU THINK WE'RE IN RED CHINA???? OR CASTRO'S SPAIN???? OR CHAVEZ'S BRAZIL?

NC: What are you talking about man?

JM: LCD, DRG, GRE!!! ALL YOU WHIPPERSNAPPERS TALK IN SOME FOREIGN JIVE THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE!!!

NC: It's 17-10 now, Washington.

JM: WHAT!?!? *#*!!??!??#$**&!!@#!!! SEE THIS IS THE PROBLEM WITH FIGHTING WARSHINGTON!!!! LOBBYISTS AND THE LIBERAL MEDIA!!! CAN'T YOU ALL SEE THAT THE FOOTBALL TEAM FROM ARIZONA IS BETTER THAN THIS!!!!!

(20 minutes later)

...and that's why I employ the nation's top lobbyists to manage my campaign. So what's the score anyway?

NC: 24-17 Redskins

JM: GOD DAMMIT!!!! SARAH! WHERE ARE YOU TUSH?

(Sarah Palin shows up.)

SP: Yes John?

GET THAT GOD OF YOURS, YEAH THE VEANGEFUL ONE, TO STRIKE DOWN THE HEADONISTIC REDSKINS!!!!! WE HAVE TO SHOW WARSHINGTON THAT WE'RE HERE TO FIGHT. ON CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS?

(30 minutes later)

NC: Look, I hate to be a bother, but the game finished 10 minutes ago and the Redskins won 24-17. So I think it's time for you to get a move on.

JM: #!$!??!?!?!?$$$%&&&***##$!

(10 minutes later)

...And I hope I can count on your vote. Remember, experience matters and that young, uppity negro doesn't have what it takes. SARAH! Get your hot buns out there and make sure my car is ready! After all, what else are you good for if you can't get my car? (snickering)

Deep thought of the day

2008-09-22T10:30:00.001-05:00

If VP Cheney is not part of the executive branch, why does Congress continue to fund his office?

Who would you rather watch football with?

2008-09-19T09:57:00.007-05:00

Yes, we've officially hit stupid. Of course, the idea of sitting down to watch a football game with McCain is utterly terrifying. There's always one of "those guys" who flip their lid when their team starts losing, screams and shouts, and puts a damper on the party. And that's John McCain.

(I realize I just contributed to stupid.)

1930´s Redux?

2008-09-19T09:57:00.004-05:00

Why do I have the distinct feeling that things are gonna get worse before they get better?

Could it be the talk of a Bailout to end all bailouts?

Or perhaps it's that we are experiencing a problem of trust and not of liquidity?

Or perhaps it's that we have a presidential candidate who either resembles Bob Dole or Herbert Hoover?

Or perhaps it's that we have suffered a number of environmental disasters in recent weeks that only makes the shitstorm worse?

Or perhaps it's the appearance of tent cities at unprecedented rates that will soon be known as either "Bushvilles" or "McCainvilles"?

I'm not expert on economics matters. But I do know this: the shit is hitting the fan and there is no end in sight.

I don't know about you...

2008-09-18T10:00:00.003-05:00

...but for me it doesn't get better than hairy nosed otters.

Uber Gaffe Time for McCain

2008-09-18T10:00:00.002-05:00

I'm really not trying to fill up this space with political stuff every day but McCain is just too irresistable.

The short version: Yesterday, giving an interview to a Spanish journalist via Caracol Radio Miami (a Colombian station), John McCain, Mr. Foreign Policy, either a)did not know that Spain was in Europe, b) did not know that the Prime Minister of Spain is named Zapatero, or c) is deaf. Several times during the interview he was prompted by the interviewer - first given the obvious clue, "let's talk about Spain...". After a lengthy comment about Latin America and Mexico a second prompt - "but I'm talking about Europe - the president of Spain" followed by a rather bizarre response about meeting with any leader who shares our values.

I'll leave the arm-chair psychoanalysis or diagnosis to the pros and make one simple point: When the foundation of your campaign is based on your foreign policy expertise, you should know that the Prime Minister of Spain is named Zapatero, that Spain is in Europe, and that you gave an interview 5 months ago stating that yes, you would meet with the guy.

Here are the links:

Americablog (with a morning update and full transcript)

Talking Points Memo (They have much more on their main page.)

The Washington Post (with a laughable defense from McCain's foreign policy advisor)

You can get to all the relevant links, stories, hooplah, whatever you like from the links above. Bottom line, McCain looks like a damn fool and a bumbling idiot. Response from his campaign: Nothing to see here, move along people (and whatever you do, for God's sake don't look at the left side of his face!!!!)

Lazy Blogging

2008-09-17T09:41:00.002-05:00

Well, I've been beyond lazy. And it continues. So instead of a real blog post, here are a few entertaining links. (Also, I added links to the Redskins Insider Blog and Chris Cooley's blog for all you 'Skins fans.)

Via Truehoop, a link to the top 50 Charles Barkley Quotes. Does it get better than Sir Charles?

Hugo Chavez and Evo Morales formally endorse John McCain for president. (Always good to have an external threat when you're trying to surpress internal dissension, no?) Here's saying McCain doesn't list these endorsements on his website any time soon.

I couldn't be happier that former HP CEO Carly Fiorina is in trouble with the McCain campaign. Not only did she run HP into the ground (all image no substance), but now she used her expert wisdom and experience to state that neither John McCain nor Sarah Palin could be CEO of a major company. Hey, if she couldn't do it, I'm certain McCain can't.

From the land of TFS (Totally effing stupid), it looks like Congress is going to lift the ban on offshore drilling, which will, of course, immediately rectify all economic problems and create energy independence for the US. Surprisingly, the White House says it doesn't go far enough because it wouldn't allow you to put up an oil well on George Bush's Best Buddies Private Beach.

Sarah Palin has peaked and is now becoming just another hated crazy. That's what happens when you don't believe in evolution, force raped women to pay for their own rape kits, unabashadly lie about everything, among other problems.

Hey, did you know that McCain invented the Blackberry and WiFi? Al Gore has got to be having a good chuckle right about now.

Remember the whole "Obama will talk to Iran, whaaaaa!" bruhaha? Looks like he's not the only one. Yes, that is McCain foreign policy advisor Henry Kissinger suggesting it would be a good idea to hold talks with Iran. Ooops.

In a somewhat bizarre turn of events, it now appears that McCain's health care plan would reduce health care coverage for millions of Americans. This has got to be the strongest reason to vote against him yet.

Oh, and in a move only the Red Chinese could respect, the US just nationalized AIG. That's in addition to Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac. Sure looks like Republiconomics and China's "Socialized Capitalism" are getting increasingly closer.

And finally, from the Hall of Stupid, comes this video of Philly's Desean Jackson celebrating a bit too early. This would be the second time he's done this in his career. Stupid is as stupid does.

McCain's Speech

2008-09-05T09:59:00.002-05:00

I confess I watched very little. Five minutes of listening to the man would put me into a deep sleep, so I flipped channels and caught tidbits here and there. What I did see wasn't good (awful morelike) and the speech has been widely panned (CNN's Jeffrey Toobin called it the worst acceptance speech since Jimmy Carter in 1980).

So I won't comment on the substance. Instead, I just want to make one point. John McCain is a seriously creepy dude. I'm referring to, of course, his forced smiling. At several points, he finished a long ramble, looked up to the crowd, they applaused on cue, and then he gave the creepiest, most forced smile ever, almost like his handlers had written on the telepromter "smile here". And then, just as quickly as it had come, the smile was gone and his nose was back buried in his notes. Really, it creeped me out.

Anyway, it appears that the GOP strategy for November is two-fold: We've got great personal histories and the only way to change the GOP run Washington (note to Creepy White Guy - No "r" in Washington) is to bring in more GOPers to run Washington! I have a feeling that that's not going to fly.

Palin's speech

2008-09-04T09:53:00.003-05:00

I missed the first part of the speech as we were watching Colombian news, so I can't speak to her personal narrative (not that I have *any* interest in her story). But I did see most of the substantive part and I have to say, I agree with CNN's Jeffrey Toobin who called the speech "smug, cutting, and sarcastic". I'd go further. I think it was too clever by half and not particularly populist (being that popularism refers to grass roots democracy, supporting the working class, and promoting issues that are relevant to the people - three things that Palin definitely did not do last night).

What I mean by too clever by half is that there were too many "inside" jokes about Obama, jokes that half the time even I didn't immediately recognize (like holding back the sea or whatever which I guess was a reference to the evangelical end-of-the-worlders who see Obama as the anti-christ). And I have to suggest that if a relative junkie like me didn't get her "jabs" that easily, then I hardly think that John and Jane Q. Average were going to get them either.

Even beyond that, I thought the speech was rather amatuerish. It hardly spoke to policy issues or the economy (the closest she got was oil "independence" which is so far beyond stupid given that hydrocarbon markets are GLOBAL and even marginally increasing US production would have zero effect on prices). The tone was antagonistic, arrogant, and, at times, a litany of lies (see Bridge to Nowhere). And , I thought all her "barbs" were distracting, lacking in class, and pointless. More on this in a moment.

But no matter what I thought, the media practically fell all over themselves for a speech that was, no matter your political predisposition, was well delivered and quite forceful. In terms of delivery, I certainly get why they thought it was better than Biden's speech. This concerns me. The media have been going after Palin and McCain for days now since she's an obvious gimmick pick and is vastly unqualified to be President. But the McCainites have pushed back against the media calling them sexist and liberal and the media has a tendency to back down.

They shouldn't. Instead they should continue to do their job. And that includes pointing out the outright lies coming out of Palin's mouth (she supported the Bridge to Nowhere before she was against it, she increased federal earmarks for Alaska, and she is involved in a political scandal - some "reformer"). And, most troubling, I have yet to see anyone in the CNN media hierarchy state the fact that her husband was a member of the Alaska Independence Party or that she herself has attended their conventions, addressed their conventions, and actively sought out their support. Because, to me, hiring a pro-successionist governor to be one heartbeat away from the Presidency is a colossal error in judgement and is reason enough to disqualify McCain as a legitimate contender.

Here's Joe Klien on this topic:

"There is a tendency in the media to kick ourselves, cringe and withdraw, when we are criticized. But I hope my colleagues stand strong in this case: it is important for the public to know that Palin raised taxes as governor, supported the Bridge to Nowhere before she opposed it, pursued pork-barrel projects as mayor, tried to ban books at the local library and thinks the war in Iraq is "a task from God." The attempts by the McCain campaign to bully us into not reporting such things are not only stupidly aggressive, but unprofessional in the extreme."

At any rate, back to what I referenced above about her barbs being classless. It has become evident in previous weeks that McCain's only chance is to polarize the electorate and hold out for 0.1% of the vote, ala George Bush in 2000 (and a miraculous Florida problem). And that desperation has led to the most craven of political strategies - a Rush Limbaugh campaign. Palin fits into this and if you listened last night, she spent the majority of her time trying to drum up a new culture war. She was anything but respectful of the opposition and, in a word, came off awfully rednecky.

Contrast that to Obama, who has always appeared presidential, and has carefully stated time and time again that he respects McCain, he just doesn't think the man is the right choice for President. Obama's rhetorical strategy is to suggest that their differences are POLICY differences not PERSONAL differences. McCain's (and Palin's) rhetorical approach have ONLY attacked Obama on a PERSONAL level and NEVER attacked him on a policy level (I mean, how could they, they're wrong on the issues and they know it). I think this difference is critical because in a world in which there are disagreements over policy, compromise is possible. But in a world in which the disagreements are personal, there is no progress. I mean, does anyone else remember high school?

Ultimately, I don't think the McCain-Palin crap is gonna fly because I think this is a "change" election about specific policy solutions to problems at home and abroad and the GOP isn't particularly interested or versed in policy solutions (McCain is a self-admitted no-nothing on economics - only the most important issue of the day). In fact, the closes Palin came to the "change" meme was to suggest that Washington wasn't working and that they needed to get the old guys out of there and start again. Which I guess is sort of ironic since the GOP has controlled the White House for 8 years and Congress for 6 and this would undoubtedly be the one area where we agree.

Ultimately, I don't think last night's speech was a "grand slam" like the media is pushing. Instead, I think it was a "base consolidation" speech that got a bunch of hard core GOPers roused up but probably fell on deaf ears in living rooms across America. To the truly "undecideds" and "independents", I don't think this speech helped McCain. In fact, I think it probably hurt. Because that voting block is likely the only voting block that actually pays attention to policy, to the direction a candidate wants to take the country, and to the "presidential" nature of any given candidate. So giving a rah-rah speech that was little more than a collection of partisan jabs that you'd be more likely to hear on Rush Limbaugh than at a national convention doesn't seem like it would satisfy the needs of the undecideds.

Anyway, it's getting hard to keep track of all of the scandals circling Palin, so I'm posting this link from DailyKos which is fairly comprehensive.

Finally, I have to confess, Palin definitely worries me. Not so much in this election. I think it would be a monstrous upset if Obama lost and I don't think, at the end of the day, it's going to be particularly close. But Palin's getting serious on the job training in national politics and I'm very worried that she's gonna be around in 2012 as a legit candidate. A lot can happen between now and then but it's extremely concerning to me that a Christian extremist can be so widely accepted and like in mainstream national politics. There's a whole racial element to this as well which I touch on in the near future, but the bottom line is, I think as a country we've had enough of the "God speaks to me", "God is on our side", and "God is punishing the Jews for not recognizing Jesus" type political leaders.

Maverick my ass

2008-09-02T10:30:00.001-05:00

A "maverick" would have picked his own damn VP:

"Up until midweek last week, some 48 to 72 hours before Mr. McCain introduced Ms. Palin at a Friday rally in Dayton, Ohio, Mr. McCain was still holding out the hope that he could name as his running mate a good friend, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut, a Republican close to the campaign said. Mr. McCain had also been interested in another favorite, former Gov. Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania.

But both men favor abortion rights, anathema to the Christian conservatives who make up a crucial base of the Republican Party. As word leaked out that Mr. McCain was seriously considering the men, the campaign was bombarded by outrage from influential conservatives who predicted an explosive floor fight at the convention and vowed rejection of Mr. Ridge or Mr. Lieberman by the delegates. "

Throwing in the towel

2008-08-29T10:51:00.002-05:00

John McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin is embarrassing and will not end well for the candidate or the party. For those of you, like me, who have never heard of her before, here are the basics: The Alaskan governor is a 44-year old mother of 5 who has 2 years on the job, prior to which she was the mayor of a town of 7,000 (and served on an Oil board). Previous experience include: Sports Reporter, beauty pageant winner, owner of an outdoor sports equipment company, and owner of a fishing company.

I’m guessing the “experience” meme is no longer important to McCain. In fact, this pick is so unbelievable because the central attack on Obama was that he wasn’t ready to lead on day one. I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that America really doesn’t want to rely on a 72-year old president with a history of cancer and possibly dementia with only a 44-year old Vice President who has no experience in foreign policy, agricultural policy, urban policy, or any of the other issues that are important to the ENTIRE nation as his backup.

This pick is also entirely illogical in the sense that she also risks alienating the very independents that McCain so needs to have any hope in November with her virulently crazy views about creationism and abortion. McCain of 2006 was the guy who was considered “moderate” on abortion and women’s rights. Hiring Palin is the final nail in that coffin and I have a feeling that his now party line conservativism won’t float well with the true independents.

Furthermore, she doesn’t have a squeaky clean image. While she has campaigned as an outsider and a reformer, it’s worth noting that she’s currently under investigation for corruption for allegedly trying to get her former brother in law fired from his job as a state trooper in retribution for his custody fight with her sister.

And if that’s not enough, she’s in bed with big oil which doesn’t seem like such a hot idea in an election year when big oil is under attack as gas prices spike. (It will be interesting to see what McCain does with ANWAR. She’s in favor of drilling while he is, as of today, opposed.)

And did I mention that she’s from Alaska?

Some people are calling this a Hail Mary but a Hail Mary implies you have a chance. I’m calling it a capitulation. Because you don’t pick a nobody with no experience from a nothing state if you are serious about winning. In fact, the only reasonable explanation is that McCain thinks that women will vote for a women simply because she’s a woman. And that’s got to be the low point in this campaign.

Earlier I said “game, set, match”. Now I’d like to repeat a favorite line from Die Hard: “The Quarterback is toast!”

Update: Did I mention that a month ago she said she didn't even know what the VP did? Watch for yourself as she states that she wouldn't accept the job until someone told her what it involved. Way to go McSamey!

An Awesome Speech

2008-08-29T10:00:00.003-05:00

It's rare that a political speech is truly "historical". The media love to say the word "historical" but most speeches don't last 3 months, not to mention the test of time. I'm here to say today that Obama's speech last night will live on famously.

The excitement was palatable and afterwards I could hardly sleep. Obama took it right to McCain on 3 levels:

1. He provided a general defense of liberalism while utterly ravaging the conservative movement's trickle down economics (a policy that could not have failed more spectacularly but is still somehow believed by many).

2. He defended himself from all the ridiculous attacks that McCain has leveled in the last weeks. Specifically the "celebrity" and "unpatriotic" claims. His response to those arguments was weaved within the larger context of his speech and was truly stunning. But not only that, he implicitly attacked McCain for making such stupid arguments with his "the times are too serious for the same old partisan playbook" line.

3. He spent considerable time on policy specifics, comparing them to McCain and suggesting that there is middle ground for "values voters" (re: Guns, Abortion, Gay Marraige, etc).

In short, he sold his ideas, his philosophy, and his character while at the same time attacking the befuddled old man that will say and do anything to get elected, even if it means crawling into bed with the same sleazebags that ruined his chances in 2000.

Assuming Obama manages to extricate his foot from John McCain's ass, the Senator will be introducing his VP selection today. They held off the news last night because it was "Obama's night" but really they just wanted to dominate the morning news cycle. (Of course picking a newbie-nobody like Sarah Palin, 42, Gov of Alaska, is essentially like waving the white flag.)

Sadly for McCain, I don't think there's any coming back from last night's assault. On every level (energy, excitement, substance, appearance, etc), Obama just housed the old man from Arizona. He turned back the elitist tag with a strong personal narrative about growing up very middle class. He ridiculed the celebrity narrative with the same narrative (it is ironic that McCain's top criticism of Obama is that the man is too popular, no?). He housed him on the most salient issue in the election - the economy. And he did it all while looking incredibly poised, earnest, trustworthy, and frankly, presidential.

Game. Set. Match.

Post Biden Reflections

2008-08-25T10:43:00.003-05:00

I think my post from the other day underlined one particular feature about the Biden choice: a lack of enthusiasm. For me, the choice was the right one given the candidates under consideration (I still think he should have seriously considered General Wesley Clark) which meant I gave a great sigh of relief when the choice wasn't Bayh or Kaine or any of the other problematic candidates. That doesn't mean I'm thrilled with the Biden choice. It just means that, given the cast of characters, from where I sit, Biden was the best of a weak group.

A lot has been made in the last couple days about how VP selections are basically non-factors in presidential elections (see this Kevin Drum post at his new digs). And I agree with that reasoning for the most part. Vice presidents don't generally matter to the electorate - i mean, after all, it's the rare event that ever makes the Vice-President relevant.

Or it used to be. Now with Cheney's unitary executive theory, the VP has a whole host of expanded powers that are probably not constitutionally supported. But I won't pretend that the electorate has noticed. No, the reality is, the electorate is going to make a choice almost entirely based on the merits (or perceived merits) of the presidential nominees.

So, to the extent that poll and historical data shows that VP selections don't matter *directly* in voter choices, I agree. What is less clear, however, is how a VP selection can have an *indirect* effect on voter selection. This is particularly relevant this year as Obama seems to have staked his ground as a "different kind of candidate" meaning that he won't go too negative or really crack down on McCain BS. Hiring Biden as the VP means that Obama can continue that role (i.e. look presidential) AND have an attack dog go after McCain nonsense in an aggressive, effective way. And, call me an optimist, but that could affect voter selection in November.

So in the end, I like the Biden choice because I think that it a) allows Obama to maintain his Presidential appearance (i.e. the high road), b) employs an experienced, well respected, and articulate attack against McCain, by someone who is well liked and respected by the insider press (never underestimate the impact of a press corp that likes a candidate, see McCain, John and "maverick") and c) is more racially pleasing to white America (having a black man attack a white former POW, war hero isn't the type of thing that white America really goes for now is it?).

Anyway, we're in DNC week now. Which means lots of ridiculous coverage from CNN and Wolf Blitzer, hours of blowhard "analysis", and political theater. For anyone who is genuinely considering their presidential selection, I recommend they watch Obama's speech and nothing else. Because the rest is like a Broadway play for political junkies.

The Biden Pick

2008-08-23T08:47:00.002-05:00

All signs had pointed to Biden during the last week, so this selection does not come as a surprise. Now that it's official I have some thoughts:

1. It's a good pick if for no other reason, it doesn't hurt Obama. The other major candidates (Hillary, Bayh, Kaine, etc) were all controversial in their own right. Clinton is obvious (inflame the GOP), Bayh is a total nob, and Kaine is a very conservative Dem and likely would have alienated the base.

2. Biden is a man of extensive experience. In particular, he is the Senate Foreign Relations Committee leader and has served in the same role on the Senate Judiciary Committee. As far as Committee leadership in the Senate goes, he's got it in spades. Of course, he got it wrong on Iraq, but then came around. But no matter, he's got the "perception"of experience which is important to beat back the silly "Obama isn't experienced enough" meme.

3. He's an attack dog. Make no mistake, Biden is an excellent debater and will provide some swerve to Obama's dignified, non-confrontational stance. To a lot of people, Obama is almost too vanilla. Biden is more rough and tumble and if I were Mitt Romney (McCain's likely choice for VP), I'd be sweating already because Biden is going to destroy the Mittster (Mitt doesn't do himself any favors by being a total tool with zero foreign policy knowledge and a rich man's economic plan).

4. They can continue the "McCain is a rich, out of touch, fool" meme. Biden has 1 house. He's not wealthy. He's a regular guy who never got corrupted by the craziness of Washington. He's what McCain should have been. That doesn't mean he's perfect, but he damn well sure knows that it lettuce pickers don't earn $50/hour.

5. He *may* help Obama in Pennsylvania, which, as we all know, is pretty big. And, as CNN is trying to drive home today, Biden is Catholic and that could help Obama win some Catholics (no actual reasons have been given for that argument except that, you know, in 'Merica we vote for people like us).

Last thought: This is yet another example of Obama rubbing it in Clinton's face. He chose the "experienced" candidate, the candidate that would fill his gaps, be a bulldog etc. That was basically Hillary's line - that she was the one candidate who could take on the GOP, that she had the experience, and that she'd "been there before". I'm guessing that this is gonna smart.

USA Basketball Update

2008-08-20T11:23:00.002-05:00

I haven't been able to watch a whole lot of down here. Local coverage more often that not shows althletes walking to their events, qualifying races, or empty fields rather than basketball. Frankly, the coverage has been rather pathetic. But I suppose that's to be expected. Colombia isn't exactly an Olympic power.

That being said, I saw most of the US-Spain game and I'm assuming US-Argentina will be on (at least the Argentinian sports channel will show it). By and large, my predictions have come true. The US team destroyed the competition in the preliminary round and today proceeded to blow out Australia in the 2nd half (it was a "close" 12-point lead at the half). And, even with the evident weaknesses of this team (lack of size, so-so 3-point shooting, defensive lapses), for the most part, our huge advantage in athleticism has won the day. I stand by my argument that no team with weak point guard play is going to beat the US.

Argentina should be an interesting challenge. I watched one of their pre-Olympic friendlies against Poland, a game in which they almost (and should have) lost. It was a pathetic display of basketball futility in which neither team shot well (Poland is not known for basketball prowess) and in which Argentina won by a slim margin after taking the lead in the final 2 minutes. Of course, Manu Ginobili did not play and he is their only elite player, so that is somewhat explainable.

I have yet to see Argentina play in the Olympics (with Ginobili), so it's hard to predict how the US will do against them. But I have to think it won't be that close. Several factors work in our favor. First, their PG play is woefully inadequate (Pablo Prigioni).

Second, their talent level suffers a steep drop off after Delfino, Ginobili, Nocioni, and Scola. In fact, aside from Ginobili, the rest of those guys are mid-level talents that are career role players. Take Delfino, for example. His career high in the NBA is 9.9 points/game and with 4.4 rebounds. He can stroke it from outside, but that's true for most everyone at this stage. Nocioni, on the other hand, is best known as a bruiser who can shoot, but more than anything, he is slow, slow, slow. And I think we've seen enough of Scola after one season in Houston to conclude that he's little more than a fairly good rebounder with limited offensive skills (think a skinny Tractor Traylor).

The conclusion of this is not to suggest that this team is terrible. Obviously, they are quite good. They play well together, they have great chemistry, and set roles. No, the conclusion is that an extraordinary offensive burden falls on Ginobili because the rest of the team is simply not that offensively gifted. This didn't matter that much against Greece (who they beat by 2) but against the US, a team that can afford to sic the Koberman on Ginobili and still have plenty of offensive punch, it will matter. Indeed, the only chance Argentina has to beat the US is if Ginobili goes off for his normal 25 and one of the other guys matches him. But even that probably won't be enough. Ginobili had 24 against Greece and Delfino had 23 and they still only scored 80 points total. Bottom line, you're not beating the US with 80 points.

Third, the US team is probably the fastest team to ever play in the Olympics. If you want to beat them, you've got to stop the fast break, get the ball over the half court line quickly, and get into your offensive sets as soon as possible to exploit the US lack of size down low and their relatively pourous pick-and-roll defense. That's a tall order. Especially when your big guys (Nocioni, Scola, and what the hell, Oberto) have the lateral quickness of a the average tree sloth. Unless something has changed in the last 3 weeks for Argentina, I think they will be hard pressed to be competitive for 40 minutes.

None of this is to suggest that the US team is going to walk over Argentina. That hasn't been our style to date (excluding weak ass teams like Angola and German). Instead, the US generally plays a little tight to start games, almost as if they're feeling out the opponent, and then, once they've got their rythm on both sides, they go on a big run and put the game away. I expect something similar to happen on Friday.

The only wild card, the only factor that makes me nervous, is that Manu Ginobili is one of the top players in the world. He does things that very few can do and as we saw last season in the NBA, if you let him get going, he can kill you down the stretch. I'm assuming Kobe isn't going to let that happen (the Spurs-Lakers rivalry extends to Beijing). But if the game is on and I get to watch it, that's what I'll be looking for. The tone of our defense on Ginobili early will likely tell us what we need to know about the eventual outcome.

Final Note: I hadn't realized just what a badass Chris Bosh was until this Olympics. I haven't seen him play in awhile but wow, he's awesome. It's incredible to think that he's only 24. Right now, I'd say he's easily the 4th best power forward in the NBA and could even move up on Amare (you know, because Bosh plays D). Anyone who suggests that Boozer is better is just a damn fool.

Watching Bad Movies so that you don't have to

2008-08-04T09:25:00.002-05:00

Spiderman 3: Finally caught this on HBO last week. It's official. The Spiderman franchise is dead. They may still make a few more movies because the box office receipts were good, but this movie was godawful bad.

I never liked the whole Harry hated Peter but both Peter and Harry love Mary Jane plotline. Not only is the acting just not good enough to support something like that (the guy who plays Harry should never act in Hollywood again) but Mary Jane is not particularly attractive or interesting as a character. Not only that, it's a frickin' COMIC BOOK movie! Who the hell wants a love triangle like that in a comic book movie?

So, I was a bit disappointed that the writers went with that plotline to start the movie. Then I got real confused because it seemed like they added two more plotlines, almost as if they knew that the Harry story would piss everyone off, except both of the new plotlines could easily have been stand alone movies by themselves so combining the 3 meant that they had to pay lip service to each one.

So, in sum, you have 3 crappy movies packed into one, extra long crappy movie that only has a few moments of redeeming action, which would never be sufficient to put up with watching the entire movie. This gets 5 crappulas.

Apocalypto: The only redeeming value of this movie is that now that I've seen it, I'll immediately recognize it any time I'm flipping channels and that recognition will save me 3 milliseconds in that I'll be able to immediately skip to the next channel without having to wonder what is on. I'd rather watch Starship Troopers twice...in a row...than ever watch Apocalypto again.

Hancock: Hey, here's an idea - Take a cool, new take on the action hero genre, make half a movie, and then start smoking crack right before you write the second half of the script. You'll end up with something like Hancock. Good enough to watch once, not offensive in any particular way, just got stupid at the halfway mark and on.

Conservative Hack-o-la WSJ notices that McCain is stupid and/or losing it

2008-08-01T14:44:00.001-05:00

You know it's getting bad when the Wall Street Journal, the center of right wing hackery in print media (along with the Washington Times) publishes and editorial entitled, "Is John McCain stupid?" which begins with the line, "Is John McCain losing it?"

I'm not the only one who has noticed that McCain's mental health must seriously be questioned given the last few weeks of flip-flops and insistence that he never said things that he clearly did.

There's no stopping LBJ

2008-08-01T10:51:00.003-05:00

Missing the first half yesterday meant that I missed the splendor that is LeBron James in international basketball. We already know that there is no one on the planet that can defend LeBron one-on-one. But what hadn't been clear was how LeBron would play with a number of superstars around him. The answer is: an unstoppable destructive force on both ends of the court. I don't even know if he has an actual position on that team. It's more like he is the designated Whirling Dervish whose job is to disrupt and destroy.

After watching him against Lithuania this morning, no slouch although quite young, I have to say, failing injury, I don't see how the USA doesn't win gold this year. Even if some team out there could stop Kobe, Deron, Redd, et al, there's no way that they're ever gonna have a chance against LBJ. We'll know more after the Russia game, so I will forego further fawning praise for now in favor of a few more observations.

1. I left out Germany from yesterday's breakdown of the preliminary round. No offense intended, just missed 'em on the ESPN schedule. That being said, they have less than no hope. You aren't beating Team USA unless you have excellent guard play and that excludes Germany. But good for them anyway. I've always been a Dirk fan and I'm happy they get to compete.

2. The US athleticism again caused serious problems for their opponent. Our guys came out with energy, quick feet, and jabbing hands and that resulted in turnovers, fastbreaks, and easy buckets. Even with an experienced, NBA calibre point guard (Sarunas Jasikevicius) Lithuania had loads of problems just getting into the half-court in the first quarter (and beyond). The US second team didn't play as well in the second as one would expect, but even with a half-effort from the second team, the US went into halftime "in control" although not with a demoralizing lead (I think it was only 17).

3. Size problems continue. I haven't seen the box score yet but it sure looked like Lithuania was getting a bunch of offensive boards. I counted 3 straight during one stretch in the 3rd. But more than that, by playing Carmelo at the 4 (which they seem to do for long stretches) they have only 2 options to stop an easy post-up score: deny the entry or swipe the ball out of the big's hands once he gets it. That seemed to work for awhile but it also resulted in a couple easy fouls on 'Melo. I'm not saying that's not gonna work against most teams. I mean, the US is great at disrupting another team's offense, but it's risky. Even a young team like Lithuania was able to handle the defensive pressure after awhile and score some easy buckets. I wonder what a team like Spain will do.

4. Pick and Roll defense continues to need work. The US team definitely played the Pick and Roll better than yesterday. But they still need work. Euro teams are great at the pick and roll. So good that I imagine that a typical Euro practice is 2 straight hours of pick and roll offense. So the US will need to defend it better. The good news is that it looks like they're figuring that out. That doesn't mean there weren't some easy buckets given up, but they're reacting quicker to the pick-and-roll, as if they now have it clear that the only real offense most Euro teams have is the pick-and-roll (and junk shooting which we'll get to next). If they continue to get better at defending the pick-and-roll, then this tournament will be a breeze.

5. Junk 3-point shooting is the other staple of the Euro offense. Anyone who's watched Euro Basket or International Ball knows that the only times the Euros don't run the pick-and-roll their offense is essentially crazy, herky jerky dribble drive and kick to a 6'10" guy who can shoot the international 3. Coming out of the break today, that's just what Lithuania did and because our guys were a little slow to pick up on it, Lithuania narrowed the lead to 9 points (4-5 3-PTs to start the 3rd quarter). So I was a little disappointed that the guys weren't realizing that: a) all the Euros can shoot the 3 and b) it's better to give up an easy bucket down low than a wide open 3-pointer.

And while I wasn't ever really worried (the offense was still rocking), I was concerned about what I saw to start the 3rd. But then, Coach K made one small change that irrevocably destroyed Lithuania - he went to the press (at times full court, other times 3/4 court). Once again, our athleticism won the day. Because if you can't reliably get the ball up the court, it doesn't matter how good your flat footed big men can shoot the rock. Suddenly, a 9 point lead went to a 25 point lead and it was over. Spain will handle this better. They have legit point guards. But I wonder about the other teams in the tournament.

6. Dwyane Wade is back. I haven't seen Wade play this good...ever. Whatever injuries he may have had last season, they're way behind him. He was bombing 3's, driving to the hoop, distributing the ball, and doing all the things that make DWade, DWade. He had one ridiculous dunk that just about brought the house down. (The Chinese are excellent basketball fans as far as I can tell, btw). To think that we have a top-5 player in the world coming off the bench must be very scary for the rest of the field.

In sum, the problems the US has are mostly correctable. And it appears like Coach K is working hard to correct them. I have to say, I just don't see this team losing. I have small concerns (being too unselfish, lack of size, etc) but even if you add up all those concerns you still come up with a couple uncomfortably close games, not a loss. This year it looks like we got the right mix of guys and the right coach. If we screw this up, then I don't know where we go from here.

Update: ESPN's Chris Sheridan, who has been doing yoeman's work on international basketball for years now, highlights Kobe more than anyone but also concludes that based on performace so far, Team USA should win the gold going away. This is interesting because he would be considered a basketball "realist" and accurately predicted our failures of the last several years.

A few thoughts about Team USA

2008-07-31T08:41:00.002-05:00

By chance, I happened to turn on ESPN this morning and surprise, Team USA is having a friendly against Turkey. I missed the first half, but watching the second I have the following observations:

1. Our offense is unstoppable...at least by Turkey. I'd be seriously surprised if we ever have trouble scoring. In this game, we've scored by posting up, with the pick and roll, isolation plays, dribble drives and kicks, and simply blowing by everyone and taking it to the rack. I know Turkey isn't the greatest team but, by comparison, I watched Argentina in a friendly against Poland the other day and there is no comparison. Our athleticism at the guard positions is far beyond anything that any team has and that means we're going to score an awful lot of points. (Aside: Argentina was kind of sorry. Maybe they'll play better in the Olympics, but the looked slow, unathletic, and lacking in shooters.)

2. We still have problems defending the pick-and-roll. I know this is a friendly, but the pick-and-roll is the most basic and fundamental basketball play and we haven't defended it properly once so far. Part of this is because in the NBA, you can't have rolling-pick-and-rolls (the guy setting the pick has to be standing still), but in international basketball, there is apparently no such restriction (let's just say that rule is fungible). That makes it a lot more difficult to defend. But our guys haven't really responded well to that and they need to and fast.

3. Our lack of size is a problem on the defensive boards. Several times in the fourth, DWade (6'2") was trying to box out a 6'10" guy to no avail. I don't think our size is going to matter hugely on defense because the international game isn't really about finding size mismatches and posting up and so many international big men shoot 3-pointers and thus hover around the perimeter. But I do think it will be a problem on the defensive boards. Something to watch.

4. We blew out Turkey, as we should have, but it wasn't like Turkey was shooting lights out. In fact, Turkey had a great number of open looks from the perimeter and just couldn't find the net. That's why they're not in the Olympics. Spain and Greece won't have that problem.

Bottom line about this game: We gave up a ton of open looks that Turkey couldn't capitalize on, got abused from time to time on the defensive boards, and scored at will on the other end. Works great against Turkey, not so great against an elite team.

But I won't end these observations on a sour note. Instead, here's a quickee prediction for the Olympics by game:

Game 1: China

It's rather popular to suggest that the combination of Yao Ming and the home crowd will make China a player. It says here that that type of thinking is nobariffic. China's guard play wouldn't make it in the D-League and Yao hasn't exactly led the Rockets to the golden land yet, has he. Look for a 40 point blowout here.

Game 2: Angola

To be honest, I know nothing about Angola. But I'm guessing they suck. Next.

Game 3: Greece

Our first challenge. We should defeat them but it won't be easy. Greece can shoot from the outside and have the big bodies down low to get more offensive possessions. But I don't believe they're as good as they were a few years ago and I think if it comes down to a close finish, they're no stopping Kobe or Carmelo and that should make the difference.

Game 4: Spain

We could very easily lose to Spain. They have, essentially, an NBA line up, they pass better than any team in the tournament, and they have the inside-outside combination that can be deadly. That being said, if we play better defense (no open looks, box out, defend the pick-and-roll) then we should win because they certainly won't be able to stop us on offense (the open seive that is Pau Gasol will be abused by the likes of Howard, Bosh, and Boozer, not to mention their guards have no hope of shutting down Paul or DWade).

At this point, the US will either be 3-1 or 4-0 and we shall know about their chances. If they get out of this group 4-0 with a decisive victory against Spain, then I think they take the gold going away. But if they struggle against Spain, then I'll be worried.

What's going on with McCain?

2008-07-29T09:53:00.004-05:00

For those of you paying close attention, you may have noticed the most bizarre series of events this week, events that seriously call into question McCain's mental abilities, not to mention his qualifications for president.

We all know that McCain's "signature issue" is national security. What, exactly, he did to become an expert in national security, no one can say exactly. (It wouldn't be his legislative record.) But the media has largely bought the argument that McCain is a national security expert who knows what's up in Iraq and other places about the world. That narrative, of course, becomes complicated when he forgets small details like the difference between Sunnis and Shiites, but to date, those little things haven't hurt him much.

This week, however, McCain bizarrely stated that a 16 month timetable for an Iraqi withdrawal would be acceptable to him if commanders on the ground approved. The, ONE DAY LATER, he adamantly refused and rejected a question about his "new" timetable position. He was combative and arrogant and angry at the very question, so much so that the rather puny weakling asking him the question backed off and let it slide.

So, imagine the surprise when ONE DAY LATER, McCain restates that a 16-month timetable for withdrawal would be acceptable if approved by commanders on the ground. This flip-flop is in addition to flip-flops on Affirmative Action, Gay Adoption, and on Raising taxes. He also seems to forget that mere weeks before Obama took an international trip, McCain himself went across the pond to conduct a quasi-legal fundraiser.

I think that we, as voters, have to be seriously concerned about the possibility of electing a president with a tendency to either outright lie or with early Alzheimer's. Because there is no real alternative explanation that makes any sense. Either McCain is becoming increasingly desperate, willing to say anything while sacrificing his dignity in the process to become president or he has a serious memory problem, a problem which suggests he should be disqualified for the presidency. I don't think I have to remind you that we've been down this road before. It resulted in Iran-Contra. And now the stakes are almost higher. Facing the problems we face - a failing economy, crumbling infrastructure, a never ending housing/banking crisis, a shrinking middle class, a foreign quagmire, losing the war in Afghanistan, and a problematic reputation, to name a few - one has to seriously wonder if electing a 72 year old with a history of skin cancer (new lesion removed yesterday) and a tendency to forget important things (either willfully or not) is a good idea. The question of Vice-President has never been so important, has it?

This is not to suggest that Obama is a panacea. He's not. And I have some very serious concerns I'll be detailing shortly. And, I confess, I would vote for him 100 times out of 100 (I have donated $55 to his campaign). But for those still wavering with their lifetime allegiances to the Republican party, reluctant to cross party lines just this once, I have to suggest that given the circumstances, Obama is the ONLY choice. Or to put it slightly more aggressively, is it sensible to put the most difficult job in the world at one of the most difficult moments in the recent history of our country in the hands of a doddering 72-year old with a history of health problems, an anger management problem, and who has a tendency to still use the word "gook" in reference to the Vietnamese?

How about that McCain Campaign?

2008-07-24T09:21:00.003-05:00

Bad times for John-Boy. First he criticizes Obama for not taking any international trips. So Obama turns around and blows that attack up by making a huge trip abroad where he absolutely looks presidential to the point that he was even referred to as the "President" by at least one foreign dignitary. And, of course, his trip is dominating headlines while McCain is grocery shopping in Bethlahem, PA and trying to appear like a regular guy (note to McCain: "Regular" guys don't have $1 million in credit card debt, 7 private estates, and a private jet).

Now, the McCain campaign's big attack of the weak is that the media is in love with Obama and giving him unfair treatment. They've even gone as far as to make videos for the McCain website set to some golden oldies depicting the media's love for Obama.

(You really can't make this stuff up. McCain's biggest weakness is that he is old and his campaign constantly provides subtle reminders that he is...old. Keep up the good work y'all!)

Exhibit A for the robot known as McCain is the NYT's refusal to publish his "editorial" on Iraq after they published one by Obama. Never mind that Obama's piece was a policy paper that mentioned or referred to McCain 3 times while McCain's "work" was 11 paragraphs directly attacking Obama with one neutral paragraph tacked on. No, don't worry about the details. The NYT published Obama and not McCain. Obvious bias.

Exhibit B for McCain is....waiting.....wait for it.....oh, right, there is no exhibit B. There's just ceaseless whining from McCainites.

Whether the media prefers Obama to McCain or not is not really pertinent. What is pertinent is that whining about media coverage looks weak and desperate. If McCain wants to win this thing he needs to make news, not whine about the lack of coverage. Obama is making news. He's been good at that. But McCain doesn't really have anything to say. And that's biting him in the arse.

(Of course, the fact that there is still a "race" is utterly depressing. McCain is a tired, angry, bitter man with no new ideas who wants to keep the US in Iraq for eternity and yet still somewhere between 40-44% of Americans support him. But foreign policy isn't even his biggest weakness. It's economic policy where he is essentially clueless. He even offered up an economic plan with zero statistics or estimates or numbers and no one really attacked him on it, probably out of pity more than anything. By the way, did I mention that the former CEO of HP is a top McCain advisor. All flash, no substance. Giving HP's best to the McCain campaign. I think I just threw up in my mouth.)

Why I likely won't by HP again (Aka Pavilion dv9500 Problems)

2008-07-16T09:16:00.003-05:00

I confess to have having HP love. The Pavilion dv9500 is a sweet looking machine. And the screen is really quite lovely. And the price was right. So, I bought HP thinking that it would be reliable and would suit my needs. And it was. For 8 months. And then Vista SP1 came around and everything went to hell. And I'm still battling with it (after installing a new hard drive, mind you) and although I may be winning the war, I'm never getting back all the time, effort, and money spent.

So here's my list of reasons why I won't be buying an HP laptop again.

1. The service sucks. When I bought a compaq from Best Buy prior to moving to England, I was offered and ultimately sold a international service plan. It cost about 1/9 of the cost of the laptop but it was well worth it. I figured, if anything went wrong, better to have some service options in the UK.

Unfortunately, HP has no such plan. Instead, one has to fix one's computer in the country in which it was bought. There seems to be no real reason for that (although they've got a litany of bullshit to fill your ears if you're so inclined). Instead, they've got a service center set up somewhere in India with people who are trained to repeat a very narrow set of sentences and who are completely unable to answer logical questions that might occur. For example, when quiered about the computer's problem, Help Tech #2 (it's always a different techie which means it's always a different level of english and confusion) immediately replied that I needed to replace the hard drive. Techie #3, when quiered, was unable to explain exactly WHO would be installing the hard drive once it arrived (me, a service tech, Bob Dole?). At which point, I gave up.

My point: For a company that has allegedly won awards for its "service", I expect service that doesn't eat open ass.

2. HP software stinks. Look, if you're gonna load up every computer you make with software that is intended to provide security and functionality (driver) updates for said computer, make sure it works first. Because for me, it's never, *ever* worked. Not only that, I find it to be annoying and after discovering that it didn't work, I disabled it.

3. They load up your box with tons of crap that no one would ever use or want. Look: I'm gonna type this real slow like so that I'm clear: I will NEVER sign up for AOL. It's a bankrupt model that worked during the 90s but is finished. Nor do I want the Yahoo! toolbar, the HP Games (which humorously HP things someone somewhere would actually pay for), or Vongo or any of the other pre-loaded fecal ridden filth that corrupt the smooth operation of the system. I know other computers come like this too, but HP is so far over the top with it that I want to punch someone.

4. Interactivity failure. I don't know, call me crazy, but if I have an HP laptop and I buy an HP printer/scanner/copier, I sorta expect that I'm gonna be able to connect the two with no problems. I'm crazy like that. So imagine my surprise when my HP printer encountered troubles interfacing with my HP laptop, ultimately resulting in a partial failure that left my printer/scanner/copier as only a printer/copier. Realizing that maybe the problem was with Windows Vista (no! never!) I then went to the HP website looking for drivers and installation software, where, surprise, I found 2 seperate programs that were intended to do the same thing, neither of which work properly, but I'm guessing you knew that already. Anyway, after extensive fighting (read: several attempts to run the same program), I was ultimately successful in installing the printer AND scanner. But then, the computer crashed and I was forced to reinstall Windows *again* and we're back where we started.

So, I'll type this real slow like too, just to be sure: A company that makes both printers and laptops should be able to get them to talk to each other and work properly.

5. Consistent errors and other problems. If one goes to the HP website and does some looking around, it will quickly become clear that the ENTIRE Pavilion line is in trouble. HP has extended warrenties for the majority of the models produced (how kind of them) and has information on common errors and fixes on most lines. Not only that, I have heard from various sources that the dv9500 (my laptop) has maddening problems with freezing and crashing after a period of use. The diagnosis is unclear but the problems are well known.

What does HP have to say about this? Nada. Zilch. Zero. Bagel. Taco.

Call me crazy, but computer reliability is rather important, no?

6. Utter lack of information. I can't confirm that I have solved the problem that has plagued my laptop over the last month or more. I think that I may have, but until I have, say, 2 weeks of use without crashes or needing to reinstall windows, I won't know. What I do know is that prior to installing Vista SP1 for the first time, I had no troubles. After installing Vista SP1, the nightmare began. Roughly a week or so AFTER SP1 was released, HP quietly released a note on its website for the dv9500 suggesting that the BIOS should be flashed an updated PRIOR to installing SP1. As was once said famously, "I REALLY COULD HAVE USED THAT INFORMATION YESTERDAY!"

If this is the root of the problem, and I hope to God it is because I just can't continue on without a functioning computer and do the things that I need to do, then the blame can't be totally shouldered by HP. After all, HP doesn't make the operating system and Vista is an utter disaster that will likely go down as Microsoft's New Coke.

Then again, it wasn't like I had ANY choice about the operating system. So maybe it is HP's fault. I mean, had XP been an option, I would have happily clicked the box and gone with the most stable, reliable, and functionable operating system around. Instead, Vista was shoved down my throat like foul cough medicine. Once again, the consumer gets screwed by the monopolization of commerce by one giant over another. (And don't get me started about Mac providing choice. I detest the Mac OS and functionality with a ribald passion that risks violent confrontation when I am forced to use it.)

Conclusion

I really hope my laptop is back. I really do. I want nothing more than to continue enjoying its large screen and I really do have many thing to do which require internet and MS word. And if I can continue to use this laptop without further repairs, I'll be esctatic.

But when it comes time to get my next laptop, I'll just repeat words from one of the least likeable and most annoying ad campaigns in recent memory: "Dude, you're getting a Dell."

Finally Free

2008-07-03T13:30:00.002-05:00

It is a story that could only unfold in Colombia, a land mostly known for its strong coffee, blaring salsa music, and melodromatic soap operas on the one hand and its drugs, terrorism, and war on the other. The fitting end to the saga of Ingrid Betancourt's kidnapping and subsequent five and a half years of living hell came when the Colombian military, after infiltrating the FARC over a series of months, absconded away with Betancourt and 14 other victims in a tale more suited to a spy novel than real life. But, sometimes the truth is better than fiction and in a land where the truth is often dark and scary, joy is shining brightly from glistening cheeks and exaultant celebrations. Finally the nightmare is over.

This story begins in 2003 when Betancourt was running for president of this war weary Andean nation. Along with Clara Rojas, her pick for vice-president, and against the advice of the Colombian military who deemed the risks too high to justify, Betancourt traveled to southern Colombia to campaign in a guerrilla stronghold. Mere hours after entering the zone, Betancourt and Rojas were stopped by opportunistic guerrillas and disappeared from the world.

Over the years Betancourt became the FARC's prized possession, their ultimate bargaining chip, and one that seems to have been too valuable to have ever used. The subsequent capture of three American contractors joined Betancourt in misery deep within the impenatrable jungle with little to no hope of escape or rescue. Stories of failed escape attempts, constant harrassment, sickness and disease, and near torture like conditions filtered out to a world agast. And even when Rojas and a few others were freed, hope for the FARC's Four remained slim.

That is until now. Yesterday, the Colombian military launched a well-devised, perfectly executed plan. Playing the role of the guerrilla, the army landed a helicopter, painted white to resemble a commercial rental, in a clearing where the hostages were being held. The undercover commandos, wearing Che Guevara T-shirts and surrounded by guerrillas, convinced the jailors that a top FARC commander, Mono Jojoy, had organized the transfer so he could speak directly to Betancourt. Quickly convinced, the FARC soldiers allowed their hostages to be handcuffed and put on the aircraft, along with two guards. Moments later, they were airborn. As Betancourt described later, she heard something she didn't understand and turning, saw her former guards bound and naked on the chopper floor. It was then that the commando leader said words that will resonate in the hearts and minds of a nation forever, "We are Colombian military; you are free!"

After waiting so many years, the rescue was over in moments. In sum, the Army spent three and a half minutes amidst the FARC encampment and made their getaway without firing a shot or suffering a casualty. It was, in the words of Betancourt, an "impeccable" operation, flawless in design, flawless in execution.

Yet, back in Bogotá, amidst the jubilation on the tarmac, Betancourt reminded the world that as great as her freedom is, there are still an estimated 700 still held in dank jungle strongholds. This nation, so proud and rich in so many ways, still suffers. And for those families who still await the return of their beloved sons and daughters, one can't help but think yesterday's dramatic rescue remains bittersweet.

Gun Rights Ruling

2008-06-26T10:24:00.002-05:00

By now you have probably heard that the Supreme Court, on a 5-4 decision, struck down the DC law banning hand gun ownership. It's pretty big news and has potential ramifications nationwide - the NRA is already preparing lawsuits in Chicago, San Fran, and elsewhere to challenge gun restrictions based on this ruling.

I have only read the AP report and a few taglines on the blogosphere, so I won't claim any great scholarship or wisdom on this issue. Frankly, it's not an issue that is "close to my heart" although maybe it should be.

That being said, I think it's pretty incredible that my country finds it permissible to illegally spy on its citizens for their "protection" - something that clearly violates the constitution - and yet people are more "up in arms" about their alleged gun rights than their right to privacy, due process, etc. Considering that the vast majority of Americans are more likely to be illegally monitored by the nanny state of George Bush than they are to own a gun, I find that troubling.

Further, I see nothing in the following text that suggests that regulation or restriction of arms is unconstitutional:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Frankly, Scalia et al are just making sh*t up if they think that gun restrictions are unconstitutional. It's pure politics because their is no intelligent argument to suggest that say, an assault rifle ban would infringe on the "right of the people to keep and bear Arms". The only potential argument they have is a slippery slope that doesn't exist.

Now, as challenges to gun laws spread across the country, we face the very real risk that much of the work of the last 30 years to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, drunks, and idiots is going to be undone. And I, personally, find myself out of step with the majority once again. I would find it extremely difficult to agree with anyone who thinks that there should not be background checks, waiting periods, registries, and restrictions. And the logical implication of this ruling is that all of those things are "infringements" on the right to bear arms.

This ruling touches on two other factors. One, I think it shows, yet again, why we can't risk employing John McCain or any other Republican in the White House over the next 8 years. The Supreme Court will soon be facing turnover and anyone who values individual freedom, privacy rights, and more would be wise to preference Obama. Because as Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas show, GOP appointees tend to be partisan hacks with an extreme view of America.

The second point relates more generally to the country of my birth. It's a country that I love and will live in again someday soon. But I increasingly find myself out of tune with what the majority of Americans believe, want, or value. All things being equal, the last 8 years have shown that in America, the only common value is economics. Gun rights are supported by a powerful lobby because the gun industry has huge financial resources that they flex to win that support. Wall Street faces troubles for their own gambling speculation and they immediately get bailed out by the Federal Government while individual Americans who either took the same gamble or were duped into thinking they could afford that mortgage are left to suffer. International human rights concerns are only as important as our trading partner (wouldn't want to upset China with any condemnation of Sudan now would we?). Voluntary wars are waged to secure American oil and security interests in a region of the world where we have few friends and many enemies. And so on. America would sell its soul to the Devil for a 1Q profit that exceeded Wall Street expectations.

Defeating a mysterious jungle virus, laziness, and other bits

2008-06-23T10:29:00.002-05:00

The last few days I've been quite the sluggard. Those mysterious Colombian viruses are all new to the gringo antibodies that I carry. Fortunately this time around it was milder than the previous time. I suppose that my antibodies are getting better at kicking ass and taking names. Either way, I lost a few days there but I'm back to an adequate level of strength today.

Of course, I'm not in the office. No, that would be too much to ask right? Well, actually, I was going to the office but was stymied by an unexpected protest which completely shut down transit to the southern end of the city. So instead, I'm working at home.

Working at home is normally a great thing except that I have yet to repair my computer. I'm currently running in Safe Mode at the moment which provides minimal functionality. The lack of a reliable computer for the last month partially explains the dearth of posts. Other reasons include: laziness, GRE study, laziness, work obligations, laziness, and laziness. Maybe I shall begin to post more regularly when I get the new hard drive.

Good news for the wife (and me). She got promoted again and as of July 15th will be the Latin American manager for HIV and pain products. It's an excellent step forward for her and for us and likely will smooth our eventual transition to the US. Of course, it's going to mean more travel for her which is generally not so good for me but the flip side is that she'll rack up miles and go to exotic places which means I'll probably be traveling abroad at some point in the relatively near future. Can't complain about that.

Other than those tidbits, things are very much the same here.

Computer is fried

2008-06-14T10:23:00.002-05:00

And slightly crispy. And HP Colombia won't fix it because it appears to be a hardware problem and they don't fix hardware problems for HP's that were "made in America - China". So, it looks like I have to send it back to the US. Fortunately it is still under warrenty. It appears to be the hard drive which really pisses me off since a hard drive shouldn't fail after 8 months and I'm seriously considering never buying HP again after this experience. Love the tech but it's no good if it breaks down and I hate all the pre-loaded crap that HP saw fit to put on the laptop.

Anyway, it looks like I'll have a surrogate computer for the meantime which will serve. Because I can't live without a computer. That would just be...uncivilized.

Never mind about being free of computer problems...

2008-06-10T10:41:00.002-05:00

...It's back in the shop. Who knows what's going on with it.

Anyway, here's a handy link about the "true" John McCain. The womanizer who came back from Vietnam to find his wife disfigured from a horrid car accident, went on a spree of extramarital affairs, before settling in with an extremely wealthy woman 20 years his younger.

The end to computer problems (hopefully)

2008-06-08T09:57:00.002-05:00

Those would be my computer problems, not yours. And I finally had it yesterday and broke down and took it to an HP store. Two very helpful and enterprising chaps stated that they were well qualified to fix it but it would be an "unofficial" repair job. I.E. HP doesn't pay them to fix stuff. HP pays them to sell stuff. But they're experts in the HP system and they fix stuff as a way to make extra money. I decided to trust them (they earned some instant cred by diagnosing the problem right away) and although it took about 7 hours to do the job (and about $75), we're back in action.

Anyway, I must apologize to Microsoft for all the hatred that has spewed forth from my soul in anger at Windows Vista. There is no doubt that Vista deserves some of the hatred and criticism leveled, but this time (at least) the problem wasn't Vista. This doesn't excuse Microsoft from releasing a power hogging, unfinished product, but at the least, they don't share the direct blame.

No, the direct blame has to be leveled on me or some other user of my computer (of which there were 2, one of whom is not a likely culprit, the other is) because I had a virus. A truly nasty virus that had infected Norton and was causing the computer to freeze. Once they uninstalled Norton, the freezing problem cleared up right away. I don't know how the virus got on the pc. I know that I didn't install or access any files which were unknown (just Skype, google taskbar, etc) but who knows. Those virus producing bastards are wiley.

At any rate, the virus was only part of the problem. The other part was more serious in some ways. HP has a hard drive partition of about 8 gigs (on this laptop). It's intended to be used for system restore purposes. Well, at some point over the last month, I backed up the hard drive on the partition (as I was automatically directed to do, directions I followed like a lemming) and that caused two problems. One, it backed up the virus. And two, it used up all but 10 megabytes of the partition. These were particularly bad occurences. With the virus backed up, any system restore would just propel the virus back into total infection stage. And, HP's partition is not particularly clever in that to delete a backup, you have to back up the files anew and with only 10 megs of space, that was impossible.

The solution was to completely restart. The techies tried to create windows disks from my hard drive but that proved impossible. The virus worked its way into those files and would have just replicated itself on the new system. So, they reformatted the hard drive and reinstalled windows from untainted discs. Now I have to ensure that my external hard drive is not infected.

In the end, I learned two things. The internets is like a $2 whore and has the diseases to prove it. And two, never, ever use the HP backup feature for anything. Plus, if anyone ever needs some reliable HP guys to fix their computer (and install Office etc gratis) I can hook you up.

Fun in hospitals

2008-06-06T12:08:00.000-05:00

I had another fainting incident. That would be the fifth in my lifetime if the count is correct and the first in the last 10 years. Fortunately, there appears to be nothing wrong with me, although we’re still doing tests to be sure. (In fact, the attending doctor said that based on the EKG it was obvious that I have a very strong heart which is the only significant concern. Plus my blood pressure was perfect.)

Anyway, the cardiologist, in addition to showing me several techniques to use when I feel lightheaded, explained that a full 3% of all emergency room visits are for fainting. And of that percent, somewhere around 90% are totally unexplainable incidents (i.e. have no medical diagnosis). I had no idea that Colombia was experiencing a fainting epidemic (and I wonder if the altitude is a relevant factor).

My official diagnosis, as of this moment, is that I have syncope which is a fancy doctor way of saying “tendency to faint for unexplained reasons” (or more officially “temporary loss of consciousness and posture, described as "fainting" or "passing out." It's usually related to temporary insufficient blood flow to the brain.”) I know all about this from reading on the Internets and, more usefully, religiously watching Dr. House. The cardiologist was very calm about it all and told me not to worry. Assuming the initial round of tests comes back normal we still may do more (my wife will insist) and if so, I kinda hope they make me do the tilt test so I can see what that’s really like. And, of course, I remain opposed to any and all invasive tests that involve large needles.

Really though, I’m not particularly worried about all this. I’ve been through the basics before and everything turned out fine. But it’s good to do another round of tests just to confirm that I’m healthy as an ox. At any rate, for people with syncope there are two things in particular they need to do. One is to drink plenty of fluids. Sounds good to me. The other is to have a high salt diet. Again, no complaints. The reason for the salt is that most patients with syncope suffer from hypotension (low blood pressure) and I know that a doctor somewhere once told me that I have a tendency for lower than normal blood pressure (although within a safe range). So, next time I go eat a very large piece of perfectly cooked meat, I’m salting it down. Speaking of which…

FARC Offers to "Give Up"

2008-05-27T12:50:00.004-05:00

Call me unconvinced.

A lot of talk about the FARC and what is likely to happen now that Marulanda is dead. What I offer is pure speculation. I have no sources and I have intentionally resisted reading other attempts at armchair quarterbacking as I didn't want to bias my opinion.

That being said, I think there are two likely scenarios.

Scenario 1: The slow death march on

I find this scenario the most likely. The new leader of the FARC is a former academic who has long been said to be the intellectual or philosophical leader of the group. While I have zero evidence in either direction, I generally believe that academics who fight in the jungles for failed ideas are pretty committed to those failed ideas. In other words, I can't imagine that an academic who has long served as the ideological leader of a failed ideology is suddenly more likely to give up those long held beliefs because the leader of the group died.

In fact, I think the opposite is more likely. This situation is not like the Israeli-Palestinian talks of 2000-2001. In that situation, you had a revolutionary leader at the negotiating table with a palatable deal on the table that his underlings wanted to accept yet that he could not. And so, the conflict continues. To the contrary, Marulanda was never at the table. He was never at the point of making a peace deal. Instead, the FARC were continuing to pressure for absurd concessions from the government just to *have* talks. So, all commentary about the FARC being more willing to "negotiate" should be seen through the lens of previous "negotiations": Ridiculous requests as prerequisites to any and all talks.

Scenario 2: Fragmentation

It could be said that this is already underway. The FARC have been getting beat back on various fronts (although not all - they are still strong in certain areas). But it does appear that the war has been creating fractures in the organization - especially in terms of communication. Uribe and his policies should be duely credited for that.

Now that Marulanda is deceased, it seems to me that there is a distinct possibility that the organization will continue to fracture. There are undoubtedly those who want to quit the war and are dissolutioned with its offer. Distraction and a weakened chain of command at the top likely will create more space for the dissolutioned to leave the organization without fear of reprisal (the rule is: leave and get shot).

Ultimately, I think that both scenarios are likely to happen at once. I find total capitulation entirely unlikely. Instead, I think we'll see a number of stories about the FARC's willingness to negotiate, the government's willingness to offer amnesty to ex-FARC soldiers outside of Colombia (Uribe offered France recently as a place for ex-combatants), and generally, more hope that the war will end. But guerrilla wars don't end like inter-state wars. Instead, they're like grapes that rot on the vine and eventually color and stain the earth with their memory. In all likelihood, my children will inherit a land still healing from the FARC's legacy.

Indiana Jones

2008-05-27T12:31:00.003-05:00

Saw it last night. Kinda sucky. Watch it on cable when it comes out if you are interested. But don't pay to see it. It just isn't worth the hassle. More evidence that Lucas has lost whatever magic he had back in the 80s. Not that we needed any more evidence. The Episodes 1-3 of Star Wars were an unmitigated disaster. He really hasn't made any good movies since Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (or Willow if you didn't like that one). That's almost 2 decades of crappy, yet commercially viable work.

Anyway, I won't give any spoilers here. What I will say is that when one becomes so fascinated by what technology can do, to the extent that one forgets that stories need to be compelling and at least marginally believable, acting needs to be good, and enemies need to be credible, one becomes...George Lucas. And that's a bad thing. Lucas is Hollywood's best special effects guy who unfortunately thinks he can not only write, but also direct. And he's likely a billionaire because of his Star Wars and Indiana Jones franchises (and subsequent production companies). He'll always be credited as a legend for those two franchises but in my mind, his legendary status ended in the 80s.

2 Bits

2008-05-25T12:04:00.002-05:00

We had an earthquake here - 5.6 on the richter scale from what I've seen. It was pretty freaky. Went on for at least a minute. The press say some people died (6 I believe). Anyway, no damage or anything like that that we've seen.

And, in other news, the founder of the Farc, Marulanda, is apparently dead. It's a pretty big story down here. Not sure if it really means anything for the future of the FARC but people seem to be rejoicing anyway.

The ruminations of a madman

2008-05-22T09:29:00.003-05:00

Yesterday an ex-soldier walked into a business, took 20 people hostage, and threatened to blow them up with a grenade if his monthly retirement was not paid. It was a startling, but not particularly shocking event. Last night, I watched it all on TV. One of the great things about Colombia is that they always get it on tape and they always show it on the nightly news. So, I watched as one of the "media" sent in to speak with the man turned out to be a copper who tackled him and retrieved the grenade. All very James Bond or Bruce Willis -esque.

This event would have just been another story in Locombia - chalked up to the crazed ravings of a lunatice except for one tiny tidbit. During his media session, the ex-soldier had an employee of the business read out a statement. The statement, in itself, was more shocking than the grenade.
The ex-soldier claims that the top levels of the military and police have $20 million peso bounties out on a between 7-10 politicians. That would be shocking in itself, right? I mean, no national military should be actively seeking the assassination of its civilian controllers. But, every single name read out on that list was a senator or congressman who is actively investigating President Uribe and his connections to the paramilitaries. In other words, it looks very much like the President or some of his functionaries asked the military to deal with "the problem".

Knowing Colombia, I'd give 5-1 odds that the ex-soldier's list is accurate. It will likely never be proven. But, it raises a point that I've been wanting to make for some time. Colombia, more than any place I've ever seen, is a "why not" culture. Gotta problem with a pesky journalist? Why not just have him killed? Gotta problem with some local land owners? Why not just push them off their land? Oh, they're objecting? Why not just kill a few of 'em so the rest get the point? And so on.

It's more complicated now, but it's completely conceivable that one of Uribe's allies went down this road as well. Some senators are getting awfully close to Uribe's paramilitary ties? Why not just have 'em shot? Of course, Uribe himself is too clever by half to get caught with his hand in the cookie jar, so to speak. And in all likelihood there will never be any finding which confirms the ex-soldier's hit list allegation. But there will be wild speculation and now that this alleged hit list is public, the politicians alleged to be on it, are likely safe. So, I don't know if we should be castigating or praising the madman. It's very possible he saved lives by jeopardizing others. Something for the philosophers to sort out.

For those considering Windows Vista

2008-05-20T17:58:00.002-05:00

Reconsider. Don't do it. I have just recovered from a major meltdown, courtesy of a Windows Vista Update. After transferring all my data to an external hard drive, I restored the system to the original form and started over. A colossal waste of time and effort. Thank you Microsoft.

Scuba Diving

2008-05-09T11:01:00.002-05:00

I write this missive not as the landlubber that I once was, but as the sea-goer that I now am. For I am a qualified scuba diver now and my instructors would wish to see the change. From the unsteady skiff to under the sea and back again, I have passed the trials and received my certificate which makes me more expert in diving that I was a month ago while less expert than an expert.

Off the coast of Cartagena, there are a series of islands that fall under the name “Islas de Rosario”. Upon one of these, one of the larger ones, there is a very expensive hotel which also serves as a base for Diving Planet, a company which leads diving excursions and teaches diving to newbies. To reach the island, one has to take a boat over open water. Over mostly calm seas, the trip is about 50 minutes. And it is hot. The sun bears down upon you like a great yoke or mantel that has to be carried with only brief moments of relief. Thirty layers of sunscreen would never be enough.

CSI was kind enough to loan us Warrick Brown for the weekend. He was to be our instructor. There were three of us in the course, my wife and I and a surly teenager. I say “surly” although I should just say a “typical” teenager since he was no different from the stereotype. Angst and a bad attitude seem to be sold under trademarks these days.

Our first dive was merely to get accustomed to the sea just like “diving” in a pool was to get accustomed to the equipment. These types of excursions are extremely important. The sea has currents, pools do not. Undertaking the various tests and trainings without the pool experience would increase the level of difficulty and likely result in more injuries and complications.

In that first dive three notable things happened. From the start, I found out just how painful diving can be on the ears. It’s a problem that still lingers and I can only hope that my doctor is correct in his assertion that there is no permanent damage. I’m not one used to physical limitations. As a boy, showing no discernible talent or ability, I played ten seasons of soccer, two seasons of baseball, two seasons of basketball, and tried out for the Junior High baseball and football teams before concluding that for me, sports are better watched than played. But not once did I allow the dearth of athleticism that I have been blessed with to infringe on my ability to try.

The ear problem would be the first time I have been physically unable to continue trying. And I don’t want to underestimate the problem. Including today, it’s been five days since my last dive and my ears are still partially blocked, they’re popping like rice crispies, and my right eardrum routinely feels like someone is jabbing a very sharp needle directly into it. The doctor suggests that this will clear up naturally. His theory will be tested next week when I revisit him. In the meantime, I maintain hope that slow improvement is coming each day.

If I can not continue diving, it will be extremely disappointing because the second discovery from the start is that diving ranks somewhere between totally awesome and whatever comes after. The fish, the coral, the wildlife, all of it is superbly sublime. We swam amongst schools of fish, we held aquatic spiders (my term) in the palm of our hands (it helps when your instructor is a Marine Biologist teaching scuba diving while he finishes his thesis), and we saw countless other things that were impossible to catalogue. The marketing material is right. When you dive, you see more species than you would ever see in any other activity which leaves you with an almost unprocessable information overload to the point that after the dive you basically just sit there and say “huh”. It would be a shame to lose out on that.

The aforementioned surly teenager had an encounter in the sea on that first dive. Swimming along quite peaceably, no doubt working as hard as possible to *not* enjoy himself (and failing), he was fish food. A rather large, hungry looking sea marmet was coasting along amongst us and seeing the curly crispiness of the boy’s hair floating enticingly in the clear Caribbean Sea, our friendly neighbor went in for a nibble. I imagine that curiosity overtook him as it is common for fish to see scuba divers in that area and that the question had been nagging at Mr. Fish for quite some time: Do these funny looking land walkers taste good or not?

Unfortunately, we never got an answer from Mr. Fish for the teenager’s violent reaction sent the fish scurrying away. I can only imagine the human flesh is not as tasty as the many other things that fish have to eat. I’d like to think that our teenager had a sudden realization that in the cosmic sense he was no more or less important than the average bit of seaweed. At least to the fish. For all teenagers seem to have an overinflated sense of self importance (I think they’re selling that under trademark as well) and at the least, Mr. Fish treated him as little more than yet another morsel for nibbling. Sadly, my wants are probably just that, my wants, for our teenager continued to maintain his surliness and aloofedness for some time. But, slowly, and I have to think that this is because it takes an extreme amount of energy to maintain surliness and angst especially when one is doing something that is, by all measures, extremely fun, our teenager started to change to the point that at the end of two days, I thought he might almost be human. At least there is hope yet.

We made a total of four dives. The first and last were the best but in those we had virtually no actual “activities” to engage in. They were mostly enjoyment dives. Our instructor was extremely confident and capable and in his trustworthy hands, we were led through the course successfully. Of course, this raises another point. Virtually all scuba instructors are the same, moreso under water. I don’t know why this is, but they are all extremely nice and caring and careful. I say this not as a complaint. All things being even, I much prefer a capable instructor than an incompetent ass who risks my life through malfeasance. Instead, I mention this because I found the instructors so interchangeable as to be ultimately uninteresting. For there’s nothing particularly interesting about cloned underwater personalities. Although, I would be remiss if I failed to acknowledge that their “sameness” was, indeed, and interesting puzzle that I have yet to work out.

And so ends my first scuba adventure. I can only hope that my ears clear up over the next week and that the doctor clears me for future dives. We have our eyes set on Providencia an island farther out in the Caribbean and a much better site for diving. It would be unfortunate to miss out on such an experience.

Somewhere outside the Realm of Stupid

2008-04-25T09:40:00.002-05:00

Turned on CNN last night for a few minutes. Not sure what happened to Anderson Cooper but his replacement was conducting a contest in stupid. They had a 3-person panel discussing Rev. Wright (again) because apparently he gave an interview or something.

I'd just like to point out 3 things:

1. Obama wasn't there when Wright said "G*d Damn America" and has since rejected the remarks.

2. John McCain actively sought out the endorsement of Rev. Hagee, a bigoted evangelical who called Katrina God's punishment for New Orleans' sin and reiterated those remarks just days ago yet there has been hardly a peep out of the media over that.

3. Wright was and is right. There are two Americas. We have yet to achieve equality and there is much work to be done. The only controversial thing in this statement is the "God Damn" part:

"The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people"

and

"God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme."

He should of course be ashamed for using the Lord's name in vain since as a preacher he should, you know, believe in the bible and stuff. But his argument has the ring of truth. We locked up hundreds in Guantanamo Bay, denied them of their fundamental human rights, and tortured them to boot. Our prisons are full of black men and women and instead of rethinking the dynamic that created that situation, we rush to build more. Our cities are decaying from within because of poverty and drugs and instead of looking for creative solutions, we continue a "war on drugs" that accomplishes nothing, costs billions, and incarcerates hundreds of thousands on relatively minor offenses. And that doesn't even begin to address the plight of inner city education, the hopelessness and despair that envelops communities that are forgotten and have little or no hope, or the increasing disparity between the haves and haves-not.

But no, we don't want to talk about that. Instead, we just want to say, "He said 'God Damn America'! He must hate America! He's unpatriotic! And, hint, hint, he knows Barack Obama! Can't let those uppity blacks take over the nation! Look what they believe!" Etc. And CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox and everyone else are willing players in that game. For shame.

But even beyond our domestic troubles, what is controversial about this statement:

"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye...We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost,"

These things are true. We did bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki, not because we needed to, but as a warning to the Soviets. We did support the apartheid state of South Africa and we do unquestioningly support Israel even while they expand settlements into Palestinian areas, create virtual apartheid, and refuse to honestly negotiate. And we have done more and worse here in South America and across the globe either out of our own arrogance or stupidity and then we are surprised that someone comes after us? Perhaps we, as a culture, don't want to hear the ugly truth about the bloody work we've done across the globe in the last 70 years. But denying something doesn't mean it doesn't exist and frankly, I find it heartening that at least some community somewhere in the Realm of Stupid is acknowledging our role in 9/11, in fostering inhumane conditions around the world, and ultimately, in withering the American Empire prematurely.

So we shall diminish for our politics lead us down the road of arrogance, ignorance, and deceit. Much like every empire before us, we castigate truthsayers, reward the fable tellers, and march on oblivious to our own impending doom. It will be a harsh blow to White America's sense of exceptionalism. But the blow will be struck, sooner now than many think for we have squandered the chance to cement the American example as different, as better than history. Instead, we have written yet another chapter in the long history of failed empires and uninspired ideas.

Hillary and the Truth

2008-04-24T08:06:00.002-05:00

Holy carp. I can't believe I missed this article back in January. Did anyone realize that in 1995, when she met Sir Edmund Hillary, the famous explorer who scaled Everest, she actually told him that she was named after him? Which would have been ever so cute except that Hillary they Explorer became famous 6 years after Hill came to this earth. What kind of maniacal liar do you have to be to just make shat up like that on the spot?

I guess that explains why she seems to think that she's leading in the popular vote count. But then again, in Hill's little world, no vote for Obama counts and every vote for her counts twice. Somebody slap me with a salmon fish. America has gone from dumb to dumber.

More information about Bolivia

2008-04-23T12:03:00.000-05:00

On May 4th, there will be a referendum in Bolivia which will decide two issues. The first measure limits the maximum size of an estate to either 10,000 hectares or 5,000 hectares. The second measure is the approval of a new constitution which, controversially, states that the government should have exclusive ownership of all natural resources.

This referendum has produced a political crisis in the land-locked nation that threatens to divide the country into two. The wealthy provinces and traditional power holders are situated to the East while the poorer and ethnically indigenous populations are to the West. For obvious reasons, the wealthy territories have no desire to give up land or resource rights that they have “earned” from previous administrations and it remains to be seen what actions they would take if President Morales wins this resolution. It should be noted that Morales has pledged that there will be no violence or militarization, although that statement was based on his “confidence” on the opposition to accept vast reduction in their personal wealth.

As I previously mentioned, getting reliable, English language news about Bolivia is not an easy proposition. So the story that I told above may very well have some inaccuracies. I have not the time at the moment to search through Spanish language sources to confirm it. Case in point, Forbes is reporting that the May 4th constitution vote has been delayed “indefinitely”. I presume that the vote on estate size will go forward.

At any rate, one issue that does seem clear is that the US government is intimately involved in the proceedings. Morales is an anti-US leftist who has closely aligned himself with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. And he has accused the CIA of trying to bring him down. Normally I would suggest that such talk is just that…talk. But then comes this bit from the Washington Note:

In a little covered speech at the UN earlier this week, Morales denounced the rich in his country for trying to stop his social programs and foreign companies which put their products before people's lives. So why is the CIA so interested in what happens in Bolivia on May 4th? Why are there so many American agents scurring around La Paz these days? (Bold Mine)

Given the long history of US CIA led involvement in controlling leftist politics and promoting the right, no matter how brutal and unwise such a move might be combined with a minimal level of confirmation from a legitimate foreign policy player in DC, I’d say this rumor has legs. Is the Bush administration playing Peter Piper again? Are they trying to stick their fingers in the eye of a legitimate political process which might actually be in the best interest of the country involved?

There can, obviously, be no clear answer to those questions. But given US history, this president, and the way American “interests” are so narrowly defined, I’d suggest that it’s likely the US is using all of its covert might to block and/or forestall any vote on the new constitution. After all, anything that threatens US business is a de facto threat to our national security these days, isn’t it?

Scuba Training

2008-04-17T10:11:00.001-05:00

Apparently, last night’s debate was an unmitigated disaster for ABC. But really, did you expect anything different from Charles Gibson? The man is a serial distorter of facts (see his view that $200,000 is a solid middle class annual income in America), exhibit 1A in everything that is wrong with American television “journalism”, and should have been fired long ago. Sometimes it’s good to not get the necessary television channel.

Anyway, rather than rehash second hand information about how craptacular last night’s debate was, I thought I’d talk about Scuba Diving today. We’ve been taking the PADI Open Water Diver course this month. It’s 5 classroom sessions and 3 pool dives, followed by qualification dives in Cartagena. The classroom work gives you a basic understanding of what’s happening (scientifically) during a dive, proper safety procedures, equipment handling, underwater communication, etc. It’s all very interesting and relevant. And it’s not at all difficult to learn or understand (even in Spanish).

The pool dives, though, are where you get your first taste of what scuba diving really means. And you do a lot of practice type activities including: taking your mask off and putting it back on under water, under water flotation, how to handle emergency situations, how to swim underwater, etc. It’s very cool and I can’t wait to actually get in the ocean and have my first, “Krikey! Did you see that!” Steve Irwin moment.

What I would say, however, is that pool diving is a fairly disgusting thing. Swimming pools are, without a doubt, extremely dirty, germ infested, habitats. We just don’t see it. But when you get in the pool, with the mask, you see the dirty truth. And, to make things worse, wearing the mask, things look bigger than they actually are. So when you see that collection of pubic hair floating ever so gently, your first reaction is, “Holy Sh*t! Someone’s pubes got ripped out!” This does not make for pleasant dinner time conversation.

At any rate, diving takes some getting used to and the pool is a necessary evil. And we’ve finished that part of the course, so I don’t have to get back in that pool ever again. In fact, we just have to take our “final exam” and then do our qualification dives at the end of the month. So I’m quite hyped up by that.

As to diving in general, I definitely recommend it to those who want to have a totally awesome nature experience that doesn’t involve climbing great heights or traipsing about steamy tropical jungles. The marketing materials suggest that on one dive you will see more natural species than you would in anywhere else in the world, doing anything else. Plus, when you’re down there, you can get ideas about what to have for lunch.

I should also add that diving isn’t a particularly taxing activity physically (if you do it right). Obviously you have to have some level of physical stamina or ability, but with weight belts and big ass fins and inflatable vests and whatnot, you don’t actually have to do much to move about and see the good stuff. At this point, I highly recommend the activity. A full report will follow our qualification dives, of course.

I’m a lazy blogger

2008-04-16T10:31:00.000-05:00

Well, I could make excuses and say I had nothing to write about but instead, I’ll just fess up. I’m the worst kind of blogger. I write when I feel like it. And that makes for unreliability.

Anyway, to explain my thought process, I had it in mind to write about the whole “bitter” dustup. But then I remembered that American politics has been reduced to the absurdly stupid. When people seriously think there is a scandal about a man saying that poor people might be bitter about their circumstances, then we have really reached the bottom. So I discarded that figuring that if anyone was really interested to read or hear about that, they could tune in to any number of blogs or non-qualified TV personalities who think they are experts on everything when they’re really experts on nothing.

After that, I thought about writing about the events in the Candelaria of late. You’ll remember that it’s the part of Bogota in which I work. Of late, it’s routinely smelled like foul armpit odor (and I mean blocks and blocks of it), although, to be fair, the city has dispatched some cleaning crews to square things away. But I discarded that as well since I didn’t want to offend the oversensitive high schooler who reads any criticism of Colombia as an indict on the country, the culture, and everything that it has to offer.

So then I turned to other machinations of my brain. There was a hint of an idea somewhere but then I lost it so I’m guessing it must not have been that good.

So finally, I decided I would put up a complaint about my Ipod. Now, I have one of those super-mini Ipods that holds 1 gig and is about 1 inch by 1 inch in size. My wife got it free when she changed her pension company so any complaint I make here really has to be taken with a grain of salt. Anyway, I’ll start by saying that the Ipod randomizer is the least randomizing randomizer ever. I changed about 30% of my library the other day and expected that I would start hearing some of those new songs. Over the course of 2.5 hours of listening (bus rides and the gym), I heard 1 new song. In the same period, I heard 3 or 4 songs at least 3 times. Somebody get Steve Jobs on the phone.

Really though, my bigger question has to do with the earphones. I don’t know if I have abnormally shaped earlobes or if the Ipod is just not well designed but for some reason, I can’t maintain the “right” earplug in my right ear. It falls out. Yet, I don’t have that problem when I put it in my left ear. And, on top of that, the right earphone emits sound louder than the left. Any ideas on why that is? It’s not just my earplugs either. My wife, after seeing how useful an Ipod can be, bought one for herself and her’s are exactly the same. So any Ipod aficionados out there with answers to these critically important questions please chime in. Let me know if it’s just me or if there is some Ipod support group I can join.

Finally, I’ll conclude this missive by stating the obvious: I’m hungry, bored, and without a point. Somebody get me a burrito.

Comment Moderation On

2008-04-09T19:06:00.001-05:00

So any wanker high schoolers who get 5 minutes of internet time during remedial study hall shouldn't be able to post barely literate scribes about how much I hate Colombia.

Peru Wrapup

2008-04-07T16:48:00.003-05:00

A combination of laziness and busyness have combined to drag on this whole "talk about Peru" thing on forever. So I'm going to try to wrap it up here.

Our last leg of the trip was a quick journey to Paracas. It's about 4 hours south of Lima by bus (and the bus is very nice by the way - sorta like what flying used to be only add Bingo and desert scenery) and on the coast. This part of Peru is basically one giant desert. Not much to see aside from the coastline (which is beautiful at times), some farms (sorta Star Wars-esque), and lots of sand. Also, Paracas was pretty much leveled in last year's earthquake, so there is basically no place to stay there. The hotel we would have stayed at is currently 1 floor. I have no idea how many floors it used to be, but I know it was more than one.

So, we stayed in a small town about 45 minutes inland called Ica. This would be a pretty nothing town except that it's astride a desert oasis - yeah, the kind you think about in Lawrence of Arabia or something. We were only there for a very short period of time (less than 12 hours total) but it was very cool. My wife even climbed up a huge sand dune and rolled back down. She loved the sand.

At any rate, the sole reason to travel to Paracas is to go to Islas Ballestas which is a rock island about 40 minutes off the coast that has penguins and sea lions. Early on Easter Sunday, we hopped into a boat with about 30 other people, and jetted out to the island. On the way you can see a giant Incan "drawing" on a rocky coast that is called the "Candlestick". They really have no idea where it came from or what it's function was and there is no organic matter there so they can't even carbon date it. Very cool.

Anyway, Islas Ballestas is, like I said, a giant island of rock that holds an uncountable number of birds in addition to pengiuns and sea lions. The birds produce such an enormous quantity of guano that they actually harvest it and sell it as fertilizer. So if you ever see fertilizer with the words "made in Peru" or "imported from Peru", that's where it came from. I wasn't terribly interested in the guano (no matter how many times our tour guide proudly declared its importance) or even the birds for that matter. It was the penguins and sea lions that got my gander up.

I can confirm that, in the wild, penguins do stand around doing nothing. They are awfully cute and it's easy to understand why penguins are so personified in animation. You can just imagine them with glasses and a bow tie giving a lecture on particle physics. As far as appearances go, penguins come across as distinguished and clever.

The sea lions stole the show, however. Our first encounter was with a female sea lion teaching a baby how to swim. She was somewhat aggrieved by our passage but probably more concerned with her baby than anything. Either way, she chatted us up a bit fiercely all the while encouraging her little one to keep at it. We found at least one other mother teaching her cub to swim.

And then we found the men. When the women are doing all the work, what are the men doing? Lazing on the beach while having a talk-about. I imagine they were debating England's World Cup chances or something given how loudly and boisterousy they were arguing, although I did not see a bar anywhere. The male sea lions were also rather fat compared to the females which I guess makes sense. If you sit around all day going on about the merits of English football versus Peruvian football instead of actually doing some of the work around the house, you'll fatten up quick.

After our excursion to the island, we had about 5 hours to relax in Paracas before our bus back to Lima. We essentially did nothing but walk around, have lunch, and sleep a bit. It was very nice.

On the last night I was in Lima, my wife and I stayed at the conference hotel which is a lovely 5-star joint in San Isidro called "Las Delfines" or "The Dolphins". I only mention it because it has a large tank that contain two Dolphins that swim about and do tricks. They were apparenty injured in the wild and now can not be returned to their natural habitat. In the basement of the hotel is a bar which is partially under the tank. We had a drink there and watched as one of the dolphins swam about. He was very graceful. The other one was a bit of a sluggard though. At first we thought he was dead but then we realized he was sleeping. Either way, it's pretty cool drinking a pisco sour in the middle of a dolphin tank. I think I should build a hotel and call it "The Sharks" or "The Hammerhead" or something and then equip it accordingly.

In conclusion, Peru was a very nice trip, albeit a short one. I heartily recommend it. As I said before though, minimize your time in Cusco and plan more days. Cusco just isn't worth it and you really need more than a week in Peru. Instead of Cusco, visit Ollantaytambo which is the site of some Incan ruins relatively near Macchu Pichu or just hike the Incan trail. We missed out on the Nazca lines as well which I gather is a must see kind of deal. With more time, you can visit Paracas then go to Nasca before returning to Lima or possibly continuing south to Arequipa and then on to Cusco/Macchu Pichu (completing a circle). There are various options. Finally, the question of when to go comes up frequently. I recommend end of March, beginning of April. Any later than that and you're going to run into some serious crowds and it will prove more expensive. And if you're gonna book a trip the week before Easter, book in advance. A lot of people travel in Peru that week and you don't want to get screwed out of hotels and/or buses.

An Interlude

2008-04-04T12:06:00.004-05:00

I have one more post to go on Peru but I wanted to briefly comment on developments in one of Latin America's poorest countries - Bolivia. I know very little about Bolivia. I know it's poor, it's landlocked, and it has a left of center president, but that's about it. I've never been there, I have no plans to visit, and any knowledge I have is from watching the news.

That being said, Bolivia may very well fragment into two or more countries in the coming months. I know, haven't heard anything about it in the US, right? Well that's because the US news media is more of a giant tabloid than an informative source of information. Down here, we get "international news" that is more than just 30 seconds on Iraq. RCN, Caracol, and CM&I all have extensive international coverage which, objectively speaking, it about 1 quadrillion times better than what you find on the nightly news in the US.

At any rate, the Bolivians, as I understand it, have been negotiating a new constitution of late and this has created a lot of controversy - for what sounds like similar reasons to what we find in Iraq. Namely, about half the country is "rich" and the other half, not so much. From what I gather, the "rich" states (departments) are threatening to succeed from the union. I don't have a particularly good read on this as the english language coverage is, shall we say, lacking and the coverage that does exist is extremely confusing and lacking in necessary context for uninformed readers (like me). One thing that is clear from watching the news down here, however, is that this crisis is worth watching. For one, if Bolivia does have a succession, it will likely be bloody. The army has already issued omnious warnings. But on the other hand, if they do peaceably resolve the crisis and create a stronger Bolivia, their methods and solutions could be illustrative of a way forward in Iraq.

Update: I should clarify that when I say "rich" and allude to Iraq, I'm speaking of natural resources. One issue of contention is the idea that the national government has "domain" over natural resources - i.e. its state property. For obvious reasons, the wealthy class isn't so hot on that idea.

Cusco, Aguas Calientes, Macchu Pichu

2008-04-03T12:17:00.002-05:00

Cusco, the city from which you must embark to get to Macchu Pichu, is one giant crap fest. As my wife said in the ultimate backhand compliment, “It looks better at night”. We arrived on a Wednesday after taking an early flight from Lima. The first thing you notice is that the entire city seems to be constructed from gray clay bricks. It’s kinda like seeing the colors of the rainbow except the exact opposite.

In Cusco, we took the “city tour”. I put that in quotes because Cusco has a huge tourism industry (wildly varying statistics about how big it is depending on your tour guide) and all of the companies offer the exact same tour. You see some cathedrals, some old Incan buildings, an Incan fort, some crap we skipped because it was freezing ass cold, and last, an overpriced market.

Now, I’m not generally big on tours. I’ve always preferred to explore on my own. Even if you miss a little here and there, you see a little more and what you want to see. That being said, the “city tour” was craptacular because our guide spoke rough, hard to understand English (we took the English language tour for my mother’s sake), it’s long, it’s cold as a brick when you finish up (elevation: 11,000 feet or so), and you end up getting rushed through the interesting stuff so that you can do more. My advice, skip it and/or dress more warmly.

At any rate, the Incan stuff is all very cool and interesting. The Spanish cathedrals, not so much. (Let’s just say, a cathedral every now and then is interesting and all, but not terribly unique.) The tour does make it easier to get to the Incan fort (outside of the city) and two other sites (only one of which we got off the bus and visited), but I’m willing to guess that hiring a taxi is both easy and economical. (I should note – Cusco is about 3 times more expensive than Lima. Never buy anything in Cusco because you can get the exact same product in Lima for a lot less.)

We did eat well in Cusco, however, and I won’t spit on that. I had Lomo Saltado which is a “national dish” (or so they say) of cubed steak sautéed with red onions and tomatoes in a soy based sauce. It’s good although I think it’s lacking something. I actually cooked it last week when I got home and found that it’s easy to make. I spruced up the sauce a bit and I like my improvements although I used lower quality meat. Either way, the food got the thumbs up, again.

The following morning we took the first train from Cusco to Aguas Calientes. This is the only way to get to Macchu Picchu from what we were told. There is no road that goes all the way to Aguas Calientes and this is a source of regular protests from cabbies and bus drivers (who block the tracks and things like that). While I agree with their position (the train IS a monopoly), I would be mighty pissed were I to lose out on seeing Macchu Pichu, THE reason for visiting Peru, due to some protest that was only tangentially related to me about a cause which I could literally do nothing about. Fortunately, we were protest free.

The train zig-zags up the hill around Cusco until finally it crosses over it and heads down into a valley. Macchu Picchu is about 3000 feet lower than Cusco (about the same elevation as Bogota) and it takes about 3:45 minutes to go from Cusco to Aguas Calientes. I’ve always been somewhat of a train aficionado. I love the way a train ride reveals the landscape around mountain bends and tunnels. So even if there were other options, I would likely take the train. This part of Peru is very similar to what one would see in Colombia driving through the Andes except the mountain peaks are snow-capped in Peru. That is to say – it’s utterly gorgeous.

The train cuts through the mountain chains and follows along a river most of the way before finally depositing a horde of tourists in Aguas Calientes. This is a small town that only exists because of Macchu Pichu. As soon as you leave the train station (and meet your guide – who I would recommend heartily for visiting Macchu Pichu) you cross through a makeshift craft market and meet your bus. The bus whisks you away up the side of a mountain. It’s a harrowing journey across hard packed dirt roads with dizzying drop-offs. When you near the top, you get your first view of Macchu Pichu, a view which, as my wife said, “looks fake” and “can’t be real”. This, in fact, was the perfect description. Macchu Pichu indeed is almost unbelievable. It’s unbelievable that the Incans could build it just so and it’s unbelievable that it was never found by the Spaniards and destroyed.

The bus drops you off in front of the only hotel “in” Macchu Pichu. It’s something like $1000/night so needless to say, we didn’t stay there. The entrance to the city is just up a flight of stairs and from there, the city stretches out before you. Instead of entering the city directly, however, the path leads up the mountain to (essentially) the end of the Incan Trail where you can overlook the ruins below you. I have not the words to accurately describe the awesome feeling that overcomes you when you behold the city from such a vantage point. Instead, I will say the following. Prior to arriving at the city, I wondered why the Incans would want to build a city atop a mountain given the difficulties involved. It seemed pointless. That question was instantly answered. That whole area is surrounded by the Andes and in the middle are two or three mango shaped “rocks” that look as if they were plunged into the earth by God’s hand. Atop one of those “rocks”, the Incans found a place where they could literally feel closer to God. It is without a doubt the most beautiful and impressive scene I have ever witnessed.

At any rate, eventually we climbed down to the city proper and went about a tour. The heights weren’t terrible although I admit to not being entirely comfortable. Some people, however, just threw caution to the wind. Tourists were walking all about the tiered farming areas one of whom I thought must have had a death wish. Fortunately, there were no incidents. (Although that hasn’t always been the case. A number of people have died in Macchu Pichu and there is a risk to be managed there. As a UNESCO world heritage site and “new wonder of the world” Peru is prohibited from altering the site in any way which means there are no safety ropes of any kind anywhere.)

We left the city feeling replete and hungry. There was more to see but we were tired and hot. Fortunately, the weather was absolutely perfect but it does make for thirsty work climbing about the lost city. For future travelers, I would recommend using lots of sunscreen, carrying water with you, and bringing rain gear (you never know in March/April). Also, disregard any and all information that says you can’t bring X, Y, and Z into the city. It’s all nonsense. Peru should be policing the site more carefully, but the truth is, they’re not. Feel free to bring in your bottled water and walking stick but please, take care not to pollute or damage the site in any way.

We lunched in the very expensive hotel. They have a buffet that is something like $30 per person that our travel agency had booked for us. It was good. I remember the suckling pig and roast beef as the standouts. Not worth $30 a head, but I wasn’t complaining at the time. And that was that. We didn’t return to the city instead opting for Aguas Calientes and rest. We were tired and rain was threatening so it seemed like a good decision. Now, I wish we had had more time. Perhaps someday I shall return.

We ate well in Aguas Calientes. I had Alpaca which is more or less a llama. It was great. It’s like white steak and allegedly has zero cholesterol (I say allegedly because it seems that every tour guide has their list of “facts” which more often than not contradict other tour guides). We also did some shopping and exploring. The next day, just after lunch, we got back on the train and said goodbye to the town and the lost city of the Incans. I, for one, was entirely satisfied with that experience, even if it left me wanting for more.

The conclusion: I have only visited one place in the world (including Europe, Japan, Korea, Hong Kong, North America, Colombia) that I would consider a "do not miss in your lifetime" place and that is Macchu Pichu. It's an amazing place for it's geography alone but seeing a basically 100% preserved Incan city is like stepping into the past in a most real and authentic way (minus human sacrifices). If you have the chance, take it. The city (or access to it) won't be there forever.

Peru: A trip worth retaking

2008-03-27T10:13:00.001-05:00

Over the next several posts, I’ll be talking about our trip to Peru but today I wanted to start with general reactions. As the title suggests, we had a great trip and I would go back. Seven days is really not enough time as we barely got to know Lima and there are many more ruins than just Macchu Pichu. Plus, I think hiking the Inca trail would be an incredible experience in itself.

At any rate, I’ll get to the specifics of each site we visited in subsequent posts but for today, I have the following thoughts. As always, these thoughts reflect my personal experiences over the course of seven days and should not be taken as universal truth.

1. I felt safe. This is a big one. In Bogota I have non-clinical paranoia to avoid any and all crime. It’s essentially a siege mentality that has been programmed into my brain by everyone I interact with here (particularly my wife and her grandfather) and by the fact that in Colombia, “a fool and his money are easily parted”. Not so in Lima. The city is well policed and it has a vibrant “city life” in that at night time its common to see couples walking in parks, people in the streets, etc. In Bogotá, due to climate and crime, people generally scurry to their homes or to Parque 93 or the Zona Rosa.

But more than just that, Lima is terror free at the moment as is the rest of Peru. The country is not in the midst of a guerrilla war. It’s not besieged by kidnapping terrorists who have only weak affiliations to a political ideology. And there is virtually no mafia to speak of. That all makes a difference and it’s something I felt acutely.

2. It’s clean. Lima, or at least the barrios we were in (San Isidro and Miraflores), is a very clean city by any standard. It’s noticeable. They have legions of city employees cleaning the streets at all times and it works. This stands in stark contrast to London or Bogotá.

In addition to clean streets, however, is the relative lack of pollution. I make no claims that Peru pollutes less than Colombia (or any other developing nation) but it is aided by its geography. Lima rests on a desert plateau next to the Pacific. The winds coming off the ocean are strong and relentless and this helps the city stay relatively cool and blows noxious fumes and toxic emissions to the east. Bogotá is less fortunate. It straddles a vast green valley and to some extent, experiences the “LA Effect” of trapped emissions.

3. The desert means less food diversity. Peru has a reputation of having some of the best food in South America. That reputation is not without merit. We did not have a bad meal while we were there and on several occasions had excellent meals. The flip side of that, however, is that Peruvian geography does not permit the type of food diversity that is found in Colombia. Fresh fruit juices found in Peruvian restaurants, for example, are mostly limited to Papaya, Orange, and Pineapple, with the occasional Strawberry or Mango. I’m accustomed to having no less than six choices in Bogota (and that’s on the low side). Even the fruit they do have is a shadow of what one finds in Colombia. The papaya is almost mango colored (it’s pink in Colombia) and not as sweet as I’ve come to expect while everyone knows that Orange pales in comparison to mandarin. But deserts aren’t so hot for agriculture and they grow what their climate and geography permits.

I imagine that this is also the reason why they didn’t appear to have any really good meats. Colombia has spoiled me. When I go for a steak in Colombia I know that it will not only be excellent in quality, it will be cooked to perfection. In Peru, there is much less of a “cattle culture” (where to raise them?) meaning that the quality of the meat isn’t as good and the institutional knowledge of how to cook a steak properly has not disseminated throughout the culture. The one exception to this would be Lomo Saltado which is a sort of national dish (ceviche being the real national dish – and damn tasty) that is prepared with cubed steak, red onions, tomatoes, garlic, a bit of hot pepper, vinegar, and soy sauce (I guessed the ingredients correctly and confirmed them on the internets). It’s a very tasty dish.

At any rate, the specialty in Peru, for obvious reasons, is the seafood. The ceviche is very good, probably the best in the world (I only say “probably” on the unlikely chance that some other country does it better), and they have a seafood soup that is excellent (tried it the last night I was there – doh!). That being said, I found the normal seafood to be lacking in creativity. I had fried shrimp once which I expected to be very good but was really just…fried shrimp. And the menus weren’t particularly inspiring. I had Trout al Ajillo (which is a garlic sauce) once which was good, but nothing compared to the Colombian equivalent (and I mean like single-A ball compared to the Bigs here) and that was at a good restaurant. I guess, given the reputation and my experiences in Colombia and the great quantity of seafood they consume, that I was expecting more.

The one thing that did not disappoint, however, was Alpaca. I wanted to try it (always try exotic meat I say), especially after it was described as a kind of “white steak”. Fantastic. Very tasty meat. Allegedly has zero cholesterol. Sort of like a combination between chicken and steak. I had it twice. I would eat it again. Today. For lunch. Or mid-morning snack. So, if you get a chance to eat Alpaca, go for it.

4. An overall lack of diversity. As I mentioned earlier, I have been extremely spoiled by Colombia. It’s not only the first South American country I’ve visited and lived in, but it’s in the family, so to speak, and I’ve come to love Colombia like a second home. And one thing about Colombia, it’s not boring. Every region is different. Different races, different food, different music and dance, different festivals, etc. Peru, by comparison, is lacking in such diversity. It’s essentially and “Incan” nation in that most of the people look the same and there is no apparent diversity in music, food, festivals, etc. Some people suggest that Peru has an African heritage like Colombia and that has enriched the country. I didn’t see it. Aside from the giant doorman at our last hotel, I don’t think I saw a single other person of African descent the entire trip. It’s very odd seeing such a homogenous culture after living in Colombia.

5. The people are extremely friendly. This is probably a truism across Latin America but Peruvian people, from the street vendor to the waiter, were extremely nice. They would offer you goods in a very polite way and then once you refused they would say, “maybe later” and let you go on your way.

They are also very stubborn. In our limited experience, Peruvians want to offer you something in only the package that they present it. Any changes are either to incomprehensible to fathom or resisted for resistance sake. This was a bit annoying at times. Bottom line, in Peru, it’s not “your way, right away”.

6. English and dollars rule. Virtually everyone except the taxi drivers spoke some English. The language is so pronounced there that I think English speakers would have zero problems. It’s incredible. I’m so used to hearing Spanish only that I almost felt like I was in Miami.

The dollar thing is a little bizarre. The Peruvian currency is the Sol. It’s about 2.75 Soles to the Dollar. But everyone accepts dollars and gives change in Soles. I think we only changed dollars for soles twice – once to pay a taxi driver and the other time to pay the one shopkeeper in all of Lima that doesn’t accept dollars. I don’t know what this means aside from the obvious – if you go to Peru, just take dollars.

7. It’s less developed than Colombia. There’s no doubt that Peru is on the way up but they’re not in Colombia’s league at the moment. Ever wonder what happens to all the used Japanese cars that the Japanese don’t want to keep? They don’t have space on the island so they convert the steering wheel to the left side and sell the in Peru (and probably other countries). Lima, for example, is dominated by second hand Celicas and Corrollas. It’s almost like walking back into the 90s. But beyond cars, the buildings, roads, infrastructure, etc are all lagging. I don’t say this to criticize. Peru has its own problems (terrain and earthquakes among them). But it is shocking to see some of the hovels where people live.

I’ll stop here for now and conclude with this: I really liked Peru in general and Lima in particular. I could live there. And I’m sure that living there, I would find that some of my observations are not entirely accurate. But even with these observations, I felt comfortable in Peru and I would definitely go back.

The Stupidity of Windows Vista

2008-03-17T10:22:00.003-05:00

Windows Vista is, in some significant ways, fairly cool. But, that doesn't mean it is without utter idiocy from time to time. This is typical Microsoft. Don't make a product that is more or less perfect. Make one with tons of problems that your customers will discover and then issue hundreds of updates to fix the problems as they come along.

At any rate, the problem I have is that Vista does not support the Cannon Powershot SD110 Digital Camera. I have searched for answers to this problem and needless to say there is a compatability issue that I won't pretend to understand and which has no solution. Even the Cannon website says that there is no driver to enable communication between this model camera and Windows Vista.

So imagine my surprise this morning when I hooked up the camera to my work computer, which is also Windows Vista, and it connected and downloaded all the pics without nary a problem. Maybe it's the spanish version or something. Either way, at least I have a temporary solution (especially important since we go to Peru tomorrow on holiday). Now, if anyone out there is more tech savvy than I (not a particularly high hurdle to cross these days), I'll welcome any explanation or assistance in this matter.

....

Yesterday, there was a big, free concert on the border between Colombia and Venezuela. Not sure if it made the news in the US but it was a "Peace without Borders" concert and it featured 7 of the most prominent Latin artists. We watched a good bit on Teevee.

This was sort of like South America's Live Aid (which really should have been called "Africa Aid") and received the coverage you would expect for such an event. Notably, and this is something you have to love about South America in general, the concert was organized in a mere 10 days, there was no real schedule for who was going to play when (aside from Juanes last), and the artists joked about that while on stage. I think that's awesome. Live Aid was a "global" event so I get why it took longer to organize, but these artists basically said the cause is more important than the BS in between and perfect or not, they can still be awesome. One artist (Miguel Bosé I think) even cancelled a concert in NY yesterday to join in the cause.

At any rate, this concert has important symbolic value in Colombia as well as in South America in that the people, for the first time in a long time (or ever according to various Colombians I talked to about this) are taking a public, active, cultural interest in ending the war and working toward peace. In the last two months we've had an anti-FARC rally, an anti-Violence (anti-Paramilitary) rally, and now a free concert that achieved regional coverage.

These types of civic actions are important. Yesterday, each artist (most notably Juanes and Carlos Vives) gave short, periodic speeches about peace with the FARC, about freeing the kidnapped people, and about regional cooperation. These messages are important in that many people, poor and uneducated people that would not hear these messages or listen to them if they heard them from Uribe or some other politician, heard them loud and clear yesterday from the very heroes that dominate their airwaves. In the short term, this type of cultural, community activity won't have a great effect. But over the long run, if these activities, these public discussions become part of the norm, it's very possible that there could be a spillover effect on the culture of violence that seems to dominate some parts of this country. One can hope.

....

Tomorrow we're off to Peru for a week's holiday. We're going to Lima, Cusco, Macchu Pichu, Ica, Islas Ballestas, and back to Lima. This represents a dream trip if for no other reason than just to see Macchu Picchu. Full report and pics to follow.

The earliest St. Patrick’s Day Celebration

2008-03-14T10:11:00.001-05:00

Easter comes early this year and that means that Bogotá will be emptying out starting Saturday morning. That puts a crimp in one of the great moneymaking festivals of the year for the Irish Pub in the Zona Rosa – St. Patty’s Day. It falls on Sunday this year anyway, which isn’t a great day for out of control green beer drinking. So, The Pub decided to hold the “holiday” on Wednesday night. Attendance of this event is, of course, mandatory.

It goes without saying that partying on a Wednesday night is not the greatest idea in the world. Not only does one have to work the next day, but dealing with a hangover in a non-English speaking environment is much, much more complicated than one would expect. Language aside, there is a cultural aspect that bears mentioning. In the UK, when one chances to be hungover on a Thursday, the entire office knows it, understands it, and provides one a wide berth. But in Colombia, in a culture in which it is considered rude not to greet fellow co-workers warmly (over the top in many cases), there is no amount of hiding and/or dodging that can avoid the exacerbation of alcohol induced pain.

Therefore, I pledged to take it easy. Fatigue I can deal with. But I learned my lesson in the old job re: hangovers. Plus, last Friday I went out with a different mate to a British Pub in Usaquen, ate food, and spent the next 24 hours in bed or at the porcelain goddess retching my guts out. I will not be returning to the Eight Bells. Ever. Again. (Second time I’ve gotten food poisoning from that place.)

My friends, however, were of a different mind. When I arrived at a fashionably late 6:40 pm, I found my friends had already drunk half a bottle of Jamison. Now I don’t mind drinking Scotch – down here it’s the “sophisticated” drink of choice. And I have drunk my fair share (there are more varieties of Scotch available down here, on average, than you’ll ever find in the US – specialty shops excluded). But I wouldn’t say Scotch is my preferred beverage and I wasn’t particularly excited by it. That actually turned out to be a good thing because I drank very slowly which fit in with my “do not get FUBB” strategy. Later, we had the obligatory pint of green beer.

The Pub (its actual name) was packed, just like last year. It’s a great moneymaking event. Anyway, here are a few observations:

1. Once again, the security guard sized me up and let me pass without giving me the metal detecting wand. The one situation where being a gringo is an advantage.

2. At 730 pm, a friend went to the toilet. When he came back he told me that some bloke had puked green beer right in front of him, all over the bathroom floor. At 730. Way to party all night there tiger.

3. The Pub had a promotion on Jamison (we actually won a free bottle which my friend took home) and the promotion worked. Conservatively estimated, they moved 100 bottles that night if not more.

4. Virtually everyone at The Pub spoke some level of English. That’s generally what you find when you go to Zona Rosa anyway, but more so for the Irish Day of Drinking. It’s the closest one can come to an English speaking environment in a non-US Embassy event in Bogota, if you’re into that sort of thing.

5. My friend (the Costeño) talks louder and more gregariously than pretty much anyone I’ve ever known. He is royally entertaining and is the only English speaking friend that I have here that speaks like a native. He’s also a spitter in that when he gets all animated, the spittle flies forth from his mouth. Unpleasant.

6. In the middle of the night (say around 10:30), a “band” walks through the whole pub banging on drums and things of that nature. It’s about the least Irish thing one could see on St. Patty’s Day (or whatever). I’m guessing it’s prohibitively costly to get Irish music.

7. I’ve never seen the Zona Rosa so entirely deserted as I did Wednesday night. Aside from The Pub (which was overflowing), nary another bar or restaurant looked to be open at 11 pm, not to mention have patrons. Some people, it seems, have the good sense to spend Wednesday night at home with the family.

8. I genuinely miss the pub culture. Here in Bogotá, it’s essentially feast or famine. It goes without saying that I prefer the British way of meeting for a pint after work and then heading home. London makes that culture work in that it has the necessary public transportation system. Bogotá not so much. And that is a problem in that it’s basically a huge risk to take a taxi on the street (which I nervously did) and there is essentially no way I’ll ever ride a bus at night (exceedingly risky, especially for a gringo).

I think, however, that this isn’t particularly unique to Bogotá. US cities which do not have excellent public transportation (like say, Atlanta) also have a problem. In place of crime, it’s driving. And this highlights one of my general preferences. I like cities in which I can walk or ride, in comfort and with little concern, especially after having a pint or two after work. That partially explains why I love London so (ask anyone who’s lived there what they miss and invariably “The Tube” will come up, expensive or not). And it partially explains why I like some things about DC. And, ultimately, it partially explains why I feel a bit of a “siege mentality” here in Bogotá.

Overall it was a good night. I avoided the craziness, my friends got hammered, and at midnight we went to a nearby restaurant and ate a “picada” which is essentially a mountain of grilled, chopped meats. I got home around 1 am and was very tired yesterday but had not even a whiff of a hangover (3 scotches and 2 beers won’t do that much). And now the week is almost over, the wife returns tomorrow, and we leave for Peru on Tuesday. All in all, I can’t complain.

The Numbers don’t lie

2008-03-12T10:54:00.001-05:00

For the Delegate Count:

“States” Won: Obama 29 (incl. Texas, DC, US Virgin Islands, and Democrats Abroad), Clinton 13 (incl. American Samoa)

Tie: New Hampshire, Florida, Michigan, Missouri

Delegate Count (Average): Obama 1556 (1405 Pledged), Clinton 1435 (1202 pledged)

Average Lead for Obama: 121

Total Pledged Delegates Distributed (or awaiting distribution): 3006

Percent of Pledged Delegates won by Obama (with Edwards): 46%

By Clinton (with Edwards): 39%

Percent of Pledged Delegates won by Obama (post Edwards): 52%

By Clinton (post Edwards): 46%

Pledged Delegates Remaining: 566

Percent that Clinton would need to tie Obama in pledged delegates: 60%

For the Popular Vote:

“States” won: Obama 29.5, Clinton 14.5 (Texas is split since I have not the data)

Not relevant: Florida, Michigan

Popular vote estimate: 13,278,372 Obama, 12,576,210 Clinton

Difference: Obama +702,162

States still to announce vote totals: Iowa, Nevada, Washington, Maine

States Remaining Estimate:

States Remaining: PA, Guam, Indiana, NC, WV, KY, Oregon, Puerto Rico, Montana, SD

Delegate estimate based on previous results (without Edwards): Obama 294, Clinton 260

States Obama expects to win: Guam, NC, Indiana, Oregon, Montana, SD

States Clinton expects to win: PA, WV, KY, Puerto Rico

States that could swing to Obama: Puerto Rico (caucus)

States that could swing to Clinton: Indiana

Conclusions:
Obama has won every month. He is leading in the pledged delegate count and the combined count (including super delegates). He has won more than twice as many states. His lead in delegates is essentially insurmountable. He is winning the estimated popular vote with a lead that is also likely insurmountable. Of the states remaining, Obama will likely win 6 of 10. Failing someone catching Obama in bed with a live boy or a dead girl, this race is over.