Ablogistan

The wrong way to beg for money

Thu, 20 Nov 2008 15:10:31 -0500

The sad thing is, CEOs of the Big Three auto companies flying to DC in private jets to beg for tax-payer money doesn't surprise me. At all. That's par for the course in today's corporate culture. At least a few Congresscritters put on a good show:

At Wednesday's hearing, Rep. Brad Sherman, D-California, pressed the private-jet issue, asking the three CEOs to "raise their hand if they flew here commercial."

"Let the record show, no hands went up," Sherman said. "Second, I'm going to ask you to raise your hand if you are planning to sell your jet in place now and fly back commercial. Let the record show, no hands went up."

"There is a delicious irony in seeing private luxury jets flying into Washington, D.C., and people coming off of them with tin cups in their hand, saying that they're going to be trimming down and streamlining their businesses," Rep. Gary Ackerman, D-New York, told the chief executive officers of Ford, Chrysler and General Motors at a hearing of the House Financial Services Committee.

Executive pay has spiraled out of control. I don't buy that "every team needs a quarterback to lead it" analogy. Today's most powerful CEOs are compensated whether they succeed or fail, and the lack of consequences for running a company into the ground has created a stagnant corporate culture that is poisonous to the overall economy.

Brain/blog types

Thu, 20 Nov 2008 13:31:45 -0500

Via Andrew Sullivan, this website analyzes your blog and categorizes it based on what look like Myers-Briggs personality types. It pegged Ablogistan as INTP, which is the same Myers-Briggs type I got when I took the actual test. Here's the description:

The logical and analytical type. They are especially attuned to difficult creative and intellectual challenges and always look for something more complex to dig into. They are great at finding subtle connections between things and imagine far-reaching implications.

They enjoy working with complex things using a lot of concepts and imaginative models of reality. Since they are not very good at seeing and understanding the needs of other people, they might come across as arrogant, impatient and insensitive to people that need some time to understand what they are talking about.

What about Props 1, 2, and 102?

Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:13:54 -0500

I'm seeing a lot of petitions going around here on the East coast in reaction to Prop 8, which banned gay marriage in California, most with vague calls to "repeal Prop 8" and no specific indication of how or even to whom the petition will ultimately be sent. Young liberals are fired up and ready to fight for gay rights, but for the most part the movement seems directionless and unorganized.

There's something about the intense focus on Prop 8 that bugs me, though. I agree with the principles, but I can't help but wonder if we'd seem the same passion for gay rights if Prop 8 hadn't passed. What about Prop 1 in Arkansas, which essentially banned gays from adopting, or Prop 2 in Florida and Prop 102 in Arizona, which also banned gay marriage? These equally-repressive amendments have been all but overlooked by liberals outside of the respective states. I understand the symbolism of Prop 8 and the unique circumstance in which gay marriage had previously been legal in California. But I'm also a bit unsettled by liberals' indifference to the rights of gays in the "flyover" states. If we're talking about a civil rights issue, shouldn't the amendments in Florida, Arkansas, and Arizona be just as offensive as the one in California?

Is this just smugness from the blue coasts? "Why campaign for gay rights in Arkansas and Arizona? It's just red states being red states, right?" Or is it because of the lack of leadership? For the most part, the part-time activists don't seem to have a clear idea of what they want to accomplish. Is their goal simply to repeal Prop 8? If so, they're missing the bigger picture and the movement is nothing more than a passing fad. I assume most people concerned about Prop 8 also, deep down, care about gay rights in all states. Even so, no one seems to have an idea for how to achieve that, so they're making a stand in California.

Now is the perfect time for gay rights activists to develop clearer goals. Should they fight marriage amendments state by state? Is a national solution eventually the answer? If so, how? The courts? Federal legislation? The answer isn't to model a movement after the protests and petitions of the 1960s; the model is the Obama campaign. Reach out to red states and religious organizations, rather than help drive the wedge further. Donate money and time, even if in small amounts. That's how you bring about change these days.

Who is al-Zawahri talking to?

Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:38:52 -0500

Al-Qaida's No. 2 released the first message attacking the new President-elect, and he went straight for the race issue:

In an audio message which appeared on militant Web sites Wednesday, al-Zawahri said that Obama is "the direct opposite of honorable black Americans" like Malcolm X. He called Obama a "house negro."

He added that Obama's plan to shift troops to Afghanistan is doomed to failure, because Afghans will resist.
The audio plays over still pictures of al-Zawahri, Malcolm X praying, and Obama with Jewish leaders at the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem.

The tape also criticizes Obama for his position on Israel, stating that this proves his "stance of hostility to Islam and Muslims".

Al-Zawahri also urged Muslims to continue attacks against "criminal America".

A little odd, to say the least. Who exactly is al-Zawahri trying to reach with this message? Al-Qaeda is no stranger to meddling in domestic political affairs, and some have suggested he's in part trying to drive a wedge in the black community.

I don't buy that. This sounds like a guy going to extremes to portray Obama as "more of the same," to borrow some campaign jargon. Al-Qaeda has in general tried to portray itself as in opposition to U.S. policy, rather than the nation itself, and here comes a new President promising to change those policies. Well, maybe some of the recruitment pool is intrigued and wonders if it wouldn't hurt to wait and see if policy really does change before rushing off to fight and die in opposition. Maybe there's an added affinity because of his race and what that represents, not only to Americans, but to the world. If you're a No. 2 Al-Qaeda leader, you're worried. Because once you lose momentum, it's hard to get a global terror network going again. So you have to re-vilify the U.S. at every opportunity, convince your troops—not the hardcore, but maybe the young boys drawn but not yet committed to this ideology—that nothing is really going to change.

It's just a theory. But I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a juiced-up PR campaign from Al-Qaeda and eventually hear them come right out and say that Obama is no different from Bush. If you want to vilify someone these days, after all, that's the way to go.

Live long and prosper

Mon, 17 Nov 2008 12:08:13 -0500

There's been a lot of speculation that Obama may be America's nerdiest/geekiest President. The evidence: His tech savvy, his early days as a comic book collector, the picture of him posing in front of a Superman statute, and finally, this:

He is a big fan of Star Trek. He said himself: "I grew up on Star Trek. I believe in the final frontier." And, when Leonard Nimoy was the guest on NPR's "Wait Wait...Don't Tell Me!" in September, he said that he had run into "one of the presidential candidates" and that that candidate had, upon seeing Nimoy, given him the Vulcan salute. He refused to name the candidate, but said he "was not John McCain."

Which got me thinking: Obama will need a radically different campaign message when he runs for reelection in 2012. "Change" only works when you're on the outside throwing rocks at the establishment. As President, he'll need a message that highlights his accomplishments yet conveys to the American people that the best days are ahead.

I guess what I'm saying is, I think the title of this post would look great on an Obama 2012 campaign placard.

meh

Mon, 17 Nov 2008 11:01:01 -0500

I like new words and all, but I'm pretty indifferent about this.

Friday Octopus Blogging

Fri, 14 Nov 2008 11:26:29 -0500

They can open bottles now. Think about the implications of that (see here and here if you aren't afraid yet).

Obama's YouTube Chats

Fri, 14 Nov 2008 11:06:19 -0500

FDR had his fireside chats, Obama will have YouTube. His administration plans to bring government into the 21st century in a big way. From the Washington Post:

Today, President-elect Obama will record the weekly Democratic address not just on radio but also on video -- a first. The address, typically four minutes long, will be turned into a YouTube video and posted on Obama's transition site, Change.gov, once the radio address is made public on Saturday morning.
In addition to regularly videotaping the radio address, officials at the transition office say the Obama White House will also conduct online Q&As and video interviews. The goal, officials say, is to put a face on government. In the following weeks, for example, senior members of the transition team, various policy experts and choices for the Cabinet, among others, will record videos for Change.gov.

This is, in part, a communications strategy. Obama won an election by tapping into new technologies and social networks, and he'll probably attempt to control his administration's image in much the same way.

But Obama's tech savvy has the potential to improve government transparency. Obama has pledged to use the Internet to shine light on the workings of Washington, and he has previously pushed "Google Government" legislation that would make all government contracts and grants publicly searchable.

I was excited by Obama's focus on transparency and technology early on, and hopefully the financial mess won't overshadow those issues once he is sworn in.

The Iran-Saudi Arabia Cold War

Fri, 14 Nov 2008 09:00:11 -0500

One of the untold stories about the effects of U.S. involvement in the Middle East has been the escalating power struggle between Iran and Saudi Arabia for control of the region. At the height of the insurgency in Iraq, for instance, Saudi Arabia—a supposed U.S. ally—was funneling money and volunteers to the Sunni insurgency to undermine the Maliki government, which it feared could become too susceptible to Iranian influence. The insurgency was prolonged by both countries funding militants in hopes of filling the power vacuum and/or preventing the other from taking control.

It's also happening in Afghanistan, as Iran and Saudi Arabia have taken opposing stances on whether the Afghan government should negotiate with the Taliban. From the Diplomatic Courier:

The talks, held at the behest of Afghan President Hamid Karzai, took place in Mecca during the final three days of Ramadan, which ended on September 29 ... The prospect of some sort of Taliban rehabilitation received a much frostier reception in Tehran. Iran's Foreign Minister Manuchehr Mottaki urged the U.S. against talks, saying that the Taliban's extremism could not be confined to the Middle East and West Asia. Iran's ambassador to the UN said that negotiations would make Afghanistan even less stable. The chairman of Iran's parliamentary foreign policy and national security committee said the talks would spread terrorism.

Iran despises the Taliban for three reasons. The first is sectarian. Iran is a Shia theocracy, whereas the Taliban are Sunni extremists who view Shias as heretics ... Not surprisingly, Iran welcomed and assisted the Taliban's downfall in 2001.

A second reason for Iran's posture is the Taliban's involvement in the production and shipment of Afghan opiates. Iran's impact on the Taliban's drugs revenue is one of the untold stories of the war on terror. Even the U.S. has praised Iran's efforts against narcotics.

A third reason that Iran dislikes the Taliban is because it sees the militia as a tool of Arab influence in West Asia. Saudi Arabia and the UAE were among only three countries, the other being Pakistan, to recognise the Taliban's government in Afghanistan.

Iran is locked in a battle with the Saudis for influence in Pakistan. Tehran is favorably impressed by Pakistan's new president Asif Zardari, who hails from a Shia Baluch family. Zardari's prime minister and foreign minister are both drawn from Pakistan's majority Barelvi sect, a syncretic form of Sunnism that shares elements with Shiism (such as the worship of saints). Zardari has publicly pledged himself to the war against the Taliban and has also forsworn violence against India, an old Iranian ally. Since he took office in September, Pakistan's army has waged its most effective campaign against the Pakistan-based Taliban to date, killing as many as 1,000 militants during a summer offensive in the Bajaur tribal agency.

I'm not sure what I think about the Taliban negotiations. That is a group that should never return to power and I have a feeling that if they are given a seat at the table in the Afghan government, it's only a matter of time before an attempted coup. On the other hand, a peaceful and stable Afghanistan may be the only way to completely marginalize their extremist ideology.

The danger in both Iraq and Afghanistan is that the U.S. will make the wrong decisions simply to counter Iranian influence. We, at times, overestimate our influence in the Middle East. Iran's quest for nuclear weapons may be in part about defending itself against a possible U.S. invasion, but it is probably more about muscling out Saudi Arabia as the dominant power in the region.

If we're too singularly focused on preventing that, we may end up just replacing one extremist regional power with another.

Generation O

Wed, 12 Nov 2008 09:56:27 -0500

The NY Times said what I said about how this election defined a generation, only they said it earlier and better:

These young voters and those slightly older, who together may forever be known as Generation O, were the ground troops of the campaign. They opened hundreds of Obama offices in remote areas, registered voters and persuaded older relatives to take a chance on the man with the middle name Hussein.
They saw in Mr. Obama, 47, who was born at the tail end of the baby boom era, the values that sociologists and cultural critics ascribe to them.

Government under Mr. Obama, they believe, would value personal disclosure and transparency in the mode of social-networking sites. Teamwork would be in fashion, along with a strict meritocracy.

The article focuses on the how (i.e., social networking and attitudes about transparency and technology) more so than the why. There's no mention of Bush, and although I think Obama appealed to younger voters on a certain non-political level, the last eight years have defined Generation O's political outlook and perhaps shifted them much farther to the left than they would have been otherwise.

Barack the Lawn Ranger

Wed, 12 Nov 2008 09:00:34 -0500

This is coming from Dave Barry, so I'm not entirely sure it's legitimate, but then again, Ben Smith over at Politico seemed to take it seriously, so I blame my gullibility on him.

Apparently, Obama was once a member of the "Lawn Rangers" a group that "wowed the Midwest corn-festival circuit with their synchronized mowing maneuvers, broom tossing and plunger wagging." I'll let Dave Barry explain.

As you may know, I am a veteran member of the world-famous Lawn Rangers precision lawnmower drill team, whose members march every year at the Broom Corn festival in Arcola, Ill., as well as various other events, depending on ~~how drunk they are~~ scheduling... The Lawn Rangers perform highly sophisticated semi-synchronized maneuvers with lawnmowers, brooms, and toilet plungers. Membership in this crack unit is a great honor, bestowed only on ~~whoever shows up~~ very few people.
Today I received an email from Lawn Rangers co-founder Pat Monahan, with a photograph taken in 2003 when the Rangers marched in the Chicago St. Patrick's Day parade. Joining them on this occasion was an up-and-coming Illinois state senator, seen here participating in the rigorous rookie-training program..

If only that image of Obama holding a plunger had surfaced earlier, he might have earned another 1-2% in the popular vote from people looking for a liberal alternative to Joe the Plumber. I just can't imagine why we didn't hear about this before the election...

Bionic contact lenses

Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:17:04 -0500

I figured something like this was coming eventually, but who knew the future would arrive so soon? From Concurring Opinions:

According to Government Technology, engineers at the University of Washington have developed contact lenses with integrated circuitry. Although the lenses have only been tested on animals, researchers are working on having electronic lenses overlay a display over a person's visual field without impairing sight. Researchers hope that the lenses, once completed, will allow users to zoom in on distant objects and see useful facts. Future applications might allow drivers and pilots to see their direction and speed projected across their view or to surf the Web without a monitor. The circuit components would be powered by integrated solar cells and a wireless radio-frequency receiver.

It's a new day

Tue, 11 Nov 2008 09:55:17 -0500

The latest from will.i.am

Obama is already meeting with aggressive, unpopular world leaders without preconditions

Mon, 10 Nov 2008 14:39:50 -0500

What will his detractors think? More importantly, what did the two talk about?

The death of the poker boom

Mon, 10 Nov 2008 12:57:04 -0500

It wasn't that long ago that you could watch a poker tournament on five or six different cable channels during an average prime time night. Now, you're lucky if you can find three or four. Oh well, I guess all bubbles must burst.