I probably won't get around to reading Anti-Americanism any time soon, but I loved this lengthy review of it by John Parker in the Asian Times:

In Anti-Americanism, which is basically a sequel to Without Marx or Jesus, a more contemporary example of the same phenomenon is given: the nearly simultaneous criticism of the US for "arrogant unilateralism" and "isolationism". As Revel dryly observes, "the same spiteful bad temper inspired both indictments, though of course they were diametrically opposed".

Examples of this psychopathology are almost endless, but the Iraq crisis has certainly provided a profusion of new cases. For example, during the 12 years after 1991, the anti-American press was filled with self-righteous hand-wringing over what was billed as the terrible suffering of the Iraqi people under UN sanctions. But when the administration of President George W Bush abandoned the sanctions policy (a policy that, incidentally, had been considered the cautious, moderate course of action when it was originally adopted) in favor of a policy of regime change by military force - which was obviously the only realistic way to end the sanctions - did these dyspeptic howler monkeys praise the United States for trying to alleviate Iraqis' suffering? No, of course not - instead, without batting an eyelash, they simply began criticizing the United States for the "terrible civilian casualties" caused by bombing.

Innumerable cases like this have made it perfectly clear to Americans that they will automatically be despised no matter what policy option they select. Furthermore, the only rational reaction Americans could have to this situation is to keep their own counsel when it comes to foreign policy, and leave their fair-weather friends - or, more accurately, no-weather friends - at arm's length. Predictably, however, the anti-American cult has a third accusation pre-packaged and ready to go for this very reaction: the inexplicable reluctance of Americans to listen attentively to their perpetually peeved critics is the result of their "arrogant unilateralism"! (Naturally, the possibility that the anti-American cultists' own statements might have played a role in promoting this behavior is never even considered.)

Ivan Miesel penned a story up on newhire Coach Bill Callahan's attempts to reinvigorate the University of Nebraska's football program. Now, just to put my biases out front, Nebraska is my least favorite schools in the Big XII and one of my least favorite in the NCAA, so an objective analysis is not what you're remarkably likely to find here. I'd love to say that I wish Callahan luck, but I don't.

[Nebraska AD] Pederson, a Nebraska native, a Nebraska alum, a former recruiting coordinator under Osborne and a former associate athletic director, returned to Lincoln as athletic director in December 2002. He hadn't been back a year when he cut down the Devaney family tree.

"I returned to a vastly different place," Pederson says. "We always had some strong leadership. We all knew what was expected, what the next day held. All of a sudden I felt like we were almost going through the motions and hoping everything was going to be fine. 'If we don't change anything, maybe we will wake up and the program will be fabulous.' I just didn't see it. I just didn't see that we were on a strong path. A lot of it was gut feel."

It's worth pointing out that the opposite of "good" [outgoing coach Frank Solich was 58-19] is not "great" and that the opposite of "improvement" [Solich went from 7-7 to 9-3 in his last two years] is not "more improvement."

Pederson hurt his case when he conducted a secretive job search that stretched to six weeks. One top candidate (Miami Dolphins coach Dave Wannstedt) after another (Arkansas coach Houston Nutt) after another (Dallas Cowboys defensive coordinator Mike Zimmer) said no. The Huskers have a streak of 42 consecutive winning regular seasons and 35 consecutive bowl games. Pederson decided that the path back to the elite is via the West Coast.

I'm a little hurt that they didn't mention my offer, but I'll get over it. That being said, Pederson and company got lucky with Callahan, who took an inherited team to the Superbowl and almost came out of it with a tying record (15-17) before being canned after his second season. On the other hand, anyone who makes an enemy out of Oakland Raiders owner Al Davis can't be all bad, I suppose.

Callahan is already off to a booming start in Nebraska, though:

Callahan understands the parallel in installing the West Coast offense in the heartland. But he doesn't believe the on-field changes pose a big problem. The coach discovered early in his tenure, however, that he must be careful in how he makes them. When Callahan announced a few weeks after his hiring that there would no longer be an open-door policy for walk-ons, the state reacted as if he had forsworn eating meat.

Hold on, Callahan said. He is the father of a walk-on. The oldest of his four children, Brian, is a quarterback at UCLA.

"We're not trying to take away the identification of a young man and his hometown with Nebraska," he says. "All we're trying to do is be more select. We welcome walk-ons. We want them in our program. They add to our program. But I think things got misconstrued. We want the numbers to be more manageable."

Dealing with Nebraska's fans and its program is going to be Callahan's biggest problem. Nebraska has a storied history in football and they're used to winning. Lincoln isn't Austin or even Stillwater as far as attractiveness-to-recruits goes. That being said, recruitment is apparently one of Callahan's strong points. Callahan's 2004 pull ranks fifth of the Big Twelve according to Rivals.com. However, they ranked second in the Big XII North, behind only Kansas State. That should be enough, right?

When the British balked at their secondary status to the United States in the Allied effort to win World War II, American troops teased that the Brits were underpaid, undersexed and under Eisenhower.

In Lincoln, with the sun setting on four decades of dominance, it chafes Husker fans that their team is underpowered, undermanned and under Kansas State.

Bob Devaney built Nebraska into a national power in the 1960s, culminating in national championships in 1970 and '71. He handed the program to his top assistant, Tom Osborne, who strengthened the program and won three national championships in the 1990s. Osborne handed the program to his top assistant, Frank Solich.

His record of 58-19 (.753) was sixth among active Division I-A coaches, yet Solich won only one Big 12 championship. Still, Solich was family, and when athletic director Steve Pederson fired Solich after a 9-3 regular season, he set off a feud. Osborne, a U.S. Congressman, called a news conference to voice his displeasure, and a few weeks later relinquished his skybox at Memorial Stadium.

In any case, I wish Mr. Callahan luck.

Oh wait, no I don't...

I got a new cell phone. It seems that cell phones aren't quite the buyer's market here that they are in Houston. There are only two national competitors here (U.S. Cellular and AT&T) that I ran across. There's also a local cell phone company that has unlimited local minutes but no LD minutes. Very weird.

I went with AT&T, where I got 800 anytime minutes, 1500 off-peak minutes, and I can call nationally. It cost me about $35/mo, which beat the competition. But I had to buy a cell phone! Gasp! I can't remember the last time one didn't come free with a year contract.

In any case, now that I'm employed I can afford a cell phone, which will help me find a better job.

Ahhh, irony.

ABCNews has an interesting article on a movement within doctors to forego insurance altogether:

It's a terrible indictment of the collapsing health care system," said Arthur Caplan, chairman of the medical ethics department at the University of Pennsylvania Medical School. "Insurance and managed care were supposed to streamline instead what they've done is add so much paperwork and bureaucracy they're driving some doctors out."

When O'Brien leaves the exam room, he writes a check for $50 and he's done no forms, no ID numbers, no copayments.

"This is traditional medicine. This is what America was like 30 years ago," said O'Brien, 55 and self-employed, who believes he has saved thousands of dollars by dropping his expensive insurance policy and paying cash. "It's a whole world of difference."

It's an interesting shift that has gone on where insurance companies have instead become health care providers. In yesteryear, health insurance was just that: Insurance against catastrophe. These days, however, insurance instead has their hand in every aspect of our health care. They pay for pharmaceuticals, doctor visits, routine tests, and so on. While this is ostensibly a good thing because it makes every day health expenses cost less for the average American, it has created boat-loads of paperwork and bureaucracy. Not only that, but we all pay for it in the end anyhow with the monthly payroll deductions or through lower wages because our employers are having to pay more.

For the most part, I would prefer a more insurance-based health insurance system. I'd much rather pay the insurance company less on a monthly basis and pay for more of my routine checkups, tests, and so on. That's similar to the arrangement that I have with Fortis at the moment until I can get a job with a more traditional plan. I would honestly consider sticking to Fortis except that if disaster ever does strike, after paying for it you can't get insurance through them again.

That brings to light one of the two problems with the "old way." Without some sort of regulation those that have the most health problems would be least capable of getting coverage. Under the current system (as I understand it) anyone that's employed cannot be denied health insurance indefinitely due to past ailments. The insurance companies can forego coverage for pre-existing conditions for up to a year if insurance coverage has not been constant and companies can decline paying for health insurance up to 90-120 days (maybe more) for new employees, but those with stable employment will get coverage at some point. Without some reform, that would not happen for companies like Fortis.

The second issue is those that require expensive medications on a regular basis. What immediately due to my experiences comes to mind for that are those suffering from depression or some other mental illness. I've never taken such medications, but a large number of people around me have and they need that to function. These medications can cost up to hundreds of dollars a month and it is certainly in society's best interest that they be covered.

On the other hand, medication is expensive to produce and an often simply forestall the inevitable when it comes to the elderly and terminally ill. A lot of people gripe about the big pharm companies charging and arm and a leg for medications, but the simple fact of the matter is that there are more of those medications available every day. But for every new medication that helps with this problem and that, it's going to cost money. From a practical standpoint, the government and insurance companies can run themselves completely into the ground by paying for everything for everyone. Many of the left (and too many in the center) want medical care (including medication) to be a right. If they succeed in this regard, it can be prohibitively expensive if we can't draw the line somewhere.

Additionally there is the matter of false positives. If doctor visits don't cost anything (or cost $10), a lot of people will go to the doctor at the first sign of a problem, whether they need to or not. If it doesn't cost the user anything, the user will not show any discretion before using the services available to them. This has been demonstrated time and time again with guaranteed emergency care. Since people cannot be turned away in the emergency room, then non-emergencies become emergencies very quickly. As it stands, hospitals are able to bill emergency room care recipients, but those bills can be hard to collect.

At the same time, I have difficulty advocating turning emergencies away at the door. Similarly, I am uncomfortable with people dying simply because they cannot afford simple treatments. On top of that, people will less income may forego visiting the doctors office (and will certainly forego regular checkups) as minor illnesses become major.

To the left, the answer is universal health care. In this vein, it's better to waste money on unnecessary visits and medications if it prevents problems down the road. Perhaps that's the case, but then doctors - the most educated and trained profession in the country - will become little more than public servants.

Speaking of which, Michael Williams has a disturbing post on that very subject. Due to high malpractice insurance premiums, neurosurgeons in a Florida county stopped accepting emergency patients and a woman died of a stroke while they tried to call someone out of the country to take care of her:

"If you have a stroke in this part of the country then you're in deep trouble because the doctors won't see you," Masterson said.

Some neurosurgeons (search) aren't disputing his claim, saying they can't afford malpractice insurance and are afraid of being wiped out by lawsuits, so they reduce their risks by refusing emergency patients.

"It makes me feel very bad that I can't take care of a lot of patients... That I have to send them on and I can't take care of them - can't accept that risk," said Dr. Jacques Farkas, a neurosurgeon in Palm Beach County (search).

Last month in Tallahassee, Fla., physicians blamed frivolous lawsuits for sky-high medical insurance and pushed for caps on malpractice attorney fees.

But some trial lawyers say there is no malpractice crisis and that patients are dying because doctors are playing the blame game instead of doing their job.

"I think its criminal," said trial attorney Marvin Kurzban. "I think its dereliction of duty. I think that's malpractice also."

As Michael and commenters point out, this creates a damned-either-way scenario where doctors are succeptable to lawsuits whether they do anything or not. This, in turn, makes them little more than civil servants.

Doctors-as-civil-servants is the norm in Canada. Whether or not it's working up there is subject to debate:

Quality is subjective and can only be evaluated through consumer choices, but the government won't let consumers make choices and vote with their feet if they are not satisfied. Anecdotal evidence of questionable quality is everywhere. In a recent piece in Montreal's Gazette, a Canadian related her own experience, and contrasted the "kindness, discretion and professionalism" of staff in U.S. hospitals, with the frequent rudeness of unionized personnel in the Canadian system.

Long waiting lines are a fixture of the system. The Fraser Institute, a Vancouver think tank, has calculated that in 2003, the average waiting time from referral by a general practitioner to actual treatment was more than four months. Waiting times vary among specialties (and, less wildly, among provinces), but remain high even for critical diseases: The shortest median wait is 6.1 weeks for oncology treatment; excluding radiation, which is longer. Extreme cases include more than a year's median wait for neurosurgery in New Brunswick. The median wait for an MRI is three months. Since 1993, waiting times have increased by 90%.

Waiting lines impose a real cost, which is approximated by what individuals would be willing to pay to avoid them. Waiting costs include health risk, lost time (especially for individuals whose time is most valuable), pain and anguish. Socialist systems are notoriously oblivious to anguish, discomfort, humiliation and other subjective factors which bureaucrats cannot measure or don't value the same way as the patient does.

That's from a Wall Street Journal article cited by Tom Kirkendal, where he discusses the partial solution of Health Savings Accounts:

HSAs allow individuals and their employers to make deposits each year equal to their health insurance deductible (there is currently a limit on the size of the deductible and a supplemental insurance policy is required to cover catastrophic illness or injury expense in excess of the amounts deposited in the HSA). The funds in the HSA grow tax free and the funds may be used to pay such things as health care expenses that would not otherwise be covered by third party insurance, insurance premiums while the owner of the account is changing jobs, and health expenses during retirement.

However, the new law is not perfect. For example, as noted above, the maximum amount that can be deposited into an HSA in any year is currently somewhat limited. Consequently, the combined cost of depositing funds in the HSA and paying for the supplemental insurance that is required can turn out to be more expensive than simply buying a third party policy with a relatively high deductible.

Moreover, products such as HSAs are only part of the solution to the problems in America’s health care finance system. From my vantage point, some sort of nationalized insurance or federally-backed private insurance is still going to be necessary for people who simply cannot afford to fund HSAs or buy private insurance, and for people with severe medical problems who cannot afford the costs attendant to those problems. In regard to these groups, the tough issue is how do you ration the health care? Or, stated another way, there must eventually be a political consensus on the limitations of such federally-insured health care. Otherwise, we simply have created another federal program that balloons into yet another governmental financial debacle.

Tom also links to and discusses another WSJ article on pharmaceuticals, which ties right back in to what we expect - and should expect - from insurance companies and how the current system health-care-provider-instead-of-insurance system may be presently failing us:

America's real problem is that drugs have been roped into the same perverse incentives that govern most health care spending. Consumers don't weigh cost vs. benefit; drug companies focus their development efforts on drugs aimed at large populations of price-insensitive, insured patients. At the same time, consumers who don't have drug insurance and pay out of their own pockets scream bloody murder because drugs seem like a violation of a natural order in which medical care is increasingly perceived as a costless entitlement.

Think we exaggerate? Everybody noticed when HCA, the big hospital chain, earlier this month put aside $700 million to cover the bad debts of uninsured patients, who are typically good for only seven cents on the dollar. Little noticed was the fact the company also has to cover the bad debts of insured patients, who routinely skip out on their co-payments and deductibles. Nowadays these people are good for only 45 cents on the dollar on average.

Medical bills seem to have become optional to Americans when deciding which envelopes to toss in the trash unopened at the end of the month. "Hospitals are ninth" on the payment list, HCA's Chief Jack Bovender told Reuters in February, well behind mortgages, car payments and cable-TV bills. "The only thing people pay worse is the student loan program."

It looks like I'm going to be living in the slumhole. At $7.50 an hour, I really can't afford much better than that. I took a tour of the rooms yesterday. They are a couple steps down from college dormatories, but at least two of the available rooms are cable-ready. That's very important if I'm going to get cable-modem. Cable-modem is actually cheaper than the alternative, which is to get a landline dedicated for the Internet.

Pros

Cheap

Cable-modem?

15 minute walk to work

3-4 minute drive to work

Cheap

"Furnished"

Located near downtown

Downtown not as dangerous as Houston downtown

If I should have a desire for adult entertainment, I wouldn't have to walk long

If I want to buy a gun, there's a store right down the street.

Would live, work, and go to church within 20 blocks.

Cheap

Reaks of authenticity

Cons

Eel wouldn't likely visit often.

That's just as well, because she'd have to leave at 10pm

Which doesn't matter because she won't likely visit often

Which is fine because she'd be arrested after 10pm

I don't particularly want adult entertainment or musicians.

No fridge

No protected mail (unlockable mail slots)

May not have a bathroom.

10 minute drive to Eel's place

No covered parking.

Landlord shows serious butt-crack.

Reaks of things other than authenticity

There's one other candidate. To give you an idea about this place, they call themselves "Thrifty Living." As near as I can tell, it's a hotel that's been converted into apartments. The parking situation is a bit better and I'll bet all of their rooms have bathrooms. Unfortunately, I think it costs more than the Dormatory (for lack of a better name because, oddly, the complex actually doesn't have a name. Just an address).

On Monday of this week I interviewed with Norwest. I think I did a quite good job on it and would probably have the inside track for the job if it weren't for two factors that I believe have pretty much disqualified me for the job:
1. They don't hire people whose former employers don't endorse them. If I actually included Gattaca on my resume I might have avoided this loophole altogether. Oddly enough, if they contacted Mr. Smith I think he would have positive things to say. As it stands I didn't and UFC is considered my last employer. While Theus didn't sabotage my job with Gattaca, there is no way he would endorse me.
2. Even if #1 didn't get me, this one would. They were less than impressed that I moved all the way across the country "for a girl." They were downright skeptical of my prospects with Eel. The more I explained of the situation, the less impressed they became. This is understandably an issue for them because if Eel and I were to break up next week, they'd have to start all over again. They were similarly concerned that if Eel took a job elsewhere I'd be on the next plane out of town. There wasn't much I could say to that since I will almost certainly be leaving in about two years, at latest.

My interview with Synchronus went considerably better. I bought a resume, but there really was no need. They just stuck us in a booth where we answered phones by simulation. I kept an eye on the clock since I know such things are important to companies like this and finished a good 10 minutes ahead of the woman next to me, who started five minutes before I did. After that I talked to the recruiter, who didn't even ask why I moved up and didn't really care that I would not be there long. As with Gattaca, that's part of their business model, I suspect. In any case, they made me an offer and I have accepted. I start a week from next Tuesday. The good news is that I will get the weekends off, which is a big deal since they run a 24/7 operation. The bad news is that I report in at 5:45 in the morning. I could have gotten an 8-5 shift, but I decided that this would actually allow me to continue to look for (other) work.

The weather here in Idaho has just gotten downright bizarre.

First, when I was driving back from a job interview, there were white drops of rain. Not all of them were white, but some of them were. I started chalking it up to pollution, but then I realized that I'm not in Houston anymore. Unfortunately, I couldn't inspect further because the whiteness of the raindrops disappeared as soon as it touched the ground.

By the time the evening rolled around, it all got even stranger. Now all of the raindrops were white. Not only that, but there was some sort of build-up forming on the ground and on objects. It was kinda like sand. I looked around for a dust storm, but I saw none. After feeling the substance, I realized that white the texture was similar to sand, it was cold and had a tendency to miraculously transform in to water.

Man, I'm never going to get used to things up here...

Lex:

A friend writes: "Because some friend of [my daughter's] backed out at the last minute, I'm stuck with a $60 ticket to Kenny Chesney. Because I'm too freakin' cheap to waste it means I'm going to Kenny Chesney tonight.

"Tell me again your evidence that God exists."

and the friend writes again in the comments section:

Actually, it turned out to be not so bad. The music was only part of the entertainment. Mostly it was buff young men, on a stage, wearing tight blue jeans that they were sewn into, swiveling their hips (I know dogs get hip displacia, can humans?), and beer, lots and lots of beer. A good time was had by most, and by most I mean the 40+ year-old women who were out for a "girls night out." I would also venture the husbands were the ultimately beneficiaries later that evening.
Anonymous | 04.26.04 - 9:54 am | #

Yeehaw.

College Football News has a great write-up on quarterback Kevin Kolb:

No true freshman quarterback has been this good since Philip Rivers was leading NC State, and we all saw how his career turned out. Like Rivers, Kolb is the signature player in the rising of a program. What was NC State before Rivers? It wasn't as bad as Houston was before Kolb and head coach Art Briles, and now there's an excitement and buzz around the program not seen since David Klingler and Andre Ware were running 'n' shooting.

"Kevin has done an outstanding job leading this program back to the postseason," said Briles. "Even though there was a lot of pressure on him, especially considering he was playing high school football
last year, Kevin stepped into a leadership role and performed as if he was a three-year starter. We
are blessed that Kevin Kolb is leading this football team."

Also, via Texas State's message board (doing some research for a future post), I ran across this history of Robertson Stadium:

In recognition of John and Julie O'Quinn's generosity and loyal support, the field at Robertson Stadium was named "John O'Quinn Field." The Cougars christened their new field with a 28-3 victory over city-rival Rice, in what was the renewal of the storied Bayou Bucket battle.

Houston "Returned to Robertson," full time in 1998, marking the first time since 1949 that UH played its entire home schedule on campus. With its five home contests a year ago, UH has now played 16 games at Robertson Stadium over the last five seasons. The Cougars have now posted a 23-21-1 record during that span, thanks in part to a 4-1 home ledger in 1999.

Last season the Cougars defeated Rice, Louisiana-Lafayette, Cincinnati and Tulane in the friendly confines of "The Mighty Quinn." At one time during the home slate, Houston kept the opposition off the scoreboard in nine consecutive quarters. The ferocious Cougar defense allowed a meager 14.6 points per game in their new digs, while the offense generated 27 points a contest while rolling up 45 points against UL Lafayette and 36 versus Tulane.

[...]

The University of Houston's inaugural football game in the stadium was against Southwestern Louisiana on September 21, 1946. The stadium was the site for every subsequent Cougar home game through 1949. In 1950, the Cougars played five home games in Public School Stadium and two others in newly constructed Rice Stadium. UH moved all of its home games to Rice Stadium beginning in 1951. The Cougars were the first college team to play its games in a domed stadium when they moved to the brand-new Astrodome in 1965. UH played all of its home games there through 1993 before splitting time in the two stadiums over the last three seasons. All-time, Houston was 112-55-3 in the Astrodome. The Cougars' record in Robertson is 23-21-1.

There were only supposed to be two parts to it, but I just discovered that I got hit by a virus. I haven't gotten hit by a virus since college.

Harrumph.

It went a little something like this:

Mom: How did your interview go?
RAW: I did as well as I could, but I don't think I'm getting the position. They don't hire people whose former employers won't endorse.
Mom: Rats
RAW: Well, the good news is that I found a place to live that's dirt cheap, so if I get a job paying $7.50 an hour, I can afford to live.
Mom: Where is the apartment?
RAW: Well that's the bad news. It's kind of in the slums. Really weird place. You can't have visitors after 10 and if any non-residents are found at that time, they'll be arrested (even if they're a guest). Some of the units don't come with bathrooms.
Mom: Sometimes cheap isn't better if you are going to be robbed. What does Camille think?
RAW: I'm under the impression that Camille is not impressed.
Mom: Go with Camille's gut reaction and keep on looking
RAW: Unfortunately, unless I can find a job that pays well, I won't be able to afford much better. On the upshot I'm getting renter's insurance in case I do get robbed.
Mom: Well you put in one claim and that goes bye-bye, and if it is a high risk neighborhood, they won't insure you.
RAW: Well, I stopped by InsuranceCo. and they gave me a quote and didn't ask where I was going to live. Oh, and I found out that Idaho has lax concealed carry laws.
Mom: The last thing you need is a gun. You would probably shoot yourself. What did InsuranceCo have to say?
RAW: $96 a month for both auto and renters insurance
Mom: Not bad. What kind of deductibles?
RAW: I can't recall offhand, but I do remember that they were reasonable. $200-500 range I think?
Mom: What about the crappy job, is that still a possibility?
RAW: Yeah, I have an interview Wednesday afternoon. That's the job that pays $7.50 an hour.
Mom: Better than nothing
RAW: Yeah, I can live off it. Particularly if I donate blood plasma weekly. That'll bring in another $140 a month...
Mom: I don't want to hear that.
RAW: Well, hopefully it won't be necessary. I've done the math and in the slummy place I should be able to live on $7.50/hr. Particularly if my apartment, job, and Camille are all in Pocatello - I'll save a ton on gas.
Mom: I'm going to put your Dad on. I have to go make banana pudding - eat your heart out.

Michael Williams puts up some thoughts as to what constitutes a "trivial sum" of money:

I know people who make less money than I do who consider larger amounts to be trivial, and I know people who make more than I do who are more frugal. If people were rational there would be some common percentage range of disposable income that would be considered trivial, but I'm not sure if that's the case.

It's certainly not the case with me. Much like Michael, my threshold is about $10, including tax. It actually remains there whether I'm making in excess of $30k a year as I did with UFC or if I'm unemployed. I'm not sure why it's at $10, other than just the feeling that if I'm giving someone a $10 bill and I'm not getting anything back, it seems like at least a modest investment to me. Obviously, I do spend more than $10 on a lot of things, but it ceases to be trivial when I do.

I actually have another threshold at about $50, when it goes from non-trivial to serious. If I'm spending money towards something that's important to me (say my computers or a gift), but it goes over $50, then I'm not only going to give it a second though, but a twentieth as well. When I went to my first anime convention, there were so many things I wanted, but very little I could afford. When I went to my last convention, I could afford it all yet I talked myself out of actually buying anything because everything I wanted (box sets, mostly) just about was over $50. Even though the money was there and I knew it would be my last chance to buy these things, I really couldn't justify doing it.

Spam's rotten partner in Internet annoyance is spyware. Owen Courreges provides a link to an InformationWeek article on the subject:

Business-technology managers are looking for all the help they can get. "We're starting to see more spyware issues," says Gene Fredriksen, VP for information security at financial-services firm Raymond James & Associates. New and better tools are needed because those available aren't able to "effectively handle the problem for a large company," he says.

Florida Cardiology P.A., which provides heart-disease diagnosis and treatment in six locations around Orlando, has 88 PCs. IT administrator Nick Butler discovered earlier this year that virtually every computer had been infected with some type of spyware. It created a serious drag on productivity, with some systems taking more than 12 minutes to start and others unable to properly connect to the Internet.

Since Florida Cardiology handles personal medical information, the presence of spyware scared Butler. "No one knows for sure what this stuff is doing," he says. "What if one of these things is keystroke logging or captures patient information? That's an unacceptable risk."

Owen surprisingly goes all big-government on the issue. The truth is that most spyware doesn't just creep on to someone's computer. Very much of the time it's part of that largely unread "terms of usage" disclaimer at the beginning of a software install. A lot of the office infections start when an employee downloads a screen-saver or some sort of freebie program. Free software is rarely free, folks; they have to get their money from somewhere. KaZaA is notorious for installing all kinds of crud you don't want on your computer unless you buy the "Plus" version. For my part, I have a freebie program that tells me the temperature and weather conditions. It has random pop-ups, but no spyware.

There are instances where such tracking is done via something viral. Those ought to be (and are, I'm pretty sure) illegal. There is also an argument to be made for a recent senate bill that legislates that users must be informed of every program being installed. Truthfully, though, I'm not sure how much good that's going to do when most of this stuff gets started after a user neglects to read (or simply consents to) a "terms of usage" contract. There isn't much the law can do about that. On the matter of notices, though, I'd imagine this is something that the private sector can handle.

My father recently cracked down on their spyware with Spybot, which has been pretty successful in that regard. A big part of all of this is just staying on top of it. So if we neglect to do so, should the government be asked to step in?

The issue at hand here is how much privacy a computer user is allowed to give up. Obviously, it's a terrible thing when a private company gets ahold of keystroke-monitoring software. Furthermore, I'm not sure what legitimate use there is for such a product. That said, I'm a believer that anyone ought to be able to sell or barter any privacy if that's there choice. It's often been said that Americans value their privacy, but would sell a splice of their DNA for a free Big Mac. In the past, I've handed over my drivers license to my friend Phil in return for some knicknacks (on a side note, I forgot to tell Phil that I moved, dangit!). People are also willing to have programs on their computer that watch the websites they go to in return for the ability to download illegal files. Well, they're willing by omission (neglecting to read the Terms) as much as anything, but it's not really the government's job to make people read a contract before they sign it (or click on it). Actually, I willingly allowed the late, great AudioGalaxy to do just that.


So what about the medical records? Well, companies with sensitive documents need to be careful about what they let employees do on their computers. Programs need to be in place to prevent employees from so much as saving an .exe file to their computer. Much of this is already done, but the private sector ought to be able to pick up the slack.

In short, I'm unconvinced that the government needs to get involved here to save the ignorant computer user from himself. A better solution would be for OS developers to come up with a rating system of intrusiveness. OS developers may then be able to prevent programs that don't subject themselves to the rating system from being installed. The ones that do submit (which is most of them, I'd wager) will also benefit because if they have a lower intrusiveness rating (if they just have pop-up ads for example), their rating will be fairly benign and people can make their decisions accordingly. Those programs that monitor keystrokes or whatnot would then have a lot more trouble making headway on most peoples' PC. Those that do so covertly could be subjecting themselves to criminal prosecution for hacking.

Update: I take back what I said about most of them being partners of free software. I apparently had security on highest, so my check came out clean. I should have noticed this, but I figured that the web sites I couldn't access were due to a slow modem's sloppy handling of the net, which has happened (to a lesser degree) in the past. In any case, I turned the security down a couple notches and I was able to start accessing all sites. Then I ran a check and sure enough, as Owen said, two peeping cookies have appeared in the last couple of hours.

I'm not an anti-spam warrior like many IT people are. There are a number of relatively easy steps that anyone can take to reduce the amount of spam and I'm not even referring to sometimes-intrusive spamblocking software:

Do not insert your email address in to any form, ever. I have a spambox that I use to insert in to fields that require an email address. You can get free email services from Yahoo and Hotmail for free that you can use. You can use that address for web sites that require sending an email to you (some quizzes work that way), comments sections that require an email address (or you can just put in a fake one), and services that get sent to your email box (for instance, my credit card payment reminders go to my spambox, though this requires knowing about when payments are due).

Do not use your email address on Usenet or message boards. You can try tricks like name-at-domain-dot-com, but more sophisticated email harvesting programs will decipher it. I personally use my spambox for what few message boards I'm apart of. I check my spambox once every few days. I look for anything worthwhile and then "delete all."

Yahoo (and possibly hotmail) have pretty good spam filters. There are a few false positives, but it does a remarkable job getting rid of a lot of spam. That said, Yahoo and Hotmail are hotbeds for spammers since they often have public registries. For all of my problems with Bigfoot, I get surprisingly few spam through them.

If someone sends you an unsolicited email and at the bottom it says "remove", be wary before actually doing that. As often as not, those are used to verify email address. When they get that, they know you've gotten the email and they can get more money for selling "verified" email addresses.

Having said all that, the recent "crackdown" of spammers does not seem to be working. My Yahoo email box holds on to suspected junk-mail for about a week before discarding it. In the average week, I used to get about 60 items, but now I get 145 or so.

Speaking of spam, InfoWorld has an interesting (if short) article on Jon Postel, one of the founders of email protocols. Apparently from the start he was concerned about the proliferation of junk mail, but his warnings went unheeded. Realistically, though, I'm not sure what all can actually be done about it that isn't already being done. What's easy for you and me (one of email's selling points) is easy for scummy businesses.

The Paris News:

Avis Lorene Whitlock

COOPER — Avis Lorene Whitlock, 91, of Cooper passed away Friday, April, 23, 2004, in a Paris hospital.

Funeral services will be held at 2 p.m. Sunday, April 25, in Delta Funeral Home chapel with the Rev. Leroy Reaves and the Rev. Gary Regan officiating. Burial will follow in Oaklawn Cemetery.

The family will receive friends from 12:30 to 1:30 p.m. Sunday at the funeral home.

She was born in Enloe on Jan. 5, 1913, the daughter of John A. and Lillie Holman Brannon. She married Charles E. Whitlock on May 3, 1940, and he preceded her in death on April 13, 1974. She was a retired school teacher and a member of the Methodist church.

She is survived by four nephews, Cletus Bridges and wife, Maxine, of Dallas, Elton Bridges and wife, Frances, of Lubbock, Aaron Brannon and wife, Faye, of Sulphur Springs and R.D. Brannon of Corsicana; one niece, Dora Lee Patrick of Dallas; numerous great nieces and nephews; and two special friends, Betty Guffy and Rosemary Phillips.

I usually enjoy Leonard Pitts's columns, even when I disagree with him. However, his column comparing the crimes of disgraced reporters Jayson Blair and Jack Kelley misses important distinctions:

It's been nearly four months since the scandal broke. Four months since Jack Kelley, star foreign correspondent for USA Today, was found to have lied his way through his professional life for the last 13 years. He lied about where he had been, what he had seen, whom he had talked to, what they had said. He lied so much I'm only half convinced "Jack Kelley' is his real name.

Yet you, my colleagues, have not asked the most important question:

What does this mean for the future of white journalism?

Granted, you've pontificated about our damaged credibility. You've felled forests with your weighty ruminations about what this portends for the future of our profession. But, evidently cowed by political correctness, you've ignored the most vital issues.

Did USA Today advance a moderately capable journalist because he was white? Did some white editor mentor him out of racial solidarity even though Kelley was unqualified? In light of this fiasco, should we re- examine the de facto affirmative action that gives white men preferential treatment in our newsrooms?

Jayson Blair's race was not the sole issue that lead many to believe that race played a factor in his success. It was the fact that Blair was a 27 year old writing hefty pieces for the most respected newssource in the nation. How did a 27-year old get so ahead so quickly? He somehow managed to bypass the bush leagues that most reporters have to wade through. I didn't hear about any huge stories he broke with another paper to warrant being picked up by the NYT. From what I understand, his academic career was not remarkably impressive. So how did this happen? Just a lucky intern who happened to be black at a paper that was trying like the dickins to be more diverse. Coincidence, surely.

If a similar pattern can be drawn for Kelley, then Pitts's parallel is apt. USA Today is a fine paper. I actually prefer it to the NYT (I'm a sucker for pie charts), but it's stature is nowhere near that of the Times and as such it's not under the same scrutiny (nor, I imagine, would potential newhires be so screened). A better parallel with Blair would be Phillip Glass, a writer for The New Republic that similarly made stuff up and got away with it. Glass, like Blair, was a young phenom that rose to a prominant newspaper before he was ready. A defense for both Blair and Glass could be made that they were simply in over their heads. But even there lies a crucial difference: Glass was not part of an attempt at diversity the same way that Blair was, therefore Glass's race (white I believe) is not an issue.

I'm personally conflicted over the value of affirmative action and diversity programs, so I don't have an anti-affirmative action ax to grind here. That said, when someone underqualified gets a job for which he is not qualified in a paper that loudly seeks people just like him, it's not unreasonable to ask questions. No such circumstances existed for Kelley to my knowledge. Lex pondered a while back if he got away with it because he was known in the industry as being a pious Christian. That's a specific circumstance that could warrant some scrutiny. If Blair were white and the NYT were making an effort to hire more "young and edgy" writers, then Blair's age (and edginess) would be an issue. As it turns out, the Times wanted more minority writers and Blair was a minority. That's a story no matter how you cut it.

From what I understand of the planet Mercury, it rotates on an axis at approximately the same rate that it revolves around the sun. This means that one side of it is always facing the sun. The side that faces the sun is extraordinarily hot while the side that never gets sunlight is freezing cold. That's why - I presume - all the little planetary pictures I was shown as a kid had one side of it red (hot) and the other blue (cold). I vaguely remember a teacher saying that if you were to stand at the top of the planet, in between the hot and cold regions, half of your body would freeze and the other half would burn up.

Almost as much as the temperature differential, if not more, one of the cheif meteorological differences between Idaho and southeast Texas is the humidity. Up here there is very little of it. One of the interesting results of this is that the temperature swing between night and day feels a lot severe between night and day. I sweat during the day and shiver at night. I was warned about this before I moved up.

What I wasn't expecting, however, was the Mercury Effect. Because of some of the recent rain (or maybe it's perpetually like this), we've had cloudy skies. What's interesting is even during the daylight, the difference between direct and obstructed sunlight is pretty severe in its own right. At 10 in the morning, if the clouds move and I'm exposed to the sun, I immediately need to take my jacket off. What's particularly weird is when half of my body is exposed to the sun and half of it is in the shade, I simultaneously feel hot and cold at the same time in a way that I never did in Houston.

Kinda like standing at the top of Mercury (minus the fact that half of my body would melt, the other would freeze, and I'd probably explode).

John Fund has an informative column in the Opinion Journal about Davy Crockett:

In Congress he championed the rights of squatters, poor settlers who claimed and built on undeveloped Western land but were barred from buying it if they didn't already own property. In 1830, he broke with President Andrew Jackson and opposed his Indian Removal Act because it uprooted 60,000 members of peaceful tribes and brutally forced them across the Mississippi River. "Several of my colleagues got around me, and told me how well they loved me, and that I was ruining myself," Crockett recounted in his autobiography. "I told them it was a wicked, unjust measure, and that I should go against it, let the cost to myself be what it might."

Indeed, his growing opposition to what he considered the headstrong policies of "King Andrew the First," cost him dearly. President Jackson, a fellow Tennesseean, urged Crockett's constituents to "not disgrace themselves" by re-electing him. Jackson's allies crafted a blatant gerrymander to drive Crockett from office, but he nonetheless survived. Then in 1834 he stumbled badly when he took time away from a congressional session to promote his book in a three-week tour of the Northeast. He lost his re-election bid, 51% to 49%, to a war hero with a wooden leg. He then famously told his constituents, "You may all go to hell, and I will go to Texas." He did just that and his death the next year at the Alamo ensured his place among America's heroes.

Unfortunately, the column goes more into positioning Crockett as a libertarian. It's a shame because I'd like to know more biographically. Maybe I'll have to pick up an authoritative biography somewhere. Anyone have any recommendations?

There was a biography of Sam Houston at my folks house. I picked it up and read portions of it. It was really quite interesting. I probably would have read the whole thing if I'd run across it sooner.

Someone gave this person a degree and a classroom:

According to an incident report by resource officer Brian Chiappetta, the incident took place in the morning during second period. The students were in class when the teacher took a photograph of some of the students, the report said. When the girl asked why the teacher had taken her picture, the teacher allegedly responded with a disparaging remark about the girl's appearance.

The girl became upset and began to use profanity and hit the office assist button on the classroom wall, the incident report said. The teacher then allegedly told two 14-year-old boys to pick up the girl and throw her out the window.

The two boys later told principal Kenneth Daniels that they threw the girl out the window because they did not want to be written up for disobeying a teacher.

The ad in the paper said that there were rooms available for $145 a month, furnished, all utilities paid.

Too good to be true? Maybe, so I checked it out.

I can see why it's $145 a month, furnished, all utilities paid.

Let's just say that it's not located in the greatest part of town. The neighborhood is such that the complex locks its front doors at 8pm (residents have a front key). They also have this thing about visitors: they're not allowed on the premises after 10pm. In fact, if found there they will be arrested for trespassing. While walking around the area, I began to wonder what Idaho's concealed handgun laws are.

The rooms are about 12"x16" or so. The furniture included: bed, dresser, nightstand, and a chair. The units have two windows and a closet. If you pay an extra $40, you get a bathroom and shower.

Oh, and I really, really, really want to live there. It is the neatest apartment complex I have seen in a very, very, very long time.

Serenity over at Serenity's Journal has an informative post about her experience in the armed services as a woman and relates it to recent proposals and fears over a draft:

One of my drill sergeants...although for a different platoon, was a female soldier and we in 2nd platoon in basic absolutely HATED her. She was such a bitch to us at every opportunity. When we gradutated, she handed us an envelope and we never saw her again. Inside that envelope was a letter she had hand written to all of us females. She explained why she had been a raging hag to us for 18 weeks. She explained what we should expect, how we would be viewed, how we can overcome this. She explained that there was no place for whining and complaining and acting like a priss in "this man's army." And she was right. The biggest reason that a female soldier needed to prove herself was because the male soldiers needed to know they could trust her to fight right alongside them when necessary. They didn't need some little girl out there who was going to cry if she broke a nail or got dirty or was tired.

So while I was working my ass off to prove myself, every action I did, every word I said was very closely scrutinized, looking for an excuse not to trust me. It was difficult to prove myself during "down time" but when we went out to the field, I got just as dirty, carried just as much as the guys, marched just as far, dug just as many foxholes, apprehended and successfully searched just as many "EPW"s, (I was an MP), and bitched no more than the guys. I did not care what my hair looked like. I did not care if my nails broke. I did not care if I was filthy. This was not the time nor the place to give a damn about my physical appearance. This was the time to protect my fellow soldiers.

We were out in the field one day and all those who were higher ranking than me were "killed" and I found myself in charge of an entire platoon for the very first time in my life. Even during a field operation, that is an enormous amount of responsibility to place on someone not even out of their teens. I will never forget that after it was realized I was next in line, all heads swiveled to me, all eyes were on me, all were waiting for me to make the next decision. I made it, and all my fellow soldiers trusted my decision. No one questioned me, no one went behind my back and did it their way, no one tried to overstep my new found authority. The trust was so instilled in all of us that they had complete faith that I was doing the right thing.

The proposals for a draft are most notably coming from opponents of Person Gulf II, Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) and Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE). I think that's telling as the fear and paranoia is the desired effect to bring down support for the war and draw more parallels between PG2 and Viet Nam. It's patently dishonest and I've lost a lot of respect for Hagel in the process (Rangel never had much to begin with).

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this one. I found it via John Hawkins, who found it via this guy, who found it via Karol. They all poke fun and laugh, as everyone should. Some are apparently trying to make this indicative of why Kerry would be a lousy president by pushing his "hipness" as a reason to vote for him.

I recall when I was in Colorado Springs, Kerry was doing a rally the youth vote in Pittsburg with, of all people, Bon Jovi. Trying to rally the youth vote with Bon Jovi! I personally have nothing against Bon Jovi and even like more of his music than I would like to admit, but I'm not sure Bon Jovi carries the college crowd anymore. So in that sense I understand where John et al are coming from.

At the same time, lighten up, people! First of all, this picture wasn't designed by the campaign, it was a submission! Yes, the campaign approved it, but I'm relatively certain they laughed at it, too. If someone did something similar with Bush in a cowboy hat on a horse saying "I'll be your huckleberry" I'd consider using it as my wallpaper.

Honestly, I find it uncharacteristically neat that the campaign would put it up.

Hideous and genuinely weird as it is.

The Top Ten Houston Heartbreaks in sports.

[via Coogfans]

The Omni-Touch job is out. They required sales experience.

The good news is that Norwest called me back again yesterday. This time it was the VP and another on-the-spot interview that I didn't do remarkably well on. On the first phone interview they asked if I worked better alone or in a group. Not knowing which the job I was, I said that all things being equal, I'd prefer to work alone. Five minutes later I was told that I'd be working with six other people. So yesterday when I was asked if I could handle the workload (overseeing about 250 computers), I said that I'd definitely be able to with some help. Then I found out that the six other people were IT personnel, not network administration and that I'd be working netadmin alone. That made me sound not-very-confident about being able to oversee such a large number of machines. Can't win for losing, can I? Having only worked with 20 or so at my last job (it was a small part of my job), I have no clue what overseeing 250 computers would be like. If I recall, though, that's about what Nova had when I worked there and there was one guy mostly responsible for that, so I think I can handle it. Regardless, over the course of the interview I went from feeling overqualified for the spot to underqualified. The good news about the six other people in IT is that I'd be able to focus solely on fixing stuff, so none of the task-hopping that UFC required.

On the Synchronus front, I moved the interview from Tuesday to Wednesday for personal reasons, but it's still on. I'm going to stop by a convenience store and if I can get $7.50 an hour or more there, I think I'll take a job there instead of with Synchronus. I really, really would rather not work for that company.

The New York Times has a fascinating article on the Japanese hostages that were recently released from the rebels in Iraq:

You got what you deserve!" one Japanese held up a hand-written sign at the airport where they landed. "You are Japan's shame," another wrote on the Web site of one of the hostages. They had "caused trouble" for everybody. The government, not to be outdone, announced it would bill them $6,000 for airfare.

Treated like criminals, the three have gone into hiding, effectively becoming prisoners inside their own homes. The kidnapped woman was last seen arriving at her parents' house, looking defeated and dazed from taking tranquilizers, flanked by relatives who helped her walk and bow deeply before the media, as a final apology to the nation.

Dr. Satoru Saito, a psychiatrist who has examined the three twice since their return, said the stress they are enduring now is "much heavier" than what they endured during their captivity in Iraq. Asked to name their three most stressful moments, the ex-hostages told him, in ascending order: the moment when they were kidnapped on their way to Baghdad; the knife-wielding incident; and the moment they watched a television show, on the morning after their return here, and realized Japan's anger with them.

"Let's say the knife incident, which lasted about 10 minutes, ranks 10 on a stress level," Dr. Saito said in an interview at his clinic today. "After they came back to Japan and saw the morning news show, their stress level ranked 12."

Whether you want to read about the war or not (or the hostage situation), this is a fascinating peak into a culture that is almost diametrically opposed to our own. With Japan and the United States exchanging technology and trade to the level that we do, it's easy to forget how amazingly different our cultures are:

As an example of the unbridgeable gap between Japan and America, consider this comment by Yasuo Fukuda, the government's spokesman: "They may have gone on their own but they must consider how many people they caused trouble to because of their action."

The criticism began almost immediately after the first three were kidnapped two weeks ago. The environment minister, Yuriko Koike, blamed them for being "reckless."

After the hostages' families asked that the government yield to the kidnappers' demand and withdraw its 550 troops from southern Iraq, they began receiving hate mail and harassing faxes and email. In the village of Japan, like the one in "The Lottery," one had to throw stones.

Even as the kidnappers were still threatening to burn alive the three hostages, Yukio Takeuchi, a top official in the foreign ministry, said of the three, "When it comes to a matter of safety and life, I would like them to be aware of the basic principle of personal responsibility."

[...]

"This is an idea that should be considered," the Yomiuri Newspaper, Japan's biggest daily, said in an editorial. "Such an act might deter other reckless, self-righteous volunteers."

When two freed hostages mentioned wanting to stay or return to Iraq to continue their work, Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi angrily urged them "to have some sense."

"Many government officials made efforts to rescue them, without even eating and sleeping, and they are still saying that sort of thing?" he said.

The comment was revealing, one that would not be uttered, at least publicly, in the United States where the government is supposed to serve the people. Here, the government is now trumpeting "personal responsibility" for those going to dangerous areas — essentially saying that travelers shouldn't accept any help from the government to secure their safety or get out of trouble.

Again, no Japanese politician dared to speak out against this idea.

Compare this to the return of Private Jessica Lynch and the difference could not be more stark. On one hand, it's difficult for me - born and raised in the U.S. - to comprehend this mentality at all. It does make sense in its own way. I remember the irritation I felt when America seemed to stop everything for the three young evangelist girls from Baylor that went into a very unstable Afghanistan. I felt very strongly that they shouldn't have been there and hailing them as heroes was a bit much. So in that sense, I can very much understand where they're coming from when it comes to society digging themselves out of problems that the victims dug themselves in to.

That aside, I find the Japanese approach to the issue fundamentally disturbing. Particularly this bit:

The foreign ministry, held both in awe and resentment by the average Japanese, was the "okami" defied in this case. While foreign ministry officials are Japan's super elite, the average Japanese tends to regard them as arrogant and unhelpful, recalling how they failed to deliver in time the declaration of war against the United States in 1941 so that Japan became forever known as a sneak-attack nation.

Defying the "okami" are young Japanese, freelancers and members of non-profit organizations, a status traditionally held in low esteem in a country where the bigger one's company, the bigger is one's social rank. They also represented something more: they belong to a generation in which many have rejected traditional Japanese life. Many have gravitated instead to places like the East Village in Manhattan, looking for something undefined. Others have joined non-profit organizations to help people in Africa or Iraq, a new phenomenon here.

I guess I'm a product of my country. I cannot help but sympathize with the young Japanese trying to carve out just a bit of individuality in such an authority-based culture.

Carroll Andrew Morse makes an interesting case that all Iraqi politics ought to be local:

Here is the plan. Sovereignty will not come to Iraq all at once. On June 30, Iraq will be divided into provinces, or occupation zones -- at different times and different places, both labels will be appropriate. There will be more than three zones, there will be at least 25, maybe as many as 100. Each zone will evolve towards civil government at its own rate. Some zones will need to be overseen using the rules of outright military occupation of a hostile nation. Other zones will be able to quickly establish full home rule, complete civil government in all matters except foreign policy and military affairs. Over six months, let's see how many zones can produce a local government that can rule without slaughtering a significant percentage of its own population, or stoning women for committing adultery, or burning the foreign nationals providing electricity and water.

Zones demonstrating the ability to live peacefully will be migrated towards full home rule. When enough provinces reach complete home rule, they will have important decisions to make. If enough zones decided to band together, they can form a state of their own. (There will have to be a few basic rules about a minimum number of provinces, or a minimum total population, and/or territorial contiguousness required to form a state.) They are free to welcome into their state other provinces that reach full home rule at a future time. Multi-province successor states may even reserve the right to join with other multi-province successor states. Under this plan, the Iraqi people ultimately decide the shape of post-Hussein Iraq.

I have several reservations with this plan.

The first issue is the same problem that exists with a three-state solution: the Kurds. Going in to this war I figured that it made sense to give the Kurds their own state. The more I read in to it, though, the more I learned about how that might cause some unfortunate instability in Turkey. In fact, it's enough of a concern up there that they demanded Kurdistan be taken off the table before they would give us what little help that they did. If each pricinct were given self-determination, it seems apparent that Kurdistan would be a reality and unrest in Turkey very well might follow. At the very least, we'd probably lose an already uneven ally.

The second, and more specific, issue with this plan involved the inequalities of the Iraqi terrain and economy. Simply put, many pricincts would have tons of oil and others would have relatively little. Many areas will have cities with a sound infrastructure and some would need to be rebuilt from the ground up. This is a problem no matter how you slice it, but when you let pricincts form their own countries with other willing pricincts, you could well end up with a Petrolistan where all of the oil-rich pricincts join together and leave the other Iraqis to fend for themselves with little resources and less infrastructure. Other than self-defense, there would be very, very little incentive for the resource-rich areas to ally themselves with the poorer regions. Speaking of self-defense, it's not hard to imagine a spurned poor community with nothing to lose unleashing war on the wealthier counterparts.

Which brings me to the last issue, which is potential war. You can't draw pricincts small enough that there won't be a minority of one type or another. If you find yourself one of the few Type-Bs in a stanchly Type-A country, the notion of "religious freedom" (or "ethnic equality") could quickly become a soundbite. It's a short walk from a beleaguered minority in one state sitting next to a state where it's a majority to a civil war between the states. Without a single identity, war would become very plausible - especially when you're dealing with unequal resources.

It's possible that these problems will exist in a single-state solution as well. It's also possible that problems with a single-state solution would be alleviated with this type of partitioning. However, I'm unconvinced that the pros outweigh the cons on this particular plan.

In the recent Louisiana governor's race, Democrat Kathleen Blanco pulled an upset on Indian-American Republican Bobby Jindal. That much political geeks like me know. Fred Barnes fleshes out a convincing case as to where Blanco got some of her support from:

Both Blanco and Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu, re-elected in 2002, won with 52 percent of the vote. "The geographic pattern of the Landrieu vote was very typical for a Democrat with a correlation of .98 with the average Democratic vote in the1996 and 2000 presidential elections," Skinner and Klinkner found. For Blanco, the correlation was .60, "indicating that Blanco was drawing support from a different set of voters."

Indeed, she was. In the 26 parishes where Duke won a majority, Blanco averaged 10 points better than Landrieu, who defeated a white Republican. The pattern was especially striking in northern Louisiana, Bubba country. In parishes where Duke got more than 55 percent, Blanco averaged 17 percentage points more than Landrieu.

The question I have about this is how much of the overall vote did that give Blanco? If it was greater than the margin of victory, then it's safe to conclude that Blanco was elected based on the Bubba vote.

Blanco - to her credit - did nothing to court this particular vote, so this is not a blight on her personally. Jindal may have done himself a disservice by openly courting the black vote (and winning the endorsement of New Orleans's black Democratic mayor), so if anyone is to "blame" for this it all falls back on Jindal anyway.

Whatever the case, it's tragic that Jindal's race may have cost him the election. As someone who'd like to see more minorities in higher positions (preferably Republican ones, naturally), it's disheartening. The good news is that the Bubbas are dying off and more and more of their kids see things differently in that area.

Conservative Bruce Bartlett has some harsh things to say about the administration's handling of the Iraq conflict:

In short, President Bush often seems to operate like the character from "Alice in Wonderland" who declared, "Sentence first -- verdict afterwards." Instead of figuring out why and how things should be done before acting, the White House seems to act first and then create ex post facto rationalizations for that decision in lieu of serious deliberation.

Although I claim no inside knowledge of the national security process in this administration, I do know that Suskind and O'Neill's characterization of its domestic policy operation rings true. While it is conceivable that a completely different process operates in the national security arena, I think that is highly unlikely. Presidents establish a style and tone for their White House staff operations, and it operates across the board. Therefore, I have every reason to believe that the same weaknesses that exist on the domestic side exist within the national security operation, as well.

Contrary to what conspiracy theorists imagine, I don't think President Bush ever ordered facts to be invented to justify the Iraq war. Rather, I think there was a great deal of what economists call self-selection bias. Facts that confirmed what President Bush wanted to believe tended to filter up to him, while conflicting facts tended to be sidelined.

Bartlett was de facto a supporter of the war, so his criticisms carry more weight with me than do those who never thought we should be there, needed permission from the UN to go, or tentatively supported the war while waiting for the first sign of problems to occur. So do I agree with Bartlett? To be honest, I don't know one way or the other how things are handled inside the Administration. That said, I don't regret my support of the war despite the absent WMD's and the current troubles there at the present time. It would also take a lot more than this to get me to consider voting for Kerry.

I'm taking a couple days off. I'll be back over the weekend or on Monday.

(oh, and Happy Birthday Adam!!)

Dear Keith,

It's hard to believe that it's been four years. In all the confusion of my cross-country move, the date almost escaped me, but I've run out of ways to distract myself

I miss you. I'm sorry that I couldn't visit the site this year.

Best wishes,
Alex

I've been here for about four days now and I've found a handful of possible jobs. So far things are going a little better than expected.

The hottest lead is Norwest Financial Group. They put an ad in the paper on Sunday that seemed right up my alley. They require a college degree, which means that (a) it should pay decently well and (b) there should be less applicants. Ordinarily I wouldn't get excited about a single job offering, but I suspect that there are less candidates up here than there would be for a similar offering in Houston, where they would be inundated with hundreds of resumes each day. So I applied on Monday and they called me back yesterday and conducted a phone interview. Unfortunately, I wasn't entirely prepared for the interview and didn't do as well as I might have liked. I did do well enough, though, that they told me what their hiring process was from here on out. That's encouraging.

The other job that I have actively pursued is considerably less desirable. Synchronus has a big office in Houston and is constantly recruiting. Why? Extremely high turnover. Why? The job absolutely stinks. I know a handful of people I know have worked for them and every last one of them firmly believes that my recent post on a nameless tech support company is about Synchronus. In fact, when I took the job at Gattaca, I explicitly remember thinking to myself "at least it isn't Synchronus." Well, it turns out that they have an office up here, too. It's basic phone support at about $7.50 an hour, which is enough to live on up here, but only barely. But it's work and could tide me over until something better comes along. I sent an inquiry and we have an interview set up on the 27th.

And the third possibility is *gasp* sales. OmniTouch Broadband is hiring hand over fist and paying really well ($11.75 base for the first six months, $16 after that). I'm not looking forward to a sales job, but at least OmniTouch is a good company that I can get behind. Unfortunately, it's an hour away in a nearby town that I would likely need to move to. I really like this town and would hate to travel 1800 miles across the country only to still be an hour away from Eel. That said, I'm going to the job fair in a bit.

This comes as no surprise:

NDIANAPOLIS (AP) -- The six conferences tied to football's Bowl Championship Series more than doubled their operating revenues over a 10-year period, while revenues for the five other Division I-A conferences lag far behind, according to a recent NCAA study.

In 2002, the last year used in the study, the only conferences showing profits from sports were the Big Ten, Big 12, Southeastern Conference and, among non-BCS conferences, the Mountain West. Only the SEC showed profits in each of the 10 years, the association reported in The NCAA News this week.

[...]

Five conferences -- the Big East, Conference USA, Mid-American, Western Athletic and Sun Belt -- reported net deficits in all 10 years of the study, and the Mountain West reported more expenses than revenues in nine of the 10 years.

The NCAA report said the six BCS conferences -- the Atlantic Coast, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-10 and SEC -- increased operating revenues by 108 percent to 146 percent.

However, expenses increased at a faster pace than revenues for most conferences.

Appearences seem to indicate that Conference USA is going to extend an invitation to the University of Texas at El Paso or they're going to hold at 11 teams. UTEP was my third choice of four listed realistic options. I would have much preferred North Texas or Louisiana Tech, but UTEP brings with it a host of advantages. They have a fan-base that many current C*USA members don't have. They had an atrocious year last year and their attendance was roughly that of breakthrough UH's. In years where the team is doing better, they could keep the conference's attendance averages up whereas UNT's and LaTech's would have brought it down. They can also be expected to travel reasonably well with large alumni bases in Houston (UH and Rice) and DFW (SMU).

There are some significant downsides. They just lost the basketball coach that turned their program around and their football team hasn't seen success in years. On the other hand, their basketball program is history-making and there is a good chance that the new coach will be able to capitalize on that. Their football program just hired Mike Price, a very successful coach who was let go by Alabama for personal infractions. Unfortunately, Price's stop at UTEP may be temporary, but hopefully he'd be able to set something up there before he heads for greener pasteurs.

What I find most interesting about this is UTEP's interest in C*USA. They are some 800 miles closest to their nearest competitor and over 1500 away from the eastern teams. The formation of divisions should alleviate this to a degree, but from a geographical standpoint, they belong where they are. They are also losing a potential rivalry with incoming WAC team New Mexico State, which is nearby. Either the alumni base is working really hard to convince UTEP's administration to make the switch or C*USA runs the risk of embarassment. UTEP is officially denying reports at the moment. Regardless of geography, being turned down by a lackluster football program (even with good prospects) would hurt the league's stature in the same way that half the league's desperate attempts to get into the Big East did. I really hope that the conference knows what they're doing here.

Update: On further reflection, adding another eastern team does present a logistical problem (and this would be the case with LaTech and UNT as well). Tulane and Southern Miss have a rivalry due in part to their close proximity to one another. Unfortunately, that's exactly where the divisional dividing line would be so their rivalry would go the way of the Oklahoma-Nebraska one where they play in alternating bi-annual contests. There are a couple ways around this, such as playing some geographical magic and putting Memphis in the east or by having set interdivision games (for instance, Tulane plays USM, ECU, and UCF every year and Houston plays UAB, Marshall, and Memphis).

Also, if we do add UTEP, I feel really sorry for Louisiana Tech, who will be virtually alone in their conference. UTEP and NorTex have a good thing going in their present conferences, but Tech most definitely does not.

RAW: Maybe that Denny's is open.
Eel: Ugh, I can't stand Denny's.
RAW: Yeah, but it's 10:05. I'm not sure what else is going to be open.
Eel: Sigh, you're probably right.

RAW: I can't believe that IHOP is closed.
Eel: Yeah, but I guess you have to consider where we are.
RAW: True, but they're open all night in Waco and San Marcos. On the other hand, I guess those are college towns.
Eel: This is a college town!
RAW: Oh well, at least this place is open.
Eel: Kill me now.

Waitress: Can I get you anything to drink?
Eel: Could I get a water with a lemon in it?
Waitress: We're out of lemons.
Eel: [blink]
Waitress: I'm not joking, we ran out of lemons.
Eel: [explodes]

Waitress: Have you decided what you want to order yet?
Eel: No, not yet.

Waitress: Have you decided what you want to order yet?
RAW: No, we're still looking
Waitress: Okay [leaves]
RAW: For something edible.

Waitress: Have you decided what you want to order yet?
Eel: Still working on it.

Eel: So what are you going to get?
RAW: I'm looking at the nachos. It's really difficult to screw up nachos.
Eel: [doesn't say a word]

Eel: How are your nachos?
RAW: Well, they didn't screw them up, per se.
Eel: ...
RAW: I mean, it's cheese, it's meat, you really can't go wrong with that.
Eel: Should we go to Taco Bell next time?
RAW: Dear god, yes.
Eel: Uhhh huhhhhhh...
RAW: Or maybe I can just get some Velveta and Hormel and make my own.
Eel: Did I mention I don't like Denny's?
RAW: Well, you were right, of course. I'm not disagreeing with you... I didn't earlier. But...
Eel: But what?
RAW: Well, I can state factually that these nachos are twice as good as Taco Bell's. They must be.
Eel: Why?
RAW: They cost twice as much.
Eel: [explodes]

It's interesting how some people can make one of the most selfless acts that millions of Americans perform into something selfish and infuriating:

The American Red Cross tells those who are sick or have recently received tattoos or piercings not to donate blood, both to protect the health of donors and to lessen the risk of transmitting diseases to recipients.

But sorority members at the University of Missouri-Columbia -- a school that once set a world record for blood collection -- were urged by a fellow member to lie about their health.

In an e-mail sent last Tuesday to about 170 members of Gamma Phi Beta, sophomore Christie Key, the chapter's blood donation coordinator, wrote: "I dont (sic) care if you got a tattoo last week LIE. I dont (sic) care if you have a cold. Suck it up. We all do. LIE. Recent peircings (sic)? LIE."

A while back I wrote on the subject of universities renaming themselves. While looking up information on UTEP for an upcoming post, I ran across this more humorous take on the subject by Lynn Ashby:

This renaming schools is practically a cottage industry in Texas. We started early. The very first venture by the state into higher education was not, as many think, the University of Texas, but the Agricultural and Mechanical College of Texas, which eventually became the Texas Agricultural and Mechanical College—they put the ”Texas” part up front. Today, it is called Texas A&M University. But do you know what the actual, official name is? Texas A&M University. No periods after either the A or the M because they no longer stand for words.

Same for Texas Tech. It began life as “West Texas A&M” and was supposed to be in Abilene, but became Texas Technological College in Lubbock. Today, it is Texas Tech University. There is no period after Tech. So you go to the University of Texas? Which one? For generations, that was an easy question for there was only one. Now, there are UTs spread all over the place. Tyler, Permian Basin, Dallas, San Antonio and on and on.

For some reason, I always like UT-El Paso, now known as UTEP. For years, it was called Texas Western University. It began life as the State School of Mines and Metallurgy and for the first decade awarded one single degree: engineer of mining. The school has a certain appeal because its buildings were modeled after temples in Bhutan. You don’t often see that in West Texas.

There are also Texas A&Ms all over the place. One is now Texas A&M-Commerce. It started as East Texas State Teachers College, and one of its students, who made money sweeping out classrooms and ringing the campus bell every 45 minutes, was Sam Rayburn. We also have one university named after the president of another university, which is odd. Sul Ross was president of Texas A&M. Now we have Sul Ross State University, which plays lousy football but has one great rodeo team.

Incidentally, what is all this name changing from “college” to “university” as though, by scraping off one name and painting on another, the institution is upgraded? Dartmouth, one of the nation’s finer institutions of higher learning, is Dartmouth College. Since 1769, it has turned out generations of leaders for the country and seems to have no need to hype up its name. In this regard, maybe Southwest Texas should change its name to “Southwest Texas University, the Only School in the State That Produced a President.”

RAW: In all of my life, I have never (a) needed to download a codec, (b) successfully downloaded said codec, and (c) had such codec actually make compressed video actually view properly.
Brian: Well hmmm.
Brian: I really like how on Trillian (b) shows up as beer and (c) shows up as coffee.*
RAW: Yeah, but that doesn't help me with my problem.
Brian: I don't know what you're talking about. Coffee and beer help with every problem.

*- Trillian has emoticons like AIM, except that they have more and (x) will often bring up images, like coffee and beer.

Houston: It takes 40 minutes to get just about anywhere.
Idaho City: In three days, I've run a fair number of chores, but have only driven sixteen miles.

Houston: Believes in U-Turns
Idaho City: What are those?

Houston: Until Mayor White institutes his city-wide bed time, you can grab a bite to eat at any number of places 24 hours a day.
Idaho City: IHOP closes - I kid you not - at 10pm.

Texas: Cars that don't meet inspection get taken off the road.
Idaho: Cars without front license plates (which are required here, I'm told) drive around with impugnity.

Houston: Police cars are everywhere.
Idaho City: I'm still not sure what a police car here looks like.

Houston: School zone speed signs say "Go slow or we will eat your children" or something to that effect.
Idaho City: Signs with flowers on them say "Please go slowly, we love our kids!" or something to that effect.

Houston: Fast food joints are manned by immigrants, kids, single mothers, the elderly, and former alcoholics.
Idaho City: Fast food joints are manned by kids and, it seems, mothers - almost all of whom are white.

Idaho: People don't say "Howdy."
Texas: People do.

Houston: It's not uncommon for people to say curse words frequently.
Idaho City: People say "darn" a whole darn lot.

Houston: If you look out into the distance, you can see oil refineries.
Idaho City: If you look anywhere, you see mountains.

Houston: When subdivisions and neighborhoods are built, they will often create a little man-made lake or something else naturey in order to bring up property values.
Idaho City: Instead of nature being built around housing, housing is built around nature (hills and mountains, specifically).

Idaho City: The city's population of about 55,000 make it one of the largest cities in the state.
Houston: League City has a population of about 55,000. Pasadena has a population of about 150,000. These are suburbs.

Idaho: People from Boise consider it cosmopolitan and urban.
Texas: People have never heard of Boise.

Houston: There are countless megaplex movie theaters with 20+ screens, three in the Clear Lake area alone.
Idaho City: They have this thing called a "tri-plex" that has only three screens and is not (a) attached to a mall or (b) an independent movie art house.

Cromulent Pete reviews the new Punisher movie:
For starters, the decision to make the Punisher more “human” is misguided. Not to say the man has to be a murderous automaton, but take the

skull t-shirt away and “The Punisher” could be any cookie cutter revenge flick. The vengeance theme is older than comics themselves (another man who lost his family to crime, Bruce Wayne, killed bad guys in the earliest Batman books, after all). Castle’s interaction with his neighbors is taken from Ennis’ “Welcome Back, Frank” comic book storyline, but that worked because of the Punisher’s long and storied history as a vicious bastard. Using it as a baseline for developing the character makes no sense, especially [spoiler].

Second, Travolta is all wrong as Saint. The man emotes like Dr. Evil, and hasn’t played a truly frightening character since “Urban Cowboy.” This will hardly come as a surprise to anyone who’s watched any movie he’s made in the last 8 years, of course, but all of you singing hosannas to Quentin Tarantino this weekend as you leave your Kill Bill, Vol. 2 screenings just remember who we have to blame for Barbarino’s return.

Marvel has had a good record on their recent releases with Spiderman and X-Men. Follow-up Hulk and Daredevil met with more mixed reviews, but compared to DC's recent offerings, they're gems (or so I'm told, I haven't seen them). So far all the reviews I've heard for this one have been bad. I agree with Pete that efforts to make Castle "human" so early on were likely to backfire. I hear the "zen" angle of Hulk backfired similarly, but again I've never seen the movie and (unlike Punisher) I have little use for that character.

A character like the Punisher is a hard one to write. Chuck Dixon, who made a name writing the comic book version some time ago, said that the one thing he'd do differently would be to make Punisher more of an anti-hero hero with a guardian hero to provide more contrast. That's one thing that the lamentable Dolph Lundgren version of 1989 did right with Louie Gossett Jr. It let Punisher be Punisher (to the extent that Lundgren can be the Punisher, which frankly isn't much) while providing a bit of levity. On the other hand, that's the sort of thing that a lot of Punisher loyalists (including possibly Owen Courreges) wouldn't like.

Kind of damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Speaking of Owen Courreges, he gives a surprisingly positive review of the new Alamo movie:

I suppose I am a sucker for historical dramas, but there's little doubting that this was a clean, professional production. Although the film jumps from character to character, the main protagonists -- Crockett, Travis, Houston, and Bowie -- all have sufficient depth and are played quite adequately by the actors who portray them. Special kudos go to Bill Bob Thorton and Dennis Quaid. Thorton makes Crockett appear skilled, intelligent, and brave. Although the film does its best to ensure that the viewer separates the legend from the man, there is no doubt whatsoever that Crockett is exceptional.

Quaid, on the other hand, makes Houston appear gruff and determined. He isn't willing to sacrifice Texas for the Alamo. Ultimately, Texas is his only real concern. Although he is initially portrayed as an angry drunk, he does not allow it to interfere with his command. I must also confess that I was impressed with the choice of Quaid for another reason: He's a native Houstonian. Very apt casting indeed.

I have been at odds as to whether to celebrate or lament the movie's box-office bomb. On one hand, Texas history things should be revered all across this great land! On the other, there were murmurings of rampant political correctness and I really don't want a "nuanced" view of a legend (be it Texas legend or otherwise). They apparently cleaned up the PC, which is good.

Anyhow, I'm probably going to see both of these movies at some point. In the meantime, these reviews will have to suffice.

I had my last lunch in Houston with some of Dad's coworkers. Of all days for me to leave, it was the one that his department at NASA had their monthly department lunch. My brother (who works for a contractor on NASA grounds) also stopped by, so it was a really nice send-off. I took it easy the first day and drove up to Fort Worth and spent the night with my aunt and uncle. That helped me avoid rush hour traffic and gave me a head start for a couple of grueling days of traffic. Early Thursday morning I left for the browner pasteurs of New Mexico.

North Texas - Eel makes a lot of jokes at Texas's expense, so I found it amusing that the route she had me go kept me in Texas for as long as imaginable, barely missing the Oklahoma border and driving all the way up to Texline in the northern part of the panhandle.

There's a place called Jim Bowie Beef Jerky in Montague County that I happened to notice out of the corner of my eye. Figuring that I could use something to much on for the drive that wouldn't make me fat, I plopped down $22 for some of the best beef jerky I've ever had. It also came with some smoked cheddar (or jalapeno) cheese.

Wichita Falls was smaller than I thought it would be.

The patch of road north of Amarillo made me seasick.

I kind of expected a visitor's center or something at the Texas/New Mexico border. I was counting on it for restroom-related purposes. Instead I got a decaying sign that said "Welcome to New Mexico, The Land of Enchantment."

Unfortunately, my camera was out of batteries and I packed them away so I couldn't take any pictures. There was much cursing at the discover of this at the border.

New Mexico - As near as I can tell, no one actually lives in New Mexico. After Clayton (which says it is in New Mexico, but it can't be because people live there) and before Raton (ditto), there is absolutely no one or nothing there. Quite odd.

The other odd thing was the street signs. It seems every few miles there would be one warning drivers that auto speed is monitored by aircraft. There were also a lot of signs telling you that fines in the "safety corrodor" double. The problem? Signs telling what the actual speed limit is were few and far between. I was careful to watch my speed cause of the aircraft and fines, but I didn't know what I was watching for, exactly.

Southeastern Colorado - Wooooowie! It was like a roller-coaster ride. All down-hill all the way. Not only that, but there were all kinds of twists and turns. It was fun and exciting, reminding me of a cross between an arcade game and an amusement park ride. I was kind of sad when I reached civilization (Trinidad, CO).

Colorado Springs - Eel complained about the winding roads here, but they didn't bother me. This is where I stopped for the night. I figured that in a town the size of Colorado Springs there'd be more Internet-ready hotel rooms, but that didn't turn out to be the case. As near as I can tell from asking at various hotels, every single hotel on the planet will have high-speed access in the next six months. As it turns out, the hotel I resigned myself to had a "business center" that had a hookup so I could check my email.

Denver - I was unimpressed.

Cheyenne, Wyoming - I blinked and it was gone. Not that the town is small, it's just that I only touched a corner of it. Not a problem except that I was counting on getting gas there. I sweatted the whole way to the next down (45 miles away) as my trackometer hit 350 miles.

Eastern Wyoming - Both Audrey and Eel warned me about eastern Wyoming, but I have no idea what their problems was. It was absolutely gorgeous! I wish I would have stopped to take a whole bunch of pictures. Every bit of it from Cheyenne to Laramie was like a pastural painting. There was a certain beauty in the mountains, abandoned wooden shacks, and sporadic fencing. I swear, if I ever make it rich I want a summer home in this area!

Central Wyoming - Laramie is the strangest college town that I've ever been to. It made College Station look bustling. That said, it was a neat little down with little to nothing in the way of "neighborhoods"... all of the houses just randomly plotted here and there.

Western Wyoming - Not as pretty as the eastern part, but the towns were A-W-E-S-O-M-E. Someone really needs to use Green River as a setting for a movie or something. Rawlins was also pretty neat. There's something really nice about a town being built around nature, instead of man-made nature being built around a town.

Utah - The Nordic Valley was absolutely wonderful. It was almost as exciting as southeastern Colorado, but a whole lot more beautiful. On a side note, it's amazing how every university in Utah that I've heard of is on the northeastern side of the state. BYU is in Provo, south of Salt Lake City. The University of Utah is in SLC, Weber State is in Ogden, just north of SLC, and Utah State is by the Utah-Idaho border.

Utah & Idaho - They apparently have little to no use of those little things called "U-Turns." If you make a wrong turn, you can literally spend half-an-hour on the road before getting a chance to turn around. In the meantime you're going to see 15 emergency U-turn places for emergency vehicles. Perhaps they wouldn't have to have all those signs up talking about the kind of trouble you can get in for illegally using one of those if they would actually give us the real thing?!

Idaho - It was late, I was tired, I didn't notice a thing. Except the lack of U-turns.