Late-night cliffhanger: Unsolicited Help

As she learned forward towards me I was startled by her tone:
“Why do you have your light on at this hour, have you no love for nature?” she admonished.
I was taken aback, hurt, but ultimately disappointed in myself.

I confessed “I seriously considered turning the light off before I left, but it is so bright and brilliant, as if it were a moon. But this causes me embarrassment to regard something man made as equal to nature’s splendor, and pain when I consider my contribution to nature’s spoilage. I have been considering penance but I am not sure how other Gaea devotees engage in penance”

She was impressed by this display of contrition and his obvious personal devotion to our ecology. His sin was to be forgiven. She pressed her body towards his and brushed her natty dreadlocks away from her face (BTW: the candle is made in Japan and is the byproduct of whale blubber, hypocrite) inviting the Green Cowboy to meet her with his lips. Of a sudden, their moment was destroyed, the candle’s flame made contact with her arm pit hair causing their bodies to be consumed by fire...

Late-night cliffhanger: The set-up

True story: I keep odd hours at work. Last night, I decided to go back in around 9PM for a couple hours. The stairs leading to my front door are narrow and steep, and in the dark it can be quite annoying to fumble with my keys. Thinking ahead to my return later that night, I left the light on above my front door. It's actually a very bright light, as comforting as it is useful.

I returned around 1130PM. I was cleaning up the apartment a bit and about to go hunting for my toothbrush (I just returned from camping, so the essentials are still scattered) when there was a knock at my door. I looked at the clock: 1205AM. The light above my front door was still on; I had weighed the financial and environmental costs of leaving it on even though I was already home (seriously, I did), and decided that for that evening, I was going to enjoy saying to the night-world "I live here!"

Through the glass of my front door I could see a figure leaning in from the narrow stairway, not quite committed to actually standing in front of my door. I was quizzical, but nothing else. I opened the door. There stood a woman in her late twenties, looking frantic and trembling, clutching a candleholder.

O Cruel Mistress, MNSpeak

If the Twin Cities bloggerdom were a mafia family, MNSpeak would be the Don. While serving as a blog itself (although, I must admit, I have never found the conversation as enlightening as that found on the PeP Network) it's most important function is through The Aggregator, a feature that classifies and previews blog posts for 200-odd Minnesota blogs.

MNSpeak, however, has played a cat-and-mouse game with the PeP for much of its stormy history. Sometimes we've been including in The Aggregator, other times we've been left in the cold. It's as if we are courting a fickle lover, one whose heart belongs to no one, yet belongs to everyone. Admittedly, I can understand MNSpeak's neglect during the Pie-Eyed Dark Ages (circa Dec. '05 to April '06), when nary a peep was heard from the PeP. But now, as the Pie-Eyed Picayune has blossomed into a Renaissance, we receive the same treatment. Today, we are included in The Aggregator. Tomorrow, we shan't even contemplate.

Tell us, MNSpeak, what must we do to remain forever in your good graces?

Dowd Zings Fukuyama

"You'd think that incorrectly predicting history is over would get you banished from the intelligentsia forever, but Mr. Fukuyama proffered another big idea, warning that the pendulum was not making its customary swing left because "values" voters were clutching it. "There's a guy I buy my barbecue from who says, 'I think we're in a class war and my class is losing,' " he shared."

Dowd adds, "(Is this The End of Barbecue?)"

Zing!

Biking, Helmets and Risk Assessment

I don't wear a helmet when I ride my bike. Am I crazy? Probably not, but surely many people think I'm being stupid not to wear one. It can't hurt, they say. And it might save my skull.

True enough. But I don't see what makes bicycle riding more dangerous than, say, walking, and we don't think it crazy to go for a walk without wearing a helmet, even though it couldn't hurt. If the danger in biking is that one might fall off, then there is little danger if you are a competent bike rider. If the danger lies in the chances of being hit by a car, then biking is no more dangerous than any other mode of transportation, including walking.

But if we're going to actually get serious about risk assessment and being safe, instead of just exhorting people to wear helmets, then we should discuss every activity and determine what level of risk to one's health is too much to accept. Is skiing too risky? Driving? Flying? Walking? Rock-climbing? Walking at night? You get my point. People die in car accidents all the time, yet we don't think it crazy to ride in one. I think people are nuts to go skiing, yet if they have fun doing it, so much the better for them. I realize that it all depends on how competent one is about these things. There is nothing inherently dangerous about such activities. They only become dangerous when someone really doesn't know what they are doing.

I think people should take the same attitude toward biking. Of course you could fall off and die - but you can also die in a car accident. But many people never get into a car accident because they are defensive drivers, just as many bikers have been riding for years without falling off, and many of these bikers have never worn a helmet.

Chill out people. There are more important things to worry about than helmets.

Let them eat grass...

This past weekend we were driving south out of St. Paul on West 7th/Hwy 5. As we were passing Fort Snelling, we noticed two lonely souls on the bridge carrying signs. One said: "Take Down Fort Snelling!" and the other: "Fort Snelling - Symbol of American Imperialism." Of course, any Minnesotan worth her salt ought to know the conflicted history behind our former frontier military outpost. It was set up to take this land from its American Indian inhabitants, violently if necessary. In a classic bit of American diplomacy, the government "purchased" land Fort Snelling sits on in exchange for guaranteed annuity payments, which the the tribes would rely on to feed themselves. After the military officers in charge failed to make the payments - uttering the famous words, "Let them eat grass..." - a battle ensued, which the tribes lost handily. It was a tragic and despicable chapter in our state's history.

My first thoughts, though, were of the two protesters. In my cynical way, I derided them as fools. This symbol of "American imperialism" is nothing but a museum, a relic of events ocurring a sesquicentennial ago. Yet, reflecting on the lives lost, and the savage treatment human beings were afforded at our own government's hands on soil just a mile or two from where I live, I can't help but wonder if they are to be admired. Some force drove those two people to stand out on a bridge, hold up signs decrying a national and state monument, and advocate for a cause that stands absolutely no chance of going anywhere. They achieved nothing but the inhalation of far too many gas fumes. I simply do not have the passion and wherewithal to face such fruitless and debilitating efforts. Yet, those two people managed to get me to look farther into the history of Fort Snelling than I had before. They managed to make their position stick in my head long enough for me to blog about it. So who, exactly, is the fool here? The protesters or me? Did they, in fact, accomplish an objective?

The Relevance of Libraries

I have to admit: Until recently, I never fully realized the importance of public libraries in our society. Sure, they're great for the kids, and it's nice that people too cheap to buy the Sunday paper pick up one of those newspaper sticks (and, really, are those necessary?), but all in all, I didn't see the big deal.

This changed one rainy Saturday afternoon when my lovely and I visited the St. Paul Central Library downtown. The fact is, libraries in the 21st century are not just about frumpy ladies who shush you at the drop of a dime, but about gathering sources of information and turning that into knowledge.

The question of whether libraries are relevant is certainly valid. It's also prescient, as evident by the impressive new digs of the downtown Minneapolis library and the improved space of the St. Paul Lexington Avenue library (scheduled to open Sept. 9). One can argue that with the wealth of information available through the Web, what need is there for these massive physical structures? If we can store gazillions of gigabytes of data in one relatively small box, what is the point of spending hundreds of millions of dollars on buildings to house them? The answers are both simple and complex.

First, the Web is great at providing information. But that information is neither here nor there without the ability to cite your source (!), prove its authenticity, or delve deeper into the subject. The problem with the Web is that since there is so much information, we can't delineate (in many circumstances) fact from fiction.

Second, the Web (obviously) is not free. Not only must one pay for an Internet connection, one must also pay for the equipment necessary to run that connection, and have the wherewithal to understand how to use, maintain, and update that connection. Libraries, if nothing else, at least provide (through free Internet) access to a world that many people are denied.

Third, the public library of the 21st century, as opposed to the library of the 19th century, is a place not simply for solitary information-gathering. Rather, it is a community space, open and accessible to all, that can be used to advance the pillars of our free society. The perfect example of this is the architecture of the new Minneapolis Central Library. From the moment you walk in the door, you feel connected to the community. Meeting spaces, conversations, educational outreach, civics lessons, citizenship classes, you name it; it's all there. Libraries are not simply stoic monuments of information. They are, and must be in order to survive, organisms that foster discourse and community interaction.

Ok. I'll shush now.

Busyness

The New York Times over the last few months has run a number of articles on one theme: the unprecedented busyness of our lives. But this busyness, apparently, does not affect us all equally. The Times has focused on privileged college students looking to make it in the professional world by cramming their resume with internship and leadership experiences, and the even more harried individuals they will become once ensconced in that world. "The Lost Summer" (June 4) considers the former, while Sunday's "Pencil It In Under 'Not Happening'" documents the latter, the euphoria felt by the overscheduled, harried professional class when someone calls to cancel - er, "reschedule" - a social obligation.

I've said this to the Pied before, I think "busyness" is a real phenomenon that is worth studying (and is being studied by social scientists and social theorists), and that it has much to do with new technologies (cell phones, email, Internets, etc.) that have profoundly changed the way humans relate to each other nowadays.

However, I have become increasingly skeptical of the idea that such busyness is a new and interesting characteristic only of elite, political, juridical, medical and otherwise professional and highly-educated classes. The phenomenon seems to afflict most ordinary citizens: we're all "busy," if not with doing, at least with thinking and planning. Or rather, we have become accustomed to think that we ourselves and everyone else is so busy — and the NYT has been reinforcing this view.

Why are we so busy? For what purpose? Is it worth it?

The Economic World Cup

Last week, Fareed Zakaria wrote an extended piece in Newsweek that coincided with a series of articles on global leadership and the U.S. position. The comparison Zakaria made is of the U.S. to Great Britain at the end of Queen Victoria's reign, which occurred at the last turn-of-the-century. Great Britain, at that time, was the world's sole superpower, a nation unmatched in its influence and reach, and unparalleled in its technology and military prowess. Yet as the 20th century proved correct, the winds of history have a way of turning even the most dominant empires into dust.

In comparing the U.S. of today to the Great Britain of 100 years ago, Zakaria makes some very valid points, but ultimately does not explore any concrete thesis. First, he goes through all of the ways that the U.S. is going down the tubes. He inevitably trots out statistic after statistic illustrating how the rest of the world is poised to not only overcome the U.S., but leave us in the dust. My favorite happens to be the fact that the U.S. graduated more people in 2006 with sports-exercise degrees than electrical engineering degrees. The bottom line: While the U.S. has higher growth and greater potential than most industrialized countries (such as France, Spain, Germany, and Italy), it will not be able to compete with the hunger, ambition, and sheer volume of intelligence, manpower, and cost-effectiveness of China and India.

Zakaria, however, then goes on to disprove this bottom line by explaining how the U.S. fosters a creative environment, how we have the best universities in the world, and that we have an increasing population, as opposed to the expected declines in other countries. The bottom line here: While the U.S. may fall dramatically behind in all of these numbers, it will never fall that far behind because of its spirit and ingenuity.

Could it be that we're actually doing both? That while our educated classes decline, our fortunes will be buoyed by the environment and nature of the U.S. economy? Well, yes, but under strict contingencies.

First and foremost, education must be a top priority. That blanket statement won't do, though. In order to compete in the world economy we need to determine what the role of the American worker is in that economy. Historically - well, for much of the past century - the traditional role was that of manufacturer. Over the past decade, and certainly in the near future, manufacturing will become nonexistent as a strong player on the national level. Simply put, U.S. workers cannot compete with Chinese, Indian, or Bangladeshi workers in the manufacturing trades. That's not a put-down to U.S. workers. It's the truth. The longer we deny that truth, the slower and more painful the death of U.S. manufacturing will be. Instead of going through that, we need to focus our educational efforts on three fronts: (1) Reeducating workers already in the workforce in innovative ways that will allow them to provide for their families while moving the U.S. forward economically; (2) ensuring that all children in the U.S. are prepared for the economy they will encounter after they graduate from high school; and (3) freeing resources for higher education to become hotbeds of technological, scientific, and other scholarly innovation. This means investing - heavily, in some areas - to earn the dividends on the other side.

The other priority is to remove xenophobic politics from the national scene. A fair, effective, and efficient immigration system - one that not only provides immigrants with the opportunity to live and work in the U.S., but also gives incentives toward citizenship - is absolutely essential if we are to compete with the "rest of the world." While our population may be increasing - certainly a positive sign when compared to our West European brethren - we cannot possibly compete with a couple billion people and change in Southeast Asia. In order to fulfill the promises of a global economy, we have to be a global country. The moment we start to truly regress in our immigration policies is the moment we will start slipping from our status as sole superpower.

I speak in the Spirit of Truth.

Minnesota's environment: "nothing less is at stake than everything"

I was accused - amicably - of entering this blog with a manifesto clutched in my earth-stained hands. Dennis Anderson, in his recent Star Tribune article on the status of conservation funding and efforts in Minnesota, brought that manifesto home to the state. He blasted local politicians for ignorance and general mishandling of environmental issues, but some of the harshest criticism was reserved for the weak-kneed approach of some local conservation groups. "Conservation is and always has been a contact sport" and those working to conserve the incredible natural history of Minnesota must be willing to fight as such.

He also called for a wholesale redefinition of conservation in Minnesota, and pointed out that the faults of those in power likely reflect the faults of those whose who voted for them. Indeed, he described a "matrix" of elements in our human society that have lead to both a) the need for conservation efforts and b) the current failures of such efforts.

Anderson closed by saying:

"The challenge, bit by bit, year by year, is to change this matrix - at the Legislature, in publishing and broadcasting, and among Minnesotans at large."

"In the case of the state's lakes, rivers, forests, prairies - and us - nothing less is at stake than everything."

What he described were the symptoms of merely and strictly 'politicizing' environmental awareness. If all those players - senators, representatives, citizens, maybe even the conservation groups - considered and understood our environment in an immediate, personal fashion, before considering and understanding it in a removed, political fashion, Anderson would not have to decry the relegation of conservation in Minnesota.

Suicides at Guantanamo Bay

All societies have a notion of permissible killing. It is unclear, however, what our society believes about suicide. Surely it is a controversial issue. Is suicide ever permissible, and if so, under what conditions and in what ways?

The three suicides at Guantanamo Bay, as a New York Times editorial rightly suggests, were "the inevitable result of creating a netherworld of despair beyond the laws of civilized nations, where men were to be held without any hope of decent treatment, impartial justice or, in so many cases, even eventual release." Reduced to live humanly incredibly inhuman conditions, it is no surprise that these inmates found it more glorious and noble to die by their own hands than to continue to suffer under their captors. We know from the experience of Nazi concentration camps that humans can be made to go willingly to their death. Now we know from Guantanamo Bay, if we didn't already, that under conditions of extreme distress and captivity, where there is no hope for release, humans will decide to take their own life as their only way out.

And it is worth documenting again the perverse reaction to these suicides on the part of the camp commander: "Admiral Harris's response was as appalling as the suicides. 'I believe this was not an act of desperation, but an act of asymmetrical warfare waged against us,' he said. The inmates, he said, 'have no regard for life, neither ours nor their own.'" Under normal circumstances, suicide may be ridiculous. But these aren't normal circumstances. Moreover, a jailer is in no position to accuse his prisoners of morally inappropriate action in trying to escape. And to call these suicides an act of warfare is beyond comprehension.

Regard for life? If anyone has little regard for life it is Admiral Harris, whose remarks show how little consideration and empathy he has for the pathos and extreme anguish of his prisoners lives. However dangerous they may be, they are still human.

The Misplaced Hippie of Good Fortune is Dead

To the protagonists of the Pie-Eyed Story: I'm in. Pieper talked me into it, and by that I mean he grabbed me by the ear and wrenched me into the room. I have been a loyal reader since the inception, keeping up on Minnesota current events and provoking worldly opinions...and the occasional pile of horse dung (sometimes I go back and read the Bearded Matriarch just for the heck of it).

Back in the day I was the MHOGF. However, a subsequent "haircut and real job" and other life changes convinced me I couldn't assume the name again. What did I come up with? A Green Cowboy. Weak sauce, I know. Truth is, I may be no more green than the average joe. I don't drive a hybrid, I don't belong to Greenpeace, and I have never ridden a 17-foot Zodiac on a suicide mission to foul the prop of a Japanese whaling ship in Antarctic seas. Nor am I a cowboy; in fact, one of the few times I have been on a horse I walked away bow-legged for days. However...I live in the cowboy part of the US and it is my team's mascot. Additionally, there is a lot to say for a "cowboy" approach to life; I have lived a good part of my life outdoors; and yes, once, I did help shoot, skin, and butcher a 900 lb. steer.

As for the title of green, I think Ilya touched on it nicely in his global warming post:

"Our environment will only be adequately protected once it becomes the object of our love, guarded with jealously against those who would despoil it."

I call myself green because I think ecological considerations of our actions must be inherent in everything we do. It's a simple position, but it has striking consequences. It is based on two ideas: 1) We live in, and are entirely dependent upon, nature. 2) Natural systems and organisms have an inalienable right to exist, and an intangible value, both of which must be respected. This in mind, I don't call myself an "environmentalist." That takes ecological considerations out of everyday life and puts them in the arena of politics. That makes concern over the environment a voter issue that belongs to environmentalists and that is only visited by other parties.

Instead, concern over the environment should be present in everything we do, from presidential votes to choosing toothpaste brands. We consider the effects of all of our decisions on our own welfare, it's second-nature. Consideration of the effects on the environment's welfare should be as such. We can't view the environment in a political context - we must view it in a personal context.

Thus, I'm no environmentalist. But I am green.

Tommie of the Year reprise

Just when you'd thought St. Thomas's graduation fiasco was over, and you'd heard the last of Ben Kessler, the National Review's Colleen Carroll Campbell issues an apologia for his speech, calling it a defense of Catholic values against the "dictatorship of relativism" and a challenge to "conventional wisdom."

Or I should say,

Just when you'd thought you'd never hear a speech so grandiose and airy, presented as the Absolute Universal Truth, the National Review's Colleen Carroll Campbell out-Tommies the Tommie of the Year Ben Kessler with this piece of cant and untruth.

Nam

Well, I am off to Vietnam for the next couple of weeks where I am going to try and avoid becoming a human carrier for avian flu. Some choice quotes from my doctor as I was getting some last minute prescriptions:

"Vietnam?!?! You couldn't pay me to go down there with all the shit that's coming from there" I believe that was a reference to avian flu, et al.

"Richard, remember, no hoochie coochie"

Off to Socialist Nirvana it is, Cheers!

Who's Afraid of Global Warming?

The so-called "controversy" between those who want Intelligent Design to be taught in biology class and those who want science and not religious dogma to be taught, is not unrelated to the brewing war of words over the threat of Global Warming. Some of the same groups who want the Bible taught alongside Darwin are probably also aligned with those who downplay or deny the phenomenon called Global Warming. This is not surprising. Both Darwin's theory of evolution and the theory of Global Warming involve virtually imperceptible changes to our natural habitat over a protracted period of time. As Darwin observed in his Origin of Species, "so imperfect is our view into long past geological ages, that we only see that the forms of life are now different from what they formerly were." However, the key difference between evolution and climate change is that the former is a natural process over which humans have very little influence, whereas the latter is a troublesome reality precisely because we have no one to blame but ourselves for the changes we have wrought on nature. Among scientists, there is no disagreement that increased concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere means higher temperatures. Like evolution, Global Warming is not a speculative theory, but a verified reality. The question, however, is whether politicians should take this reality seriously.

That the climate has changed, just as species have evolved, is all too evident. This is not news. Nor is it news that humans have altered the earth's atmosphere. What is news is that we can no longer watch reports about Global Warming as merely news, but must do something, must really do something significant, and quickly, before the earth is rendered "inhospitable" to human life, as Bill McKibben continues to warn.

During the last half of the twentieth century, a period characterized by the Cold War, the fear was that the human race would destroy itself directly through a nuclear war or indirectly as a result of the damage such a war would inflict on our environment. This threat remains. We still live in a nuclear age stalked by the threat of nuclear extermination, as Jonathan Schell, author of The Unfinished Twentieth Century, and Robert S. McNamara, former U.S. Secretary of Defense, continue to warn. But the fear of nuclear annihilation has been eclipsed in the public imagination by the fear of Global Warming, the new favorite topic of prophetical fearmongers.

A case in point is Al Gore’s new movie, "An Inconvenient Truth." Unfortunately, it has already created more buzz about Al Gore’s non-existent ambitions to be president than about the "Truth" of its title. As the title indicates, and as Al Gore has insisted repeatedly, the film is a vehicle of Gore the Professor, not Gore the would- and should-be president. Its goal is a moral one: to bring to light inconvenient facts -- inconvenient, that is, for Party platforms. This movie is very much the creation of a man who has made teaching his new vocation. And it will be Gore’s moral achievement if the audience of his movie should come to accustom themselves with the facts, and demand real action from politicians.

I haven't seen the movie, but I’ve read that Gore, like McKibben, suggests that Global Warming, in the not so distant future, may make the world unfit for human habitation. This is an unproductive digression from the inconvenient truth: an attempt not to persuade people to love the environment but to make people fear inaction on the issue. Resort to fear here is an act of desperation, a political weapon in defense of an all but lost cause. This is not a productive way forward, for it provides the opportunity for politicians to appear active by claiming credit for token legislation that fails to change the facts. Our environment will only be adequately protected once it becomes the object of our love, guarded with jealously against those who would despoil it. Until then, let us hope that the apocalyptic fearmongers are wrong. I'm afraid that we believe our hopes more than our fears, and that while we may fear the worse, we will commit to action only on the basis of our hopes for the future.

Club Donkeyass Part III...or Mandingo as 'The Runaway Groom'

Three pie-eyed cheers to Mandingo and his lovely Queenie who tied the knot last eve in a beautiful ceremony at none other than the University of St. Thomas chapel. For those who weren't there, Mandingo rode into the church on a gallant steed, wearing the finest chain mail of the 14th century. He and his beloved were then tied at the wrists with twine, while showered with garlic cloves to ward off witches and hobgoblins. After a rousing sacrificial offering to the Norse gods, we became merry with ale and other intoxicating spirits. Mandingo and his lady then mounted their fine horse and rode into the sunset to begin their magical quest of lifelong happiness.

hip-hip-hooray.

Hip-Hip-Hooray.

HIP-HIP-HOORAY!

My Pet Peeve

I had never been to a Cold Stone Creamery, which is odd, because Ice Cream is the bane of my existence. I am mildly overweight, those that are less charitable would call me obese. How appropriate, the sole conservative on this blog is fat. Anyhow, that aside, I decided it was time to pop my Cold Stone cherry. As I approached the counter still contemplating the various condiments that would push my obesity to the point of morbidity, I was confronted with what is seemingly a simple question "What size would you like?". Knowing the idiocy of American sizing regimes I looked to the menu to see what was this company's inane translation for medium. I noticed three phrases beside which their respective prices were listed in ascending order: Like It, Love It, and Gotta Have It. And I thought to myself, yes these look to be the potential "sizes" as the prices are listed in ascending order, but they can't really be serious. I was frozen and momentarily unable to complete my order. In the meantime the stupid clerk was getting impatient with me and repeatedly asked me what size I wanted as if it were all so obvious. Finally, I tepidly offered "Love It". And the deed was done and I had my ice cream. And the point of my post, well it there really isn't one except that I belive we should return to the days of small, medium, and large. I go to starbucks and order their coffee (regular, drip, no soy milk or horse jizz or whatever). I ask for a medium, the "barrista" or clerk goes spiraling into conniption fits as if I were ordering in Chinese. Tall, Grande, Venti. That is idiotic, three sizes in three different languages, the first two are hardly distinguishable. Think about it, the appropriate measurement for a liquid is volume, does tall or grande (big) indicate greater volume than the other. And then Venti, it simply means 20 in italian. Is a venti truly 20 ounces? If so kudos to Starbucks but maybe those idiots in Seattle could label their other sizes in a similar fashion. Or at least have all of the sizes in the same language. Better yet, adopt a sizing regime that was once known to Western Civilization before the discovery of the all important self-esteem: small, medium, large.

Youngsters these days!

I have to hand it to the Old Grey Lady. If the source of that nickname may have been dubious, it no longer is. To wit,

But the line between what is public and what is private is increasingly fuzzy for young people comfortable with broadcasting nearly every aspect of their lives on the Web, posting pictures of their grandmother at graduation next to one of them eating whipped cream off a woman's belly.

The more things change...

Some Good Humor

A: Sometimes you miss the forest for the trees.
B: What forest?

UST Can’t Even Do Graduation Without Making The Front Page

As some of you may or may not know, last Saturday was commencement weekend at the University of St. Thomas. Which usually means plenty of boring speeches and of course the always enjoyable task of sitting through every single name being called off, but the typical boring graduation ceremony would have been a godsend for UST compared to what occurred instead.

Some of you may have noticed front page stories in both the Star Tribune and the Pioneer Press concerning remarks made by UST’s 2006 Tommie of the Year Award winner at the undergraduate ceremony. Or maybe you saw it on KARE 11, WCCO, or KSTP.

Father Dease, president of UST, offered a statement late yesterday concerning the speech and Ben Kessler the graduate who gave the speech has offered a statement of apology which was included with Dease's statement. But even with his apology there is still a petition movement to strip Kessler of his Tommie Award.

Here is a link to video of the speech where at graduation he called certain faculty members selfish as well as calling everyone who uses birth control selfish. Make sure you pay close attenting to the faculty getting up and leaving, as well as the graduates who are walking out of their own graduation.

After everything that has happened this semester you think the leadership at UST would have done everything possible to keep graduation of all days, as non-eventful as possible, I guess not.

• Here is another perspective on UST's commencement ceremony from the point of view of a graduate’s family.

Have Your Phone Records Handy

Verizon has been sued for giving the NSA the phone records of millions of Americans. The lawsuit was filed on Saturday just days after USA Today reported Verizon, Bell South and AT&T handed over millions of phone call records to help the government build the world’s largest database, The 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy Act made it illegal for telephone companies and computer service providers to give the government records showing who their customers had dialed or e-mailed. Attorneys say that under the 1986 law the telecoms could be forced to pay out one thousand dollars per violation per customer.

Everyone get your phone records out, President Bush may have just solved the countries economic problems if these lawsuits are allowed to go class action. But of course all of the major phone carriers, except for Qwest, would end up going bankrupt. Oh well seems like a small price to pay for a few thousand bucks each.

Two Down...Cheney and Bush To Go

It was reported on Saturday by truthout.org’s Jason Leopold that in a meeting Friday with Karl Rove’s lawyers lasting 15 hours, Patrick Fitzgerald served the attorneys with an indictment charging Rove with perjury and lying to investigators. It is not known yet if the expected obstruction of justice charge was included in the indictment.

I haven't seen any coverage of this from any of the major newspapers, but hopefully it is true. So when are President Bush and Vice President Cheney going to be getting their indictments?

EATS: Don't go to Chatterbox II if you want Chatterbox I

There's been a lot of buzz surrounding the new Chatterbox Pub location in St. Paul's Highland Park. My special ladyfriend and I went last night to check it out and compare Chatterbox II to Chatterbox I, a well-loved locale.

First things first: The new Chatterbox is nothing, nothing like the original. Some may think that's a travesty, some may call it a blessing. Personally, I don't see any problem with establishing a new ambience around the same concept. After all, the physical structure itself is not a hole-in-the-wall nestled away in a South Minneapolis neighborhood. It's in a converted Perkins (one of the best Perkins ever, mind you), and smack dab in the middle of a high-traffic commercial area. So if you're looking for, or expecting, Chatterbox I when you walk into Chatterbox II, don't bother.

As for the restaurant itself, both of us gave favorably reviews. We were a bit disoriented walking in, because there was actual natural light in the new joint. Also, there is a family-friendly aspect to the place, at least during the day. The decor is quite reminiscent of Chatterbox II's neighbor the Highland Grille, with futuristic furniture. Of course, you can still order board games at your table; there are a number of casual, comfy looking couches, and there's also original Nintendo on flat-screen TVs. I watched a nine-year-old try to figure out Mario 3 for a few minutes, then left with disgust when he didn't even know to go into one of the mushroom huts.

The food and drinks were classic Chatterbox. I had a delectable Inferno Hellcat Burger on ciabatta with deep-fried pickles and great fries. With a name like Inferno Hellcat, though, I expected some more heat, but alas, that's the problem anywhere in Minnesota. There's a huge bar with a decent selection, including it's own Chatterbox Lager (a fine brew).

All in all, you need to check it out for yourself. It's definitely worth it.

Lasers

"Rather than allow our intelligence professionals to maintain a laser focus on the terrorists, we are once again mired in a debate about what our intelligence community may or may not be doing." -- Rep. Peter Hoekstra, Republican of Michigan, as quoted in today's New York Times

Now, I don't have the intelligence (literally and figuratively) of Rep. Hoekstra, and he may know of some really, really big lasers. But maintaining a program that intends to collect every phone call ever made seems about as precise and laser-focused as killing a sea monkey with a stack of phone books.

News & Views: Home Stretch Edition

• So as Stadium Bowl XV stretches into Year 11, the Minnesota House and Senate enter into conference committee and they're only about 2/5 of a light-year away from each other, which considering previous arrangement is actually fairly close. The whole thing is an exercise in ridiculousness and an unfortunate pandering to the electorate for the primary purpose of giving embattled Republican incumbents something to tell folks back home they accomplished without paying for. Hey, I'm all in favor of a new stadium...for the Twins. They're the only ones we would actually be in danger of losing at this point. Vikings aren't going anywhere quite yet; and the Gophers? Come on...
• The DFL has some more endorsed Congressional candidates. Two sacrificial lambs (Rowley in the 2nd and Wilde in the 3rd) and (maybe) a sure bet in Ellison. I'll let Anti-Everything tell you about the fireworks in the 5th District. Yikes. In other news, all three DFL candidates for governor - Hatch, Lourey, and Kelley - are outpolling Teflon Tim. Of course, it is only May.
• For Mandingo's sake, I hope the government isn't monitoring 1-900 calls. He'd be "outted" for sure.
• Hey, guys, did you hear about this body plastination thing at the Science Museum where you can see everyone's innards? Oh, you did? Like a month ago? Get with it, MPR! Oh, and Katherine Kersten ets us know that the bodies are dead. Thanks, Kathy. Here I thought they were just mannequins.
• Don't cry for me, Laura Billings.
• City Hall Scoop catches RT Rybak courting Bill Finney. Inevitable or unsubstantiated rumor...you decide.

Relief...

...is handing in your final law school exam for the year.

...is not working on a closed memo and editing exercise due 10 days after your final law school exam for the year.

A Pie-Eyed Year

Well, folks, I just noticed that the Pie-Eyed Picayune has been at it for just about a full year now, and what a year it's been. We've gone from the meanderings of a solo PiedPiper, to a dynamic duo with the addition of Ilya, to the panoply of contributors we have today: Xtra, Anti-Everything, Mandingo and the Archduke. Sure, we've had our ups and downs, as well as the requisite coma followed by an identity crisis and a search for ourselves through the wilderness of bloggerdom. But, here we are, one year later, fighting the good fight and all that. Thanks for playing along, PePpers. With that, some highlights:

• The Beginning
• Katherine Kersten and Terri Schiavo...kinda like Batman and Robin
• Ilya - The Original Man in Pink
• An Ode to Teflon Tim
• Remember when the government shut down? That was awesome...
• Ilya's trademark: President Bush's Siren Song
• Xtra joins the Krewe
• The other great debate: Townies vs. Hipsters
• Rethinking Pat Robertson
• Hurricane Katrina...jumped the shark back in September
• Mandingo = Incomprehensible
• The first State of the Blog address
• PiedPiper's 5-point plan for an improved Twin Cities
• Oh no...NO...it's Hurricane Bearded Matriarch
• It's too bad about Tom Delay...no, really, I feel bad...seriously
• Xtra + Bill Bennett x Race - Freakonomics = Eh.
• Bill O'Reilly clubs baby seals
• Can you believe Harriet Miers was almost a Supreme Court justice...what a country!
• Pie-Eyed Picayune: Always patting ourselves on the back
• I'd love to have a piece of Roy's Rock
• Archduke calls out local heartthrob Mason Jennings
• The second State of the Blog address
• Why the right is wrong...
• 2,000 soldiers dead in Iraq...I guess those flowers and candies got lost in the mail
• Scootstock and CNN's VonWolfenblitzer as cyborg
• Archduke gives his picks for Park and Rec Board, as well as Board of Estimate and Taxation and Library Board
• Eliot Spitzer as Pied's hero
• Tim Pawlenty's chickenscratch
• Pie-Eyed Poetry and the "The Lament of Randy and Peter"
• Anti-Everything: It's all about the gays
• PeP reached 10,000 hits, and somehow, somewhere, a dolphin cried
• Anti-Everything: More gays
• Election 2006: Genesis 1:1
• Torture and mercy...what are we not getting?
• And the gay ninjas, my God man, the gay ninjas
• Anti-Everything practically broke the biggest story of Election 2006: Vampire runs for Minnesota governor
• The doldrums begin with Mandingo's word cloud
• Was Kanye right?
• The return of Hurricane Bearded Matriarch, as if once wasn't enough
• March was a really thin month as far as posts go
• On the brink of blog termination...
• ...and the ressurection
• CHEEBAdanza...and the cancellation of CHEEBAdanza

There you go, folks: the highlights and the lowlights of the first year of the PeP. Thanks for the memories!

FILM: 'Paradise Now' is da bomb

Despite the crude title to this post (I couldn't pass it up), "Paradise Now," a Palestinian film that was nominated for Best Foreign Film (for whatever that's worth), translates the intricacies of the most divisive issue in the Middle East. It equally displays the shackles placed on Palestinians through the Israeli occupation, while demonstrating the uselessness, fruitlessness, and human waste that results from the Palestinian armed "resistance."

The film follows two young Palestinian men, Khaled and Said, who face poverty, underemployment, lack of free mobility, and the constant knowledge of Israel's domination over them. After we see the humanity of their regular life, we find out that they have volunteered for a joint suicide bomb mission in Tel Aviv. And from there, the story follows a weaving, intricate path that is both tragic and somehow hopeful.

There are several things this film does very well. First, it humanizes the Palestinian cause, which has been (perhaps rightfully so) characterized in our country as nothing but a violent group of thugs and terrorists. This, of course, is true to some extent. Yet, the basic fact that a debilitated and occupied people still exists somewhere out there in the desert. Which is why the second thing this film does is so essential. It shows how senseless suicide bombings, and armed resistance in general, are. If the Palestinians renounced violence, if their struggle was one of non-violent resistance, they would already have a two-state solution at the very least, because not even the most pro-Israel countries would be able to condone Israel's actions against a peaceful people. Sadly, this leads into the third thing the film does exceptionally well, and that is illustrating the false logic that drives young Palestinians to suicide bombings without making it a sympathetic endeavor.

For all these reasons, you should see this film. But, there is another one. The American youth (which I count here ranging in age from about 15 to 35) has never, and very probably never will, had to encounter any sort of dilemma as Said and Khaled do in this film, not to mention the dilemma millions of young people face in Palestine and other parts of the world everyday. We don't know what social shackles are, much less what they feel like. If we are to throw our weight around the world in effecting the experiences of such people, we should at least try to empathize and understand their struggle.

Immigration, part 2

There is much discussion amongs those who are "pro-immigration" (note the lack of a qualifier), or as critics call them, "pro-amnesty", about our economy's reliance upon the cheap labor illegal immigrants provide. You constantly hear about how "illegal immigrants do jobs that Americans won't." This argument is simply idiotic. If, of a sudden, illegal immigrants vanished, American employers would replace labor with capital where possible and raise wages where necessary. This is not to say there would be zero impact in the dissapearance of cheap labor. People would have to pay more for their meals and mow their own lawns, etc. The economy would hit a snag. But life would go on. There are good arguments for amnesty, this is not one of them.

Immigration

There is one thing that I have found to be an obnoxious omission in the recent immigration debate, the plight of the legal immigrant. I am constantly in awe of the brand quality that is "America". Yes, we may be hated all over the world but according to the rest of the world, America is still the land of opportunity. People come from near and far through legal channels to set down their roots in what they perceive to be more fertile ground for prosperity. I grew up in the suburbs of Washington D.C. and was exposed to a broad swath of immigrants. There were Europeans who came here because they were fed up with the economic malaise that dominates across the pond. Asians, Arabs, and Africans who often were part of the professional class in their home countries but were reduced to driving cabs or mopping floors (work is work but going from running a surgery to driving a taxi has to be a tough pill to swallow) in their adopted countries but considered the sacrifice worthwhile as their children would be able to become part of the educated class in a country were political strife was not the norm. Regardless, of their backgrounds, the common denominator was that these immigrants all shared the pain in the ass that the US immigration process is. The well to do hire lawyers to navigate this diahreal mass of laws and regulations. Those less financially able simply persist. However, due to the complexities of the law and a generally unresponsive bureaucracy, formally INS (Immigration and Naturalization Services) now CIS (Citizenship and Immigration Services, the process is time and financially intensive and the customer service is piss-poor. One would think that when a skilled worker is willing to incur huge personal sacrifices to become an American, we would simply open the door and welcome them, but through bureaucratic bungling we kick them in the teeth instead. Yet they still come. This is remarkable but not indefinite. At some point other countries will catch up and market themselves as viable alternatives for skilled workers. The U.S. has to streamline its immigration process for those who come here through legal channels and should expand legal immigration. Otherwise we will lose the attendant benefits of immigration, the infusion of human capitol and the enrichment of our society through different cultural influences, from which our country has gained so much.

News & Views: The Long Slog Edition

Well, folks, final exams are coming up and I'm hoping to keep my head above water just long enough to expound on the Constitution for the next two weeks. Despite those responsibilities, it behooves me to offer a weekly look at what's in the news. (Although, perhaps my Strib links ought to be discredited.)

• The safest Democratic seat in the nation, Minnesota's own 5th Congressional District, held a debate between all the neophytes, nobodies, and nincompoops vying to replace the venerable Martin 'Olav' Sabo. MPR's political blog, Polinaut, has the audio.
• PiPress is reporting that University Avenue is today's equivalent of the Oklahoma Land Rush of 1889. Used car dealers and strip mall owners wanna cash-in on increasing property values, while gentrifying urban yippies salivate at the prospects of a light-rail stop just blocks from the Turf Club and Big V's (not to mention TREND Bar). City Hall Scoop takes a look at some of the criterion St. Paul is requiring for new development.
• It's Stadium Mania XV! With Dr. No (aka House Taxes Committee Chair Phil Krinkie, R-Lino Lake) presiding over the end-around on a Hennepin County referendum (see who gave the yeas and nays here), it's looking like Gopher football may find an on-campus home. Will the Vikings get the trifecta? And isn't amazing how quickly Republicans turn their votes around in an anti-incumbent election year?
• I was at the DFL shoot-out going on for the Ramsey County Attorney endorsement, where up-and-comer Cory Tennison attempted to dethrone 3-time incumbent Susan Gaertner. Both camps remained entrenched after five ballots, with Tennison leading in each one. Unfortunately, Tennison decided to fold, surrendering the election to a woman who is by definition a DINO (Democrat in name only).
• In yesterday's PiPress, the front page article focused on the Grups, "hip" middle-aged folks who obsess about staying young and "cool." I don't think I know any current Grups, but I do know a future one, and his name is Mandingo. He'll be carting his kids to Pantera concerts while they're still in diapers.
• Is Minnesota's Democratic senator Mark Dayton one of the worst? Only if we all agree Norm Coleman is one of the slimiest.
• Get a job, Junior!

CHEEBAdanza cancelled! Pot-smokers momentarily outraged!

The Strib is reporting* the powers-that-be at the liberal establishment known as Macalester College are stomping all over free speech, freedom of assembly, and like, a lot of other stuff...CHEEBAdanza, as reported on these pages, has been cancelled! Apparently, the adminstration thought the student org leading the effort for the "re-legalization" of marijuana were actually just looking for an excuse to smoke some reefer. Who knew?

I really think this might be the straw that breaks the camel's back, folks. The student union will be stormed, the power will be given to the people, we shall rise...ah, hell, who are they kidding.

*Best part of the article: Members of CHEEBA were unavailable for comment...hmmmm.

I'm sure our invitation is in the mail

The Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School is hosting a syposium entitled, "Bloggership: How Blogs are Transforming Legal Scholarship." Full disclosure: I actually had to turn down Harvard when they asked me to be the keynote speaker. I told them I refused to participate in anything with the word "bloggership" attached to it, as well as anything that tried to lend academic credence to the "blogosphere." Eat it, Crimson.

Cannabis:Macalester :: Peas:Pods

Oh, Macalester College. Nothing like reinventing the wheel of '60s revolution over and over again until it becomes a mockery of a mockery of ridiculousness.

As the PiPress is reporting (in some awfully contrive pot-speak), Mac's own student org CHEEBA (Creating a Harmless Evironment to Enjoy Buds Appropriately) is hosting CHEEBAdanza on (what else?) April 20 (4/20...get it?). Oh, and just so that you do get it, the festivities begin at 4:20 p.m. Their agenda? The re-legalization of marijuana, what else?

What's best is that this gem of an event comes just hours before Mac's most famous alumnus, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, visits for the school's Springfest celebration. Will Kofi do a little tokie? (Ok, now I'm laying it on a bit too thick.) Mac's other most famous alumnus, the PeP's own Ilya, will certainly be partaking in the celebration.

I have to give Mac kudos for having some very industrious potheads, but really, Mac, where's the originality? I mean, maybe if CHEEBAdanza were being held at Bethel, then this would be a story. But Mac? Soooo typical.

And as a sidenote, has anyone ever considered the fact that maybe marijuana would already be "re-legalized" if its advocates didn't throw celebrations called CHEEBAdanza?

MegaMN

In light of the Mall of America's proposed $1 billion expansion, which would nearly double its size, I have to ask: why stop there? Let's just build a mall over the entire state. That way, we can all stay indoors in the winter, and keep our consumer economy booming! Eh, guys? Eh?

News & Views

• Will they rename Ford Parkway now that St. Paul's Ford Ranger plant is biting the dust? Don't know. But that's the least of our concerns, as Minnesota's capitol city will lose almost 2,000 jobs. Jobs that happen to be in manufacturing. Paging Lou Dobbs... (Sidenote: Anyone want to wager on the redevelopment plans? Keep in mind, you may not want to drink the water.)
• Minneapolis City Council finally showed some good sense and actually approved green space downtown, taking the generosity of gazillionaire Bill McGuire and turning the land next to the new Guthrie into a city park. While this effort pales next to the egalitarian wonders of St. Paul's two (and perhaps soon-to-be three downtown parks) it's welcome relief.
• ESCAPED SEX OFFENDER! Cindy Brucato at Channel 5 couldn't be more excited (especially now that the Uptown murder isn't "breaking" news).
• MPR wants to know: "Will gay marriage ban harm Minnesota's 'creative class'?" Short answer: Indecipherable. Long answer: Why the hell are we still talking about the "creative class" as if its a real thing?
• In a (mostly) unrelated story, the Republicans of the 6th Congressional District are in a pissing contest to determine who hates gays and taxes the most, as well as who loves God, guns, and babies the most. It's a toss-up, folks.

Free the PeP!

Yes, people, this is PiedPiper with his notes from underground. My voice is a little hoarse from not having breathed in a while, so please excuse me. I have been to the brink and back, my PePpers, and I return to these pages with the wisdom of the ages, the insight of the sages.

In case you haven't noticed, the Pie-Eyed Picayune has been in a temporary vegetative state for some time now. I can blame it on this and that - you know, school, life - but none of it really does this blog justice. The PeP's illness climaxed recently in an unadvised, bloodthirsty attempt to pull the plug, to remove the feeding tube, to refuse sustenance to this most sacred of Internet texts. Thankfully, my PeP brethren wrestled me away from the cliff's edge. And after a tongue-lashing from Mandingo, and weepy intervention from Xtra, and some time in the blogosphere's significant halfway house, I've been born again. Bloggerdom, be on notice. King Pied is back, baby.

As usual, I'll mention that the contributors and I have discussed some changes (that most assuredly won't be made, per ususal) to the Pie-Eyed Picayune. I'll be sharing the adminstration duties with some of my more nurturing partners. Also, since we only learn to appreciate things when they are near exinction, we will all make a more concerted effort to raise the PeP from the ashes, until it rises like the Phoenix silhouetted against the Mississippi sunrise.

Be hearty; be humble, fellow PePpers. I'll be seeing you soon!

PiedPiper

The Pieper of Pie-Eyed

Did someone say....Issachar:

Jacob...jacob and sons...

Or maybe....Arvide Abernathy?

Guys and dolls...we're just a bunch of crazy Guys and Dolls...

GO MASON!

I don't know if we still have a readership after months of sparse postings, but it is a PeP reader's duty to root for George Mason in the Final Four.

Interesting blog

While Republicans generally point out Iraq the Model as the exemplar of Iraqi democracy in action, I found another interesting one a while back. It's done by a female dentist in Mosul who calls herself Mama. It's depressing, for sure, but it gives a different perspective from Iraq the Model. The most recent post is heartbreaking.

Also: I didn't realize that women could be things like dentists in a place like Iraq. I guess it's just Saudi Arabia where that would be impossible.

Touch 'em all

It is probably odd to get all sentimental about a man I'd never met, and who I'd only seen outside of the confines of the Metrodome once. It is odd that something like the death of Kirby Puckett would affect me at all, since his memory has been tarnished in recent years by indiscretions and allegations that, though unproven, somehow still weigh down on my mind.

I guess it's just that Kirby was an important part of my development as a person. Not integral like peers or parents, but at least somewhere outside of that, somewhere floating on the periphery. I was 7 years old when the Twins won their first World Series. I barely remember it, but that same year I remember writing one of the first short stories I ever wrote about the Twins playing a Japanese team (did that ever happen?) and Kirby hitting a home run in the game. Maybe it wasn't a short story, maybe it was just an article about the game. No matter. Whatever it was, it is my first memory of writing a story. Since then, writing has been an important part of my life, and his athletic achievement is what sparked my imagination.

I remember the 91 World Series much better. I was awake when Jack Morris went 10 innings, and I remember making fun of John Smoltz for getting taken out of the game. That game would never have occurred, though, had Kirby not hung in the air in front of the plexiglass wall and pulled in a sure double, and then belted a home run that elicited one of the best home run calls in the history of baseball: "We'll see you tomorrow night."

I'd love to say that the real Kirby was the one who was playing out on that field, not the one who suffered through allegations that eventually led him to move to Arizona to escape the scrutiny. I'd love to be able to say that I knew him, but I didn't, even though I read his (auto)biography from cover-to-cover in one sitting. I'd love to have some nice eulogy for a man who was flawed, who was cocky, who pulled himself out of the South Side of Chicago with determination and a smile. But the truth is, we can never know people like Kirby, athletes who astound us with their physical gifts and wow us with their competetiveness, athletes who are competing for us. We can never know them, never really understand who they are or what they are like. When the game is over and we walk out of the stadium with the tornadic winds pushing us through the Metrodome doors we can only know what we saw: the catch, the hit, the throw, the smile.

If You Say You Vote Democrat, Your Computer Crashes

Hooray for the MN GOP. Pawlenty's party decides spyware is the best way to ingratiate themselves to the masses. They send you a CD, you answer questions, they send it back to themselves unencrypted, the whole time never telling you that what you say is going to be transmitted. Privacy? Who cares.

Carl Eller Should Not Have Been Driving Yesterday

This man should not have been driving his car last night.

Apparently, "replaced knees" is not a valid reason to refuse a field sobriety test.

It's too bad, really, because this is going to hang on him, and I've heard such good things about his time as a chemical and drug abuse consultant for the NFL. Argh.

Why We Fight

In a new Zogby poll of the troops, there seems to be some disconnect between the reasons the administration/media/Congress gave for going to Iraq and the reason the troops believe we are there.

The administration's rationale (at least what the White H said at the war's outset) was the "disarmament of Saddam Hussein," which we must infer means getting rid of his biological and chemical weapons, as Fleischer's press conference on March 3 makes clear. Biological and chemical weapons are often referred to as Weapons of Mass Destruction. Sorry for all the links, but I don't want anyone contradicting me.

According to Zogby (with a margin of error of +/-3.3 percentage points), ninety-three percent of the troops said that "removing weapons of mass destruction is not a reason for U.S. troops being there." 68% said the real mission was the removal of Saddam Hussein. This is not entirely wrong, I suppose, since if you read Fleischer's responses we often find him talking about getting rid of Saddam, although the W.H. said for a while that exile was a possible solution. 24% said that establishing a democracy for the Arab world was a reason, 11% said oil supplies, and 6% said we needed to have long-term bases there. I am troubled by this disconnect between the administration's rationale and the troops' reasons. Perhaps the 93% understood the question as "Why are troops in Iraq now?" but that wouldn't account for the Saddam Hussein removal statistic.

The Saddam removal statistic is interesting, though, because it can account for more than just the fact that he was an aggressor. Many of the troops might take that to mean that we wanted to get him out of Iraq to take the burden of his power and ruthlessness off of the Iraqis, while others might see it more as a pre-emptive strike on an enemy.

The most troubling statistic, however, was the troops' overwhelming belief (85%) that the reason we went to Iraq was mainly "to retaliate for Saddam's role in the 9-11 attacks." No reputable news source believes this, Bush himself has denied it, and the 9/11 Commission said there was no "collaborative relationship" between Iraq and al Qaeda, which makes the 77% of troops who believe that we were there to stop Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq troubling as well.

The question I ask is this: How did so many people who were fighting over there come to believe exactly the opposite (the 93%) of what the administration said? Is it coming from the higher-ups, or is it mostly just a matter of second- and third-hand information getting spread and disseminated among a large group of people?

I'm not sure if any of you have seen the Midwest Heroes commercials on TV. They actually seem to link up pretty well with the poll, though, because al Qaeda and 9/11 are mentioned, and Saddam is alluded to, but there is never a mention of weapons of mass destruction. The focus of the commercial, though--if we are to believe the Zogby poll--is all wrong. It says we should stay the course and the soldiers want to finish the mission. The poll says otherwise, as 72 percent of troops say that the US should be out of Iraq within the year. There is a difference among different branches, predictably, as only 58% of Marines think so while 89% of reservists do. Either way, the majority believe that we should be out soon and they should be home, though it must be noted that the poll took place before the Golden Dome was destroyed, and before the current week's violence.


Update: I didn't think about it before, but I wonder if the Saddam-9/11 link was part of the survey itself. If so, I suppose some soldiers--though I don't believe 85% worth, or even 20%--could be fooled into thinking that there was a link, since the question said there was. A lot of these soldiers are overworked, and a question like that could throw them. If anyone finds the actual questions asked, please post about it in comments.

Feckless

Historians will look back - a thought experiment pundits like to deploy - and sum up the G.W. Bush years in one word: feckless. Not the first definition of the term, but the one about being not merely irresponsible, but also unforgivably blithe, and, in that blitheness, causing great harm.

Tenure?

How is it that academic tenure still exists? The competition for a professorship, particularly within the humanities (or really any field where there is no private sector alternative) is intense. I may be mistaken but I have routinely heard that for each professorship, depending on the field, there may be several hundred applicants. To me this indicates that academics are overpaid (I know, most aren't paid squat) and that there should be a greater personnel churn.

The Odd Couple: Mohammed Cartoons and Holocaust Deniers

Has anyone noticed the juxtaposition of the free speech debate regarding the Mohammed Cartoons and the jailing of David Irving, Holocaust Denier Extraordinaiire? A tad bit hypocritical I suppose. I have always found the concept of hate speech laws more repugnant than the restricted speech itself.

Today's NYT op-ed page

Oscar Robertson and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar weigh in on Kobe Bryant's 81 point game in the New York Times. Robertson proves the better writer and more insightful commentator. And what the f*&$ is Kareem doing these days writing about the 761st Tank Battalion??

"Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, a member of the Basketball Hall of Fame and a 19-time All-Star, is the author, most recently, of "Brothers in Arms: The Epic Story of the 761st Tank Battalion, World War II's Forgotten Heroes."

Pie-Eyed Poll

Would you rather go hunting with Dick Cheney or driving with Ted Kennedy? I really think this one is a toss-up.

Frivolous Post

I was searching over at Craigslist Minneapolis and happened upon a person selling her CD collection. I say her because the person who formerly owned the collection purchased Tracy Chapman AND Paula Cole. And not just the Paula Cole with "Where have all the cowboys gone?" on it. Two Paula Cole albums.

Going down the list it is a veritable cornucopia of crappy 90s music. Tubthumper? Seriously, you bought Chumbawumba? When you realized it was mostly Brit Anarchist music, did it get relegated to the back pages of your CD folder? You buy not one, but two Best of Aerosmith albums?

And yet there is Tom Waits, sitting down near bottom of the alphabetized list. You're getting rid of Alice? His crazy soundtrack for a German version of Alice in Wonderland? And Mule Variations? Hell of an album. Why get rid of these, when you so obviously need his gravelly voice? (A voice that has caused more than one million-dollar lawsuit for copyright infringement, as well as infringement of his "moral rights")

Please, girl-who-once-loved-The Spin Doctors-and-Seal, don't let Tom Waits slip away.

Starbucks's Frankenstein Coffee and Customers

Starbucks has evolved its own enemy: its customers. Accustomed to the ability to customize their drinks, Starbucks customers made Chantico a no-go:

"Described as "a drinkable dessert," Chantico resembled the thick, sweet hot chocolate found in European cafes but was only available without any variations in a 6-ounce size. In the end, that limitation irked customers who are used to dictating not only the size of their lattes and cappuccinos, but also whether they want regular or decaf coffee, non-fat, whole or soy milk, sugar-free or regular flavor shots, and even extras like whipped cream and caramel."

Remembering the Beat Generation

The saying "turn on, tune in, and drop out," interpreted as an injunction not to reform but to drop out of society and seek enlightenment via psychedelic drugs, is credited to Timothy Leary.
But in the documentary on the Beat Generation called The Source, a man is shown saying the following: "The ancient goals which we follow can be defined in modern terms in the metaphors of the present as turn on, tune in, and drop out." Drugs necessary?

Jack Wants To Go To Washington

It will be announced today at an 11 o'clock press conference that Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer will be challenging Rep. Martin Sabo for the democratic nomination for Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District.

Jack is an Associate Professor of Justice and Peace Studies at the University of St. Thomas and on a personal note I have worked with Jack and he is brilliant.

I doubt he will get the nomination but hopefully he will at least make the precinct caucuses in Minneapolis a little more interesting. Here is a link to his campaign website.

Civil Liberties Are Over Rated Anyways

I have been listening to Alberto Gonzales testifying in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee today and I know I haven’t posted anything on this so I will throw my two cents in. After researching the administrations rationale and legal justification for the domestic spying program, or whatever fear invoking terrorist stopping title they are calling the program this week, as well as outside legal analysis of the legality and effectiveness of the program I have come to one conclusion. For lack of a better phrase the administration is FULL OF SHIT.

Now the administration has come out with many different lines of reasoning and rational for why this program is necessary as well as reasons why authorizing the program could only be done through executive order without the authorization of congress. I don’t really know where to start so I will just look at comments on certain lines of reasoning as they pop into my head.

As my illustrious colleague, Xtra, has pointed out one of the administrations reasons for the program is that 72 hours is not a long enough time period to seek a warrant and still be effective in hunting and tracking terrorist activities. This idea that 72 hours is not enough time is comical to me considering it was the president who told Congress to change the time limit to 72 hours in the PATRIOT Act. Now I understand that Washington is just one big slow bureaucracy, I do not doubt this, but from my research I have found that the FISA court is actually rather efficient. I don’t remember which article I read this in, so if I miss quote these statistics I apologize, but I believe that over the past four years or so there have been over 20,000 requests for warrants from the FISA court and only four or five of these requests have been denied. Further I believe I read somewhere that the longest it has taken to receive a judge’s approval for a warrant through the FISA court was 20 hours. Also if we are to believe the administrations reasoning then one would think that the president would welcome any legislation that would make the process of obtaining warrants easier. Yet in 2002 the president and the justice department rejected any need for legislation proposed by Sen. Mike DeWine that would make the process of obtaining warrants easier. So to me it appears that the administration has contradicted itself in regards to this reasoning that the process is too slow and cumbersome.

Another line the administration has used to justify this program is that (I am paraphrasing here), if this program was in place before 9/11 then 9/11 could have been prevented and that the current domestic spying program has helped stop potential terrorist attacks since 9/11. The administration has consistently reiterated that the wire taps only relate to communication between Americans and terrorists abroad. I approach these assertions with a great amount of skepticism considering that the administration has yet to actually release any details concerning the program to demonstrate that they were only targeting terrorists abroad. Furthermore it has been reported by the New York Times that according to FBI agents, whose job is to follow up and investigate any information received from the NSA, stated that virtually all of the information received were dead ends and forced the FBI to waste valuable resources following up on these dead ends. It was also reported by the Washington Post today that according to individuals familiar with the program that “Fewer than 10 U.S. citizens or residents a year, according to an authoritative account, have aroused enough suspicion during warrantless eavesdropping to justify interception of their domestic calls.” So the president and members of his administration consistently reiterate the importance of the program and its effectiveness, while those who actually carry out the program say it’s ineffective. Again this leaves me feeling rather skeptical of the administration.

Another issue is the general legality of the program. The president stated in a press conference on January 26 that “the FISA law was written in 1978. We're having this discussion in 2006. It's a different world. And FISA is still an important tool. It's an important tool. And we still use that tool. But also -- and we -- look -- I said, look, is it possible to conduct this program under the old law? And people said, it doesn't work in order to be able to do the job we expect us to do.” I realize that according to the president FISA is out of date in handling the threat of terrorism, and if he thinks that is the case then I would suggest he go to Congress with his concerns and receive the tools necessary to combat terrorism. I am actually pretty sure this is what he did when Congress passed the PATRIOT Act, but to simply circumvent the law in order to achieve this goal of protecting Americans is simply unacceptable. Now I am by no means a legal expert, so if any lawyers or law students out there would like to add to this please do, but it is my understanding that once a law is on the books it continues to be a law that must be followed until the law is updated or expires, I think that is what our system of laws that govern our country are based on. So even if the president feels that a certain law is out of date, I am rather sure that he (like every other citizen) must follow the law. This seems rather basic to me but maybe I am missing something.

Basically what this all comes down to is whether or not America is willing to simply trust the president and his administration concerning issues of civil liberties and the protection of them, I for one am in the majority of Americans who do not think that the president is being honest and straightforward with the American public. After all the lies from the Bush administration, i.e. the lead up for the war against Iraq, Valerie Plame, and what ever else you want to throw in here, I find it very difficult to simply trust the president, especially considering the fact that the NSA has in the past spied on anti-war Quakers in the United States and that both Rumsfeld and Cheney have wanted the president to be able to spy on American citizens without warrants for the past 30 years. I think there is much more to this program that is not being told to us, and I have a sneaking suspicion that there are many aspects of this program that are illegal.

Those Crazy Danes

One thing to keep in mind about the fall-out from the cartoon riots/embassy burnings is that the cartoon, which portrayed mohammed with a bomb in the place of his head/cranium is a taboo in of itself. Islam forbids any visual portrayals of the prophet mohammed. This not to say that those people that set the Danish embassy on fire aren't complete and total moonbats.

72 hours

In the wake of the revelation of about the NSA wiretapping story, most of the discussions have focused on whether or not the President has overstepped the limits of the law. And obviously, this is the core issue. But one of the things that irritates me about this discussion is this notion that 72 hours is akin to an eternity. The subtext is: gosh, three days is a long time just to get somebody to say "OK". 72 hours in government is the blink of an eye. The government is a lumbering morass. Public bueauracracies tend to be, some less so than others, but nonetheless. This is largely because they cannot be purely concerned with efficiency. Public organizations pick winners and losers every day, thus efficiency as a primary organizational goal, is insufficient. As a result, 72 hours, what may seem like a fair amount of time is not.

Teflon Tim and the Mystery of Marconi's Invention

MPR has a nice little article on the conflict of interest/just plain bad form of the Best Governor Currently Residing in Minnesota. It seems that Pawlenty still holds his radio show every Friday morning, same as he's been doing since he took office. Problem is--according to his opponents--that he's a candidate in an election year and he's getting a free hour to shoot the breeze with his potential voters while they're forced to hoof it from door-to-door in Uptown to get some face time with the locals. Do the locals ever invite them in for soup and biscuits? No, never.

Now, as the article points out, Tim hasn't declared his candidacy, and thus is legally okay. He doesn't need to give up the show--or at least provide an extra hour for the whole "equal time" thing--until he officially enters the race. From a legal standpoint, I suppose, Tim's ass is covered. But ethically? It's strange, but while you'd think that ethics and the law would go hand in hand, it's often not the case. Ethically, Tim's treading on some thin ice. Getting a free propaganda hour every Friday while Kelly Doran has to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars whiting-out "For Senate" and plastering "For Governor" over his "Kelly Doran for Senate" signs is hardly fair.

"Addicted to Ferin Oil"

This part of the State of the Union (SOTU) was truly assinine. Oil is traded on global energy markets, all you need to know is that oil is black and money is green. If the United States were to buy oil exclusively from Russia or Norway or anywhere other than the Middle East it would have no impact on oil prices. Ultimately that which would have an impact on oil prices is reduced consumption. Drastically reduced. You can address that question either by focusing on increasing other energy supplies or reducing demand for oil consumption. However, the logical favorite for increasing supply, Nuclear Energy, is, well, radioactive. Discouraging consumption of oil through a Gas Tax, is even less likely. Although, this would be a fairly sensible tax.