Obama's OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO(DA) Loop

The genius of John Boyd's OODA Loop lies in its simplicity and brevity. Developed to give allied fighter pilots an edge during WWII aerial dogfights, it proved immensely successful - even over superior pilots and aircraft. Briefly, it outlined a strategic process to "observe", "orient", "decide" and "act". And then repeat as often as necessary. Modern businesses found the process to be so understandable and intuitive they adopted it wholesale after the war. Read the full Wiki piece for clearer details.

What our current president has cleverly done is modernize that process - at least as far as the war in Afghanistan is concerned - into an endless cycle of repeated observations and orientations, thus eliminating his onerous duty of actually forming a decision and doing something about it. As pointed out in Young Hamlet's Agony published today by RealClearPolitics and by the pen of Charles Krauthammer, after a lengthy process begun post-inauguration in January our leader claims to have "decided" March 27 on a "Comprehensive New Strategy" (CNS) vis-a-vis Afghanistan and Pakistan, going so far as to publicly "outline" the CNS. Only we now find out the "decision" forming the CNS was probably announced before it was really ready.

Fast forward two months later to early May. We are told the apparently still pre-decisional CNS is now "under review". OK, we have a new military commander on the ground and he needs time to "orient" himself. Point taken.

But then, five months later on October 4, we learn "The president is currently in the midst of an involved, overall strategic review of the U.S. military operation in Afghanistan." Hmmmmmm. What happened to the CNS? Still no deciding and acting reported. Just observing and orienting. And today we learn from the president's national security adviser, James L. Jones, Jr., "you don't commit troops before you decide on a strategy." What? We STILL don't have a "strategy"? Isn't that what a "CNS" is - or was?

Egads! Hamlet would be proud. But poor Colonel John Boyd should be rolling over in his grave. At this rate a real decision might not be forthcoming until the next US administration takes office. Way to go, President International Rock Star. Keep talking - essentially about yourself. No sense "doing" anything now and besmirching your regime's reputation.

Hi-Jinx on American Idol?

Are the sound engineers for American Idol on air broadcasts that bad or simply rank amateurs? The truth is for the last two weeks they stunk. Imo I know of several unpaid sound guys in junior colleges and churches who could work rings around those so-called professionals. But they don't belong to any broadcast union.

Watching the two hour airings this week brought deja vu memories from last week's first group of twelve show. During both broadcasts I thought the sound person(s) "riding the boards" were either deliberately sabotaging certain contestants, or learning their craft on-the-job. Either way, they did a lousy job.

What I'm speaking about is the "mix". During "live" artist performances using background vocalists and instrumentalists there should be at least four - or more - main categories of sound, plus a large number of minor categories. First and most prominent should be the artist, then the background group, then the instrumentalists and finally the concert hall. Last week and again tonight home viewers could clearly hear the concert hall, the instrumentalists and the background singers. Down somewhere in the "mud" both weeks were the first three or four - or more - artists. Just couldn't clearly hear their voices, their notes, their tones or their lyrics in order to judge how well they did. Until afterward when they began talking to the judges. Oddly, that part worked OK.

[NOTE: I am not even mentioning the obvioous short-comings in the "monitoring" process (direct sound feeds for the artist, etc.). That important function's failures were also obvious. But to keep it simple this rant is only about the sound being broadcast].

During both weeks' shows the singers further along in the sequence benefited from better broadcast acoustics, in my opinion. This gave them a tremendous advantage. But was it fair? In my opinion, no! If it had happened just one week it could have been an odd occurrence. But two weeks in a row make it a pattern. In my view it is most likely a deliberate attempt to skew the rating results. And that makes the entire series merely an underhanded, cheating set-up. Boy, am I surprised.

Oh, well. That's just Hollywood.

Smile, please!

It is official. The Monterey Bay and its environs have become overly-saturated with touristy types. See this item in the Monterey County Herald. So-called playful sea-otters of the area may have noticed this, too, and although unremarked upon in the daily paper, are apparently compiling evidence to be used for goodness knows what type of future complaint? For proof see this:

This shot, taken from a tour boat in the Elkhorn Slough on February 3, 2009, by freelance wildlife photographer Enrique Aguirre, shows a "happy critter" spotted turning the tables on a boatload of photographers who themselves were enjoying a photo shoot on the bay. At any rate, this is fair warning that whenever visiting the Monterey Bay and its sanctuary, one should now stay alert for the latest menace - nautical paparazzi.

What's wrong with this picture?

Found on boingboing.net is this graphix of a bus from the Netherlands, but it is not what it appears to be. What you think you see is not actually happening. Study the photo again if you haven't yet figured it out.

And then scroll down for the solution.






OK, scroll a little further you cheater, you!










Careful scrutiny will show red stop and taillights on both sides of the "front face" of this coach, plus high in both corners may be seen red and amber marker lights. Even in the former Holland red lights may only be displayed on the rear of a normal vehicle, so what gives?

Well, the "windshield view of the driver and interior of the bus scene" and "the headlights" are merely hi-res graphic wraps, but the license plate, route designator, manufacturer's marque and company logos are all legit. It turns out an advertiser - apparently Apeldoorn Insurance in Amsteredam - is using this simple but effective eye-catching scene to establish name recognition and competitive positioning in this marketplace. Pretty cool, I say.

No word on what the local motorists think about this situation, but the mind boggles when considering the reaction of some folks on their way back to offices after extended "business" lunches. What they think they are seeing is a city coach "backing up" at normal speeds on the regular bus route. Talk about too much information to filter. 12 Step Programs, here we come.

Reflections on [not-always] Solid Waste

One of my regular "reads" is William M. (Matt) Briggs' interesting site [His MOTTO: "All manner of statistical analyses cheerfully undertaken"] wherein the author frequently expounds on a statistician's life's work and its associated travails. Lately Matt is sounding somewhat introspective and bored, as per this post on a study comparing satisfaction factors of 200 careers. Close to the bottom of the list were "garbage collectors". Said Matt:

For the last eleven years I have seen the same two guys drive their garbage truck down my street. They are always chatting and appear happy. They are outside and not hunched in front of a computer. There’s very little stress. They get good pay and benefits and first dibs at any choice garbage¹. They don’t need to shell out cash for a gym membership to “exercise”, which is better defined as work that you pay for. In every parade I’ve ever been to, it’s the garbage men following after the horses that get the biggest applause.

His comment re: one of my cherished former occupations could not in all good consciousness remain unanswered, thus the following 49er Fiction and Fact tidbits:

• The most rewarding time of the year for G-men vis-a-vis choice of food scraps is the week after Thanksgiving. Turkey is king!
• On average it takes a retired G-man 20 years to sort through and dispose of the "usable" trash hauled home during a 10 year collection career. When all is said and done he will actually be able to use less than 2% of the stuff.
• A hauling company will cut 25% off their labor budget if they require drivers dump loads at local transfer stations rather than outlying landfills. Locally there's much less opportunity for drivers to be distracted wasting time looking through "good stuff" others have dumped.
• Usual question from a new customer: "Do you deliver in River City"? Usual answer: "Sure. How many truck loads do you want"?
• Residential hauling technique pre-1965. Open top dump-truck with running boards on both sides; at least one man on each side plus driver, stepping on running board while lifting/carrying can, lifting and dumping can at least 45" above ground, sweeping upside-down can from side to side to spread trash around, stepping down and dropping empty on ground then picking up next can and repeating as needed. Jumped on running boards and held on till next stop. Time: About 45 seconds per can. Capacity: 220 cans. Work interval between bad back episodes: five days
  
• Residential hauling technique post-1965. Covered bodied compaction truck with rear loading hopper; one man plus driver, lifting and dumping can into empty hopper from ground level, dropping empty on ground and repeating as necessary. Jump on rear step, activate compaction lever and held on till next stop. Time: About 30 seconds per can. Capacity: 800 cans. Work interval between bad back episodes: forty five days
  

OK, that's enough for now. Too many memories. And too much turkey-ala-king.

To my children

We here in America usually don't keep close track of happenings in other nations. That's probably more because we lead extremely busy lives and have full plates just "getting by," much of the time, and not due to our parochialism or arrogance I hope. But I could be wrong.

Anyway, something is now occurring in The Netherlands [nee Holland] that bodes ill for your future, and as the "supreme authority figure in this family" [interpretation: ancient of days] it is my solemn duty to draw the issue to your attention - not that you can change it, but because you need to be aware of the ramifications that might eventually flow over you and yours from it.

Please read this post from one of my favorite web sites. Maybe even follow its links. Afterwards you might want to "google" Geert Wilders and read more about his supposed "crime". The sad fact is that America is the ONLY major nation left in the world that allows our level of "free" speech. Not Canada, not Australia, not Great Britain, not Scotland, not France, not China, not Japan, not any of the major players. All those nations in some way limit "free" speech if the words in question cause someone else to "feel" a certain way. In other words, they've given up one person's freedom to accommodate another person's feelings. I'm trusting you each see the fallacy in this line of thinking.

Now I'm not an absolutist on "free speech". There are reasonable limits to this freedom, such as not being permitted to yell "fire" in a crowded theater when there isn't one, etc. But arresting a person just because one's exercise of free speech might cause others in opposition to the expressed viewpoint to become violent is not "reasonable," in my view. Someone else's criminality is their responsibility, not a speakers merely because the speaker expressed an opinion. And any nation or peoples group which thinks otherwise have slipped a cog in the rationality department I fear.

By-the-way, taking away free speech would be the important first step in eventually altering or removing freedom of religion, and though that end result might at first glance seem far away, in fact once "free speech" could be shackled a restriction on religion is probably less than a decade behind - in my estimation.

The reason I raise this issue with you now is because there is a fear, whether realistic or not, that some radical supporters of our new administration, along with a few congresspersons, also favor the approach taken by The Netherlands in limiting certain aspects of "free" speech. Please be vigilant in the years ahead over this issue. If it comes up please exercise your rights as citizens to be heard. This issue sounds so innocuous at times, but once taken away, freedom of speech can almost never be restored without bloodshed. And the thought of that possibility waiting my offspring's future saddens me.

Ranting lesson over. Resume normalcy.

The "Cleanliness" of Hypocrisy

Nothing seems to excite liberals quite so much as when they go about supposedly "righting wrongs" perpetrated by evil conservatives. Latest example is BHO's order closing down - within a year - the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. A thread on The Volokh Conspiracy blog has been discussing a few ideas on how that task might be accomplished, but some of the commenters there seem giddy about this supposed "victory" over GWB. See here and here, for instance. Or read the entire thread for more flavor. [208 comments at one count].

Widely seen as the epitomy of torture and brutality, few take the time to remember why "Gitmo" was needed in the first place. For that memory jogger one needs the historical perspective of this Belmont Club entry. During his administration if it hadn't been for WJC's desire to keep his hands "clean" by cruelly and unproductively dealing with terrorists through third party entities, and the deniability - and paucity of intelligence - that afforded him, we likely wouldn't have had the deadly result of 9/11.

But who really knows? What is provable is that since then, by virtue of the intelligence obtained from interrogations at Gitmo [of non-state affiliated terrorist gunmen captured while dangerously trying to blend in with local citizenry], the war on terror has NOT had to have been fought on our shores. But for some that apparently is not a good thing.

So once again liberals throw out wisdom in search of "cleanliness". The terrorists we capture post Gitmo will apparently not have to worry about gaining weight during incarceration any more, but will they tell us anything to prevent future attacks - or will they even survive? Their future - and ours - looks much bleaker. I suspect we are returning to "don't ask, don't tell" once again. Merely in order to "feel good" about ourselves. Hypocrisy. Hope and change.

Do we start a new count? Or merely continue......?

President-elect Obama is apparently more like President Bush than his supporters expect. At least as far as becoming known as a

..... is concerned.
If both these linked reports below are correct he is continuing the trend covered here earlier and is just another politician - who lies.

Here's what was said then, in mid-October when criticisms surfaced over Obama middle east policy adviser Robert Malley being seen talking with Hamas. According to a campaign spokesman,

Rob Malley has, like hundreds of other experts, provided informal advice to the campaign in the past. He has no formal role in the campaign and he will not play any role in the future.

And here's what's being said after the election.

President-elect Barack Obama has dispatched his "senior foreign policy adviser", Robert Malley to Egypt and Syria........

Hmmmmmm. What would you call it? Just a quick hire?

H/T to lgf

Now its time for some serious stuff

First, congratulations to Senator Obama and the democrats for their historic election victory. I wish them well in the coming term.

But seriously, isn't it about time our nation "fixed" the national elections? Weren't any of you a teensy bit embarassed by one or more aspects of the process? I was. Here is a list of what made me uncomfortable:

1. The whole thing took too long
2. Too many candidates dropped out early, restricting later choices
3. The primary process gave too much weight to a few voters
4. The two party system restricted the development of minority points of view
5. Some qualified voters were not registered to vote, some unqualified voters were registered to vote, some qualified registered voters were not permitted to vote and some unqualified voters voted. The registration and voting process has become too politicized, and there is no real system in place to fix it, nor do politicians seem to care
   
6. The news media had too much influence on the outcome
7. The polling industry had too much influence on the outcome
8. News media coverage may have [once again] lowered some voter turn-out numbers in western state elections

I'm planning on discussing each of these points - and might even add to the list - in the days and weeks ahead. Stay tuned.

From the UK - a conservative manifesto

H/t to Samizdata for this eight year old manifesto by Sean Gabb on his strategy for conservatives "taking back" governance of their island nation. It will take a few minutes to read, and some of Gabb's examples and situations may not exactly fit, but it's amazing how apropos his ideas are to the current US situation. Who'd a thunk it? Is the UK today where we're going to be tomorrow? Scary thought.

The most difficult task for Yank conservatives to do, I suppose, is to come to the point where we comfortably consider liberals as an "Enemy Class". But Gabb is spot on. Members of the Enemy Class have thought of conservatives in the US as enemies for several decades, only we right-wingers have been too modest or polite to acknowledge this dirty little point. Its time for a reality check. Whether one is carrying an AK-47, a typewriter or a video camera, a person who wants to destroy my way of life is an enemy - and I need to accept that if I'm going to do my job and protect my family.

Gabb has a list of suggested action points once a conservative sweep occurs in the UK. Below is my US version:

Within 30 days of conservatives coming to power:
Abolish the following executive departments: Agriculture; Commerce; Education; Energy; Health and Human Services; Housing and Urban Development; Interior; Labor; State; and Transportation.
All agencies, commissions, boards, councils and committees associated with those departments would be closed. Whole divisions of other departments would be scrutinized and many, like the Internal Revenue Service, abruptly shut down. We should likewise stop federal funding of the tasks associated with these defunct departments and agencies to local governments.
At the same time, we should abolish all other statutory agencies not directly associated with the departments of Defense, Homeland Security, Justice and Treasury. This would include all "self-financing regulatory agencies", without exception. We should abolish the functions, destroy the records, sell off the physical assets, and discharge people by the hundreds of thousands. Termination and pension rights would be respected according to law, but during the termination cycle seniority could not be taken into account outside one's own department or agency. At least a half of the federal government should no longer exist after our first month in power.

There's much more to his plan. Is it radical? Sure. But read Gapp's entire thing and let me know if you agree or disagree with his take. Fun stuff.

Racism and blue bins

I'm going to suggest something controversial.

49er's Premise #44: There might not be as much "racism" running rampant through the US as some pundits believe. Furthermore, it may turn out to be "racism" is a little analogous to "blue bins".

OK. You want me to explain? Consider this. By "bin" I'm speaking of what you might call a dumpster. Real "G-men" [garbage picker-uppers] don't often use that term, but that's not important. They call most larger bulk trash containers designed to be emptied by mechanical devices "bins". [The smaller ones, usually plastic, are often called "tubs"]. Bins are usually metal, but they can be plastic. And they are everywhere. Here's a 3 yard capacity front load type.

Recognize it? They come in various sizes, and the larger ones look and are handled differently, but "bins" similar to the one pictured are so common that almost no one pays them attention. They just "are". If you commute three miles to work in almost any city these days chances are you'll pass over a hundred of these babies located at businesses and apartment you drive by while going to work, and the same number traveling home. So why are bins like "racism"? It's because if you look for them, you will see them. And that's the point of premise #44.

Years ago our family lived in a rural area and traveled to a medium-sized city regularly to shop, etc. Usually all of us traveled together in a van. "Us" included a disabled foster son, I'll call him "Charley". Over the years he taught us many valuable life-lessions. Though "bent" Charley's not "broken", and seeing life through his eyes has been a journey unto its own.

Charley is almost a savant when it comes to knowing where he is, how he got there, where to turn to reach his destination, and also which is the quickest or best way home. Being male, I don't need this talent, but when DW travels afield she frequently takes him along "just to be safe" and not end up lost. This was once merely a family joke but over the years has turned into a useful benefit.

Another of Charley's skills is "eagle-eyed-ness". Before he fully matured he knew where everything was, or where it should go, or where I had left the car keys, or flashlight, or........you name it. He was particularly useful when we were in a hurry to leave and couldn't find something critical to the trip! He could - and did - spot anything. And remembered it. This has all been prelude, of course, but the nub approaches.

One of my earlier careers involved managing a local garbage company. And we had bins. Lots of them. Charley knew as we traveled around the community that when I saw an overflowing bin I took a special interest in it because of service considerations. Soon he knew where all the bins were and would spot them - and their condition - before I would. But those bins were brown. Or rusty. Or ???

After a few years I graduated into a better position with a branch of an international garbage company headquarted in the medium-sized city mentioned above. And all our new bins were blue. The competions' might be brown or green or tan, but ours were blue. Henceforth when our family traveled through that city Charley soon learned I was only interested in blue bins, and so he would loudly call out "blue bin" every time he spotted one. Or two. Or twenty.

Then on lengthier trips he noticed blue bins in other cities. His joy was complete. Did I mention he was basically "non-verbal"? Didn't speak much at all, and could not - for the life of him - answer direct questions. His brain was wired in a way that when he tried to answer a question he switched to a "blank look" stare". So when he was able - without coaching - to call out "blue bin" he was proud that he could speak and prouder still of his scouting skills. He - and we - thoroughly enjoyed those times.

Charley's "blue bin" spotting skillset exists still today, decades after I no longer care if a blue bin has been emptied or not. Whenever we travel to a new city Charley always remembers those earlier days and can't wait to call out "blue bin" whenever he spots one. You see he's looking for blue bins. The same ones you drive by everyday without noticing.

I'm not equating the evils of racism with the smelliness of blue bins. Well, that is an apt comparision, isn't it? What I'm saying is that if you look hard enough you will probably find whatever it is you are looking for. And that search and resultant discovery will effect you. But if you know some something is there and choose to ignore it, driving by it blindly every day as it were, the thing will not damage you. It's only when you stop and get too close to a bad thing that the harm occurs. Calling attention to it only means its impacting you. Ignoring nastiness means it end's up rotting out onlu the one who's nasty.

Yes, I know the analogy ultimately breaks down. But the heart of the premise still holds. At least in my view. You see what you're looking for. Have your kids watch for the "blue bins" next time, and see if you agree.

More sad than funny

Here's a link to a whole slew of Michael Ramirez cartoons. Spend some of your time and open up a few. He makes very telling points. Thanks to Investors Business Daily for sharing his work.

H/T to Powerline

Could this really occur? MN thinking of adopting CA air standards?

Ran into this post from Minnesota Majority concerning two local bills currently being considered there, HF863 and SF481. I simply could not believe it. After shaking my head and laughing mirthlessly for ten minutes decided to post on it a bit further.

Accordingly, in my view one of the silliest things Minnesotans could do would be to tie their own vehicle emissions standards to those of Californians. I AM a native Californian and since I'm older than dirt have some insight into the evolution of CA's standards.

They were implemented year ago solely to partially resolve an environmental crisis in the Los Angeles air basin. A crisis caused more by manufacturing and processing plants, than by autos, and a crisis that local government at-the-time would not deal with and fix. The remainder of the state, like Minnesota, did not actually need those restrictions, but politicians at the time looked at the overwhelmingly huge voter block in SoCal and as is their wont in a panic felt they "had to do something", so they did.

Years later the fed's standards "caught up" to CA's, but once started down this path the ARB could not let that minor trifle stand in the way so EVEN THOUGH THE PROBLEM WAS SOLVED emission standards in CA became even further constrained, until today they make no sense and cause Californians to pay 5 to 8% or more for extra transportation associated costs than do residents of other states.

If Minnesotans fall for this silly idea they will join CA in spending needless extra funds merely to go shopping or commute to work. That is their free choice to do, but where is the "common sense" most Minnesotans I've known display?

Unbelievable. Or it should be.

On capturing wild pigs - a fable

Apropos of "free" stuff from the government is this post from Yankee Cowgirl. Significantly to the point, I believe.

We are already up to the fourth rail, in my view, and I think I see some Obamiacs lurking in the woods who intend to quickly close the gates.

It's time to flee to the swamp or trample down the posts.

So HERE's what we're looking forward to?

Scroll down just a bit to get to the meat of this scathing piece posted by Mark Steyn over 10 years ago pointing out not only the abject and foreseeable failure of Canada's highly vaunted nationalized socialized health care system, but also the leading part that very system played in worsening Toronto's public health - to the point of shamefully causing several needless deaths. And Canadian politicians, of course, then sprung to the system's defense rather than try to "fix it" in order to protect it's users - our northern neighbors, real Canadians.

Is this what we have to look forward to in solving the "health care crisis"? On that point, here's a post by statistician William M. Briggs - accompanied by an eye-opening chart - that posits there may not even actually be a "crisis" per se. It might all simply be a change in perspective. Boggles the mind. For another perspective see this.

Here's what I do know about "free" things. They are considered to be not as valuable as those for which we pay, and thus are more easily or casually wasted. I'm concerned that a so-called "free" health care will absolutely turn out by itself to cost more than the system we have now. Without being "better".

Add to that the administrative cost of the system being run by a bureaucratic government entity and things can only become worse. Tell me again. Why is this a desireable "change"?

More liars called out - by a 'journalist', no less

Here's another person ranting about media lies and liars, and this one's a "journalist".

Read the entire thing. Extremely perceptive point of view.

Be still my heart!

Who is the Liar? Or does truth no longer matter?

16 proven lies from the lips of Senator Obama

For at least seven years - or maybe even more - literally thousands of bloggers [including a few friends] and commenters from all over the world have with virtual impunity and a straight face been calling president George W. Bush a "liar".

Now it looks like the shoe may have moved to the "other foot". A writer from McLean, Virginia, has written a thoughtful and well-documented piece that highlights well over a dozen outright lies from the democrat's presidential candidate. But nobody on a national level seems to care.

Apparently, all this time the tactic of calling the oppostion leader a "liar" has been a well-thought-out strategy meant to immunize the vox populi against the next truth denier to come down the pike. The opposition's own. And it's working! People no longer care if politicians lie. They are almost expected to do so. As evidence, here is the cited letter listing far too many proven outright lies and almost again as many factual distortions from the lips of the current democrat candidate, senator Barack Obama.

Read the entire missive, please, but here's my partial summary:

Lied about relationship with Bill Ayers

Lied about relationship with Tony Resko

Lied about what was heard from the pulpit of Rev. Jeremiah Wright

Lied about what he had said earlier re: foreign leaders and meeting preconditions

Lied about what he had forecast earlier as the "failure" of the surge

Lied about what he said about voting against funding for the troops

Lied when he claimed to have a record of “working with republicans”

Lied in February about talking to an army “captain” “the other day”

Lied when he claimed to have been a “professor of constitutional law”

Lied when he claimed that John McCain voted for a tax increase on those making as little as $42,000 per year

Lied when he said he had “always” been for more oil production and nuclear power

Lied about the reason for changing his mind about public financing for his campaign

Lied about John McCain supposedly voting against additional funding for troops

Lied about John McCain voting against funding for alternative energy sources

Lied about John McCain voting “with” George W. Bush 90% of the time when he knows most democrats also voted that way 90% of the time. In fact, the only reason he does not have a similar record is because he has been missing from the Senate so much while "running for office"

Lied about the reasons for his failure to take an active role in the recent financial rescue plan.

Regrettably, there's but one conclusion. The junior senator from Illinois is a

Now I'm perfectly prepared to give the senator the benefit of the doubt on most of these items, if only he'd say he's changed his mind, or "misspoke", or give any other rational or logical explanation. But he can't bring himself to be forthright or humble enough to do that, apparently, and none of his bedazzled supporters seem inclined to worry about that character flaw at this late date. Furthermore, no one entrusted with media responsibilities seems to give a "fig", either. So we're likely in for another term of a US president being called a "liar". Better get used to it.

This is really troubling. Does anyone care?

On September 27 I posted on a bothersome, to me, quirk of Senator Obama's personality.

Today I ran into this and this, both [WARNING] very lengthy, thoughtful and in my view well-documented analyzes of what the senator allows to be seen of his public persona. The named examples of individuals virtually "worshiping" the senator, provided by Sam Vaknim, Phd, are eerie and creepy reminders of previous NPDs known through history and raise extremely worrisome issues. Is anyone still listening?

My conclusion? Senator Obama displays enough of the symptoms of Narcissistic Personality Disorder for me to raise this question. Why should we not be concerned? What checks and balances do we have in place to prevent an NPD sufferer from assuming an elected public office? I can't think of any and I'm finally frightened. Can anyone clear this up for me?

Throw da bums out!

The idea is growing. It didn't start here, but I totally agree with the viewpoint.

Others have been more creative, and here's the link to prove it. Enjoy!

You Always Hurt The One You Love

Back in 1932 - I can remember it even now - [kidding, I was only a toddler at the time] the fantastic Mills Brothers recorded several numbers on a single day in March, including "You Always Hurt The One You Love", a song I've listened to on radio, record, tape and everything else recordable for almost six decades. Loved it, loved them and just re-listened to their sound on the net. What memories. But I digress.

The reason for today's solo trip down memory lane is a realization the Law of Unintended Consequences has struck again! Thanks to professor William Briggs of Cornell for his comment [#2 on the post] on Roger Kimballs interesting piece, for this epiphany. The very folk our beloved and selflessly dedicated elected representatives in Congress were attempting to help have become the heaviest damaged victims of this misguided attempt to "help" less fortunate folk "own" the American dream. It is ever thus. Ill-advised schemes to "help" too often end up "hurting". We need to legislate "smarter", but with the tendency to return too many incumbents I see little hope of that taking place.

And so the Mills Brothers will apparently remain talented and entertaining prophets. With a great sound.

Cheers