Sunday, February 01, 2009
Friday, November 07, 2008
Notes to a friend on 'a rational, informed explanation that will make sense'
I do have a lot of reasons for supporting Obama. I wouldn't say a word if you didn't ask, but I know (hope) you're not going to give me a hard time. First, I will say that I would have preferred John McCain over George W, and I was very sad to see how much of himself he had to give up to run a national campaign. If it had to be a Republican eight years ago, McCain had a lot of good qualities, and it was tragic what Rove and Bush did to him during the 2000 campaign. Now, it occurs to me that if you are still a staunch Bush/Cheney supporter that you won't agree, but so be it.
Bush/Cheney have something to do with why I support Obama so very strongly. From my perspective, not meaning to be argumentative, they have gutted our country with their policies. They came into office with a neo-con plan, and used a national tragedy to manipulate the public into supporting their longstanding neo-con plan to remake the middle east by lying and manipulating the truth about weapons of mass destruction. It has been an eight year rape and pillage of the US by arms dealers such as Haliburton and dysfunctional corporations, ending in a massive 700 billion dollar hand out to their supporters. They have nationalized the banks and much of the free market. Talk about socialism, Bush/Cheney have moved our country closer to socialism than at any other time in history. Under Bush/Cheney we went from a 5 trillion dollar surplus to a multi-trillion dollar deficit. Tax cuts went to the wealthiest 2% of the population. My taxes have personally gone up. The Bill of Rights is shredded. Torture is our new national policy. The Geneva convention is for other people. All of the goodwill generated after 9/11 has been squandered. We are now the most hated country on earth. And we have brought down the financial markets of the entire world with our failed policies.
Ok, you're probably fuming by now, but that is the groundwork. There are a few things that I know personally about Obama. He is an intellectual. He is one of the brightest minds of our generation. He is honest and places high value on personal integrity. He has been preparing for this job for his entire life. He has a profound understanding of international politics. Whenever I would sit down and talk to Obama it would be about the intricacies of how governments around the world work, about the economy, about international relations. He knew more about the Soviet military missile plans and the US defense systems at 18 than I have ever learned. He could talk about how many of what kind of missiles and where they are. He knows history. He knew the details of every treaty and trade agreement the US made - as a kid. Seniors would stop us to discuss their dissertations on the Soviet military with him while I just waited slack jawed. And this was before he got one of the finest educations available. The depth and breadth of his understanding of political history and current events of the US and most of the countries in the world was astounding. I thought I loved obscure topics, but I never stumped him, came close of course. ;)
He is a nice person. He used to call his Grandma when he left the library at 2 am because it was still early in Hawaii, and she would worry about him. He is open and not judgmental. When I would say something rude to someone he would bring it up later in a quiet way and say something about how did it make that person feel, then drop it. Of course, that annoyed me at the time, but I can see that he was trying to do what seemed like the right thing, not trying to annoy me, just questioning unkindness. Because he was ultimately very kind and thoughtful. He never got mad or lost his temper even when he was very mad.
So, enough about my anecdotal perspective. I definitely had to put aside my personal knowledge of 'Barry' in order not to get freaked out about the surreal quality of seeing him on television so frequently.
As a candidate, I felt and still feel that we need a brilliant and inspiring leader in office now, an intellectual. We need someone who can understand the complexity of the problems facing our country. We need a very strong leader. And we need someone who can put together a team of the best and brightest.
When Obama first started campaigning, I was not convinced by him because I liked the idea of a tough broad like Hillary being the first woman president. But during the fierce primary process, I started watching them both speak. Barack had a message the likes of which I have never had the good fortune to hear in my lifetime. Hillary had the same old Clinton attack, take no prisoners, ruthless, us versus them attitude that had made the Clinton presidency controversial.
But Barack had this incredible speech about moving past the politics of divisiveness, about the country coming together and healing, and creating a new order in which Democrats and Republicans work together. And then he stuck to it. He never attacked Hillary Clinton with any of the mud that the Republicans would have used against her. He ran a tough primary, but without ever stooping to drubbing her reputation or impugning her past. Next, he never said one negative word about Sarah Palin. Unbelievable. If ever a red herring was dangled in front of a candidate, she was it. He refused to go negative when it would have been a popular thing to do in the sense that he could have run an angry campaign that would have fired up people - a campaign railing against the arms dealers and deregulators who have left our country a shambles - and think how those remarks aggravate you - because he did think about it - and he didn't do it. That is a conscious choice to try to bring harmony to a divided country.
Next we need a president who can put together a team of the best and the brightest in the country and inspire them to find solutions to the problems we face being in two wars and having brought the world markets to a near collapse. Look no further than his campaign. He picked people who put together a campaign the likes of which has never been seen before. He is the first democratic candidate ever to outspend the republican candidate. Ever. His team reached out across the internet and inspired 3 million people to donate 650 million dollars. 3 million people donated. All of those people felt empowered. But his campaign didn't stop there. They saw what happened when Rove put together a ground team of the religious right and Bush won in 2004. They learned. And Obama's campaign reached out to students and community organizers around the country. In states where the Republicans had 50 offices, Obama had 150. This is all part of a well thought out plan to succeed.
Which brings me to one point that is again personal. In my entire life, I have never seen someone achieve success with the steadiness and self-confidence of Barack. We both tried to transfer to Ivy League schools when we were sophomores. He got in. We both stayed up all night to write our Poli Sci papers. He got A+'s. When I stepped into an empty, sunny street in New York City after having been kicked rudely out of an interview for not being prepared, tears streaming down my face, who did I see walking towards me into the sunlight. Yes, on this completely deserted street, on a rare sunny day in winter, it was Barack Obama. I desperately looked for a place to hide, an alley, an unlocked door, jeez even a trash bin. But it was just me, concrete and steel buildings, the brilliant sun and Barry strolling along whistling. And as he approached me, and I froze in place, he got a huge, joyful smile and came up and gave me a hug and started talking about what a beautiful day it was. He looked a little quizzical when he saw the tears, but I just smiled and lied through my teeth about how great everything was and sent him on his merry way. He radiated even more than that brilliant sun.
He was on his way to work. To a job. A job he liked. A well paying job. At the time it made me miserable but now I get it.
The point of that story is that Obama has this inner light guiding him to success. He plans. He makes good plans, then works hard to stick to them, then eventually succeeds. And that is a hell of a quality. That is a quality that our country needs right now. At this moment in time, to have this person come out of the blue, out of nowhere, who is exactly what we need is extraordinary. We need the man who inspires millions. We need the man who can make good plans, and work hard enough to achieve success. We need the person who put together the team that ran the kind of campaign that will be studied for years to come.
When Beth was in law school and we were at Paul's house at the beach, she started quizzing Obama about when was he going to go to law school, the way she can really grill a person. He was unfazed and told her that everyone has to listen to their inner voice to find their own way. That shut her up of course, not having any idea what he was talking about. But he is guided from within in a very spiritual way. And I think he would be the first to acknowledge that it is important to work on your spiritual side and have a relationship with God.
Another point, that I have been hoping for the past couple years is that I hope he gets the presidency now because he owes no one anything. Everyone goes to Washington D.C. clean and idealistic, but the money and the power seep into every crevice. Hillary Clinton is now indebted to major special interest groups. John McCain faced public censure for his support of Keating. George W arrived owing huge favors to diverse groups including the Saudi royal family who made him rich by investing in his oil firm for the purpose of deducting the loss. Cheney owed the defense industry (aka arms dealers... ;) ) big time. No one can ever stay clean. But at this moment in time Obama is clean. He owes 3 million people, but he does not owe the defense contractors, the bankers, the Saudis, the thousands of rich and powerful special interests who do their best to control government policy. He is free to do what he does: think, plan, put together a team of the best and the brightest, and inspire people to do the hard work and make the sacrifices that will be needed to get to the success that is waiting.
This is a job he has been preparing for his entire life. Soviet aggression is not new to him. He understood the history and political processes of the former-USSR better as an 18 year old teenager than George W does now as sitting president. He is a constitutional law professor. He understands our United States Constitution and treasures it.
And one of the most amazing parts of all this is that Obama did this completely alone when compared to all others. The Bush family has a long legacy of wealth, power and holding public office. McCain comes from a family with a very strong father figure and a long line of successful military officers. Al Gore's father was a Senator. Mit Romney's father was a Senator. McCain's second wife is incredibly wealthy. John Kerry's wife is also unbelievably wealthy. But Obama had nothing. He knew little about his father. His mother was a single mother, often overseas working on her phd. He grew up with his grandparents in a tiny apartment and only got to go to a good school because his grandmother was able to get him a scholarship. He was no one. No connections. Almost no family. Not even a distant father checking on him. He got himself through school on scholarships and student loans. And when he graduated from Colombia and got a well paying job writing for a business journal, he quit it to make next to nothing in the slums of Chicago to try to help people organize themselves. And when he got out of law school, a hundred grand in debt, he didn't take the great jobs offered him, but moved back to the slums of Chicago and worked again for little money to help disadvantaged people.
That's not all he did, of course. He got some great jobs, well-paying jobs. But there were times when he chose to serve others. That's what his mother and grandparents taught him was an important value. It's very Midwestern. You help out your neighbors, and those less fortunate. It's one of the values of this country that I admire the most.
And he kept at this work while he lost all of his nuclear family. His father died a few months before he went to Kenya to meet him. His mother died very young of cancer which her HMO refused to treat with new drugs. His grandfather died. And the day before the election, on Monday of this week, his grandmother died. The one he used to call from the late night reading room because the time was earlier in Hawaii. He would call his grandmother so she wouldn't worry and make me wait because he didn't think I should walk alone across campus at two in the morning. I'll admit, it kind of annoyed me at the time, but in retrospect that is the kind of son I would want to raise.
So, it's a combination of the power of his personal story and inner strength, and a respect for his intellect and his ability to build a winning team of the best and the brightest, then inspire them to accomplish more than anyone has done before that gradually put me solidly behind Obama. It is his dignity and self-confidence that inspire people around the world to once again look to the US for leadership. His years of unrecognized preparation for this moment inspire me. His outsider status as a person who is free to make decisions because they are good for the country, not because he owes someone a favor. His powerful curiosity and desire to learn. His steadiness in the middle of a storm. When Wall St. first collapsed he talked to people who really understand the problems, put thought into his response. He didn't jump half cocked on the first plane to Washington.
He is unflappable. Indefatigable. Thoughtful. He actually thinks before he speaks. An extraordinary communicator. As much as I love knowing that "man and fish can live in harmony", eight years of unintelligible gibberish is enough.
He's a better person than I am. He would never write all those rude things about Bush/Cheney that I wrote to someone who might be offended. But I think I can tolerate being outclassed and out-successed and out-shined so long as he brings with him to office that light that shines through him, the way the sun did on a lonely street in New York.
Ok, don't yell at me for rambling on. Remember you did ask.
K, you seriously should watch Obama and McCain's speeches on YouTube. We are part of history. Millions of people who never voted before, voted because Barack made them feel like they weren't worthless, like they could be a part of this country also. And McCain gave a moving speech about the historical nature of this election. It is not just the first African American president, but really the first president who was elected by the little people who have no lobbyists and no wealth.
And you know this person. He has turned into a brilliant orator. Your grandchildren are going to want to hear about Barack. This is much bigger than politics.
Do you remember how so many people were against Kennedy because he was Catholic? It was a huge deal because he was the first Catholic to run for and become President. If your parents had gone to school with JFK, wouldn't you be a little interested? He broke the religious divide that treated Catholics as second class citizens.
In the same way, Barack will be the last first black President of the United States. Here is a rare chance to move forward, past race. All the things that you are afraid of for your boys, that affirmative action will hurt them, he is putting those things in the past.
I'm not trying to sway your politics, or annoy you. Just point out that you are part of some of the most remarkable history that will be made in our lifetime. Don't miss it. His rhetoric is beautiful. But that is not a bad thing. You don't have to vote for him, or change your views. But give him a listen. He is a sum of more than his parts. There is a real light shining through him. Yes, maybe it is calculated to achieve an end, perhaps written by someone else, all of that. But there are few chances to hear someone like this.
Yes, he could even fail. Quite possibly no one can get us out of the current situation with collapsing economies and multiple wars, hated around the world, jobless rate soaring. Perhaps no one. But it is going to be a hell of an effort. Don't miss it because of the old politics. I almost missed it by dismissing him as someone who was just another guy I went to school with. I'm so glad that I took a second look. I'm not suggesting you change your opinion of him, the way I did. Very few people live up to their potential in this world. Very few people have a vision of how to make the world a better place. Don't miss it like I almost did.
Bush/Cheney have something to do with why I support Obama so very strongly. From my perspective, not meaning to be argumentative, they have gutted our country with their policies. They came into office with a neo-con plan, and used a national tragedy to manipulate the public into supporting their longstanding neo-con plan to remake the middle east by lying and manipulating the truth about weapons of mass destruction. It has been an eight year rape and pillage of the US by arms dealers such as Haliburton and dysfunctional corporations, ending in a massive 700 billion dollar hand out to their supporters. They have nationalized the banks and much of the free market. Talk about socialism, Bush/Cheney have moved our country closer to socialism than at any other time in history. Under Bush/Cheney we went from a 5 trillion dollar surplus to a multi-trillion dollar deficit. Tax cuts went to the wealthiest 2% of the population. My taxes have personally gone up. The Bill of Rights is shredded. Torture is our new national policy. The Geneva convention is for other people. All of the goodwill generated after 9/11 has been squandered. We are now the most hated country on earth. And we have brought down the financial markets of the entire world with our failed policies.
Ok, you're probably fuming by now, but that is the groundwork. There are a few things that I know personally about Obama. He is an intellectual. He is one of the brightest minds of our generation. He is honest and places high value on personal integrity. He has been preparing for this job for his entire life. He has a profound understanding of international politics. Whenever I would sit down and talk to Obama it would be about the intricacies of how governments around the world work, about the economy, about international relations. He knew more about the Soviet military missile plans and the US defense systems at 18 than I have ever learned. He could talk about how many of what kind of missiles and where they are. He knows history. He knew the details of every treaty and trade agreement the US made - as a kid. Seniors would stop us to discuss their dissertations on the Soviet military with him while I just waited slack jawed. And this was before he got one of the finest educations available. The depth and breadth of his understanding of political history and current events of the US and most of the countries in the world was astounding. I thought I loved obscure topics, but I never stumped him, came close of course. ;)
He is a nice person. He used to call his Grandma when he left the library at 2 am because it was still early in Hawaii, and she would worry about him. He is open and not judgmental. When I would say something rude to someone he would bring it up later in a quiet way and say something about how did it make that person feel, then drop it. Of course, that annoyed me at the time, but I can see that he was trying to do what seemed like the right thing, not trying to annoy me, just questioning unkindness. Because he was ultimately very kind and thoughtful. He never got mad or lost his temper even when he was very mad.
So, enough about my anecdotal perspective. I definitely had to put aside my personal knowledge of 'Barry' in order not to get freaked out about the surreal quality of seeing him on television so frequently.
As a candidate, I felt and still feel that we need a brilliant and inspiring leader in office now, an intellectual. We need someone who can understand the complexity of the problems facing our country. We need a very strong leader. And we need someone who can put together a team of the best and brightest.
When Obama first started campaigning, I was not convinced by him because I liked the idea of a tough broad like Hillary being the first woman president. But during the fierce primary process, I started watching them both speak. Barack had a message the likes of which I have never had the good fortune to hear in my lifetime. Hillary had the same old Clinton attack, take no prisoners, ruthless, us versus them attitude that had made the Clinton presidency controversial.
But Barack had this incredible speech about moving past the politics of divisiveness, about the country coming together and healing, and creating a new order in which Democrats and Republicans work together. And then he stuck to it. He never attacked Hillary Clinton with any of the mud that the Republicans would have used against her. He ran a tough primary, but without ever stooping to drubbing her reputation or impugning her past. Next, he never said one negative word about Sarah Palin. Unbelievable. If ever a red herring was dangled in front of a candidate, she was it. He refused to go negative when it would have been a popular thing to do in the sense that he could have run an angry campaign that would have fired up people - a campaign railing against the arms dealers and deregulators who have left our country a shambles - and think how those remarks aggravate you - because he did think about it - and he didn't do it. That is a conscious choice to try to bring harmony to a divided country.
Next we need a president who can put together a team of the best and the brightest in the country and inspire them to find solutions to the problems we face being in two wars and having brought the world markets to a near collapse. Look no further than his campaign. He picked people who put together a campaign the likes of which has never been seen before. He is the first democratic candidate ever to outspend the republican candidate. Ever. His team reached out across the internet and inspired 3 million people to donate 650 million dollars. 3 million people donated. All of those people felt empowered. But his campaign didn't stop there. They saw what happened when Rove put together a ground team of the religious right and Bush won in 2004. They learned. And Obama's campaign reached out to students and community organizers around the country. In states where the Republicans had 50 offices, Obama had 150. This is all part of a well thought out plan to succeed.
Which brings me to one point that is again personal. In my entire life, I have never seen someone achieve success with the steadiness and self-confidence of Barack. We both tried to transfer to Ivy League schools when we were sophomores. He got in. We both stayed up all night to write our Poli Sci papers. He got A+'s. When I stepped into an empty, sunny street in New York City after having been kicked rudely out of an interview for not being prepared, tears streaming down my face, who did I see walking towards me into the sunlight. Yes, on this completely deserted street, on a rare sunny day in winter, it was Barack Obama. I desperately looked for a place to hide, an alley, an unlocked door, jeez even a trash bin. But it was just me, concrete and steel buildings, the brilliant sun and Barry strolling along whistling. And as he approached me, and I froze in place, he got a huge, joyful smile and came up and gave me a hug and started talking about what a beautiful day it was. He looked a little quizzical when he saw the tears, but I just smiled and lied through my teeth about how great everything was and sent him on his merry way. He radiated even more than that brilliant sun.
He was on his way to work. To a job. A job he liked. A well paying job. At the time it made me miserable but now I get it.
The point of that story is that Obama has this inner light guiding him to success. He plans. He makes good plans, then works hard to stick to them, then eventually succeeds. And that is a hell of a quality. That is a quality that our country needs right now. At this moment in time, to have this person come out of the blue, out of nowhere, who is exactly what we need is extraordinary. We need the man who inspires millions. We need the man who can make good plans, and work hard enough to achieve success. We need the person who put together the team that ran the kind of campaign that will be studied for years to come.
When Beth was in law school and we were at Paul's house at the beach, she started quizzing Obama about when was he going to go to law school, the way she can really grill a person. He was unfazed and told her that everyone has to listen to their inner voice to find their own way. That shut her up of course, not having any idea what he was talking about. But he is guided from within in a very spiritual way. And I think he would be the first to acknowledge that it is important to work on your spiritual side and have a relationship with God.
Another point, that I have been hoping for the past couple years is that I hope he gets the presidency now because he owes no one anything. Everyone goes to Washington D.C. clean and idealistic, but the money and the power seep into every crevice. Hillary Clinton is now indebted to major special interest groups. John McCain faced public censure for his support of Keating. George W arrived owing huge favors to diverse groups including the Saudi royal family who made him rich by investing in his oil firm for the purpose of deducting the loss. Cheney owed the defense industry (aka arms dealers... ;) ) big time. No one can ever stay clean. But at this moment in time Obama is clean. He owes 3 million people, but he does not owe the defense contractors, the bankers, the Saudis, the thousands of rich and powerful special interests who do their best to control government policy. He is free to do what he does: think, plan, put together a team of the best and the brightest, and inspire people to do the hard work and make the sacrifices that will be needed to get to the success that is waiting.
This is a job he has been preparing for his entire life. Soviet aggression is not new to him. He understood the history and political processes of the former-USSR better as an 18 year old teenager than George W does now as sitting president. He is a constitutional law professor. He understands our United States Constitution and treasures it.
And one of the most amazing parts of all this is that Obama did this completely alone when compared to all others. The Bush family has a long legacy of wealth, power and holding public office. McCain comes from a family with a very strong father figure and a long line of successful military officers. Al Gore's father was a Senator. Mit Romney's father was a Senator. McCain's second wife is incredibly wealthy. John Kerry's wife is also unbelievably wealthy. But Obama had nothing. He knew little about his father. His mother was a single mother, often overseas working on her phd. He grew up with his grandparents in a tiny apartment and only got to go to a good school because his grandmother was able to get him a scholarship. He was no one. No connections. Almost no family. Not even a distant father checking on him. He got himself through school on scholarships and student loans. And when he graduated from Colombia and got a well paying job writing for a business journal, he quit it to make next to nothing in the slums of Chicago to try to help people organize themselves. And when he got out of law school, a hundred grand in debt, he didn't take the great jobs offered him, but moved back to the slums of Chicago and worked again for little money to help disadvantaged people.
That's not all he did, of course. He got some great jobs, well-paying jobs. But there were times when he chose to serve others. That's what his mother and grandparents taught him was an important value. It's very Midwestern. You help out your neighbors, and those less fortunate. It's one of the values of this country that I admire the most.
And he kept at this work while he lost all of his nuclear family. His father died a few months before he went to Kenya to meet him. His mother died very young of cancer which her HMO refused to treat with new drugs. His grandfather died. And the day before the election, on Monday of this week, his grandmother died. The one he used to call from the late night reading room because the time was earlier in Hawaii. He would call his grandmother so she wouldn't worry and make me wait because he didn't think I should walk alone across campus at two in the morning. I'll admit, it kind of annoyed me at the time, but in retrospect that is the kind of son I would want to raise.
So, it's a combination of the power of his personal story and inner strength, and a respect for his intellect and his ability to build a winning team of the best and the brightest, then inspire them to accomplish more than anyone has done before that gradually put me solidly behind Obama. It is his dignity and self-confidence that inspire people around the world to once again look to the US for leadership. His years of unrecognized preparation for this moment inspire me. His outsider status as a person who is free to make decisions because they are good for the country, not because he owes someone a favor. His powerful curiosity and desire to learn. His steadiness in the middle of a storm. When Wall St. first collapsed he talked to people who really understand the problems, put thought into his response. He didn't jump half cocked on the first plane to Washington.
He is unflappable. Indefatigable. Thoughtful. He actually thinks before he speaks. An extraordinary communicator. As much as I love knowing that "man and fish can live in harmony", eight years of unintelligible gibberish is enough.
He's a better person than I am. He would never write all those rude things about Bush/Cheney that I wrote to someone who might be offended. But I think I can tolerate being outclassed and out-successed and out-shined so long as he brings with him to office that light that shines through him, the way the sun did on a lonely street in New York.
Ok, don't yell at me for rambling on. Remember you did ask.
K, you seriously should watch Obama and McCain's speeches on YouTube. We are part of history. Millions of people who never voted before, voted because Barack made them feel like they weren't worthless, like they could be a part of this country also. And McCain gave a moving speech about the historical nature of this election. It is not just the first African American president, but really the first president who was elected by the little people who have no lobbyists and no wealth.
And you know this person. He has turned into a brilliant orator. Your grandchildren are going to want to hear about Barack. This is much bigger than politics.
Do you remember how so many people were against Kennedy because he was Catholic? It was a huge deal because he was the first Catholic to run for and become President. If your parents had gone to school with JFK, wouldn't you be a little interested? He broke the religious divide that treated Catholics as second class citizens.
In the same way, Barack will be the last first black President of the United States. Here is a rare chance to move forward, past race. All the things that you are afraid of for your boys, that affirmative action will hurt them, he is putting those things in the past.
I'm not trying to sway your politics, or annoy you. Just point out that you are part of some of the most remarkable history that will be made in our lifetime. Don't miss it. His rhetoric is beautiful. But that is not a bad thing. You don't have to vote for him, or change your views. But give him a listen. He is a sum of more than his parts. There is a real light shining through him. Yes, maybe it is calculated to achieve an end, perhaps written by someone else, all of that. But there are few chances to hear someone like this.
Yes, he could even fail. Quite possibly no one can get us out of the current situation with collapsing economies and multiple wars, hated around the world, jobless rate soaring. Perhaps no one. But it is going to be a hell of an effort. Don't miss it because of the old politics. I almost missed it by dismissing him as someone who was just another guy I went to school with. I'm so glad that I took a second look. I'm not suggesting you change your opinion of him, the way I did. Very few people live up to their potential in this world. Very few people have a vision of how to make the world a better place. Don't miss it like I almost did.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Their house survived Ike, but it's the only one left
Their house survived Ike, but it's the only one left
(CNN) -- Warren and Pam Adams lost a house to Hurricane Rita in 2005, so it seems they'd be relieved to learn their new home withstood Hurricane Ike.
Helicopter pilot Ray Asgar submitted this aerial shot of the house on Wednesday.
1 of 3
But not when their house is the only one still standing in their section of Gilchrist, Texas.
Ike's storm surge last week devastated the Bolivar Peninsula town, flattening most of the roughly 200 homes there. The couple's yellow house at the beach -- supported 14 feet off the ground by wooden columns -- was the only house on Gilchrist's Gulf Coast side not to be flattened.
"As we got there, the tears started flowing," Warren Adams, 63, said Thursday after his first visit to the home since evacuating. "There's a yellow house sitting there, but that's all. It was devastating."
Although the house is there, it might not continue to stand. Huge storm surges walloped the interior, making it uninhabitable and destroying many belongings.
WSJ: McCain is "un-Presidential"
McCain's Scapegoat
Article
REVIEW & OUTLOOK
SEPTEMBER 19, 2008
John McCain has made it clear this week he doesn't understand what's happening on Wall Street any better than Barack Obama does. But on Thursday, he took his populist riffing up a notch and found his scapegoat for financial panic -- Christopher Cox, the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Christopher Cox.
To give readers a flavor of Mr. McCain untethered, we'll quote at length: "Mismanagement and greed became the operating standard while regulators were asleep at the switch. The primary regulator of Wall Street, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) kept in place trading rules that let speculators and hedge funds turn our markets into a casino. They allowed naked short selling -- which simply means that you can sell stock without ever owning it. They eliminated last year the uptick rule that has protected investors for 70 years. Speculators pounded the shares of even good companies into the ground.
"The chairman of the SEC serves at the appointment of the President and has betrayed the public's trust. If I were President today, I would fire him."
Wow. "Betrayed the public's trust." Was Mr. Cox dishonest? No. He merely changed some minor rules, and didn't change others, on short-selling. String him up! Mr. McCain clearly wants to distance himself from the Bush Administration. But this assault on Mr. Cox is both false and deeply unfair. It's also un-Presidential.
Take "naked" shorting, in which an investor sells a stock short -- betting that it will fall in price -- without first borrowing the shares he is selling from an investor who owns them. The SEC has never condoned the practice, and since 2005 it has clamped down on short selling in any stock that shows evidence of naked shorting. The SEC further tightened its rules against naked shorting just hours before Mr. McCain excoriated Mr. Cox for doing nothing.
The rules announced Wednesday will increase penalties and close loopholes that exempted broker-dealers from the rules against naked shorting. They also make it clear that deliberately selling short a stock whose shares cannot be borrowed is fraud under the Securities Exchange Act. That's all to the good, we suppose; fraud is fraud. But regular short selling is not fraud. It adds valuable information to the market about what investors believe to be the price direction of a stock. Demonizing short-sellers as a band of criminals, or barring short-selling outright in financial stocks, as regulators in the U.K. did Thursday, removes information from the market.
Then there's Mr. McCain's tirade against the "uptick rule," a Depression-era chestnut that investors could only short stock after a rise in that stock's price. The SEC staff studied the effect of the uptick rule on prices for years, in a controlled experiment involving thousands of stocks. It found the rule had no effect. Other studies, including those that examined the uptick rule's effect on stocks disclosing bad news, also found that it "protected" no one. The SEC's permanent staff has long supported repeal and the SEC's commissioners voted to do so unanimously in June 2007.
While he was at it, Mr. McCain added the wholly unsupported assertion that "speculators pounded the shares of even good companies into the ground." It wasn't very long ago that he blamed speculators on the long side for sky-high oil prices. Then oil prices fell. Now Mr. McCain wants voters to believe speculators are responsible for driving mismanaged financial companies to ruin. The irony is that this critique puts Mr. McCain in the same camp as some of the Wall Street CEOs who have led their firms so poorly. They also want someone (else) to blame.
In case Mr. McCain is interested, overall short interest in financial companies actually declined by 20% between July and the end of August. That's right: Far from driving this crisis, shorts were net buyers of financial stocks this summer, as they must buy stocks back to close their positions and realize their gains (or losses).
In a crisis, voters want steady, calm leadership, not easy, misleading answers that will do nothing to help. Mr. McCain is sounding like a candidate searching for a political foil rather than a genuine solution. He'll never beat Mr. Obama by running as an angry populist like Al Gore, circa 2000.
Copyright 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit www.djreprints.com
WSJ.com
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178318884054675.html#printMode
Article
REVIEW & OUTLOOK
SEPTEMBER 19, 2008
John McCain has made it clear this week he doesn't understand what's happening on Wall Street any better than Barack Obama does. But on Thursday, he took his populist riffing up a notch and found his scapegoat for financial panic -- Christopher Cox, the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Christopher Cox.
To give readers a flavor of Mr. McCain untethered, we'll quote at length: "Mismanagement and greed became the operating standard while regulators were asleep at the switch. The primary regulator of Wall Street, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) kept in place trading rules that let speculators and hedge funds turn our markets into a casino. They allowed naked short selling -- which simply means that you can sell stock without ever owning it. They eliminated last year the uptick rule that has protected investors for 70 years. Speculators pounded the shares of even good companies into the ground.
"The chairman of the SEC serves at the appointment of the President and has betrayed the public's trust. If I were President today, I would fire him."
Wow. "Betrayed the public's trust." Was Mr. Cox dishonest? No. He merely changed some minor rules, and didn't change others, on short-selling. String him up! Mr. McCain clearly wants to distance himself from the Bush Administration. But this assault on Mr. Cox is both false and deeply unfair. It's also un-Presidential.
Take "naked" shorting, in which an investor sells a stock short -- betting that it will fall in price -- without first borrowing the shares he is selling from an investor who owns them. The SEC has never condoned the practice, and since 2005 it has clamped down on short selling in any stock that shows evidence of naked shorting. The SEC further tightened its rules against naked shorting just hours before Mr. McCain excoriated Mr. Cox for doing nothing.
The rules announced Wednesday will increase penalties and close loopholes that exempted broker-dealers from the rules against naked shorting. They also make it clear that deliberately selling short a stock whose shares cannot be borrowed is fraud under the Securities Exchange Act. That's all to the good, we suppose; fraud is fraud. But regular short selling is not fraud. It adds valuable information to the market about what investors believe to be the price direction of a stock. Demonizing short-sellers as a band of criminals, or barring short-selling outright in financial stocks, as regulators in the U.K. did Thursday, removes information from the market.
Then there's Mr. McCain's tirade against the "uptick rule," a Depression-era chestnut that investors could only short stock after a rise in that stock's price. The SEC staff studied the effect of the uptick rule on prices for years, in a controlled experiment involving thousands of stocks. It found the rule had no effect. Other studies, including those that examined the uptick rule's effect on stocks disclosing bad news, also found that it "protected" no one. The SEC's permanent staff has long supported repeal and the SEC's commissioners voted to do so unanimously in June 2007.
While he was at it, Mr. McCain added the wholly unsupported assertion that "speculators pounded the shares of even good companies into the ground." It wasn't very long ago that he blamed speculators on the long side for sky-high oil prices. Then oil prices fell. Now Mr. McCain wants voters to believe speculators are responsible for driving mismanaged financial companies to ruin. The irony is that this critique puts Mr. McCain in the same camp as some of the Wall Street CEOs who have led their firms so poorly. They also want someone (else) to blame.
In case Mr. McCain is interested, overall short interest in financial companies actually declined by 20% between July and the end of August. That's right: Far from driving this crisis, shorts were net buyers of financial stocks this summer, as they must buy stocks back to close their positions and realize their gains (or losses).
In a crisis, voters want steady, calm leadership, not easy, misleading answers that will do nothing to help. Mr. McCain is sounding like a candidate searching for a political foil rather than a genuine solution. He'll never beat Mr. Obama by running as an angry populist like Al Gore, circa 2000.
Copyright 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit www.djreprints.com
WSJ.com
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178318884054675.html#printMode
Friday, September 19, 2008
Bush on the run
Is President Bush AWOL?
This is the perfect ending to the most disastrous eight years of any President of any time.
If people vote for Grampy and Vampy, then they deserve the 100 years war, oops 100 years peaceful occupation with uncounted deaths and dismemberments, the tax cuts to the extreme end of the wealth spectrum, the insurmountable debt to China that they will get. Better yet maybe Grampy and Vampy will privatize social security which they supported once. Then the system can go completely broke and be gotten rid of. This will allow the divide between the poor and wealthy to blossom and eradicate the middle class. The masses getting what they deserve. Too stupid to understand what failure means.
This is the perfect ending to the most disastrous eight years of any President of any time.
If people vote for Grampy and Vampy, then they deserve the 100 years war, oops 100 years peaceful occupation with uncounted deaths and dismemberments, the tax cuts to the extreme end of the wealth spectrum, the insurmountable debt to China that they will get. Better yet maybe Grampy and Vampy will privatize social security which they supported once. Then the system can go completely broke and be gotten rid of. This will allow the divide between the poor and wealthy to blossom and eradicate the middle class. The masses getting what they deserve. Too stupid to understand what failure means.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Monday, September 01, 2008
Duh: Playground time proves helpful for students with ADD
I suspect that children are getting doped up on Ritalin and other drugs too often because it's a quick fix for the schools and teachers.
When reading articles about Playground time proves helpful for students with ADD, it is hard to believe that any school would reduce the amount of time for recess. It is a no-brainer that kids need recess. And physical-ed class. What the hell is the matter with people to make them lose their common sense? Kids need to run around, yell, play and kick loose. Everyday.
When reading articles about Playground time proves helpful for students with ADD, it is hard to believe that any school would reduce the amount of time for recess. It is a no-brainer that kids need recess. And physical-ed class. What the hell is the matter with people to make them lose their common sense? Kids need to run around, yell, play and kick loose. Everyday.
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Those Mayo Clinic folks are so smart
Autonomic neuropathy
ARTICLE SECTIONS
* Definition
* Symptoms
* Causes
* Risk factors
* When to seek medical advice
* Tests and diagnosis
* Treatments and drugs
* Prevention
* Lifestyle and home remedies
* Coping and support
Coping and support
Living with a chronic illness or disability presents daily challenges. Some of these suggestions may make it easier for you to cope:
* Set priorities. Decide which tasks you need to do on a given day, such as paying bills or shopping for groceries, and which can wait until another time. Stay active, but don't overdo.
* Seek and accept support. Having a support system and a positive attitude can help you cope with the challenges you face. Ask for or accept help when you need it. Don't shut yourself off from family and friends.
* Prepare for challenging situations. If something especially stressful is coming up in your life, such as a move or a new job, knowing what you have to do ahead of time can help you cope.
* Talk to a counselor or therapist. Depression and impotence are possible complications of autonomic neuropathy. If you experience either, you may find it helpful to talk to a counselor or therapist in addition to your primary care doctor. There are treatments that can help.
Reprints and permissions icon Reprints and permissions
April 15, 2008
By Mayo Clinic Staff © 1998-2008 Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research (MFMER). All rights reserved.
ARTICLE SECTIONS
* Definition
* Symptoms
* Causes
* Risk factors
* When to seek medical advice
* Tests and diagnosis
* Treatments and drugs
* Prevention
* Lifestyle and home remedies
* Coping and support
Coping and support
Living with a chronic illness or disability presents daily challenges. Some of these suggestions may make it easier for you to cope:
* Set priorities. Decide which tasks you need to do on a given day, such as paying bills or shopping for groceries, and which can wait until another time. Stay active, but don't overdo.
* Seek and accept support. Having a support system and a positive attitude can help you cope with the challenges you face. Ask for or accept help when you need it. Don't shut yourself off from family and friends.
* Prepare for challenging situations. If something especially stressful is coming up in your life, such as a move or a new job, knowing what you have to do ahead of time can help you cope.
* Talk to a counselor or therapist. Depression and impotence are possible complications of autonomic neuropathy. If you experience either, you may find it helpful to talk to a counselor or therapist in addition to your primary care doctor. There are treatments that can help.
Reprints and permissions icon Reprints and permissions
April 15, 2008
By Mayo Clinic Staff © 1998-2008 Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research (MFMER). All rights reserved.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
I am the anti-Obama
I don't think it was really meant as a compliment when I was referred to as the anti-Obama.
But it does have a sound like 'anti-Christ' and that leads to a strange topic that has floated on my periphery of my thoughts.
Why Obama? Usually, ones asks of fate or god or whatever, why? when something terrible is happening. But this time it is something good. In fact, this is one of the few times I have found something good happening in the world, at least something good and newsworthy also.
Obama has this magnificent oratory gift. He has optimism and hope. He comes across as young and vital and at the beginning of his gifts. It is stirring. And moving. And unsettling.
He had nothing. Absent father. Absent mother. Far off siblings. No family connections. No money.
And he cruised through the experiences that beat the crap out of me. College he made grades and friends easily. After college he slid smoothly into a decent job. Along the way he figured out what he wanted to do with his life. Then he did it. He married the right person. She never left him. He had beautiful children. He got into every school he applied to. He has not been fired or laid off from work. He did not have his energy sapped by an endless series of meaningless low paying jobs. He is healthy physically, mentally and emotionally. He is self-confident. He does not need anyone. He moves forward.
And I struggle to get out of bed everyday. I struggle to take a breath. I fail and fail and fail again. And start all over, only to fail. Then I wallow in negativity and hopelessness. And it seems that I am fairly normal. In fact, I am rather successful and positive depending on who you compare me to, in all my wallowing glory.
So, the weird part is this feeling of inevitability about Obama. He always seemed to walk on water. Whatever he tried he succeeded at. And wondering does the US deserve him?
I mean he is the real deal. He does care about people. Maybe not persons but definitely about people. He has held onto his ideals. He did set a path for himself and follow it. He does seem to answer to a higher calling. His drummer does seem to have an inside track to elevate the human spirit. Do you see where I am going with this? I can't put into words this feeling because I just hate the crackpot idea it seems to be. But I can't help wondering, who is calling him? and why?
But it does have a sound like 'anti-Christ' and that leads to a strange topic that has floated on my periphery of my thoughts.
Why Obama? Usually, ones asks of fate or god or whatever, why? when something terrible is happening. But this time it is something good. In fact, this is one of the few times I have found something good happening in the world, at least something good and newsworthy also.
Obama has this magnificent oratory gift. He has optimism and hope. He comes across as young and vital and at the beginning of his gifts. It is stirring. And moving. And unsettling.
He had nothing. Absent father. Absent mother. Far off siblings. No family connections. No money.
And he cruised through the experiences that beat the crap out of me. College he made grades and friends easily. After college he slid smoothly into a decent job. Along the way he figured out what he wanted to do with his life. Then he did it. He married the right person. She never left him. He had beautiful children. He got into every school he applied to. He has not been fired or laid off from work. He did not have his energy sapped by an endless series of meaningless low paying jobs. He is healthy physically, mentally and emotionally. He is self-confident. He does not need anyone. He moves forward.
And I struggle to get out of bed everyday. I struggle to take a breath. I fail and fail and fail again. And start all over, only to fail. Then I wallow in negativity and hopelessness. And it seems that I am fairly normal. In fact, I am rather successful and positive depending on who you compare me to, in all my wallowing glory.
So, the weird part is this feeling of inevitability about Obama. He always seemed to walk on water. Whatever he tried he succeeded at. And wondering does the US deserve him?
I mean he is the real deal. He does care about people. Maybe not persons but definitely about people. He has held onto his ideals. He did set a path for himself and follow it. He does seem to answer to a higher calling. His drummer does seem to have an inside track to elevate the human spirit. Do you see where I am going with this? I can't put into words this feeling because I just hate the crackpot idea it seems to be. But I can't help wondering, who is calling him? and why?
Monday, August 04, 2008
Things That Suck
Unemployment and underemployment. Not keeping limits on the H1-B Visa program. Companies, including a certain unnamed multi-national, are hiring and training college graduates from India instead of from the U.S. Industry needs to work more closely with schools to build a workforce for the future and be incentivized to focus on more than short term profits that boost stock prices and executive bonuses.
The mortgage crisis. The push for short term profits drove the mortgage crisis we are currently experiencing. Lenders dropped their standards for making loans during a clearly speculative market period in order to cash in on the short term profits. The industry could easily have averted this crisis by taking responsibility.
But that's the trouble with working for a corporation. Individual responsibility is strongly discouraged. If you try to take an ethical stand for even the smallest principle, you will be pulverized. Literally pulverized.
The corporate world controls by fear of layoffs. And crushes anyone who takes an ethical stance. The Corporation is a soul-crushing, spirit sucking, vat of congealed evil dressed up in a suit and worshiping at the alter of the devil named quarterly earnings.
The mortgage crisis. The push for short term profits drove the mortgage crisis we are currently experiencing. Lenders dropped their standards for making loans during a clearly speculative market period in order to cash in on the short term profits. The industry could easily have averted this crisis by taking responsibility.
But that's the trouble with working for a corporation. Individual responsibility is strongly discouraged. If you try to take an ethical stand for even the smallest principle, you will be pulverized. Literally pulverized.
The corporate world controls by fear of layoffs. And crushes anyone who takes an ethical stance. The Corporation is a soul-crushing, spirit sucking, vat of congealed evil dressed up in a suit and worshiping at the alter of the devil named quarterly earnings.
Monday, July 14, 2008
The work maze
Sometimes you need to evaluate your work life. I am reading "The Four Hour Work Week" and the author posits that the opposite of happiness is not sadness, it is boredom. Brilliant. Because boredom is the one most unbearable condition in the world. Fear of Boredom is why I take five books and ten magazines on an airplane with me. I've never read five books and ten magazines, but I feel safer from the brutal possibility of boredom.
I worry about work when it becomes boring. When it is diminishing instead of growing. When my accomplishments are ignored or credited to others. And based on several of the articles I have been reading on the internet, I am correct to worry.
The title of this article is not accurate, but some of the information in it affirms what I already know and believe:
Employee Beware: Five Signs of a Lousy Job
Ever known someone who worked at the same job for years, but complained about it daily? Have you accepted an unfulfilling job because you think work is work and it doesn't need to be enjoyable? The fact is many people are stuck in lousy jobs and have either grown complacent, don't know that there are better options out there, or just aren't sure what the warning signs are.
Here are some signs it's time to look for greener pastures:
1. You dread going to work.
How you feel about going in to your job each day can tell you a lot about whether it is the job for you, says Andrea Kay, career consultant and author of "Life's a B*tch and Then You Change Careers." Do you wake up in the morning and dread leaving your house for the office? While you are not expected to jump up and down with excitement every Monday morning, feeling constant job-related anxiety is a significant sign that you are in the wrong place.
2. You get no enjoyment from your day-to-day responsibilities.
No job is fun and games every day, but you should find some enjoyment in your daily responsibilities. Kay says that examining your job's typical duties is important to gauging whether or not it is a good fit.
The things you do daily should fit with your strengths, which are the things you like to do and do well, Kay says. For example, if you are happiest when you are out communicating with people, you probably will not be happy working with numbers and spreadsheets all day.
3. You are uncomfortable with the company culture and environment.
Some people write off the importance of culture in the workplace, but it can have a dramatic effect on your overall happiness and success. Kay says you need to ask yourself if you feel comfortable with the values of the organization. Are they in alignment with your own?
Additionally, the work environment can be another big factor in determining if a job is one that meets your needs. For example, if you love to spend all your time outdoors, you might not be happy sitting behind a desk day in and day out.
4. Your relationship with your boss is turbulent.
Problems with the boss are the most common reason that professionals give for leaving jobs, and the employee/employer relationship is critical to overall job satisfaction. "Define what would be an ideal relationship with your boss so you can take the initiative to help create it or know what to look for," Kay says. For example, do you like someone who works closely with you or would you rather work for someone who is hands-off? Only after you determine what your ideal is can you assess whether or not your relationship is living up to it.
5. You see no opportunities for career advancement or enhancement.
If your company does not place an importance on job training and professional development, this should raise some concerns. Similarly, if you have been stuck in the same position for years, have the desire to move up, but are not given the opportunity to do so, you might want to re-evaluate your situation.
While Kay says these five factors can be indicators of a lousy job, she also strongly cautions against using them as an excuse to leave without first taking some initiative to change your current situation. For example, if you feel like you have not been provided with opportunities to advance, proactively seek out these opportunities by talking with your boss or consulting human resources. If you feel like you do not fit in with the culture, assess whether or not you have made an effort.
"You need to ask yourself 'have I done everything that I can to explore advancing or enhancing my career here?'" Kay says. "Do what's in your power to make a difference."
If you are still feeling unsatisfied, the job is probably just not for you. And while it might be time to look for something new, your lousy job is not a total loss -- use what you've learned to help you find the right fit next time.
Copyright 2007 CareerBuilder.com. All rights reserved. The information contained in this article may not be published, broadcast or otherwise distributed without prior written authority.
Story Filed Monday, September 24, 2007 - 3:50 PM
I worry about work when it becomes boring. When it is diminishing instead of growing. When my accomplishments are ignored or credited to others. And based on several of the articles I have been reading on the internet, I am correct to worry.
The title of this article is not accurate, but some of the information in it affirms what I already know and believe:
Employee Beware: Five Signs of a Lousy Job
Ever known someone who worked at the same job for years, but complained about it daily? Have you accepted an unfulfilling job because you think work is work and it doesn't need to be enjoyable? The fact is many people are stuck in lousy jobs and have either grown complacent, don't know that there are better options out there, or just aren't sure what the warning signs are.
Here are some signs it's time to look for greener pastures:
1. You dread going to work.
How you feel about going in to your job each day can tell you a lot about whether it is the job for you, says Andrea Kay, career consultant and author of "Life's a B*tch and Then You Change Careers." Do you wake up in the morning and dread leaving your house for the office? While you are not expected to jump up and down with excitement every Monday morning, feeling constant job-related anxiety is a significant sign that you are in the wrong place.
2. You get no enjoyment from your day-to-day responsibilities.
No job is fun and games every day, but you should find some enjoyment in your daily responsibilities. Kay says that examining your job's typical duties is important to gauging whether or not it is a good fit.
The things you do daily should fit with your strengths, which are the things you like to do and do well, Kay says. For example, if you are happiest when you are out communicating with people, you probably will not be happy working with numbers and spreadsheets all day.
3. You are uncomfortable with the company culture and environment.
Some people write off the importance of culture in the workplace, but it can have a dramatic effect on your overall happiness and success. Kay says you need to ask yourself if you feel comfortable with the values of the organization. Are they in alignment with your own?
Additionally, the work environment can be another big factor in determining if a job is one that meets your needs. For example, if you love to spend all your time outdoors, you might not be happy sitting behind a desk day in and day out.
4. Your relationship with your boss is turbulent.
Problems with the boss are the most common reason that professionals give for leaving jobs, and the employee/employer relationship is critical to overall job satisfaction. "Define what would be an ideal relationship with your boss so you can take the initiative to help create it or know what to look for," Kay says. For example, do you like someone who works closely with you or would you rather work for someone who is hands-off? Only after you determine what your ideal is can you assess whether or not your relationship is living up to it.
5. You see no opportunities for career advancement or enhancement.
If your company does not place an importance on job training and professional development, this should raise some concerns. Similarly, if you have been stuck in the same position for years, have the desire to move up, but are not given the opportunity to do so, you might want to re-evaluate your situation.
While Kay says these five factors can be indicators of a lousy job, she also strongly cautions against using them as an excuse to leave without first taking some initiative to change your current situation. For example, if you feel like you have not been provided with opportunities to advance, proactively seek out these opportunities by talking with your boss or consulting human resources. If you feel like you do not fit in with the culture, assess whether or not you have made an effort.
"You need to ask yourself 'have I done everything that I can to explore advancing or enhancing my career here?'" Kay says. "Do what's in your power to make a difference."
If you are still feeling unsatisfied, the job is probably just not for you. And while it might be time to look for something new, your lousy job is not a total loss -- use what you've learned to help you find the right fit next time.
Copyright 2007 CareerBuilder.com. All rights reserved. The information contained in this article may not be published, broadcast or otherwise distributed without prior written authority.
Story Filed Monday, September 24, 2007 - 3:50 PM
Sunday, July 06, 2008
Chinese leaders say the country faces a critical water shortage
Water. Water is the resource we cannot do without.
It's a lot of information to put together from all over the world. Pollution. Salinity of irrigated farmlands. Urban/suburban sprawl.
ABC News
Pollution Turns Chinese River System Red
Pollution Turns Central China River System Red and Foamy, As Many As 200,000 Without Water
By ANITA CHANG
The Associated Press
BEIJING
Pollution turned part of a major river system in central China red and foamy, forcing authorities to cut water supplies to as many as 200,000 people, the provincial government and a state news agency said Wednesday.
Some communities along tributaries of the Han River a branch of the Yangtze in Hubei province were using emergency water supplies, while at least 60,000 people were relying on bottled water and limited underground sources, Xinhua News Agency reported.
Residents in some towns were getting water from fire trucks, the Hubei provincial government said on its Web site.
Five schools were closed in Xingou township, while others could not provide food to students, the Xinhua report said without elaborating.
The pollution was discovered Sunday when water plant workers from Jianli County found that the Dongjing River, a tributary of the Han, had turned red and foamy, the Hubei Web site said.
Water plants along the river suspended intake and cut tap water to as many as 120,000 people, according to reports on the site. Xinhua said 200,000 people were without water.
Tests showed the polluted waters contained elevated levels of ammonia, nitrogen, and permanganate, a chemical used in metal cleaning, tanning and bleaching, Xinhua said. The pollution apparently flowed down from the Han River, the Hubei government said without elaborating on its source.
Water from nearby Lake Chang was being diverted to dilute the pollution.
Most of China's canals, rivers and lakes are severely tainted by industrial, agricultural and household pollution. Chinese leaders say the country faces a critical water shortage, partly due to chronic pollution and chemical accidents.
In one of China's worst cases of river pollution, potentially cancer-causing chemicals, including benzene, spilled into the Songhua River in November 2005. The northeastern city of Harbin was forced to sever water supplies to 3.8 million people for five days. The accident also strained relations with Russia, into which the poisoned waters flowed.
A paper mill dumped waste water directly into the Han in September 2006, forcing authorities to cut water supplies for a week in some areas, the Xinhua and government reports said. They did not say how many people were affected.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Copyright © 2008 ABC News Internet Ventures
It's a lot of information to put together from all over the world. Pollution. Salinity of irrigated farmlands. Urban/suburban sprawl.
ABC News
Pollution Turns Chinese River System Red
Pollution Turns Central China River System Red and Foamy, As Many As 200,000 Without Water
By ANITA CHANG
The Associated Press
BEIJING
Pollution turned part of a major river system in central China red and foamy, forcing authorities to cut water supplies to as many as 200,000 people, the provincial government and a state news agency said Wednesday.
Some communities along tributaries of the Han River a branch of the Yangtze in Hubei province were using emergency water supplies, while at least 60,000 people were relying on bottled water and limited underground sources, Xinhua News Agency reported.
Residents in some towns were getting water from fire trucks, the Hubei provincial government said on its Web site.
Five schools were closed in Xingou township, while others could not provide food to students, the Xinhua report said without elaborating.
The pollution was discovered Sunday when water plant workers from Jianli County found that the Dongjing River, a tributary of the Han, had turned red and foamy, the Hubei Web site said.
Water plants along the river suspended intake and cut tap water to as many as 120,000 people, according to reports on the site. Xinhua said 200,000 people were without water.
Tests showed the polluted waters contained elevated levels of ammonia, nitrogen, and permanganate, a chemical used in metal cleaning, tanning and bleaching, Xinhua said. The pollution apparently flowed down from the Han River, the Hubei government said without elaborating on its source.
Water from nearby Lake Chang was being diverted to dilute the pollution.
Most of China's canals, rivers and lakes are severely tainted by industrial, agricultural and household pollution. Chinese leaders say the country faces a critical water shortage, partly due to chronic pollution and chemical accidents.
In one of China's worst cases of river pollution, potentially cancer-causing chemicals, including benzene, spilled into the Songhua River in November 2005. The northeastern city of Harbin was forced to sever water supplies to 3.8 million people for five days. The accident also strained relations with Russia, into which the poisoned waters flowed.
A paper mill dumped waste water directly into the Han in September 2006, forcing authorities to cut water supplies for a week in some areas, the Xinhua and government reports said. They did not say how many people were affected.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Copyright © 2008 ABC News Internet Ventures
Tuesday, July 01, 2008
The Itch
New York Times article about itching will make you itch, very good article but it really does make you start itching.
Sunday, June 29, 2008
More about mosquito repellants
Another informative site about mosquito repellants:
Integrated Mosquito Management
The Centers for Disease Control has a useful discussion of repellents http://wwwn.cdc.gov/travel/yellowBookCh2-InsectsArthropods.aspx
Colorado State University has a good summary of repellents
http://www.ext.colostate.edu/westnile/mosquito_mgt.html
Integrated Mosquito Management
University of Wisconsin - Madison
Integrated Mosquito Management
The Centers for Disease Control has a useful discussion of repellents http://wwwn.cdc.gov/travel/yellowBookCh2-InsectsArthropods.aspx
Colorado State University has a good summary of repellents
http://www.ext.colostate.edu/westnile/mosquito_mgt.html
Integrated Mosquito Management
University of Wisconsin - Madison
Eucalyptus, Soybean Oil, or Citronella
As long as it is understood that frequent reapplication may be necessary, plant-derived repellents should provide the same protection against mosquito bites as deet.
Oil of eucalyptus-based repellents include Repel Lemon Eucalyptus Insect Repellent, SC Johnson Off Botanicals, and Fite Bite Plant-Based Insect Repellent. The active ingredient in these repellents is para-menthane 3,8-diol (PMD). Field studies have shown that PMD provided protection that was equal to lower concentrations of DEET (<20%)>
Eucalyptus oil protects from mosquitoes
Have you ever been concerned by all the warnings on a bottle of mosquito repellant made with deet? Put on clothes, not skin. Avoid over exposure. Keep out of reach of children.
Eucalyptus oil may actually work better than deet, and is not a caustic chemical.
This blog has a good summary of the studies done: Insect repellents: Do natural alternatives to Deet (such as eucalyptus) offer reliable protection?
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
Insect repellents: Do natural alternatives to Deet (such as eucalyptus) offer reliable protection?
Many travelers, especially those with chemical sensitivities, are reluctant to apply Deet, a potent and somewhat toxic chemical, to bare skin. Some turn to natural alternatives. But are any of these natural substances anywhere near as effective as Deet at preventing mosquito bites? When I asked an Australian doctor in Laos this question, he quipped: “I certainly would not put trust in a herbal insect repellent.” Nevertheless, I was curious to explore this question further.
Jotman investigates.
The chemical industry, much like the drug industry, has little incentive to popularize non-chemical-based preventive measures. In other words, supposing there were a natural alternative to Deet that had been scientifically proven just as effective, it probably would not be very well publicized. The fact is that the chemical-pharmaceutical complex dominates the media-marketing-information channels in our society. Nevertheless, as malaria and dengue are potentially deadly diseases, I thought the doctor might have a point. Better safe than sorry. Where there any studies exploring the effectiveness of natural Deet alternatives?
Conducting some online research, here's what I learned:
* According to a UK study conducted in Bolivia that compared three mosquito repellents -- one eucalyptus based, one neem based, and one mixed essential oils based -- to a repellent containing 15% Deet, the eucalyptus-based repellent gave 97% protection for four hours, whereas Deet only gave 85% protection. The study reported that the other 2 products did not provide significant protection from mosquito bites.
* A UC Chapel Hill study compared Deet to several natural repellents -- and found Deet superior to the botanicals (providing protection for 300 minutes), though one botanical gave protection for 94 minutes, the others repellents were almost useless.
* A US Department of Agriculture study compared Quwenling, lemon eucalyptus plant to Deet concluded that "as a topically applied mosquito repellent, Quwenling has a shorter duration of effectiveness than Deet."
* Another UK study compared a eucalyptus repellent to Deet and found "no significant difference between PMD (the eucalyptus-based insect repellent) and Deet in terms of efficacy and duration of protection."
On the basis of these studies, in sufficient concentration, eucalyptus insect repellents would appear to offer an effective, safe, and natural alternative to Deet.
Update:
It's worth considering that many of the natural substances are produced in countries where there is no government oversight over the processing and labeling of the natural agents. As trusted brand-names seldom offer natural product alternatives to Deet, one may have to go on faith that the bottle of “natural repellent” contains the indicated substance in the strength claimed. Sadly, when purchasing locally-produced natural products in a corruption-prone region, you can’t be so sure what you are buying.
Eucalyptus oil may actually work better than deet, and is not a caustic chemical.
This blog has a good summary of the studies done: Insect repellents: Do natural alternatives to Deet (such as eucalyptus) offer reliable protection?
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
Insect repellents: Do natural alternatives to Deet (such as eucalyptus) offer reliable protection?
Many travelers, especially those with chemical sensitivities, are reluctant to apply Deet, a potent and somewhat toxic chemical, to bare skin. Some turn to natural alternatives. But are any of these natural substances anywhere near as effective as Deet at preventing mosquito bites? When I asked an Australian doctor in Laos this question, he quipped: “I certainly would not put trust in a herbal insect repellent.” Nevertheless, I was curious to explore this question further.
Jotman investigates.
The chemical industry, much like the drug industry, has little incentive to popularize non-chemical-based preventive measures. In other words, supposing there were a natural alternative to Deet that had been scientifically proven just as effective, it probably would not be very well publicized. The fact is that the chemical-pharmaceutical complex dominates the media-marketing-information channels in our society. Nevertheless, as malaria and dengue are potentially deadly diseases, I thought the doctor might have a point. Better safe than sorry. Where there any studies exploring the effectiveness of natural Deet alternatives?
Conducting some online research, here's what I learned:
* According to a UK study conducted in Bolivia that compared three mosquito repellents -- one eucalyptus based, one neem based, and one mixed essential oils based -- to a repellent containing 15% Deet, the eucalyptus-based repellent gave 97% protection for four hours, whereas Deet only gave 85% protection. The study reported that the other 2 products did not provide significant protection from mosquito bites.
* A UC Chapel Hill study compared Deet to several natural repellents -- and found Deet superior to the botanicals (providing protection for 300 minutes), though one botanical gave protection for 94 minutes, the others repellents were almost useless.
* A US Department of Agriculture study compared Quwenling, lemon eucalyptus plant to Deet concluded that "as a topically applied mosquito repellent, Quwenling has a shorter duration of effectiveness than Deet."
* Another UK study compared a eucalyptus repellent to Deet and found "no significant difference between PMD (the eucalyptus-based insect repellent) and Deet in terms of efficacy and duration of protection."
On the basis of these studies, in sufficient concentration, eucalyptus insect repellents would appear to offer an effective, safe, and natural alternative to Deet.
Update:
It's worth considering that many of the natural substances are produced in countries where there is no government oversight over the processing and labeling of the natural agents. As trusted brand-names seldom offer natural product alternatives to Deet, one may have to go on faith that the bottle of “natural repellent” contains the indicated substance in the strength claimed. Sadly, when purchasing locally-produced natural products in a corruption-prone region, you can’t be so sure what you are buying.
Yes, I am chopped liver
People suck. They really suck. It's a never ending series of betrayals. And I am chopped liver. But enough already.
More interesting and less heated, is the story of how those fabulously descriptive phrases came into our national language.
And the NY Times, naturally has the story, in a column written some time ago by William safire, entitled, "On Language; Enough Already! What Am I, Chopped Liver?"
October 25, 1998
On Language; Enough Already! What Am I, Chopped Liver?
By WILLIAM SAFIRE
'What red-blooded American hasn't surveyed the muck and mire of our national politics,'' writes Mark Jurkowitz of The Boston Globe, ''and said, 'Enough, already'?''
''Time magazine reports that Clinton's woes have left U.S. foreign policy adrift,'' writes The Guardian of London, ''though Garrison Keillor says, 'Enough already!' ''
Howard Fineman of Newsweek asks, ''Is there any way out of this mess?'' leading to an inch-high, 102-point, block-letter headline: ''enough already.''
The stylistic issue raised is: Should there be a comma between the first and second words of this increasingly important phrase? The publication that pioneered in its popularization is The Toronto Globe and Mail; of the 19,000 entries in the Dow Jones database, the first 22 uses (from 1977 to 1983) were in that newspaper. According to Warren Clements, style editor, ''We abandoned the comma in 1979 because enough already was considered one of those expressions that is almost one word. It rips rollingly off the tongue; the comma would slow it down.'' Adds Michael Kesterton of that newspaper, ''I know it's a Yiddishism, but it just fits the Canadian soul -- you know, 'I've had it and I'm not gonna take it anymore.' ''
The origin is the Yiddish genug shoyn, literally ''enough already.'' It is part of an array of phrases using shoyn for emphasis, from the similar gut shoyn, ''All right already!'' in the sense of ''Stop bugging me,'' to shvayg shtil shoyn, ''Shut up already!'' one calibration more irritated than genug shoyn.
''This use of already began to appear early in the century,'' says Sol Steinmetz, the lexicographer who has taken the place of the late Leo Rosten as my primary Yiddish adviser, ''among immigrant Yiddish speakers living in New York who were just starting to talk English. By the 1930's it had become common usage among their children who no longer spoke Yiddish -- a development that enabled it to entrench itself in the American language.''
Another scholar, Lillian Feinsilver, in her ''Taste of Yiddish'' (1970), notes that ''English would normally use the mild now, as in 'Come, now,' or the stronger 'Come on, now.' ''
Now is an adverb of time that can be used as an admonition before a statement (''Now, I want you to listen to this. . . ''). Similarly, already and yet are adverbs of time that can be used to intensify a statement when used at the end. (''Were you bitten by a mad dog?'' ''And the dog is mad, yet.'') Thus, already -- in Standard English, ''beforehand; by this time'' -- can be used in this idiomatic sense to mean ''without further ado'' or ''and you'd better believe it.''
We have seen how this Yiddishism has been thoroughly assimilated and is now an Americanism. Because other American English expressions have been adopted in many other languages -- O.K. and no problem are examples -- does this mean that this particular emphasis of exasperation is taking root elsewhere?
Some evidence exists that it does. Here is a letter to The Washington Post from Robert Hill, an American working in a large Saudi hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: ''The overwhelming -- by 9 to 1 -- response to the Clinton affair varies among 'What is the very big deal?' to 'What about the problems in the rest of the world?' to 'Enough already!' ''
When a Yiddishism takes root in Riyadh, that's saying something. Have we exhausted this subject? The reader may now vent exasperation at a surfeit of data by expostulating the very phrase being so minutely examined.
WHAT AM I?
At a chic Washington cocktail party, Elizabeth Drew, author of ''Whatever It Takes: The Real Struggle for Political Power in America,'' accepted an hors d'oeuvre of chopped liver smeared on a cracker and asked: ''Chopped liver is delicious. Why do people derogate it so? As in the expression, 'What am I, chopped liver?' ''
The earliest use of this phrase in its derogatory sense -- that is, ''something trivial; something to be scoffed at'' -- in the Random House Historical Dictionary of American Slang is by Jimmy Durante on his 1954 CBS-TV show: ''Now that ain't chopped liver.''
In a 1980 monologue about the Reagan-Carter Presidential debate, Johnny Carson noted Ronald Reagan's statement that if all the unemployed were lined up, they would stretch from New York to Los Angeles. ''He came up with another one today,'' said Carson. ''If everyone on welfare were chopped liver, you could spread them on a line of Ritz crackers from here to Bulgaria.'' A decade later, the actor-producer Michael Douglas applied the phrase to himself, complaining about his secondary role in a movie: ''That hurt me in the industry as an actor, and it ticked me off. I thought, What was I -- chopped liver or something?''
This show-biz usage contributed to the treatment of the ethnic culinary delicacy (in Yiddish, gehakte leber) as an object of disdain. It may have also been influenced by its sense in underworld lingo as ''a beaten and scarred person,'' or by the urbanization of the once-rural expression ''That ain't hay.'' Steinmetz speculates: ''Chopped liver is merely an appetizer or side dish, not as important as chicken soup or gefilte fish. Hence it was often used among Jewish comedians in the Borscht Belt as a humorous metaphor for something or someone insignificant.''
Nobody who tastes properly made chopped liver can use it as a derogation. I turned to my Times colleague Marian Burros, author of ''The New Elegant But Easy Cookbook,'' for the recipe: ''Saute one finely chopped medium onion in two tablespoons hot chicken fat until lightly golden and very soft. Add 1 pound chicken liver and saute until cooked through; process in food processor with one small raw onion and one hard-cooked egg. Season with salt and pepper and mix with enough chicken fat to make it moist and spreadable.''
Then you can say, ''I feel just as terrific as chopped liver!''
* Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company
More interesting and less heated, is the story of how those fabulously descriptive phrases came into our national language.
And the NY Times, naturally has the story, in a column written some time ago by William safire, entitled, "On Language; Enough Already! What Am I, Chopped Liver?"
October 25, 1998
On Language; Enough Already! What Am I, Chopped Liver?
By WILLIAM SAFIRE
'What red-blooded American hasn't surveyed the muck and mire of our national politics,'' writes Mark Jurkowitz of The Boston Globe, ''and said, 'Enough, already'?''
''Time magazine reports that Clinton's woes have left U.S. foreign policy adrift,'' writes The Guardian of London, ''though Garrison Keillor says, 'Enough already!' ''
Howard Fineman of Newsweek asks, ''Is there any way out of this mess?'' leading to an inch-high, 102-point, block-letter headline: ''enough already.''
The stylistic issue raised is: Should there be a comma between the first and second words of this increasingly important phrase? The publication that pioneered in its popularization is The Toronto Globe and Mail; of the 19,000 entries in the Dow Jones database, the first 22 uses (from 1977 to 1983) were in that newspaper. According to Warren Clements, style editor, ''We abandoned the comma in 1979 because enough already was considered one of those expressions that is almost one word. It rips rollingly off the tongue; the comma would slow it down.'' Adds Michael Kesterton of that newspaper, ''I know it's a Yiddishism, but it just fits the Canadian soul -- you know, 'I've had it and I'm not gonna take it anymore.' ''
The origin is the Yiddish genug shoyn, literally ''enough already.'' It is part of an array of phrases using shoyn for emphasis, from the similar gut shoyn, ''All right already!'' in the sense of ''Stop bugging me,'' to shvayg shtil shoyn, ''Shut up already!'' one calibration more irritated than genug shoyn.
''This use of already began to appear early in the century,'' says Sol Steinmetz, the lexicographer who has taken the place of the late Leo Rosten as my primary Yiddish adviser, ''among immigrant Yiddish speakers living in New York who were just starting to talk English. By the 1930's it had become common usage among their children who no longer spoke Yiddish -- a development that enabled it to entrench itself in the American language.''
Another scholar, Lillian Feinsilver, in her ''Taste of Yiddish'' (1970), notes that ''English would normally use the mild now, as in 'Come, now,' or the stronger 'Come on, now.' ''
Now is an adverb of time that can be used as an admonition before a statement (''Now, I want you to listen to this. . . ''). Similarly, already and yet are adverbs of time that can be used to intensify a statement when used at the end. (''Were you bitten by a mad dog?'' ''And the dog is mad, yet.'') Thus, already -- in Standard English, ''beforehand; by this time'' -- can be used in this idiomatic sense to mean ''without further ado'' or ''and you'd better believe it.''
We have seen how this Yiddishism has been thoroughly assimilated and is now an Americanism. Because other American English expressions have been adopted in many other languages -- O.K. and no problem are examples -- does this mean that this particular emphasis of exasperation is taking root elsewhere?
Some evidence exists that it does. Here is a letter to The Washington Post from Robert Hill, an American working in a large Saudi hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: ''The overwhelming -- by 9 to 1 -- response to the Clinton affair varies among 'What is the very big deal?' to 'What about the problems in the rest of the world?' to 'Enough already!' ''
When a Yiddishism takes root in Riyadh, that's saying something. Have we exhausted this subject? The reader may now vent exasperation at a surfeit of data by expostulating the very phrase being so minutely examined.
WHAT AM I?
At a chic Washington cocktail party, Elizabeth Drew, author of ''Whatever It Takes: The Real Struggle for Political Power in America,'' accepted an hors d'oeuvre of chopped liver smeared on a cracker and asked: ''Chopped liver is delicious. Why do people derogate it so? As in the expression, 'What am I, chopped liver?' ''
The earliest use of this phrase in its derogatory sense -- that is, ''something trivial; something to be scoffed at'' -- in the Random House Historical Dictionary of American Slang is by Jimmy Durante on his 1954 CBS-TV show: ''Now that ain't chopped liver.''
In a 1980 monologue about the Reagan-Carter Presidential debate, Johnny Carson noted Ronald Reagan's statement that if all the unemployed were lined up, they would stretch from New York to Los Angeles. ''He came up with another one today,'' said Carson. ''If everyone on welfare were chopped liver, you could spread them on a line of Ritz crackers from here to Bulgaria.'' A decade later, the actor-producer Michael Douglas applied the phrase to himself, complaining about his secondary role in a movie: ''That hurt me in the industry as an actor, and it ticked me off. I thought, What was I -- chopped liver or something?''
This show-biz usage contributed to the treatment of the ethnic culinary delicacy (in Yiddish, gehakte leber) as an object of disdain. It may have also been influenced by its sense in underworld lingo as ''a beaten and scarred person,'' or by the urbanization of the once-rural expression ''That ain't hay.'' Steinmetz speculates: ''Chopped liver is merely an appetizer or side dish, not as important as chicken soup or gefilte fish. Hence it was often used among Jewish comedians in the Borscht Belt as a humorous metaphor for something or someone insignificant.''
Nobody who tastes properly made chopped liver can use it as a derogation. I turned to my Times colleague Marian Burros, author of ''The New Elegant But Easy Cookbook,'' for the recipe: ''Saute one finely chopped medium onion in two tablespoons hot chicken fat until lightly golden and very soft. Add 1 pound chicken liver and saute until cooked through; process in food processor with one small raw onion and one hard-cooked egg. Season with salt and pepper and mix with enough chicken fat to make it moist and spreadable.''
Then you can say, ''I feel just as terrific as chopped liver!''
* Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)