Tannishblog

…or “What I’ve Been Doing Lately Instead of Playing Computer Games.”

Blog themes never seem to hit the right spot. A consummate geek must modify. Blogger made the tweaking relatively simple, so I was able to create a new masthead in Paint Shop Pro (Photoshop is too pricey), and modify the blog’s colors accordingly. Playing with the structure was off limits, lest the aspiring geek noob break their site.

It wasn’t enough. Partly that longing to get “under the hood” led me to switch to Wordpress last June. The price was right too. Gotta love the free software groupies. My first peek seemed daunting, so I altered a couple color settings and left the template alone. All Wordpress templates are of high quality, so I was happy - for a while.

Working with the same site presentation over time gets weary on the eyes, and incessant curiosity and an attenuated slow season at work compelled me to dive into the CSS sites and read the Wordpress Codex (a lot of it, anyway.) Production themes, as they are called, involved a healthy dose of CSS, a smattering of PHP, a refreshening of my web standards knowledge, Paint Shop Pro skills, and installations of MySQL and Apache web server. Color schemes were limited because I felt obliged to use tan as a base - something about the name…

Ten weeks later I emerge wondering where all the snow went, proud of my finished fourth-attempt of a blog template (the other three will be done soon.) At least I think it’s finished… as much as anything like this can ever be complete.

I hope you like it. Feel free to comment.

The Democrats have already screwed up. Their seats aren’t even warmed yet and they stuff $21 billion of pork barrel spending into the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Bill for FY2007.  So much for integrity. The NY Times provides a PDF partial list of all "the other white meat" that Democratic congresspersons chose as payment for their votes. Porkbusters.org and Council for Citizens Against Public Waste are almost apoplectic. Who can blame them?

I would remind all the new Congressionals that much of the whining that got them their new chairs was about indiscriminate spending by congress. D’OH!

Our government hasn’t come to grip with the Internet yet. They haven’t understood the new era of transparency we’re heading into. Clinging to old-school methodology, our leaders still live in a world where the inner workings of the Hallowed Halls are mystical, where secrets are commonplace. Similarly, the quid pro quo chumminess governments have with major media outlets are circumvented. Instant access to information by the unwashed masses destroys these dynamics. This is, to my way of thinking, A Good Thing.

Tyranny breeds of secrecy, as does oppression, theft, warfare, and corruption. These common diseases of governments can be treated, if not cured, through unhindered sharing information. It is through the formation of a world in which no one can hide that may save humanity from itself.

Yet large beasts such as the American Political Animal are difficult to turn once the stampeding begins, and so in the fervor of power wresting, our Democratic majority has shown their anachronistic thinking, and their old bad habits. Akin to a pot  smoker in remission, this vote selling is a tough habit to mask, and the Internet is a glass wall the addict is crouching behind ineffectively.

So clean up your act, servants of the public, your actions are plainly visible, your tracks impossible to cover. Welcome to a new world order of accountability and transparency, a world, I note, that you have paid for. Selling votes for unimportant pet projects in this time of war and astronomical deficits - after a bitter campaign of demanding accountability -  is, well, to quote a certain American cultural icon: "it’s DesthPICable!"

 No doubt Left Blogistan is roaring today about this Karl Rove Rap Video. Who pays for the annual bash between government officials and the media? Not the taxpayers, I hope.

It’s shameless, really. Doesn’t anyone on the hill know there’s A WAR GOING ON? Drunken revelry has it’s place, but not when US troops are being slaughtered for a lie perpetrated by the partying drunks.

I’m disgusted. I need to wash my mind out with lye… Excuse me for a bit.

It annoys me how Republican "pundits" are attacking every idea with which they disagree. Most especially the whole Stay The Course / Get them Out debate. Yes, its a tough decision.

What everyone seems to agree upon is that Iraq is a mess. In four years, the greatest military machine in the world cannot re-stabilize what it has destroyed - namely the sovereignty and economic stability of Iraq. We broke it. We should fix it. But how long do we continue to try?

The same opinions that rile me scoff at the Democratic congress’ recent attempts to pin down a plan from the president: timetables, measurable progress by the Iraqi government, and conditions met to bring our soldiers home. In order to show they’re serious, the tackle the issue when money is on the table. Money is what all Americans understand: when money is involved, people pay attention. Surely, congress did get the president’s attention - along with its attendant anger - and a threat to veto. The Righty opiners think this proves (yet again) how the left is unsupportive of our military. The Lefty pundits say that a veto of the appropriations bill without stipulations of progress would endanger the troops just as surely as the alternative.

This argument should have taken place two years ago, but a Republican majority refused to oversee expenditures. Since the start of Armageddon until today, the richest nation on Earth blindly wrote blank checks to fund a questionable military pursuit. Most of the money wasn’t real, but borrowed from future Gross National Product and from taxes our children have yet to pay. The Righties seem okay with that.

If our World’s Greatest Military(tm) cannot manage a regime change in more time that it took to end WWII, then it’s high time to rethink things. If a thirteen-digit expense account cannot fund this endeavor - or any, for that matter - how is the delaying tactic currently being played on the beltway going to change anything one way or the other? In a war of trillions of dollars, what’s a few billion between rivals?

Four years. Eight TRILLION dollars carte blanch. How much is too much? How long is too long? How many thousands more dead and injured? How many more survivors psychologically damaged?

We blew it in Iraq. We’ve broken something that we cannot fix. Conventional warfare does not account for amorphous combatants and suicide troops. We cannot win by doing "What we’ve always done." We’ve already spent too much money and time. Staying the course and expecting different results is a textbook definition of insanity. The whole Iraq situation is insane.

Let’s be sane, now. It just might help.

A 3-D computer rendering of the Chicago Spire was unveiled Monday for the Grant Park Advisory Board, providing a magnificent viewing of a project that will create the tallest condominium building in the nation.

At 150 stories, the tower, created by architect Santiago Calatrava reportedly wowed the audience in its depiction of the proposed building that would rise above the Sears Tower by over five hundred feet. Over all, the design is breathtaking. With the gratis incorporation of a adjacent lot being made into a park as accompanist - a project neighbors have wanted for a decade - the plans will surely go forward.

The Chicago Tribune has the story with commentary. The video of sketches by Calatrava and narrated by Blair Kamin can be found here. As the photos provided by these sources are copy written, I will not post them here, but one glance and you may have the same response I did: It’s disturbingly phallic. Will people rename it the Chicago Dildo?

A friend and coworker once said to me, "I would like to see the government run like a business. That’s why I voted for Ross Perot both times." Well, I’m not sure that’s the answer to our problems, but the theory is interesting.

Then it hit me: That’s exactly what we’ve been experiencing these past few years. Remember the papers touting GWB as the "CEO president?" That claim remains in doubt, but we do have a CEO presidency. The questionable interpretations of Executive Power within this White House has precedence in the business world. Whether or not our Commander in Chief is a Chief Executive Officer notwithstanding, our VP is all business.

Unlike public servants, a corporate head can have closed meeting with influential players and make all decisions therein, fully expecting the workers to comply. Dick Cheney did that with his energy policy.

Unlike public servants, a CEO can act unilaterally provided he has the shareholders trust. The trust of employees is not considered. Acting as shareholders, the Republican majority in previous congresses did indeed trust the White House, rubber-stamping anything that came their way, even as the people’s trust diminished.

A CEO can fire people without much threat of retaliation. The test of whether an administration can act similarly is currently playing out in congressional hearings. Clearly, the administration believed it owned the right to do so.

A primary goal of any corporate leader is to ensure continued growth despite economic and market factors. The primary goal of this administration is to expand American influence globally.

A CEO must be aggressive in dealing with competition. Ruthlessness is rewarded.The degree of importance of this tenet is reflected in the language used to describe business tactics, such as "hostile takeover." Many phrases from corporate-speak are of militant origin.

In light of all this, it should be no surprise to find our corporate-styled administration embroiled in an endless struggle for dominance - not only on the global stage, but within its borders as well. It’s just business as usual.

Businesses, by necessity are pyramidal structures, managed top-down. In this aspect, they are not unlike Monarchies. In every company I’ve worked for (more than a few) There have been equivalencies to kings, princesses, counselors, chancellors, knights and knaves. Modernization has done little to change this basic organizational structure beyond giving the various players new titles. Businesses are, in fact, tiny kingdoms. Scott Adams illustrates this best.

Whereas businesses are monarchies, and our current presidency is being run like a business, there should be no surprise that detractors are increasingly replacing "CEO President" with "King George."  It doesn’t help matters when the White House issues proclamations like this one. Yesterday, Tony Snow fielded questions about the US Attorney scandal and Bush’s subsequent reluctance to allows officials to testify under oath:

"There are — in this particular case, the Department of Justice — the Congress does have legitimate oversight responsibility for the Department of Justice. It created the Department of Justice. It does not have constitutional oversight responsibility over the White House, which is why by our reaching out, we’re doing something that we’re not compelled to do by the Constitution, but we think common sense suggests that we ought to get the whole story out, which is what we’re doing."

In a monarchy and in a business, that would be true. The US government, however, is neither. At least, at the time of writing this.

Well that proves it. He says he’s guilty then he must be. This proves that Gitmo is relevant as a tool for finding terrorists, that it should stay open indefinitely. This proves that the president was right all along, and that we should stay the course. Right?

Except for a few minor details:

One of his Australian lawyers, David McLeod, had said on Sunday that Hicks was convinced he will not get a fair trial. "He expected that he would be convicted even if he defends the charges," McLeod told reporters on Sunday. Hicks has said he was sodomized, beaten, and subject to forced injections while in U.S. custody, allegations the military calls untrue and nonsense.

"He’s really changed a lot in three years," said (his father, Terrence) Hicks, who had last seen his son at the 2004 hearing.

No shit. The last guy to get released after years of Guantanamo incarceration suffers severe mental disorders. And he was found innocent. It seems that after three years of US hospitality, Mr. Hicks will say anything to be back home, even if home will be another prison. It can’t get much worse that what he’s already endured.

Imagine the following scenario: After a pent up morning in the classroom, children burst from the school for recess. Several of the older kids group to play a game. But the same old games are becoming boring, so one child begins a new game by pretending to be president. Another pipes up to vie for VP, and soon the prominent roles are filled in this schoolyard administration.

Over the course of a few weeks, this game plays out. Policies are discussed. A war is planned and executed, causes invented, and the children recruit underclassmen to act out a battle.War is, after all, what governments do. Follow through limited, as the kids quickly loose interest.

At one point, a younger group of kids attempt to join the game, and are snubbed. Talk begins on building an imaginary fence to keep out the undesirables.

An election begins when two more vocal members disagree on policy. Sides are drawn and after a week of recess one-upmanship, a vote is taken. this leads to a protracted argument on cheating, but the child with the bully on his side eventually wins reelection, and losers sulk and start scheming together.

The newly reinstated president again plays at general while younger kids fight for him, but the battles are confusing and it’s hard to see who is winning. Talk begins about passing laws, but every initiative by the losing group is ignored by the winners. Meanwhile, the empowered few start cutting imaginary taxes because someone once heard parents complain about taxes. As the children lower taxes, they cut money for the things they don’t like: education, hospitals, improved roads and bridges, helping poor people.

One child heard on the news about a big storm somewhere, and this is folded into the play. The president quickly dismisses the story: "Who cares?" he said.

Another pipes up about his grandma getting help from the government for medicine, and the vice president speaks out against giving things away for free to old, sick people. Better they just die.

Talk eventually comes to teachers they don’t like. There are many of them. One child, in a desperate attempt at being noticed by the president, suggests firing them, and a list is soon made of the teachers that should go. Some of the other kids disagree and task the president about the idea. He just points to the small boy who thought the idea up, and the group starts picking on him.

Eventually, the game becomes stale, and the children look for other amusements. Their mock government dissolves. Unknown to them some younger kids, having overheard the game, start their own governments, and in time, the game becomes a permanent fixture in the arsenal of recess amusements. As some kids relocate to new schools, the idea of playground politics spreads, evolves, and becomes more sophisticated and treacherous as the kids constantly try to one-up the previous motions.

Meanwhile the first group grows up, attend college and seek careers - some in politics. Styles and aspirations developed on a gravel lot come back to influence their methods and motivations. Some things never change.

The NY Times today features a nicely staged photo-op of our president standing at a podium in the oval office. I note that the camera angle rises from the floor as if the whole world looks up to the man. Beneath, the caption reads:

“We will not go along with a partisan fishing expedition aimed at honorable public servants,” President Bush said in a news conference.

Interesting phrase; carefully crafted. My first reaction, though, was "Wait. What ‘honerable public servants’?" If the people feeling pressure from the senates investigation regarding the firings of US Attorneys were indeed honorable, then why would they feel pressured. And why would the president feel the need to pre-empt regularly scheduled TV programming to say this to the people. I mean, besides the fact that he likes to pre-empt things.

He then offered a ridiculous concession to congressional Democrats: You can interview Karl Rove and Harriet Miers, but not under oath and if you do you cannot later subpoena them. The Democrats refused. Now the Republicans can spear them with the "partisan fishing expedition" line, because - on the surface - the White House made a reasonable offer. That’s what they are thinking, anyway. I question how reasonable it is to cripple a congressional investigation by demanding special dispensation for "honorable public servants." How honorable are they that they have to hide behind bogus provisions?

(That reminds me of a short conversation I had yesterday with a friend from Canada about how the Internet is creating a transparent society: My comment was "If you have done nothing wrong, why worry about privacy?" She didn’t agree, though.)

Also in the Times is an Op-ed piece by ousted US Attorney David C. Iglesias entitled "Why I Was Fired." A must-read.

Meanwhile, Tom Delay (remember him?) - another paradigm of honor - has this to say regarding last weekend’s anti-war protesting, as reported by Impeachbush.org:

Disgraced Tom Delay went on television Sunday morning and complained on Meet the Press that "we shouldn’t have had what we had yesterday…in Washington, D.C." with people calling for "impeaching the commander in chief."

But, Tom… That’s not what you said during the Clinton Impeachment hearings. Talk about a partisan fishing trip! Mr. Delay’s message these days is to do as I say, not as I do. Hmm, my Dad tried that. I didn’t work for him either.

So: we have "honorable public servants" crouching behind special conditions, presidential posturing - again - and a disgraced former congressional leader reprimanding the public for exercising free speech. As my Canadian friend noticed; American Politics are Never Boring.

So true.

That’s what the teenager’s sign read as the Olympic Torch passed through Juneau, Alaska and the cameras rolled: "Bong Hits 4 Jesus". Joseph Frederick, as part of a school group allowed to leave Juneau-Douglas High School grounds to watch the quasi-historic event, unfurled his banner at the opportune moment. For that he got ten days suspension.

He is suing the school’s principal for violation of his freedom of speech. That was in 2002.  Last summer, former White House special counsel Kenneth Starr petitioned the Supreme Court on behalf of the school district to adjudicate the case. As the Wall Street Journal aptly shouted: "Starr Goes From Cigars to Bongs."

As the case is heard, Religious E-zines have followed the story, some with wry bemusement, some with fire and brimstone. Some in the latter community believe the nature of the case is religious, not civil, and fear the association of their beliefs with illegal drug use. Thankfully, some Christian groups are keeping their heads clear on the matter:

"It’s disrespectful to God and disrespectful to believers," said Kevin Theriot, an attorney for Alliance Defense Fund, a conservative Christian legal network based in Arizona.

Nonetheless, a number of Christian heavy-hitters, including ADF, the American Center for Law and Justice and the Christian Legal Society, have filed briefs defending the student.

"I’ve been doing religious (legal) work for almost two decades, and in my opinion this is probably one of the most dangerous cases to religious freedom in the last decade — because you don’t think it’s about religion," said Kelly Shackelford, chief counsel for Liberty Legal Institute. The Plano, Texas-based institute has filed a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of the student.

The Education community is also anxiously awaiting the verdict. To them, this case represents a blurring of jurisdiction between the school’s view that , because the teenager and his friends were at a school outing, and because Mr. Frederick refused to drop the banner when asked by  the school’s principal, Deborah Morse, the suspension was warranted.

The crux of the case is as follows:

“The phrase ‘Bong Hits 4 Jesus’—to me, it’s absurdly funny,” said Joseph Frederick … “Of course,” he added in a conference call with reporters this month, “I knew there was a possibility that some people would not take it well.”

[…]

“We didn’t view the sign as serious speech on a political topic,” said Peggy Cowan, the Juneau superintendent, who was an assistant superintendent at the time.

Absurd it is. Morse V. Frederick is a classic example of the occasional absurdity inherent in what passes for Civilization in this century. It also exposes the fragility of the more paranoid sectors of the Christian community who gleefully torch anything remotely ill-associated with their Jesus - no matter how petty and, yes, absurd.

Yesterday the Supreme Court heard the arguments; the third court to review this case. Its decision, no doubt, will heavily influence the continued rise or disastrous fall of Civilization itself. Your tax dollars at work.