Time Warner Seeks to Destroy the Internet

Like a cartoon villain, Time Warner has enacted a devious plan that promises to destroy something that brings joy to the people like you and I. If you haven't heard about this yet, Time Warner has begun testing a tiered system where they charge you by both the speed and total amount of bites you operate at in a month. If you aren't feeling outrage right now, then you don't understand what I just said.

Time Warner is attempting to take advantage of the average person's ignorance of how computers and the Internet operate by manipulating ambiguities in language to make it seem like there is somehow a finite amount of Internet out there. When operating under that vague understanding of resource use that is so obvious in the physical world, it seems reasonable that they would want to charge us for how much of something we use. The thing is that this is a deception. There is not a finite amount of internets out there that one day we might us up much like we might one day use up all the oil. There are just limits on how much can be delivered to a certain number of users at any given moment. Which is why the erroneous "tubes" analogy is so attractive.

It is helpful to think of this from the end of the ISP. Faced with the need to consistently upgrade their capacity to handle many more and more customers at the faster and faster speeds that are needed to run the more and more intensive operations we perform over the Internet the ISP decides, not that the costs will one day become prohibitive(because as the Wired graph shows, that simply isn't true. And simple logic tells you that if they faced a problem of overhead they could simply raise their rates. They are the cable company after all), but that since this technical reality creates users of different needs, using a different metric vastly changes your rate structure and you can balloon your revenue.

The simple capitalist, free market logic is obvious here. Where you have a monopoly in your individual markets you can charge whatever you want. Since most regions of the country are serviced by a single cable company or ISP they can all do this without fear of being out competed by the numerous other companies out there. The only customers that will be spared are those that live in competitive markets. And sure enough ATT has started testing this idea out themselves. Now Comcast, the big villains of the last bandwidth war are looking competitive because all they have is a cap.

The slightly less obvious reason that is highly compelling for a cable company to do something sinister like this is that they are a cable company. They are primarily in the business of offering TV entertainment and people going over to the Internet to get their shows whenever they want(even their own customers) deprives them of a customer for their other services, and of ad revenue since people are having difficulty finding satisfying advertising solutions on the Internet. Largely because you have accurate measures of how effective your ads are on the Internet where they are cheap, but have to pay top dollar for television ads that are widely believed to be entirely ineffective.

The tiered structure is basically Time Warner punishing online gamers and online movie watchers for getting their entertainment elsewhere.

The tiers are also very low. Or at least in the way we measure Internet use anymore. Time Warner points out that their first tier, 1G, satisfies the needs of a third of their customers. These are basically the people that don't use the Internet. I admit that these people will probably pay less for the same amount of Internet. Anything above your grandmas Internet use enters an onerous tiered system where you pay for each gigabyte you use. In a month.

Apart from the possibility of viruses and malware using Internet without your consent and beyond your control, this is an attack on the basic philosophy that has led to the Internet and computer use as we know it. We all converted over to cable Internet because it was fast and primarily because we didn't have to pay for every minute of Internet use through a dedicated phone line. It freed up so much of the initial cost barrier of the Internet and increased the speed to the point where it became the multi-media communications tool it had always promised to be. This type of Internet service created the concept of the computer as the always-on, always-connected Internet terminal. This philosophy of the personal computer is central to the way we think of computer use and central to how software operates. Going back to a tiered structure where one pays based on an almost arbitrary metric is an attack, an attack based in greed, but an attack on the philosophy that was foundational to Web 2.0. We will never be able to proceed to Web 3.0 with this albatross around our necks.

That is where monopolies hurt business. Even regional ones. This was a lesson we learned around the last great depression and hopefully with a Democratic congress it is not a lesson we will have to re-learn the hard way. There is at least one Congressman trying to fight back. He has proposed the interesting philosophical change of calling the Internet a utility. I like that. If phone service was essential to daily life enough to be called a utility then the Internet is as well.

You should write to your representatives at the state and federal level. Raising Cain on the Internet will only go so far to produce resistance to this move by Time Warner and Ma Bell. You have to get the honest perspective of the people to the government before the industry twists the story.

It's easy to question the validity of an economic argument that relies on the business generation of the Internet. If you are a moron, or have been living in a cave since 1990. It is easy to point out that many small businesses and individuals have been able to expand their sales and start new businesses because of the low overhead cost of the Internet and its ability to reach an international consumer base. But there are specific businesses that will be impacted by this kind of tiered Internet usage structure. Online gaming is the first that comes to mind. This is now the primary business model for game manufacturers. Every gaming platform is connected to the Internet. The single player content is often secondary in importance to the users of the games. And every gaming device now can download new titles entirely from the Internet. This new business model for the gaming industry that drastically reduces overhead and cuts out the middle man would be jeopardized by requiring gamers to engage in a cost benefit analysis of whether the game would be worth the additional tiered charges.


I currently use Time Warner service to access the Internet. But that will change as soon as I can find an alternate service provider. The only thing a corporation can understand is their own greedy, short term, self interest. So the only way to communicate with them is with money. So I will be taking mine away from the finks at Time Warner for even thinking about using the byte as a metric for billing.

Anticipating The Worst: Update

Ohio state legislators are beginning the process of seeking permission from the federal government to allow local law enforcement officers to enforce immigration laws. This is not intrinsically racist, unless you believe that having an immigration policy is racist. However, if you listen to the segment in this link, toward the end there is the comment made that this is being justified in relation to job competition.

I haven't heard of any race riots yet (though there has been an obscene level of unexplained gun violence) but comments like this one cause me to be concerned. When made by politicians, particularly those that have been in office through the beginning of this crisis, or those who may have voted for legislation that could be seen as having contributed to this recession, comments like this seem to be a crass attempt to redirect public outrage away from our elected representatives and the corporate crooks responsible toward a marginalized and politically defenseless group. I think I am looking for a more serious word than "crass" but I don't want to pull a Godwin's Law at this stage. Though when it comes to vilifying an ethnic minority in a time of great economic crisis it is hard to come up with alternative adjectives.

Again, what worries me is the speed with which this is progressing. This was already an issue politicians and talking heads used to distract people when times were good. Now that jobs are scarce, the economic fear mongering that has been invalid for so long is starting to get traction at the fringes of the sane media. Note that the link above is to an NPR station.

Gun Control in Washington D.C. - No, This isn't a Repeat

I had previously remarked about the bill moving through Congress that would give full voting rights to Eleanor Holmes-Norton (D-D.C.). In those comments I also remarked that it was interesting that John McCain was voting against more equal representation of the nations citizens on what appears to be party lines because the seat is expected to be solidly Democratic. People have tried to throw a red herring into this debate by claiming that only states can be represented in Congress. Which is an interesting academic debate from a legal perspective but in reality is a smoke screen for partisan bickering. I find it hard to believe that anyone actually has a principled stance on the nature of the state when it comes to representation in Congress like they do about gun control or abortion. It's a politicians issue and I seriously doubt that framing the issue in this way will get any traction.

To be sure, the Republicans aren't the only ones with partisanship dirt on their hands. The Democrats brought this up because they wanted the extra seat, and threw in the extra seat for Utah as a token gesture. That seat is likely to be just as solidly Republican but Utah was due that seat in 2000 and would be getting it in 2011 anyway after the next census so really, the Democrats aren't giving the Republicans anything of similar value to what they are attempting to give themselves. Still for me this is a freedom and democratic representation issue.

The real fun came in last week when the Republicans dusted off their old roadblock issue, gun control. This article comes from the same ignorant perspective that most MSM coverage of guns has but covers some interesting angles on the nature of gun politics in the Capitol. It pisses me off that in their effort to be as childish and partisan as possible the Republicans are dragging gun control into the mix. Sure it worked, but bringing an unrelated issue into the debate was crass and only indicates that these Republicans don't take a principled stand on anything. It's all politics.

The thing that pisses me off about this is that there is a legitimate reason for the Republicans to bring this up but they don't see it. They don't see it because they don't care about the Second Amendment. All they care about is political power and what they can get away with.

The real issue is the 5-4 decision in Heller. For gun rights Heller is Roe v. Wade. Heller affirmed that the Second Amendment protects the right of the individual to keep a pistol independent of any militia. That is a reasonably narrow interpretation but D.C. interprets the holding even more narrowly to only mean that individuals may keep a loaded single action pistol in their home. Which would mean a definition of "firearm" that is even more restrictive than the now expired Brady Bill and would mean that it is illegal to transport a firearm in any kind of working order. Lots of people on the abortion issue are eyeballing the Supreme Court and not just because of Justice Ginsburg's recent illness. (may she always be healthy and live to be 100) If D.C. can argue for their narrow interpretation successfully or if the balance of The Court shifts, the triumph of gun rights will have been short lived and the jubilation of gun nuts will turn to rage. Federal preemption of further suit by the fascists in D.C. will preserve the rights of law abiding citizens and help close a chapter of wasteful, ineffective, and unconstitutional legislation.

The New Politics: RIP 2/1/09 That Didn't Take Long

Apparently Republicans are running around raising ideological opposition to Obama's huge economic stimulus package. Heh heh. The Republicans got a good look at Obama's Package this week and the President spent time coming in and out of their offices trying to get them to take it. It seems like the do nothing Congress has decided to keep with what they know rather than try to spend massively huge shit tons of money in hopes Keynesian economics does work.



The kicker is that the debate isn't over whether the money should be spent. Its about whether we are giving enough tax breaks to the wealthy fuckers that aren't feeling the pinch. This is a debate over ideology rather than substance. Let me point out that tax cuts and government spending are actually the same thing. Cuts in income and spending both reduce the amount of money in the treasury. The two terms are just ideological code for where the politician thinks the money should go. If you believe in entitlement of the upper class you say "tax cuts." If you believe in entitlement of the poor you say "appropriation." It's bullshit and I am surprised that the fact this is all about ideology doesn't rise to the level of public discourse. Sure you might say that there is an economic debate behind the two sides, except real economists will admit that even amongst them it is really an ideological debate because there is no lab in which to experiment and prove who is more wrong.

The Walk Of Shame

Apparently the House seat for Florida's 16th congressional district is like Spanish fly. It must be the holding of this office. Why else would the man that ran against Mark Foley then become embroiled in his own sex scandal?For those of you who don't remember, Mark Foley lost his reelection bid when it was revealed that he had traded explicitly sexual text messages with male teenaged congressional pages. Now Tim Mahoney, who campaigned on a platform of returning morality to the capitol has been exposed as having hired and then fired his mistress to his staff.

You could say that this is ironic. I am more cynical. I am inclined to believe that most people who run for national office have a pathological need to be loved that causes them to engage in self destructive behavior when they are given power. But I am no psychologist.

The Walk of Shame: Palin

This is a pretty detailed article on the whole affair. The bottom line is that the legislative investigation found that Sarah Palin violated the public trust in her office as Governor when she allegedly pressured for the firing of a State Trooper that had been married to her sister. In these cynical times it is hard for me to explain how serious a violation of the public trust is other than to say that even lawyers are required to be more ethical than this.

Once again this raises the question of how well Palin was vetted before she was picked as the VP nominee. Her ability wink and to segue into memorized talking points during the VP debate does not reassure me that she is more intelligent than the Couric interviews have shown her to be. Now there is this report detailing how she wasted no time in becoming corrupt after being elected as Governor of Alaska. Its probably a testament to her Orwellian campaigning that she was originally billed as a reformer.

The most telling part of this story is the reaction of the Republican party and the Republican presidential campaign. When the eye of justice was turned on them they immidiately and vigorously began attacking the integrity and nature of the investigation. What they were doing was analogous to if one was a murder suspect, arguing that the police did not have the authority to look for the murder weapon.

It makes me wonder if any other Alaska Republicans will be found guilty of corruption in the final weeks before the election.

The Ben Franklin Report: Talking Points and the MSM

It was interesting to me to observe the tone of media coverage regarding the Bailout over the last week. Prior to the rejection of the first bill by the House the coverage was neutral with most coverage being directed at explaining just what the legislation was supposed to do but there was almost no coverage of popular opinion which was vastly opposed to the measure. After the shock subsided from the precipitous drop in the stock markets following the vote by the House, and it was found that the sky had not fallen and business continued as normal, the MSM started covering the vast negative public sentiment. This was mainly as a means of explaining why the Representatives voted as they did and attached to the old adage that the House is the more populist body. Suggesting that the real people of the country are only actually represented in government at the national level in the House of Representatives.

Until this morning the MSM was freely using the term "Bailout" to describe this massive gift of taxpayer dollars to the greedy rich motherfuckers that got us into this crisis in the first place. However this morning, the MSM has started referring to the bill as the "Rescue Plan." Yes, the Bailout that passed the Senate in the dark hours of the night when noone could see their shame has been spun. Instead of being a colossal failure of leadership, this is now a plan. Instead of being a giant burden of over $10,000 on every taxpayer, this is being called a "Rescue."

How long will this kind of transparent bullshit go unchallenged? Where is the voice of the American people? We, the people of the United States are overwhelmingly opposed to this legislation but if you look at the MSM you would think that we all accept this bill as a necessary evil. This is exactly the same failure of the media that got us into Iraq. Where are the pointed questions? Where are the experts holding the feet of the members of congress to the fire? Why is Kucinich the Keebler the only person that sounds sane? It takes a vegan who thinks he was abducted by aliens to raise concerns about the artificial haste with which this bill is being forced through congress? What about the old adage that the Senate is the more deliberative side of the Legislature?

Where was the thought process yesterday? It was clouded by fear and greed. Fear that there is an imminent catastrophic collapse in the future, and greed motivated by all that money. Why think about rational solutions when you can slip in a rider that directs funds back to your pet projects? If you are going to alienate millions of people by voting "yes" you might as well buy the votes of a few back home.

Like 9/11, this is another crisis that was easy to foresee but once it materializes people in government are using the ignorance of those that did not see it coming to create an unjustified panic in order to gain unfettered power. I cant' believe that exactly the same trick is working on the same people just six years later. I guess Lincoln was wrong.

I wish that was all I had to say about this but I want to highlight the behavior of the presidential candidates and I want to single out a particular economic pundit who has been causing me great personal outrage for the last three weeks.

The H-pod has been getting increasingly aggravating with his constant reliance on the trickle down theory of economics as if it is still a valid method of thinking. As if trickle down hasn't been clearly disproven by the recent recession. As if he isn't just fattening us up for the slaughter. Velshi is just trying to keep the taxpayers calm and encourage acceptance of the vastly flawed Bailout.

As for the candidates, they have both failed to show leadership in this crisis. Neither candidate has even attempted to deliver a strategy for solving this problem. Neither candidate nor their VP nominees have given concrete examples of things they would do if elected that differs from anything they have been saying since June of '07. To me its painfully obvious that they could follow FDR and his lead that propelled us out of the last Great Depression. They start a massive public works project. How about one that creates energy independence? Then you solve two national problems at once. OK, its four problems is you include oil wars in the middle east and energy's impact on the environment. Massive building projects that create super solar farms in the sun belt, wind farms in the great lakes and off the Atlantic coast, factories that produce the new solar power generating windows. The government can spend some of the seven hundred fucking billion dollars of U.S. taxpayer rape on investing in our technology future. The U.S. is falling behind. It was the lack of foresight of congress that caused the Large Hadron collider to be built in France and Belgium.

Both parties have failed. Both houses of Congress have failed. The Bush administration has failed. Local governments have failed. Wallstreet has failed. Individual investors and property buyers have failed. Foreign governments and corporations have failed. There is plenty of blame to go around but little understanding of the full scope of the failure. This colossal failure of leadership is not likely to be cured by panic and a rush to pass the first piece of legislation proposed by an administration that has showen itself to be power hungry and incompetant. We need to vote every one of these selfish beureaucrats and politicians out of office. We need to finish the job of cleaning house that we started in 2006.

Throw the bums out.

Sen. Feingold Breaks it Down

Sen. Feingold, in the video below reminds us why it is that people participate in the democratic process. It's a long lecture, but it's the most authoritative denunciation on the the government's program possible given today's classification restrictions. We can only hope that the ACLU's lawsuit, timed with Bush's signature, forces the judicial branch to step in and hold those responsible for abrogating the rights of American citizens to be held accountable in the way the law proscribes. After all, how strong is the rule of law when the government itself is known to disregard provisions and limitations on its behavior? Why should anyone be allowed to be immune from allegations of rape, for instance? Maybe I'm deranged. But someone really deranged would wonder why anyone votes at all. By the way, that's not a scream you're hearing, it's the utter silence of a society looking on in horror as an elected body completely contravenes their desires.

War and Business as Usual

When one learns of phenomenal profits reaped by elected officials during their tenure, the typical reaction isn't necessarily one of disgust. However, when one learns that several officials personally profited off of W's decision to go to war, any American citizen who claims to 'support our troops' should be incensed. Incredibly, to belabor the point with an altogether morbid and tragic twist, the fact that 2004 Democratic Presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, one is left simply flabbergasted.

Why, after all, should the voters attempt to disregard an individual's rational choice? If the decision is presented that one must vote against or otherwise hinder and impede a potentially illegal invasion of another country yet lose billions of dollars (and counting) in the process, or wave a flag and cash the checks, the voters should not expect much.

Clearly, many American politicians are in the business of war, but how much of this business is really in the public interest?

My Contempt for W

If those who are being held in contempt of Congress are above the law because they were ordered not to cooperate by Bush himself, then why not hold W in contempt? There is no article or provision that puts the President above the laws of the land. For offenses up to and including the most heinous crime against a state, treason, the President should expect, as any other citizen, the combined weight of our laws, codes, and regulations when he chooses to violate them. Otherwise, why should any other citizen expect that there will equitable enforcement of the laws? Tin foil hats aside, with just a sparse review of his conduct, there are very simple cases that can be made. For starts, how about the NSA wiretapping program that is widely acknowledged to have been illegal? Then, in the light of Grand Jury discovery, or perhaps even the threat of it, we can finally untangle the web of lies, spin, and contempt which has so characterized the way the Bush administration has treated its adoring public.

Probable Cause

Kenneth Wainstein was on NPR today discussing the warrentless wiretapping bill currently stalled in the legislature. The man must be an excelent litigator, he never became distressed even when faced with difficult questions or confrontational or callers. The part of the interview that sent me into a patriotic rage was his explination as to why FISA is insufficient to aquire necessary intelligence on terrorists. Unfortunately no transcript of the interview is available currently but audio file of the show should be on NPR's website tonite. So I will be forced to paraphraze.

Mr. Wainstein explained that FISA is insufficient because it requires them to show probable cause. Showing probable cause to a judge requires expendature of manpower and time. Those intelligence analysts and lawyers could be doing other things.

So basically the justice department finds it inconvenient and cumbersome to deal with our justice system designed to protect innocent people from abuse of police power. Or in other words, the warrentless wiretapping bill, in its avoidance of probable cause, is designed to circumvent our Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure. Or to put it another way the government wants the ability to spy on anyone with or without probable cause.

In discussions of this nature the question is often raised, "Why do you care?" or, "You should not have anything to worry about if you are not a criminal." These kinds of statements being based in a naive trust not just in the institution of government but in the individuals acting as agents of the government.

Honest, law abiding people have reason to fear not only of being wrongly accused by mistaken identity, beureucratic error, mistake from lazyness or stupidity, intentional framing by the real perpetrator of the terrorism, but we also have reason to fear simple corruption in the hourly employees of the various agencies handeling the information. For example, if you purchase anything over the internet, use internet banking, or speak about your financial information on the phone, you put your account numbers and pin numbers at risk of simple opportunistic theft by the employee handling your info.

For a real world example of things "going missing" after being handled by agents responsible for national security. boingboing

More pertinent article outlining other reasons to be conserned.

How Much Stress is Too Much?

With all due respect for our appointed public officials, whatever else you may say about them, their job is undoubtedly stressful. Sure. But, how much of an excuse is this in the face of almost naked hostility displayed by Condoleeza Rice in responding to questions from Rep. Robert Wexler (FL-19)? (Impeachment petition)

“Big Brother“ 應該怎麽翻譯？

If you think concerns about GPS positioning in cell phones is scary in a tin foil hat kind of way, or you're concerned about a few hundred thousand Social Security Numbers being inadvertently disclosed by Wisconsin state agencies, you might have read George Orwell's "nineteen eighty-four". Wang Jianzhou (王建宙）, head of China Mobile, made quite a splash at a panel about the future of cell phones, with the very literal disclosure, "We know where you are." Sure, Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google, looking to break into the cell phone market, has every right to be enthusiastic about location-based advertising, but the definition of privacy has slightly different meaning in Chinese. For instance, in the first Legal Dictionary published in Chinese after the the opening up of the Chinese marketplace and the liberalization of state regulation (改革開放)　in 1980，the only mention of privacy (隱私) relates to the privacy concerns in the case of rape of other illicit sexual activity. Admittedly, a lot can happen in the 30 years, for instance, China has become an economic superpower with a maturing discourse in civil society. A tightly disciplined form of protest against the problems of development are being demonstrated with increasing regularity, for instance, the ongoing maglev protests in Shanghai.

Congressman Edward Markey (MA - 7th) and Sony CEO Howard Stringer stand on the other side of the issue here in the United States. I, however, still sleep comfortable and content in the knowledge that the Bill of Rights will protect me from an overly intrusive government intent on invading commonly accepted and legally protected norms of telecommunications privacy. Ooops. Rep. Markey, Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Log Cabin, wouldn't agree with that statement. On Friday, the Senate voted 60-36 to reject re-writing the laws governing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance court, no matter how much Sen. Harry Reid wanted to to get Bush a bill before the February 1st deadline.

With 6 million new subscribers every month China Mobile has a significant share of the Chinese cell phone market,　and plans to list on a mainland stock exchange in the near future.　China Mobile covers their liability by mentioning in their privacy policy published online (中文) that government coercion is one reason your privacy could be violated.

Ben Franklin Report: the Economic Stimulus

In the course of putting together their bipartisan economic stimulus package together, Congressional Democrats are willing to put aside something as small as the rule of law. After all, it wouldn't be prudent to try to bring contempt citations against former White House officials during the middle of negotiations, nonetheless the mountain of lies that led up to the Iraq War.

Bush hasn't outlined his plan, per se, just given a rough outline, namely a "robust" package with a $150 billion price tag. All of the key players in Washington have some version of the stimulus on their wish list, and each has already staked out his or her position on the matter. The Republicans and Democrats in Congress are pondering how to bridge the philosophical divide between individual tax rebates and decreasing business taxes. Lou Dobbs, ever the interested observer, says that the economy is going into a recession and there isn't much that a stimulus could hope to accomplish.

Of course, the presidential candidates of both parties aren't to be left out of the fray, each of them is sticking their pole into a position. We can probably expect to see more of the petty bickering among the Democratic candidates that they've exemplified so far. What they hope to accomplish using the decade-old "No Friends in Politics" mindset that has gotten us so far over the course of Republican control of the Congress. The only candidate who is actively against the stimulus is the one candidate who isn't officially running, Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I-$$$$) of New York City, who sees the giveaway as bad fiscal policy.

Meanwhile, the Congressional Budget Office is seeing the glass as more than half full. Focusing more on the $219 billion dollar deficit that the government has run so far this year, and predicting that the economy won't hit recession levels.

Regardless of how I otherwise disagree with Mayor Bloomberg's politics, I find his position the most reasonable. With another year of phenomenal deficit in the face of countervailing trends, this drop into the general economy will prime the markets for further spending, if the authors of the agreement see their dreams come to fruition. I remain skeptical. With the further aggravation of the deficit, this will further aggravate the U.S. National Debt, and contribute to a worsening macroeconomic situation. On Aug. 9, 2009, by my rough calculations, the clock will turn over to $10 trillion dollars, or roughly the same as our annual GDP, barring additional spending or the unlikely attempt to pay it down.

As another reminder on why not to put off anything, negotiations are over and the stimulus package has been assembled. Unfortunately, workers who earned less than $75K or couples who earned less than $150K, will earn approximately $300 and $1200, respectively. This little drop is hardly likely to inspire the next bubble, unless it's for pharmaceuticals; breweries, wineries, and distilleries; or for local head shops.

The Scent of Rage

According to the principal deputy director of intelligence, Donald Kerr, the American people need to reconsider what they consider to be known as "privacy." This, of course, follows in the wake of the revelation of AT&T's involvement in the terrorist surveillance program. This week is the week to pressure your Senator, especially if they are on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Of course, he is an appointed official who has to worry about his superiors above in producing quotes. Otherwise, he might have said something rational. Stranger things have happened.

Rage for Breakfast

In a case of trying to have one's cake and eat it, too, the Bush Administration, through the Departments of Justice and State (re: more political interference in the federal bureaucracy) is pushing Congress to not adopt the Sudan Accountability and Divestment Act, which appears to be the brainchild of savedarfur.org . As loathesome as the conduct of the Bush Administration may be at times, this is by far the worst case of hypocricy and ineptitude that has been demonstrated thus far. I mean, it may not seem like the most pressing issue in the world to some, and I'm not going to touch upon the obvious question that this viewpoint raises. However, in this situation, even a little practical U.S. support in the form of even an AWACS or two tasked to administer a no-fly zone to support the UN Peacekeepers, could go a long way toward bringing about a sustainable resolution to the issue. Given the strong response that the crisis drew from the administration in the past, notably in the speeches of former Secretary of State Colin Powell and current Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, one would think that they might consider more than just their political backing. Which brings me to, perhaps, the most important question raised by this entire affair, just who is the administration protecting? Whose stock price stands to take a tumble after retirement funds and pension boards all over the country divest themselves of corporations doing business in the Sudan?

Rage is clinically proven to be a better stimulant than a morning cup of coffee.

FEMA impersonates Journalists

FEMA has been caught sending its own staffers to impersonate members of the media to lob softball questions during press conferences. Lest we forgit, the Bush administration has been caught doing something like this before when it was discovered that a member of the Whitehouse press corps was actually working for a "news source" that was funded by a wing of the Republican party. That and their press secretary for the last year or so has been former Fox News man Tony Snow.

This brings up two of the major problems I have with the current situation. I cant blame the administration because we (by which I mean YOU) are letting them get away with blatant wrongdoing. They keep using the same tricks over and over and never face any consequences because they refuse to cooperate with anyone who would impose any consequences on their malfeasence. The part that makes me spit with rage is that, that very refusal is the end of any discussion of punishment or wrongdoing. Noone holds their feet to the fire and wnenever they try or the suggestion comes up the Democrats fold and slink away with their tails between their legs.

The horribly sad thing is that the Democrats seem to be week because they are leaderless, which suggest to me that they dont actually have anything to offer once you get past whatever charismatic mask they slap on the front of the monster.

I hate them because they are such failures against such a guileless foe.

The Wisconsin Crazy, Oct 21

There are many types of crazies in Wisconsin, roughly raging from the overly zealous millenarian Christian to the armed, violent drug addict. However, on some special occasions, the Crazy takes the form of someone in a position of importance, just remember what McCarthy, another native son, did during his illustrious political career. Agitator, soothsayer, or just another crazy person that isn't begging, I'll leave that for you to decide. Today's crazy is 31 year old Tom Nelson, Democrat, and State Representative from the very Republican 5th district, just west of Green Bay. Rep. Nelson has lost patience for his colleagues in the state legislature and is holding what is, sadly only a one man, live-in protest in the state capitol building. There are rumors that there is a state budget ready to be voted on, a compromise between Gov. Doyle's higher taxes and State Assembly Republicans' reactionary fiscal conservatism. I would have to agree that Rep. Nelson that the budget fight isn't over until the votes are tallied.

Why Don't You Know You Are Free Wednesday II

To bring everyone in the class up to speed on what has transpired so far, the Bush Administration embarked upon a path to violate, in part or whole, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in February of 2001, well before the 9/11 attacks. At least AT&T, Verizon, and BellSouth were involved in the program as it was established. In the case of Qwest, though, the Bush administration met resistance in the person of Joseph Nacchio. Fast forward to today, Mr. Nacchio was sentenced to a six year jail sentence over the summer, in what some might call a political trial, especially given the fact that the defendant couldn't testify about classified information. Now the phone utilities involved in this heinous violation of the law are refusing to release details about their cooperation. Although the above pieces does describe the FBI's methodlogy behind the eavesdropping. But if a friend of a friend has a name close to 'Bin Laden,' you've probably been eavesdropped on.

Here's a brief refresher on the definitions of suspicion and reasonable doubt.

And Texas is the freest state in the union.

In related news, the House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly in support of a moratorium on state and local Internet taxes. Who are the two members of the House of Representatives that would be so bold as to vote against this? None other than Rep. Anna G. Eshoo, Democrat from California's 14th and Rep. Michael Turner, Republican of Ohio's 3rd. Rep. Eshoo represents Palo Alto, and has this statement strongly in favor of the moratorium on her website. The only reason she voted against it, is because it is temporary. The funny part is that Rep. Turner's vote was apparently an accident.

Texas Legislature Antics

This is so funny that it requires very little introduction, but it does seem really funny considering the voting reform legislation the piece begins with.