tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-293206752024-03-14T00:54:11.502-07:00(insert title here)registered contrarian since 2003Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.comBlogger997125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-56850463201245204522013-10-01T15:52:00.000-07:002013-10-21T15:57:20.810-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhx2D80ptto9mxWyLfS-oUuIuwRx7xLkr9ja7onAujSfJQoARo3wGb4SGFn5wiYi6E9v6Z308p4i4FtSEB7uwaM6QLVhCB4onTniHR1YHKQ1Elf0mXtfRrS_ExjTHRwUBdNgCFw4Q/s1600/closed.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhx2D80ptto9mxWyLfS-oUuIuwRx7xLkr9ja7onAujSfJQoARo3wGb4SGFn5wiYi6E9v6Z308p4i4FtSEB7uwaM6QLVhCB4onTniHR1YHKQ1Elf0mXtfRrS_ExjTHRwUBdNgCFw4Q/s320/closed.jpg" /></a></div>
Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-62126102103169600392013-09-03T09:32:00.000-07:002013-09-03T09:48:45.625-07:00<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-size: small;">If the
chief danger associated with failing to punish Bashar al-Assad for gassing his people
is that it will embolden our supposed enemies, shouldn’t it follow that
by punishing him, we would expect it would be less likely for another
country to do the same sort of thing? And if so, doesn’t Assad's recent
behavior itself stand in refutation of this assertion? Put another way,
what <i>didn’t</i> we do to Saddam Hussein? To be sure, <i>he</i> is permanently
“deterred”. But his neighbors seem no less deterred than ever. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-size: small;">The key
here, to my mind, is that it is a mistake to try and make sense of Assad’s
behavior (and Qadaffi's before him) in terms of how US policy affects it.
Game it out, from Assad's perspective: he faces an armed insurrection of
religious fanatics who will surely execute him if they prevail. If he
puts them down with force, he may face recriminations from the US and/or
the international community. But if he doesn’t put the insurrection
down, he is as good as dead anyway. <i>Ergo</i>, he really has nothing to lose
by fighting his rebels by whatever means he deems necessary. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-size: small;">(If
there is any lesson we ought to be taking away from Syria, it is that
attempting to broker a swift, safe, and peaceful exit for the occasional
tyrant is a policy approach that really should be examined. It may
offend our sense of justice to have these men living out their days in
comfortable obscurity, but how many Syrian lives--never mind US blood
and treasure--could have been saved had Assad retired to Tehran 12
months ago? But this is a discussion for another day; that ship sailed
for Assad when he gassed his people.) </span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">The
neoconservatives (and their occasional humanitarian interventionist
fellow travelers) worry about the perception of US power on the part of
our supposed enemies. What they <i>should</i> worry about is our own failure to
perceive the limits of our own power. The unexamined assumption that we
can do everything is diminishing our ability to do anything, faster and
more thoroughly than any Syrian gas or Iranian nuke ever could. </span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><b>Brief addendum:</b> I wasn't even going to talk about the president--because I couldn't care less about what all this means for his political fortunes, or those of his SecState or Congress--but Sully's <a href="http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/09/03/marching-as-to-war/">summation</a> is worth quoting in full:</span></span></span><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
If the Congress votes no – which, given the current arguments, it
obviously should – then the president should accede to the wishes of the
American people as voiced by their representatives. If he were to do
that, the kind of transformation Obama promised in America’s foreign
policy would be given a huge boost. This would be a president who
brought Congress back into the key decisions of war and peace as the
ultimate authority on them, as the Founders intended. It would be seen
by history as the first key step away from the imperial presidency and
the beginning of democratic accountability for the permanent war
machine.</blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
This could, in other words, be the dawn of a new, realist and
constitutional age. Or the final death-throes of an empire that won’t
quit until it bankrupts us both fiscally and morally. That’s why next
week’s debate is so critical. And why Obama can still come out ahead on
this, even as the conventional Washington wisdom will surely be all
about his humiliation in a zero-sum narrative whose attention span is
the next five minutes. If he defers to Congress on a new war in the
Middle East, we are definitively in a new era.</blockquote>
<br />
One hopes. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"> </span></span></span>Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-47370641365717537442013-08-27T18:43:00.000-07:002013-08-27T18:43:56.709-07:00nothing to gain, everything to lose<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUQKcKBoqs4hIuRpl3BIMOLL-Aw_rHQ6ROpSaD8Y2TSyJEOLsRmeGJ-1o5b6ms_1uAH4-OR4wFliUTkPsqOIQxwuKLxOfpXTpS2NCtEGCTV_3jab4I2wn8ZVOD1eE8DUCulzC_gg/s1600/lola+rennt_881.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUQKcKBoqs4hIuRpl3BIMOLL-Aw_rHQ6ROpSaD8Y2TSyJEOLsRmeGJ-1o5b6ms_1uAH4-OR4wFliUTkPsqOIQxwuKLxOfpXTpS2NCtEGCTV_3jab4I2wn8ZVOD1eE8DUCulzC_gg/s1600/lola+rennt_881.jpg" title="Groundhog Day just seemed a little too obvious" /></a></div>
<span style="font-size: small;">I’ve
been silent here (and pretty quiet elsewhere) for nearly two months now.
At first, because I simply had other things on my plate that took
precedence (a cross-continental move, finishing up old business on one
side of the country, starting a new job on the other, setting up a new
household, and trying to breathe a little in the interstices.) Later,
because I found I just didn’t miss this very much. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-size: small;">Which is a roundabout way of me saying that the two-month hiatus from
blogging I’ve been on will continue indefinitely. I know better than to
say “permanently”, chiefly because I have a few times before. But I will
say, it feels different this time. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-size: small;">Or
rather, it doesn’t at all, and that is kind of my point. When I started
doing this a little over a decade ago, my country had just waded into a
war in the middle east, justified largely by the fact that another
country’s leader had murdered his own people using
means that were somehow less morally acceptable than the
time-honored tradition of hurling enough mass with sufficient force into
a human body as to cause it to cease functioning. No one questioned
that that man was repugnant thug unworthy of the title “human”, much
less “president”. Nor that his people were suffering immeasurably under
his thumb. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-size: small;">The
problem was, no one seemed to be able—or importantly, willing—to make
the case that by intervening with force, we wouldn’t make an already bad
situation worse. Never mind making the case for the likelihood of a "good" outcome. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-size: small;">If this show is going into re-runs, count me out. I’ve said it all already. </span></div>
Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-60390579075242493622013-06-25T10:19:00.000-07:002013-06-25T19:26:54.663-07:00(insert snowden pun here) <a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2013/06/25/opening_act_snowden_hunt.html">Dave Weigel</a>:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
At the risk of sounding overly Team Obama, is [tracking down Edward Snowden] like those
other crises? This is a pretty-please campaign of asking other states to
hand over a 30-year-old guy who leaked some greatest hits from his NSA
homework. The insertion of the president in the negotiation raises the
political stakes for the leaders of those states, the risks of failure
are high, and they're especially pathetic. Remember when Obama
personally appealed for Chicago to get the Olympics, and failed? Imagine
that on a grander scandal.</blockquote>
<br />
This seems about right to me. Set aside for the moment the relative merits of Snowden's cause and actions--elevating his fugitive status just strikes me as a dumb move. How many Chinese and Russian dissidents have been granted asylum in the U.S., over the objections of those countries? <b><i>Of course</i></b> they are going to be uncooperative about it when presented with the rare opportunity to aid an American dissident. Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-78493188632568510652013-06-24T12:20:00.003-07:002013-06-24T12:20:56.091-07:00ground rushThe movers are coming a week from today. They were originally supposed to be coming Saturday; when I found out that they weren't I was initially pissed off (mostly because it necessitated a hasty re-negotiation with my landlord, whose graciousness in the matter made what could have been a clusterfuck no big deal) but now I am relieved. I could use an extra couple of days to catch my breath.<br />
<br />
Officially, I am still at work until the end of the week; unofficially, I'm hoping to get that down to about 3.5 days.<br />
<br />
We are planning a trip to Winnipeg en route (not strictly en route, but close enough in the context of a 3000-mile drive to be worth it) to see our niece (and a few adult family members, if we must) who will be turning 1 year old while we are there. I'm looking forward to that. I'm also looking forward to a nice long drive across Alberta and Saskatchewan, but that may change if <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity/2013/06/your-photos-of-southern-alberta-floods.html#mid=11723367&offset=1&page=&s=">Alberta is still flooded</a> this time next week. <br />
<br />
The delay in the movers means we will have a little less time on our hands to mosey across the countries than I would have preferred, but hopefully we will get to do a little bit along the way. See some giant ball of twine, or maybe pull off in Chicago long enough to grab a hot dog. (That'll be about all we can do, as we will have an actual dog in tow.)<br />
<br />
Anyway, even though I've been down this road a few times now, it still feels quite surreal and slightly panicked. I'm definitely glad we're not trying to buy a house at the same time. For us, landing two good jobs in the same metro at the same time (and it happening to be one in which we are quite eager to live again) is enough a coup. No need to press our luck.<br />
<br />
I will probably be a bit of a non-entity in the land of ones and zeros for a while. Stay out of trouble.<br />
<br />Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-19093012410484973212013-06-19T12:53:00.000-07:002013-06-19T12:53:49.210-07:00probably the last time i will blog about seattle politicsThere's a <a href="http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/whos-the-boss/Content?oid=17059428">mayoral election</a> coming up, which I will no longer be around to vote in. So, I won't belabor the point here. I suspect incumbent Mike McGinn may benefit from the fact that so many people are running against him in the primary (we have a non-partisan, top two candidates go to the general primary system in WA). And at the moment, it would appear that it will be down to McGinn and either Ed Murray (who has zero experience with city issues, and whose effectiveness in Olympia is frankly questionable) or Peter Steinbrueck, who is much more conversant in the issues of the city, but on the wrong side of too many of them (especially density and transit).<br />
<br />
I think McGinn has dropped the ball on handling SPD, and that is not trivial. However, as far as the local economy goes, <a href="http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/06/19/jobs-killing-socialism-drives-seattles-unemployment-rate-down-to-47-percent">Seattle is doing really, really well</a>. And even though McGinn can hardly take credit for all of that, it matters.<br />
<br />
Apart from the police issue, the main complaint I hear about McGinn is that he just isn't nice enough. (File this as an "only in the Pacific Northwest" thing.) Given that the state government in Olympia is frequently and actively hostile to the city's interest, I consider that a feature, not a bug.<br />
<br />
Steinbrueck is in denial about where the city is and where it is going. (The best description I've heard, and I apologize for not remembering from whom I've heard it, is "approaching San Francisco-like density with a Phoenix-like transportation system".) Murray, as far as I can tell, just really, really wants to be our First Gay Mayor, in an era where being "X's first Y Z" is becoming increasingly less noteworthy by the moment. (And that is a <i>good</i> thing.) <br />
<br />
In other words, I don't see any reason to expect Murray to be particularly competent, and I worry that Steinbreuck would competently implement policies that are not in the city's best interest. McGinn may not be perfect, but I really think it would be foolish not to give him another term, given the options. Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-2894412165199158632013-06-19T10:55:00.001-07:002013-06-19T10:55:57.554-07:00with diplomats like these......<a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-18/pentagon-shoots-down-kerry-s-syria-airstrike-plan.html">who needs a War Department?</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Twenty years ago, in a debate over
the war in Bosnia, Madeleine Albright, then the U.S. ambassador
to the United Nations, issued a challenge to the chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Colin Powell. Albright wanted the
U.S. to confront an aggressive Serbia; Powell and the Pentagon
were hesitant. Albright grew frustrated: “What’s the point of
having this superb military that you’re always talking about if
we can’t use it?” Albright asked. Powell later said that he
thought Albright was going to give him an aneurysm.<br />
<br />
Flash-forward to this past Wednesday. At a principals
meeting in the White House situation room, Secretary of State
John Kerry began arguing, vociferously, for immediate U.S.
airstrikes against airfields under the control of Bashar al-Assad’s Syrian regime -- specifically, those fields it has used
to launch chemical weapons raids against rebel forces.<br />
<br />
It was at this point that the current chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, the usually mild-mannered Army General Martin Dempsey, spoke up, loudly. According to several sources, Dempsey
threw a series of brushback pitches at Kerry, demanding to know
just exactly what the post-strike plan would be and pointing out
that the State Department didn’t fully grasp the complexity of
such an operation.<br />
<br />
Dempsey informed Kerry that the Air Force could not simply
drop a few bombs, or fire a few missiles, at targets inside
<a href="http://topics.bloomberg.com/syria/">Syria</a>: To be safe, the U.S. would have to neutralize Syria’s
integrated air-defense system, an operation that would require
700 or more sorties. At a time when the U.S. military is
exhausted, and when sequestration is ripping into the Pentagon
budget, Dempsey is said to have argued that a demand by the
State Department for precipitous military action in a murky
civil war wasn’t welcome. </blockquote>
<br />
Holy hell. If anyone should be able to grasp the problems with "precipitous military action in a murky civil war," it's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kerry#Anti-war_activism_.281970.E2.80.931971.29">John Fucking Kerry</a>. Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-36054527664280028332013-06-19T09:58:00.001-07:002013-06-19T09:58:59.221-07:00big wheel keep on turnin'<blockquote class="tr_bq">
You know we armed Iraq. I wondered about that too, you know. During the Persian Gulf war,
those intelligence reports would come out: "Iraq: incredible weapons –
incredible weapons." "How do you know that?" "Uh, well … we looked at
the receipts. But as soon as that check clears, we're goin' in." </blockquote>
<div style="text-align: right;">
--William Melvin Hicks, c. 1993 </div>
Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-57226476094623883052013-06-18T09:09:00.000-07:002013-06-18T09:09:02.184-07:00further comment is not requiredWill Wilkinson on the security state. Just<a href="http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2013/06/cost-benefit-analysis-and-state-secrecy?fsrc=scn%2Ftw_ec%2Ffoiled_plots_and_bathtub_falls"> read it</a>. Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-67024536834843665502013-06-17T11:39:00.002-07:002013-06-17T11:39:34.359-07:00edward snowden in his own wordsFrom a very long <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/17/edward-snowden-nsa-files-whistleblower">reader Q&A at The Guardian</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<br />
Further, it's important to bear in mind I'm being called a traitor by
men like former Vice President Dick Cheney. This is a man who gave us
the warrantless wiretapping scheme as a kind of atrocity warm-up on the
way to deceitfully engineering a conflict that has killed over 4,400 and
maimed nearly 32,000 Americans, as well as leaving over 100,000 Iraqis
dead. Being called a traitor by Dick Cheney is the highest honor you can
give an American, and the more panicked talk we hear from people like
him, Feinstein, and King, the better off we all are. If they had taught a
class on how to be the kind of citizen Dick Cheney worries about, I
would have finished high school. </blockquote>
Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-90879715060901299732013-06-13T19:20:00.000-07:002013-06-13T19:20:11.767-07:00pretty sure i've seen this movie beforeWell, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/14/world/middleeast/syria-chemical-weapons.html?hp&pagewanted=all&_r=0">fuck</a>. Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-37824689447449786352013-06-13T10:56:00.000-07:002013-06-13T10:56:09.683-07:00us law should not be a tool for international criminalsI <a href="http://samedishdifferentsauce.blogspot.com/2013/02/why-prostitution-isnt-like-pot.html">mentioned my evolving views </a>on the subject of legalizing prostitution a little while ago, my main misgiving being that legalization does not appear (at least in the cases examined) to do a great deal towards preventing human trafficking, and in fact may <a href="http://www2.lse.ac.uk/newsAndMedia/news/archives/2012/12/Legalised-prostitution-increases-human-trafficking.aspx">make it worse</a>. <br />
<br />
This <a href="http://www.wgbhnews.org/underground-trade-boston-bangkok">recent series</a> on the subject of human trafficking by WGBH is well worth your time. I listened to the last installment this morning, that summarized what can be done to combat this problem. I found some of their recommendations more satisfying than others, but most glaring to me was the policy recommendation that they didn't make, at least not explicitly:<br />
<br />
Blanket, permanent immigration amnesty for suspected victims of human trafficking.<br />
<br />
And yes, I do mean "suspected"--more specifically, that the crime of trafficking need not be "proven" in a legal sense (that no one need be convicted for it) for the victims to qualify for amnesty.<br />
<br />
One of the greatest weapons traffickers have against their victims in the US is fear of running afoul of US authorities, of being deported and/or imprisoned, and --importantly--of <a href="http://www.immigratingtoday.com/2012/03/dont-become-banned-from-us.html">being permanently banned from the US</a>. This is a <i>tremendous</i> disincentive for trafficking victims to come forward. In effect, the traffickers are using US immigration law against their victims.<br />
<br />
One might argue that putting such a broad amnesty in place creates a back door to immigration, that the system will be ripe for abuse. Perhaps. But personally, I am a great deal less concerned about someone getting into the US on a false pretense of being a victim of trafficking than I am about the trafficking happening under our noses going unpunished. Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-89627766078310788432013-06-10T23:07:00.000-07:002013-06-10T23:07:27.038-07:00david brooks on the issue of the dayHe manages to <a href="http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/opinion/brooks-the-solitary-leaker.html">spill a few hundred words</a> wildly speculating about Snowden's motives and absolutely none on the merits of the NSA program itself. Where to begin? Never mind, take it away, Twitter:<br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Ok, seriously, are we chimpanzees? We've decided we need to debate whether Ed Snowden is personally a dick rather than what he's revealed?<br />
— Julian Sanchez (@normative) <a href="https://twitter.com/normative/status/344291606377144321">June 11, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script><br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
If you think, say, John McCain is a ego-maniacal jerk... does that make what he did in Vietnam less heroic?<br />
— Conor Friedersdorf (@conor64) <a href="https://twitter.com/conor64/status/344306308360589312">June 11, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script><br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Edward Snowden saw something, said something.<br />
— Daniel Lin (@DLin71) <a href="https://twitter.com/DLin71/status/343823696475090944">June 9, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script><br />
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
"Invisible bonds"? Check. "Fraying social fabric"? Check. Demon individualism? Check. Yep. It's David Brooks. <a href="http://t.co/ASL7578hwg" title="http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/opinion/brooks-the-solitary-leaker.html">mobile.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/opi…</a><br />
— radleybalko (@radleybalko) <a href="https://twitter.com/radleybalko/status/344302774693031936">June 11, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script><br />
I mean...you do realize that Snowden in all likelihood outed himself to make it harder for the government to <b><i>kill</i></b> him, right? Given what he has firsthand knowledge of, I think it is fair to say that his assessment of his chances of being found out might be...slightly better than average. <br />
<br />
So fine, speculate about his motives, his politics, and whether or not he'd make a good neighbor. But maybe, just maybe, it is worth considering that he knowingly put himself at considerable risk for a cause he considered much greater than himself. Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-26313725779542204762013-06-10T17:34:00.000-07:002013-06-10T17:34:14.433-07:00(in which i begin my career as a quasi-anonymous political operative)I've <a href="http://samedishdifferentsauce.blogspot.com/2013/04/when-place-you-love-goes-horribly-wrong.html">mentioned </a>that things are getting a little bit nutty down in Raleigh. Truth be told, I've barely scratched the surface of it. Expect more on that when I am in thick of it.<br />
<br />
I've come to realize that life in Seattle has made this libertarian-leaning liberal a bit...<i>complacent</i>. Don't get me wrong--I'm happy to see my neighbors getting (legally) married. I'm happy to know that no one in my state is going to go to jail for simply having pot. It's really pretty great when one of the most heated topics of local debate is whether we need more bike lanes or not.<br />
<br />
But I'm moving back to the front lines. And holing up on the island of comparative sanity that is Durham and Chapel Hill just isn't going to do.<br />
<br />
So I've started a <a href="http://insurgenc.blogspot.com/">new project</a>, which I intend to be unapologetically partisan in purpose, but ruthlessly data-driven in execution. Putting it bluntly, it's going to be wonky as fuck, which is why I'm not doing it here. And I'm serious about the fact that it will <b>not </b>be a venue for partisan debate. The only debates entertained there will be how best to go about defeating Republicans in North Carolina. <br />
<br />
This may--if I have the juice to maintain it for as long as I hope--take a little bit away from the goings-on here. But don't worry; I don't have the attention span to only ever write about <i>one thing</i>...Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-59502564060952525672013-05-31T09:21:00.000-07:002013-05-31T09:21:19.397-07:00friday tab clearing--A great write-up about Durham, NC-based start-up <a href="http://www.indyweek.com/indyweek/will-the-elf-from-durham-based-organic-transit-save-the-planet/Content?oid=3644982">Organic Transit</a>, who is producing what might very well be the most innovative and promising alternative to the automobile in the United States, if not the world. (By way of disclosure: employees 1 and 5 are close personal friends of mine, I donated to their Kickstarter, and I've gotten to take the ELF for a test drive. It's pretty awesome.) <br /><br />--Marijuana is <a href="http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/05/30/seattle-entrepreneur-plans-100-million-national-chain-of-pot-stores">going corporate</a>. It's a brave new world. <br />
<br />
--James Lipton was a pimp. No, <a href="http://www.parade.com/17599/dotsonrader/inside-the-actors-studio-host-james-lipton-on-his-favorite-interview-and-pimping-in-paris/">seriously</a>.<br />
<br />
--<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqFaiVNuy1k">Patrick Stewart</a>: still one of the <a href="http://samedishdifferentsauce.blogspot.com/2012/07/happy-birthday-mr-stewart.html">coolest human beings</a> alive. Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-60464780741133806452013-05-31T09:06:00.001-07:002013-05-31T09:06:25.898-07:00that'll be the last time i link to the daily callerAs the great man said: fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice...<a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/05/the-fake-story-about-the-irs-commissioner-and-the-white-house/276399/">we won't get fooled again</a>. Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-57382855663119678102013-05-30T09:56:00.001-07:002013-05-30T15:51:41.266-07:00white house smoke in the irs scandal? (updated--probably not) <img height="380" src="http://dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Obama-admin-visitors.jpg" width="400" /><br />
(Compiled by and further discussed at <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/29/irss-shulman-had-more-public-white-house-visits-than-any-cabinet-member/#ixzz2UnHj90Ln">The Daily Caller</a>)<br />
<br />
I'm with <a href="http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/05/30/explain-this-mr-president/">Sully</a> on this: there are <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/09/daily-caller-still-wrong-tucker-carlson">plenty of reasons</a> to distrust The Daily Caller as a source. But they appear to be drawing from public records, and acknowledge the caveats of the data (specifically, that not all high-level visits to the White House are logged). And in any case, 150+ visits by the IRS commissioner to the White House seems like a hell of a lot in <i>absolute </i>terms; never mind how that actually compares with Eric Holder or Hillary Clinton. <br />
<br />
This needs an explanation from the top. And soon.<br />
<br />
<b>UPDATE: </b>Andrew Sullivan's readers are doing a <a href="http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/05/30/explain-this-mr-carlson/">pretty thorough job</a> of dismantling this--or at least going a long way towards pointing out that The Daily Caller has (shockingly) skewed the data to cast the President in the worst possible light. To wit:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I shared the same concern regarding the disclosure of IRS
Commissioner Shulman’s visits to the White House. But they were quickly
assuaged when I looked at the actual data, which can be downloaded <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/disclosures/visitor-records" target="_blank">here</a>. The correspondence from your reader <a href="http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/05/30/explain-this-mr-president/">on your updated post</a>
seems absolutely correct – looks like many (if not most) were about
health care. I engaged in a cursory review of the first 20 or so Shulman
entiries, and virtually all were with individuals involved with the
health care reform proposal. In particular, the contact for most of the
initial meetings was Nancy-Ann Deparle, the Deputy Chief of Staff for
Policy, who was at the center of shaping health care reform. One entry
specifically notes that it was for the “bi-weekly health reform deputies
meeting.”<br />
<br />
I did not review all the entries, and it is conceivable that there
are others that raise suspicions. But the log make one thing very
clear: “visiting the White House” does not mean a meeting with the
president. Typically, it means (and apparently did in Shulman’s
case) meetings with policy wonks and other staff. Given
Shulman participation in such policy meetings, it is hardly surprising
that he was there frequently, or that a lower-level official might be
present at the White House far more often than a cabinet secretary.</blockquote>
Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-62327310324579709512013-05-30T09:30:00.000-07:002013-05-30T09:31:03.602-07:00in which i praise (some of) the media, for onceI had jotted a mental note to myself yesterday, to write a post pointing out the absurdity of Eric Holder's <a href="http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/05/29/eric-holder-continues-to-do-wrong-things">offer</a> to meet with Washington bureau chiefs to discuss the DOJ's policies vis a vis the investigation of journalists <i>off the record, </i>and to suggest that were said bureau chiefs to agree to such a thing one might reasonably consider that a (further) abdication of the press's duty to serve as watchdog of those in power. <br />
<br />
But it appears that a good many of them <a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/eric-holder-off-the-record-meeting-92029.html">have reached the same conclusion</a> without my help. <br />
<br />
So I will simply say: good for CNN, Fox News, CBS News, McClatchy, The Associated Press, The New York Times and The Huffington Post, and shame on ABC and The Washington Post.<br />
Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-1015641431641781852013-05-22T11:58:00.001-07:002013-05-22T11:58:53.618-07:00i love this<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="157.5" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/0LP3Zs_V_BQ" width="280"></iframe><br />
<br />
Geez, Wolfie...condescend much?<br />
<br />
Give this woman credit: if you are an atheist living in the Bible Belt, and find yourself put on the spot like this (never mind on national television), it is frankly a hell of a lot easier to just smile politely and go along with things. (I know of what I speak, here.) <br /><br />She stays true to herself, and does so graciously. She's magnanimous towards her neighbors (some of whom--I absolutely guarantee you--are going to give her shit about this.) And she doesn't say anything along the lines of, "no, I don't feel I should 'thank the Lord' for killing someone else's children instead of mine this time."<br />
<br />
(Which is probably what I would have done.) Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-41619551271627159892013-05-17T11:15:00.000-07:002013-05-17T15:37:32.542-07:00friday jam: wugazi A buddy of mine sent me a CD with a metric ton of music on it a while back, and it's taken me a while to get around to listening to it all. Which is a real shame, because now I know how much time I could have been listening to <a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=29320675#editor/target=post;postID=4161955127162715989">Wugazi's 13 Chamber</a>s, but wasn't<br />
<br />
A mash-up of songs from the Wu-Tang Clan and Fugazi sounds like it could be gimmicky. Hell, it sounds like it <i>should</i> be gimmicky. And there is every reason to expect it to be terrible, because <a href="http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/4/4064574/nins-head-like-a-hole-mashed-with-call-me-maybe-is-perfect">most mash-ups are terrible</a>. But this isn't. Not only is it not terrible, it's 13 amazing tracks that could each stand on their own.<br />
<br />
Just as one example (and I could probably do this for every track)...I don't think that I would have ever noticed the rhythmic consonance between the menacing piano hook of ODB's "Shimmy Shimmy Ya":<br />
<br /><br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/4ITLNzPoEqs" width="420"></iframe><br />
...and the understated <s>guitar</s> bass riff of Fugazi's "Forensic Scene":
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/3HrKh1fdxHM" width="420"></iframe><br />
...much less would I have imagined that combining them just so would produce this:
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/G1WoEkx6H4Q" width="420"></iframe><br />
<br />
This might be the greatest gateway drug for hip-hop in a long, long time.
Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-67205139666748605622013-05-16T06:26:00.001-07:002013-05-16T06:26:54.472-07:00how to take a leak in privacy (or something like that)Some solid, practical <a href="http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/05/listen-up-future-deep-throats-this-is-how-to-leak-to-the-press-today/">advice:</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Of course, the job still isn’t finished. When you are done you must clear the browser’s cookies and turn off the Wi-Fi before turning off the computer and removing the battery. The dedicated computer should never be used on the network except when checking your press-contact account and only from open Wi-Fi connections away from home and work.</span></blockquote>
<div>
More--lots more--at the link. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-79028930595676165682013-05-10T11:57:00.000-07:002013-05-10T11:57:57.653-07:00the problem is people (and it always is) Farhad Manjoo <a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/life/a_fine_whine/2013/05/i_hate_dogs_they_re_lounging_in_our_offices_and_licking_us_at_our_cafes.html">wrote</a> yesterday about the invasion of public spaces by canines and their owners. This has, predictably, kicked up a chorus of what passes for discussion these days. <br /><br />This is silly. Manjoo raises some perfectly reasonable objections to dogs being off leash where they shouldn't, being present where they shouldn't, and being poorly controlled by their owners in public situations. (I say this as someone who will take <a href="http://www.theagitator.com/2012/06/10/sunday-evening-dog-blogging-reader-dogs-9/">his dog </a>anywhere and everywhere that he can. After all, poorly controlled dogs are a problem for other dogs, too.) But this has nothing to do with dogs. You could write the same piece about children (Manjoo halfheartedly acknowledges as much himself), cell phone usage, bicycle riders, wearing perfume, leaf blowers, and probably a dozen other things that people do or have in public, that can either be handled with some basic consideration for the people around you, or not.<br />
<br />
To single out dogs (or any of those other things) as being a particular scourge on society is to miss the point entirely. We should be talking about basic manners. <br />
<br />
<br />
Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-59528446987624523612013-05-07T15:53:00.000-07:002013-05-07T15:53:13.951-07:00i've been on this road so long i'm going in circles nowI've kept mum about this here, since it has been up in the air for a lot longer than I would have preferred, but as I now have it in writing, and (by the time this actually publishes) have informed my current employer (not that he reads or knows about this page), I suppose I can say that this blog and its attendant author will be pulling up stakes and leaving Seattle in just under two months. <br />
<br />
We will be moving to Durham, NC, which long-time readers will know is <a href="http://samedishdifferentsauce.blogspot.com/search?q=durham">familiar ground</a>. <br />
<br />
Without going into a lot of googlable detail, I've gotten a much, much better job in the RTP area. I will still be doing science, but in a more collaborative and interdisciplinary environment, and at a much more "big picture" level. <br />
<br />
That's all I should probably say about the job here and now. My wife and I are both very, very excited about this. Seattle has been a great place to live--I think that it is, for all its quirks, one of the better governed and most livable major cities in the country. Life here was great, and I'm grateful to have had a few years to experience it. We've met some wonderful people here, and hope that a few will remain lifelong friends. <br />
<br />
However, despite its charms, I don't think I've ever felt truly at home, here. My work situation has been very, very difficult, and it wouldn't surprise me that given a better situation on that side of things if I would have found myself happy to put down roots and never leave. But that is not the hand I was dealt. <br />
<br />
More than that, though, is that I've felt a nagging pull back to Durham since we left. We have friends there that aren't "like" family to us, they <i>are</i> family to us. And the community there is something very hard to explain, but very, very special. I'm amazed and humbled that the job market (and especially <i>this</i> job market) has provided us with an opportunity to go back to the one place I really do feel is home. <br />
<br />
This will be my fourth major relocation in 14 years. But I'm hoping that it will be my last. Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-46489073639492807452013-05-07T10:23:00.000-07:002013-05-07T10:23:33.166-07:00<a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/07/us-usa-missing-ohio-idUSBRE94600620130507">This</a> is just nuts. I hope someone does these poor young women a solid and makes sure they know what a horrible person <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5x8ARIxg51I">Nancy Grace</a> is. Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29320675.post-67699917364842154562013-05-06T09:22:00.000-07:002013-05-06T09:22:06.554-07:00the war on salt waterI just got an email forwarded to me that originated with the WA Board of Pharmacy, to the effect that sterile saline for injection is considered a "legend drug" for the purposes of regulation. Which means--I kid you not--that it has to be kept under lock and key, logged per usage, and disposed of per very specific protocols. <br /><br />I don't even think I need to add a joke, here. Brianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06799024060528185282noreply@blogger.com5