Avoiding Whiplash

If you're following the whole "healthcare reform" process, you're at serious risk for whiplash (which is why I've kept my distance). Both the political debate and the public debate have sunk into street theater, instead of movement toward a goal.
On the political side, the "public option" is back and forth like a tennis ball at Wimbledon. It's in, it's out, it's back in, or maybe it's out. It's going to be "bi-partisan", but one party will oppose anything at all. So the Dems will go it alone. Except if they don't. Even if you're paying close attention to the process, the picture is about as clear as mud.
The public debate is even more absurd. People with guns screaming about "death panels" get TV airtime as if they were credible. People on Medicare decrying "government run healthcare", proving we really need a better mental health system, seemingly have zero sense of irony. Never mind the "facts" (which are rather dull), let's focus on the absurd. The lobbyists are having a field day. It would be really entertaining if it weren't so tragic.
Somewhere in reality there is the main actual proposal, H.R. 3200. While it's certainly going to go through changes in the reconciliation process, this is what is actually currently "on the table". Good friend badtux the snarky penguin has put together the best summary analysis that I've read so far:

Well, basically, HR3200 is a strange amalgation of the German system -- which has publically owned nonprofit sickness funds and for-profit insurers largely funded by employer contributions with all citizens required to purchase insurance if not provided by employer (and all employers required to provide insurance for their employees) -- and the Swiss system, where individuals purchase insurance in a heavily regulated must-issue must-have individual insurance market (that is, insurers are required to issue insurance that meets minimum standards w/no pre-existing conditions exclusions, and individuals are required to purchase insurance). Subsidies are provided in both systems so that people who cannot afford to buy insurance on their own can afford to buy insurance, and HR3200 includes similar subsidies. One thing HR3200 does *not* do is force employers to provide insurers -- if employers refuse to provide insurance, instead HR3200 taxes them 8% of payroll
in order to fund subsidies so the employees themselves can afford to buy individual insurance.

There's no reason why HR3200 should not work as designed -- the public option in the German system keeps costs low, the 8% tax encourages employers to provide employer-provided insurance, while the various mandates and subsidies insure that all Americans can afford and obtain insurance that will cover all common health costs -- but of course it is nowhere near the most efficient way to provide health care. The system HR3200 sets up will provide universal healthcare, but at a cost much higher than a single-payer system. Still, it's a whole lot better than the current system, which is "let them eat cake" filled with rescissions, refusals to insure due to pre-existing conditions, discrimination against women, older Americans, and against families with young children, and far too many people who cannot afford to purchase health insurance and cannot obtain any subsidy for doing so.

"What HR3200 really is"

So, it's not "bad", but it's also not all that good. It may be the best bill we can get passed in the current climate, but it's not a solution to the healthcare crisis.
Like most "liberals" ("socialists" in the current lexicon), I would really like a "single-payer" system. It's not even "on the table", but Thom Hartmann has a really simple, good proposal:

Dear President Obama,

I understand you're thinking of dumping your "public option" because of all the demagoguery by Sarah Palin and Dick Armey and Newt Gingrich and their crowd on right-wing radio and Fox. Fine. Good idea, in fact.

Instead, let's make it simple. Please let us buy into Medicare.

It would be so easy. You don't have to reinvent the wheel with this so-called "public option" that's a whole new program from the ground up. Medicare already exists. It works. Some people will like it, others won't - just like the Post Office versus FedEx analogy you're so comfortable with.

Just pass a simple bill - it could probably be just a few lines, like when Medicare was expanded to include disabled people - that says that any American citizen can buy into the program at a rate to be set by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) which reflects the actual cost for us to buy into it.

So it's revenue neutral!

To make it available to people of low income, raise the rates slightly for all currently non-eligible people (like me - under 65) to cover the cost of below-200%-of-poverty people. Revenue neutral again.

Most of us will do damn near anything to get out from under the thumbs of the multi-millionaire CEOs who are running our current insurance programs. Sign me up!

This lets you blow up all the rumors about death panels and grandma and everything else: everybody knows what Medicare is. Those who scorn it can go with Blue Cross. Those who like it can buy into it. Simplicity itself.

Of course, we'd like a few fixes, like letting Medicare negotiate drug prices and filling some of the holes Republicans and AARP and the big insurance lobbyists have drilled into Medicare so people have to buy "supplemental" insurance, but that can wait for the second round. Let's get this done first.

Simple stuff. Medicare for anybody who wants it. Private health insurance for those who don't. Easy message. Even Max Baucus and Chuck Grassley can understand it. Sarah Palin can buy into it, or ignore it. No death panels, no granny plugs, nothing. Just a few sentences.

Replace the "you must be disabled or 65" with "here's what it'll cost if you want to buy in, and here's the sliding scale of subsidies we'll give you if you're poor, paid for by everybody else who's buying in." (You could roll back the Reagan tax cuts and make it all free, but that's another rant.)

We elected you because we expected you to have the courage of your convictions. Here's how. Not the "single payer Medicare for all" that many of us would prefer, but a simple, "Medicare for anybody who wants to buy in."

Respectfully,

Thom Hartmann

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/08/17

Of course, this has a snowball's chance in Turlock of ever passing. Good ideas aren't allowed in the current dialogue. There is no army of lobbyists for "common sense".

My own personal healthcare is paid for by the state of Arizona. Because I was unemployed when I broke my shoulder, I'm enrolled in "AHCCCS", the "Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System" (the name makes clear their motivation), and as long as I remain below the poverty level I'll continue to receive basic health services on the taxpayers dime. I can't complain; the service has been adequate and my Dr.'s have been top-notch. The problem for me is that if I ever rise above the poverty level, I'm screwed. I'm uninsurable thanks to pre-existing conditions, and unless I got really, really rich there's no way I could afford the treatment I need out of pocket. And a lot of Americans are in even worse shape.

So that's where we stand: A huge problem, a number of vested interests in the status quo, weak political leaders without real solutions, a largely ignorant populace inflamed with rhetoric, and a dysfunctional legislative system determined to avoid real action. And I only say this because I'm trying to remain optimistic. Because if you watch too closely, you're likely to suffer whiplash.

So...

How long until Brett Favre retires (again)?

Not Getting What I Want

I really wanted the "pubic option".

Also, smarter opponents.

Has it Really Come to This?

Maybe I'm becoming an alarmist, but I don't remember this happening under the Shrub: At a presidential event in Arizona this afternoon, civilians were seen carrying assault rifles. This is legal in this state:

PHOENIX - About a dozen people carrying guns, including one with a military-style rifle, milled among protesters outside the convention center where President Barack Obama was giving a speech Monday - the latest incident in which protesters have openly displayed firearms near the president.

Gun-rights advocates say they're exercising their constitutional right to bear arms and protest, while those who argue for more gun control say it could be a disaster waiting to happen.

Phoenix police said the gun-toters at Monday's event, including the man carrying an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle slung over his shoulder, didn't need permits. No crimes were committed, and no one was arrested.

The man with the rifle declined to be identified but told The Arizona Republic that he was carrying the assault weapon because he could. ``In Arizona, I still have some freedoms,'' he said.

Phoenix police Detective J. Oliver, who monitored the man at the downtown protest, said police also wanted to make sure no one decided to harm him.

``Just by his presence and people seeing the rifle and people knowing the president was in town, it sparked a lot of emotions,'' Oliver said. ``We were keeping peace on both ends.''

``It's a political statement,'' he told The Boston Globe. ``If you don't use your rights, then you lose your rights.''

Police asked the man to move away from school property, but he was not arrested.

Fred Solop, a Northern Arizona University political scientist, said the incidents in New Hampshire and Arizona could signal the beginning of a disturbing trend.

``When you start to bring guns to political rallies, it does layer on another level of concern and significance,'' Solop said. ``It actually becomes quite scary for many people. It creates a chilling effect in the ability of our society to carry on honest communication.''

He said he's never heard of someone bringing an assault weapon near a presidential event. ``The larger the gun, the more menacing the situation,''

Arizona is an ``open-carry'' state, which means anyone legally allowed to have a firearm can carry it in public as long as it's visible. Only someone carrying a concealed weapon is required to have a permit.

Paul Helmke, president of the Washington, D.C.-based Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said people should not be allowed to bring guns to events where Obama is.

``To me, this is craziness,'' he said. ``When you bring a loaded gun, particularly a loaded assault rifle, to any political event, but particularly to one where the president is appearing, you're just making the situation dangerous for everyone.''

He said people who bring guns to presidential events are distracting the Secret Service and law enforcement from protecting the president. ``The more guns we see at more events like this, there's more potential for something tragic happening,'' he said.

http://ktar.com/?nid=388&sid=1200460

I'm a liberal, but I own a couple of guns. But the idea of ever bringing a gun to a public event is beyond my comprehension. And the police were making sure that "no one decided to harm him"? The dude had an AR-15, and you're worried about his safety? This is not a good sign.

(Added) Steven D at Booman Tribune has it right:

Which brings me to my quote of the day by the Brady Campaign's President Paul Helmke:

Bringing loaded firearms to any Presidential event endangers all in attendance. Even though our weak national and state gun laws may allow this dangerous behavior, we should use a little common sense. Individuals carrying loaded weapons at these events require constant attention from police and Secret Service officers, thus stretching their protective efforts even thinner. The possibility that these weapons might be grabbed or stolen or accidently mishandled increases the risks of serious injury or death to all in attendance.

The National Rifle Association and other 'gun rights' groups need to send a message about 'gun responsibilities' to their members and all gun owners. Loaded weapons at political forums endanger all involved, distract law enforcement, and end up stifling debate. Presidential protesters need to leave their firearms at home -- no exceptions."

I couldn't agree more. There is no need for to bring weapons to a political event unless your goal is to intimidate those with whom you disagree into silence, or unless you intend to use those weapons to assassinate a political figure. Neither of those is a legitimate exercise of one's right to bear arms.

The Sky was Yellow

There's a big fire burning in Sycamore Canyon, and the smoke is so heavy that the sky is yellow here in town. Not good for breathing.
Added: Details for local readers: Wildfire blankets region in smoke

Like a Complete Unknown

Everybody must get ID'd:

Rock legend Bob Dylan was treated like a complete unknown by police in a New Jersey shore community when a resident called to report someone wandering around the neighborhood.

Dylan was in Long Branch, about a two-hour drive south of New York City, on July 23 as part of a tour with Willie Nelson and John Mellencamp that was to play at a baseball stadium in nearby Lakewood.

A 24-year-old police officer apparently was unaware of who Dylan is and asked him for identification, Long Branch business administrator Howard Woolley said Friday.

"I don't think she was familiar with his entire body of work," Woolley said.

The incident began at 5 p.m. when a resident said a man was wandering around a low-income, predominantly minority neighborhood several blocks from the oceanfront looking at houses.

The police officer drove up to Dylan, who was wearing a blue jacket, and asked him his name. According to Woolley, the following exchange ensued:

"What is your name, sir?" the officer asked.

"Bob Dylan," Dylan said.

"OK, what are you doing here?" the officer asked.

"I'm on tour," the singer replied.

A second officer, also in his 20s, responded to assist the first officer. He, too, apparently was unfamiliar with Dylan, Woolley said.

The officers asked Dylan for identification. The singer of such classics as "Like a Rolling Stone" and "Blowin' in the Wind" said that he didn't have any ID with him, that he was just walking around looking at houses to pass some time before that night's show.

The officers asked Dylan, 68, to accompany them back to the Ocean Place Resort and Spa, where the performers were staying. Once there, tour staff vouched for Dylan.

The officers thanked him for his cooperation.

"He couldn't have been any nicer to them," Woolley added.

How did it feel? A Dylan publicist did not immediately return a telephone call seeking comment Friday.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iy8jnlcZu7jfNUS3KQ5phFhctnBQD9A2UAHO1

Another story that makes me feel old. The cops were so young that they'd never heard of Bob Dylan? That's quite a generation gap. Of course, when you record an album of Christmas songs (see my earlier post) you're destined to slip into obscurity.

Woodstock

40 years ago? woodstock.
I didn't get to go.
I blame my parents.
I was 10.
Living in San Francisco.
But growing up, it looked like fun. We wished we could have been there.
But I wasn't there.

Why They Lie

The latest round of right-wing lies, the "death panels", shouldn't be a surprise. They know that this type of lies work. The "Willie Horton" ads worked. The "Swift Boat" ads worked. They were lies, but they managed to obscure the truth in enough minds to actually win. So this shouldn't come as any surprise, either:

Leaked memo shows energy industry execs sending employees to industry sponsored events to play average citizens outraged about cap-n-trade.

In short, expect the same type of lies, loudly shouted, as we move toward any attempt at energy reform. The screams of "euthanasia" and "socialism" have effectively scuttled any real health reform, and those who oppose energy reform will adopt the same tactics.
Because lying, loudly and repeatedly, works.

Boobie News

New friend Lockwood from Outside the Interzone (a very smart blog, which you should go read frequently) sent me this link to a new National Geographic article, telling me "These aren't the boobies you're looking for." The Tasman Boobie was thought to be extinct, but it now turns out that the Tasman Boobie and the Masked Boobie are the same. Nice to know that the Boobie's are still around.

Today's Question

Zymurgian asked me: "How'd you get to be so old?"

Me: "By not dying"

So my question to all of you: How'd you get to be so old?




(added explanation: This conversation was about Zymurgian's angst upon approaching age 40. Since I'm 50, I qualified as "old" in his view. I don't feel that I'm old, except on certain mornings.)

QOTD

From distributorcap

Sometimes I wonder if the media isn’t so much anti-Obama as it's just plain anti-intellectual and pro-toilet paper sales.

Couldn't say it better.

Evidence

Here is the most basic evidence of why we need real healthcare reform:

The free medical clinic at the Forum in Inglewood reached capacity again Wednesday, as hundreds camped out overnight to receive medical and dental care.

More than 2,000 sought services on the first day of the medical clinic -- and hundreds were turned away. People were lined up Tuesday night, hoping to get in. The MTA announced it was extending service of Line 115 because of "overwhelming demand" for rides to the clinic, which runs for eight days.

On Tuesday, procedures included 95 tooth extractions, 22 oral surgeries, 470 fillings, prescriptions for 140 eyeglasses, 45 mammograms, 43 HIV tests and 96 Pap smears.

The Remote Area Medical Foundation is a trailer-equipped service that has staged health clinics in rural parts of the United States, Mexico and South America. It brought its health camp to urban Los Angeles County on Tuesday to begin a stint that the group's officials described as its first foray into a major urban setting.

Organizers expected big crowds in a county with high unemployment and an estimated 22% of working-age adults lacking health insurance.

On Tuesday, the turnout was so large that hundreds had to be turned away.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/08/free-medical-clinic-at-forum-reached-full-capacity-for-second-day.html

I'm still composing my thoughts on the whole "healthcare reform" debate, but this proves that what we're doing now isn't working.

Miers and Renzi

Ah, the old case gets more interesting...

In the House Judiciary investigation into the U.S. Attorney firings, Harriet Miers admitted to her role in helping re-elect Rick Renzi by hiding the corruption investigation of him:

It's just days before the mid-term elections, and you're sitting in the White House watching a close Congressional race when it bubbles up that the the Republican incumbent, long dogged by corruption rumors, is under federal investigation.

That's the situation the Bush White House found itself in when it was reported in late October 2006, first on blogs, that U.S. Attorney Paul Charlton was investigating Rep. Rick Renzi (R-AZ).

And that's when the damage control machine kicked into gear.

Scott Jennings, deputy to Karl Rove, and White House Counsel Harriet Miers intervened to try to get the Justice Department to throw cold water on the reports of an investigation, despite the DOJ's policy not to confirm or deny the existence of ongoing probes, according to e-mails released by the House Judiciary Committee today. (Read them here.)

In the two days following Miers and Jennings' emails, articles appeared in the press quoting DOJ officials saying the investigation was in "preliminary stage" -- which it was not.

One piece in the Arizona Republic, speculating that the news about the
investigation was politically-motivated, quoted a DOJ official: "I want to caution you not to chop this guy's (Renzi's) head off." That's the type of statement that surely helped Renzi in the heated days before the election.

Renzi went on to win reelection, but was indicted on wide-ranging corruption charges in April 2008. The case is still pending.

The Jennings/Miers e-mails make for rich reading. On October 24, Jennings wrote, under the subject "re: our call":

"The person I called you about [Renzi] said the USATTY in his area, as well as the local FBI office, said they were unaware of any investigation."

Miers replied, describing how she intervened to pressure the DOJ on its public stance:

Scott, I just finished speaking with [Deputy AG] Paul McNulty. He said what we suspected he would. He has been contacted by a number of frustrated members of the Congress asking why people can't be vindicated in the event nothing is going on. He acknowledged that the situation is frustrating, but reiterated their position that they cannot confirm or deny the existence of an investigation. He said the AG did an interview last week to put things in as good as a perspective as possible by explaining that no one should be talking and that a refusal to deny should be given no meaning beyond that Justice does not admit or deny the existence of an investigation. I observed that at some point, immediately preceding an election, unattributed statements about the existence of an investigation was rankly unfair. He is continuing to think about the situation, but I did not get a lot of encouragement that they will deviate from normal course.

In other words: despite being told it was DOJ policy not to confirm or deny the existence of an investigation, Miers asked Paul McNulty, the deputy attorney general, to knock down the reports of a probe. But she "did not get a lot of encouragement that they will deviate from normal course."

In the next two days, the articles citing anonymous DOJ officials appeared, falsely reporting the probe was in early stages. It's still not known who made those leaks and whether anyone directed them to do it.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/on_election_ever_miers_tried_to_intervene_renzi_case.php?ref=fpb

Renzi's corruption investigation was kept hidden until after the election for political reasons, a classic example of how the shrub administration operated (read the whole article for a lot more juicy details). Paul Charlton was fired in the Attorney purge, in hopes of killing the investigation of Renzi, and it almost worked. But Mr. Corruption's trial is scheduled for next month. I wonder if Harriet will be called to testify? That certainly could be worth watching.

And, (in keeping with the Pygalgia tradition with all things Renzi), Mr. Renzi, here's your pig:

(And read all about sleazy Karl Rove's roll in it all here: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-rove12-2009aug12,0,6512321.story, here: Raw Story, here: NYTimes, and The full interview transcripts and documents can be found here.)

Finch Fighting?

This is a little old, but: weird news that I almost couldn't believe (except that I can):

SHELTON, Conn. -- Connecticut authorities say they arrested 19 people and seized more than 100 birds in a house raid on an alleged bird-fighting operation

Wayne Kasacek, of the Connecticut Department of Agriculture, and Shelton police Sgt. Robert Kozlowsky say most of the 150 confiscated birds were saffron finches and that a few were canaries. Kasacek say some of the birds had previous injuries, including blindness in at least one eye, and may have to be euthanized.

Police say they made the arrests Sunday just as spectators had placed bets and were getting ready to watch the birds fight at a home in Shelton, just west of New Haven. Authorities say they seized $8,000 in alleged betting money.

Saffron finches are small birds that are native to South America.

» Report on WSFB-TV
Channel 3 in Connecticut (video, photo slideshow)

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2009/07/police_arrest_19_in_conn_finch.html

There are a lot of strange people in this world, but the thought of watching and betting on small birds forced to tear each other apart boggles my mind. But...I'm not sure. When, at the local pub, I proposed "worm racing" for a slow night's entertainment, the owner said "no way. that's cruel". I think "Finch Fighting" is far more cruel than a worm race, but I might be wrong.

Note to Sweaterman: Your Gig's Been Stolen

Regular readers are familiar with co-blogger Sweaterman's great writing, but those of us who also know him in the meat world know that he also does a mean Dylan impersonation. One of the highlights of the local holiday season is getting a few beers in Sweaterman, and having him do the "Bob Dylan Christmas Songs", a guaranteed laugh riot. Now the joke is becoming a reality:

Bob Dylan is finally following Elvis Presley and Nat King Cole: He has made a Christmas album. The Dylan album will include Here Comes Santa Claus and O Little Town of Bethlehem.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=111764735

That just sounds so wrong. It was great fun coming from Sweaterman, but from Dylan himself it feels like crass commercialism.

Celebrate!

August 9, 1974 was a really good day, for those of us old enough to remember.

Kirkpatrick Cancels

The (never) right-wing rent-a-mobs managed to shut down a local town hall meeting before it even started:

Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick of Arizona is the latest Democrat overrun by protesters at a local town hall event.

Sources say the protesters showed up after a robocall -- it's unclear from whom -- went out to Arizona voters encouraging them to show up at the event. The event was supposed to involve one on one chats with Kirkpatrick, a freshman member of Congress.

Kirkpatrick was unable to get the event started and canceled it.

"I am disappointed that the event was disrupted by a small but vocal group," Kirkpatrick said. "I grew up in Greater Arizona, and I remember the days when folks who disagreed would do so respectfully and were still able to work together on the important issues to find solutions."

Kirkpatrick is the latest Democrat to run into what Republicans have called "recess roastings," as congressional town halls from Utica, N.Y. to Austin, Texas, to Green Bay, Wis., have been disrupted this week by protesters. Debate continues over how genuine a grass roots movement this is, but POLITICO has reported that national conservative interest groups have helped organize some of the opposition.

"These 'chats' are meant to give people a chance to let me know what they need and what's important to them, and today's disruptions meant that a lot of folks did not get that chance," Kirkpatrick said. "I look forward to more public events, but more importantly I look forward to a return of civility and respectful dialogue where the focus is on the people and not scoring political points."

UPDATE: Turns out the anti-health reform group Conservatives for Patients Rights posted the Kirkpatrick event on its listing of town halls.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0809/Another_Dem_overrun_by_protesters_at_town_hall.html?showall

Not a big surprise, as Ann Kirkpatrick isn't exactly a courageous fighter for her constituents. When I talked with her at a July 4th picnic, she didn't even have an articulate position on health care, except that she "supported reform." So I'm not a big fan of Kirkpatrick.
But I was ready and willing to stand up against these thugs, and help Ann talk with her constituents. It's all about real democracy, and also that I'm big enough (and ugly enough) to intimidate bullies. Dialogue is good; shouting and disruptions aren't. When an angry mob wants to shut down conversation, decent people need to stand up to them. Sure, you're free to protest. But you're not free to prevent others right to free speech. I realize that there's no guarantee of 'civil discourse' in the constitution, but if enough people stand up to the screamers perhaps we can actually talk about how best to reform health care.
Please, Ann, don't run away from these mobs. People like me are ready to get your back. Standing firm is the only way to make bullies back down.

A Masked Boobie

Friday's are for Boobies.

Don Your Robes, Justice Sotomayor

Congratulations to our newest Supreme Court Justice. The vote was 68-31 (Byrd was wheeled in; Kennedy still out), with no surprises.
I don't think she'll be all that liberal, perhaps more conservative than David Souter, and her seating won't change the balance of the court (still controlled by the five conservatives). But it's nice to see the court becoming more diverse.

Local Wind Power

Finally, a real plan for a wind power plant in our area. Anybody who lives around here knows that we have plenty of wind, especially east of town. I've hiked in the Grapevine Canyon area, and there's plenty of room for a wind farm. Here's the proposal:

Wind developers are proposing to build the first major wind farm near Flagstaff on a cattle ranch about 22 miles southeast of the city.

Foresight Wind Energy is proposing to install 130 to 330 large turbines on the Flying M Ranch east of Mormon Lake and tie into federally owned power lines. In all, the proposed project could cover 55 square miles, and if fully built-out, provide the equivalent of 500 megawatts of electricity. About 100 megawatts of electricity would power half of Flagstaff -- or 25,000 to 30,000 homes in the Southwest. A 500 megawatt project would power 125,000 homes.

http://www.azdailysun.com/articles/2009/08/05/news/20090805_front_201179.txt

I do have some concerns about the location. There are areas around that are far windier, but the Flying M ranch happens to be owned by the right people:

The Flying M Ranch is owned by the Metzger family, which runs cattle on a checkerboard of state and private land. Mandy Metzger is a Coconino County supervisor.

It kind of sucks that an otherwise good idea comes with a taint of cronyism. I know Mandy, and did some volunteer work on her campaign, so I'm really hoping that there's nothing corrupt behind the land choice. But it is a concern that I plan to discuss with her.

But I'm glad that we're about to harvest the wind. Now we need more solar plants to go along with it. Because, along with wind, sunshine is another thing we have in abundance here. Witness the mighty solar powered garbage can:

Happy Birthdays

A famous duo:

President Barack Obama, marking his 48th birthday, takes a break from his official duties to bring birthday greetings to veteran White House reporter Helen Thomas, left, who shares the same birthday and turns 89, Tuesday, Aug. 4, 2009, in the White House Press Briefing Room in Washington. Helen Thomas has covered every president since John F. Kennedy. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/President-Barack-Obama/photo//090804/480/8841b1a7ac22491abf42182f222a1c15//s:/ap/20090804/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_birthday_surprise

Happy wishes to both, but I think I'd have more fun at Helen's party. I bet she can tell some great stories.

Clinton in North Korea

Former President Bill Clinton is in Pyongyang, meeting with Kim Jong-Il:

Former President Bill Clinton met Tuesday with North Korean leader Kim Jong Il on the first day of a surprise visit to Pyongyang, with the "exhaustive" talks covering a wide range of topics, state-run media said.

Kim engaged Clinton in a "wide-ranging exchange of views on matters of common concern," the report said.

Clinton was in communist North Korea on a mission to secure the release of Americans Euna Lee and Laura Ling, reporters for former Vice President Al Gore's Current TV media venture who were arrested along the Chinese-North Korean border in March and sentenced in June to 12 years of hard labor for illegal entry and
engaging in "hostile acts."

A senior U.S. official confirmed to reporters traveling to Africa with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton that the former president was in North Korea to secure their release, but said the White House would not comment until the mission was complete.

"While this solely private mission to secure the release of two Americans is on the ground, we will have no comment," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said in a statement. "We do not want to jeopardize the success of former President Clinton's mission."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=111528528

This could be quite interesting. Clinton isn't the first former President to go to North Korea; Jimmy Carter went in 1994. But this is a whole new dynamic in international diplomacy, with the former President's wife being the current Secretary of State. Because of this, anything Bill says will be seen as official U.S. policy; even though he doesn't hold any official position, he carries an international gravitas unlike any other individual. In some ways that makes this a brilliant move with regard to the diplomatic impasse with North Korea, as the Obama administration can maintain a plausible distance from any concessions toward formal diplomatic relations, while creating an open conduit for communications. But there are perils with this move, by both creating a new GOP attack talking point and allowing Kim Jong-Il a new propaganda campaign. Relations with North Korea have been an almost impossible dilemma, with no good options available, but this may be the most creative diplomatic move in recent history. Because of the international respect for both Clintons, the world will pay attention.

We'll see how this all plays out, but I'm betting that Bill will get the journalists released. And that's a good place to start.

(Added: Well, that didn't take long. The journalists have been "pardoned", and that they will be released during Clinton's visit. Nice work, Bill Clinton.)

Connected

Or, more precisely, re-connected. The 'bootleg' wireless that I had been using (for free) has faded to the point of being almost non-existent, leaving me off the internet. So I've finally broken down and agreed to pay (shudder) for real internet service. It was a difficult decision for me, as one of the keys to surviving in poverty is being a tightwad. I pinch every penny until it is concave. But I really want to be here, so I've re-arranged my budget priorities enough to afford the service (but any donations will be gratefully accepted). This means I might post something beyond Boobies, and with greater frequency. Actual quality of posts will still be debatable.

Tentative Boobies

I'm sort of back, but my wireless is rather flacky. Have some Boobies while I work on the stories.

And That's The Way It Was....

…forty years ago, when I was a wee lad of 4 and put to bed early by my folks. Of course, on that magic night, when Neil and Buzz were to gambol on the lunar dust for the first time, my parents did me the courtesy of waking my sorry, skinny ass up and plonking me in front of the tee-vee to watch what was happening on the screen.

Not that I had no idea; schools were running non-stop with programs and studies of nothing but the “Space Program” and had been for years. Children of my day grew up wanting to be a fireman, a policeman, or an astronaut; the latter a profession that was unbelievable to even the previous generation. Due to my ignorance of astronomy (not atypical for a 4-year-old) and the lucky alignment of some stars, I actually believed I could see Columbia and Eagle near the moon during that week. Like I said, I was ignorant of a lot of things; probably, at age four, the last time that was ever charming. And, of course, the magic was damn near everywhere; supermarket clerks gushed on and on about it; next-door neighbors called each other over for cocktails and BBQ; the talking heads didn’t just babble on about it – instead, the whole freakin’ newscast covered basically nothing but the progress of the lunar voyage.

A-and, guess what?! We did it! When I say we, of course, I don’t mean that I, a dinky kid, had anything to do with it, nor am I so sure that it was all America’s doing, as there was a race that captivated the entire world at the time. It could have been just the zeitgeist of humanity during that decade, but there was a lot of forward-looking, progressive ideals shared worldwide, of which the space program was easily the most impressive.

Through it all, however, there needed to be a narrative, a tale told that would entice everyone to believe and to participate in the story, so that there would be, in today’s terms “buy-in” towards the idea. Luckily, the space program, was able to capture the world with the unimpeachable voice of a great and singular man: Walter Leland Cronkite, Jr.

Although Cronkite himself admitted to “much glee” during the lunar flights and could often be seen on camera smiling broadly and rubbing his hands together in anticipation, he was pretty much the voice of the networks when it came to following the Apollo program and especially Apollo 11, not to slight Shorty Powers, who was commonly known as the 8th Astronaut during the Mercury program. But by the time of Apollo, it was Cronkite who ruled the airwaves and mesmerized the audience with his commentary on the moon missions. His complete amazement and exuberant exclamation of “A man on the moon!” as Neil Armstrong walked down the LEM ladder on that day is one of the best monuments to that program.

His death today, coincident with the 40th anniversary remembrance of Apollo 11, is one of those serendipitous moments that life throws at us; Cronkite is probably best remembered not for Apollo 11, but for his outstanding coverage of the Cuabn missile crisis, JFKs assassination, his coverage of Vietnam and Watergate, and the fact that his persona embodied the concept of “news anchor”; a position that will likely never be equaled again given the fragmentation of news channels and organizations in our time. And this, after serving as one of the top American reporters during World War II, earning accolades in reporting bombing raids over Germany and later covering the Nuremberg trials.

In comparison, today’s “journalists” are, unfortunately, not cut from the same cloth. Quite possibly, because today’s journalists, much like today’s citizens haven’t really had to face too many crises; 9/11 notwithstanding, America has been a pretty safe place since the 70s. Because of this, they’ve never been “forged under fire” or “tested their mettle” or any other b.s. journalistic phrase. And if they have, they only had to once, before they got out, got a book contract, and retired to the lecture circuit. Versus, of course, the lifetime career of Cronkite.

In more recent years, he championed the idea of a freer political press, such that the press should provide free airtime to candidates as they pursue office; indeed, he argued for a provision to the Feingold-McCain Act to provide exactly that, although it was never attached.

We all knew he had been ill lately. But people have an illogical (but understandable) reason not to dwell on death, as we will all make friends eventually. He is survived not just by family, but by his mark on the world: a Cronkite school of Journalism (at ASU) and the leading journalistic award, the Cronkite Award for Excellence in Journalism. And, I am sure that his voluminous collected papers will continue to show his outstanding ability for years to come.

RIP, Walter Cronkite. May the hereafter stand your observation and commentary. May any celestial tapes be preserved so that if the rest of us ever get there, we can follow your reporting on the items beyond our ken. In the meantime, we’ll be content ourselves to remember and admire your work here and aspire to follow in your steadfast footsteps of curiosity, honesty and integrity.

The Friday Booby

And this time it's a baby! Pictured alone at the nest because Mom and Dad are probably out getting some food....

Another Road Trip

I'll be leaving in the morning, going to Colorado for some river running and some music (and some micro brews, of course). A dear friend is going with me, so I shouldn't get into too much trouble. Back in about 10 days (sweaterman promised to handle the Boobie duties while I'm away), give or take.

Fresh Friday Boobies

(Picture by DbacksSkins, a friend from AZ Snakepit; don't ask me how our comments during a baseball game led to his sending me his Boobie pics. Thanks, 'Skins!)

Dear Baseball Fans

Please go read this :http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/delving-into-the-dalkowski-depths/. You'll be glad you did.

Only 1,500 Nukes Left

Obama's new proposed nuclear weapons reduction treaty with Russia will reduce our arsenal by roughly 30%:

Washington - President Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev committed Monday to reaching a new nuclear-arms reduction agreement that would set both strategic warheads and warhead delivery vehicles, such as missiles, at post-cold-war lows.

Yet despite the upbeat tone at the first of two days of summit talks in Moscow, the two leaders offered few specifics on how the looming stumbling blocks to a new era of cooperation will be overcome. Those issues include American plans for a missile-defense system in Eastern Europe and US-supported expansion of NATO to Ukraine and Georgia. The two presidents issued a "joint understanding" that commits the two countries to reducing strategic warheads to a range of 1,500 to 1,675 – down from the current ceiling of 2,200 – and to a maximum of 1,600 launch vehicles. The goal is to
reach an agreement in time to replace the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), which expires on Dec. 5.

Although the Obama-Medvedev statement speaks only of reaching an agreement "at the earliest possible date," Mr. Obama affirmed at a joint appearance of the two leaders Monday that the treaty "will be completed this year."

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0706/p02s01-usfp.html

Which means we'll only have the capacity to destroy the planet nine times over, rather than the prior twelve times over. I suppose this is good progress, but I doubt that these numbers will convince the rest of the world to abandon their nukes. 1,500 is still a hell of a lot.
I'm just waiting for the right-wing attacks on Obama for "weakening America." I guarantee they're coming.

McNamara

Robert McNamara...for people my age, his name evokes anger and pain. Before Rumsfeld brought us Iraq, McNamara's Vietnam was the greatest example of military wrongheadedness in American history. In later years he expressed regret and remorse for his actions, but it was much too little too late to wash the blood of some 58,000 American, and countless Vietnamese, souls from his hands. The simple fact that he lied and escalated the war, even after he "knew" it was lost, is enough to condemn him to a legacy of shame.
I suppose I shouldn't speak ill of the dead, but that's one bastard I won't miss.

(Added: Read Attytood for a much deeper analysis)

Happy Independence Day

What a great holiday! Barbeques, beer, and blowing up stuff! It doesn't get much better.

Actually, as much as I love explosives, I avoid fireworks up here in the mountains. Too high a risk of fire.

Oh yeah, there's another thing to celebrate. This little document:

Still well worth reading.

Should a 'Socialist' go to a 'Tea Bag' Party?

We have a local wingnut who I thoroughly enjoy debating politics over a beer with. It's so much more entertaining than debating with people who agree with you. Anyway, he's one of the organizers of the local 4th of July "tea party", and last evening he invited me to attend (maybe they're really desperate). "Free food" was his main selling point; "I know you Socialists like free food." (most of our debates involve him calling me a 'socialist', and me trying to get him to define 'socialist'. As best I can tell, anything that involves government, society, or civilization is socialist, and Obama is the most evil socialist ever. Like I say, it's entertaining.) Actually, the food isn't a compelling offer, as the local Democratic party is also having a barbeque to celebrate the 4th and the opening of the new headquarters. But since the two groups will be on opposite sides of a local park, I may go to both. There is something delightfully ironic in the thought of me, a well known "flaming liberal" on the local political scene, walking up and having a burger with the local wingnuts. Could be fun.
Afterwards I'll be going to a sane friends party.

Palin Resigning

OK, that's a shocker. Was it because of this picture?

(snarky pic stolen somewhere on the net)

I just hope she doesn't start campaigning for 2012 right away. That would be way too long to maintain an appropriate level of satire.

Or (pure speculation) is there an Argentinian hiking type story about to break?

At least it's not another Michael Jackson story.

Independence Boobies

"It's Friday"

"Is today a holiday?"

"Sort of."

"How should we celebrate?"

"We're Boobies. We just hang out."

"Oh. OK."

More Truth, Too Late

As the Iraqi people celebrate our withdrawal from their cities (but not their country), we are starting to get more of the facts about the lead up to this horribly unethical war:

Saddam Hussein told an FBI interviewer before he was hanged that he allowed the world to believe he had weapons of mass destruction because he was worried about appearing weak to Iran, according to declassified accounts of the interviews released yesterday. The former Iraqi president also denounced Osama bin Laden as "a zealot" and said he had no dealings with al-Qaeda.

Hussein, in fact, said he felt so vulnerable to the perceived threat from "fanatic" leaders in Tehran that he would have been prepared to seek a "security agreement with the United States to protect [Iraq] from threats in the region."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/01/AR2009070104217.html

I knew most of these things already, but in the media's war lust they got buried. Shrub wanted a war, and no facts were going to stop him. Smart analysis showed that there were no WMD's, and even if there were a few they weren't really a threat.
As we've seen, getting into a war in Iraq was a whole lot easier than getting out will be. But I wish for one big first step: Can we put shrub and the cheney on trial for war crimes yet? That would be the best first move toward healing the damage they've caused.

Mixing Drugs

I've got a bit of a personal interest in the FDA's move to ban Percocet and Vicodin because of the liver toxicity problems associated with Acetaminophen.

ADELPHI, Md. — A federal advisory panel voted narrowly on Tuesday to recommend a ban on Percocet and Vicodin, two of the most popular prescription painkillers in the world, because of their effects on the liver.

The two drugs combine a narcotic with acetaminophen, the ingredient found in popular over-the-counter products like Tylenol and Excedrin. High doses of acetaminophen are a leading cause of liver damage, and the panel noted that patients who take Percocet and Vicodin for long periods often need higher and higher doses to achieve the same effect.

Acetaminophen is combined with different narcotics in at least seven other prescription drugs, and all of these combination pills will be banned if the Food and Drug Administration heeds the advice of its experts. Vicodin and its generic equivalents alone are prescribed more than 100 million times a year in the United States.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/01/health/01fda.html?_r=1&ref=health

During my recovery from my broken humerus, I went through some serious pain that is treated with Hydrocodone (Vicodin). The main problem for me was the limit I could safely take (I have a tolerance level for opiates that rivals that of an elephant) because of the Acetaminophen content, and it's potential for liver damage. In the hospital, they could give me morphine, which is much safer, but once out of the hospital, that wasn't an option. (aside: Oxycodone (Percocet) does almost nothing for me when it comes to pain. All it does is make my brain as mushy as Lush Rimbaugh's. Stupid and still in pain is not a desirable situation.) I repeatedly wished that I could get Hydrocodone (which I needed) without Acetaminophen (which I didn't need), but thanks to the pharmaceutical lobby that wasn't an available opton.
I'm way better now, and rarely need to take a pain pill. But for millions of people with chronic pain, this could be really major. Getting rid of the Acetaminophen is a good idea, but Hydrocodone and Oxycodone need to still be available for those who need them. That's an issue that is still unresolved, what alternatives will be offered.
How typical of health care in America. The pharmaceutical companies can push Acetaminophen (which can kill you) into a wide variety of medications. But most of us can't get Medical Marijuana, which is safe AND effective.

Evening Observations

From spending a few hours sitting at a bar drinking beer and watching baseball:

A LOT of liberals are getting pissed at Obama. They are disappointed. They expected more on (health care, gay rights, ending wars, etc), and bigger changes. I'm not. I knew Obama was much more a corporatist moderate than a liberal savior. All I expected him to be is more competent and sensible than McCain or Shrub. When your expectations are low, you're rarely disappointed.

A woman I was chatting with had the best line on Michael Jackson: "Well, during the 80's, I liked him better than Ronald Reagan." I spit beer laughing at that.

My favorite bartender does the worlds best Billie Mays impersonation. I had no idea who "Billie Mays" was before tonight (I don't pay much attention to TV), except that I recognize him as "that really annoying guy." But when the bartender starts using that voice to sell you another beer, it's time to leave.

And the Arizona Diamondbacks are a really bad baseball team this year. Thank goodness I'm a Giants fan.

Uranium Mining: A Bad Idea That Won't Die

Uranium mining has a long and sordid history in this region. The failure to cleanup the pollution from the tailings from mining operations in the 50's and 60's are still causing deaths and illness (mostly among Native Americans) to this day. So there's a lot of resistance to any new mining operations. But the mining companies are still trying:

A Canadian company is one permit away from reactivating an Arizona uranium mine near the Grand Canyon where conservationists have been pushing for protection from new mining operations, a state official says.

Thousands of mining claims dot a 1 million-acre area around the canyon, but Arizona Department of Environmental Quality spokesman Mark Shaffer says only Denison Mines Corp. has a pending air permit with the agency for a site about 20 miles from the canyon's northern border.



Most of the claims for uranium are staked in an Arizona strip, a sparsely populated area immediately north of the Grand Canyon National Park known for its high-grade uranium ore. The silvery white metal is used in nuclear energy and weapons and for medicine.

But nearby residents and environmentalists, who are pushing to ban new mining in the area, are worried about possible groundwater contamination, destruction of wildlife habitat and the transport of radioactive material. Some miners and their families have blamed exposure to uranium for deaths and health effects, including cancer and kidney disease.

http://www.azdailysun.com/articles/2009/06/28/news/20090628_arizo_198945.

While the mining companies insist that modern techniques are safer for the environment, there's a lot of skepticism based on the history. I'm of the opinion that no new mining should even be considered until the old mines have been cleaned up.

Boobie Day

Happy Friday. Here's a Boobie.

Revisiting the History of Renzi

In the long delayed prosecution of my former congress critter Rick Renzi, now news is coming out that confirms something I long suspected: Shrub's (in)justice department manipulated evidence to protect Renzi:

In the fall of 2006, one day after the Justice Department granted permission to a U.S. attorney to place a wiretap on a Republican congressman suspected of corruption, existence of the investigation was leaked to the press — not only compromising the sensitive criminal probe but tipping the lawmaker off to the wiretap.

Career federal law enforcement officials who worked directly on a probe of former Rep. Rick Renzi (R-Ariz.) said they believe that word of the investigation was leaked by senior Bush administration political appointees in the Justice Department in an improper and perhaps illegal effort to affect the outcome of an election.

At the time of the leak, Renzi was locked in a razor-thin bid for reelection and unconfirmed reports of a criminal probe could have become politically damaging. The leaked stories — appearing 10 days before the election — falsely suggested that the investigation of Renzi was in its initial stages and unlikely to lead to criminal charges.

In fact, the investigation had been ongoing for some time and had already amassed enough evidence of alleged criminal misconduct to obtain approval from the highest levels of the Justice Department, including then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, to seek an application from a federal judge to wiretap Renzi. In February 2008, a federal grand jury indicted Renzi on 36 felony counts of money laundering, extortion, insurance fraud and various other alleged crimes.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/bush-administration-leaks-bolstered-rick-renzis-reelection-bid-2009-06-24.html

Renzi didn't run for re-election in 2008 when his blatant corruption finally lead to criminal charges. His trial has been delayed to September of this year. But he barely managed to retain his seat in 2006 by downplaying the investigation, even though his corruption was well known to anyone paying attention.
One of the reasons that I began this blog was to attempt to fight against Mr. Renzi, who represented my district. I dedicated pictures of tattoo'd pigs to him, and I'm only too happy to revive the tradition. There have been a lot of corrupt congress critters, but he was consistently among the worst. The entire Shrub administration acted as a crime syndicate, and Renzi was a typical rethug criminal who belongs in jail.
So have another pig, Mr. Renzi. I'm looking forward to the trial.

Damn You, Sanford!

Here I had a perfectly good piece of political snark (see below), and in less than 24 hours you go and make it irrelevant. Any politician can run off and have an affair. I had hopes that you could give us real political weirdness, but this is just the usual run-of-the-mill sleaze (although it is slightly exotic to be boffing an Argentinian, rather than the standard white staffer).
I really wish that my lame attempts at humor had a longer shelf life.

Sanford in 2012

OK, time for a little baseless speculation (and take full advantage of the opportunity to snicker):

Check out this set of facts. Fact 1: Gov. Mark Sanford went missing Thursday and hasn't been seen since. Fact 2: His staff has since told us that the governor has been hiking the Appalachian Trail. Fact 3: Sunday was "Naked Hiking Day" on the Appalachian Trail. We kid you not.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/06/23/1974627.

While no one I know wants to see a naked republican governor, Sanford could take a bold step to change the image of the republican party. Imagine him declaring "I'm the only candidate who's openly pro-walking naked in the woods." Where would Obama stand on the "nude hiking" issue? I'm thinking this could be a real winner for the republicans.

(added: Sanford now says he was in Argentina. I'm still looking for a good political snark angle in that.)

A Couple More Pics

A couple more from the Pagosa/Animas trip. Because they make me happy.

Can't wait to do it again.

Happy Summer Solstice

And Happy Father's Day.

Local News Can Be Fun

Ah, the joys of living in a smaller city. Little things make the front page of the paper:

Two city police officers have been placed on paid leave after police officials received photos of the officers surrounded by four women in what police officials call suggestive poses.

The photos show two uniformed officers in their patrol cars stopped at an intersection. Four women stand outside of one patrol car and have posed themselves in a manner that Police Chief Brent Cooper said the officers should have known might have happened.




"We're very embarrassed by this," Cooper said. "We're very disappointed our officers allowed themselves to get drawn into it."

http://www.azdailysun.com/articles/2009/06/19/news/20090619_front_198395.txt

I know two of the women in the photos, and they're both sweet, fun-loving, and intelligent ladies. Seems pretty harmless to me, but I guess the law enforcement bosses don't share my sense of humor. The two officers were reprimanded and suspended for one day; not a huge punishment, but still rather silly and unnecessary.
It does make the local newspaper more entertaining, though.

We Need More Boobies

It's true. We need more Boobies. Please send me your Boobie pics ASAP. Thanks.

Well...

Our President will harm a fly...
Whereas...
the Cheney would have killed a kitten...
and shrub would have eaten the fly...by mistake
but Rove would have called it "manly"

Thoughts on Iran

First, if you want real insight into the events in Iran, I recommend (as with all things Middle East) that you read Juan Cole. Also, Andrew Sullivan (who I usually disagree with) has been doing a great job covering the Iran protests. And finally, this piece by Robert Fisk. (Added: see also Watergate Summer, where Enigma4ever has a great roundup). They, and many other real experts, will give you more serious insight than I am capable of. That said, here's some of my view:
First, it's important to remember that the Iranian election isn't about us. The vast majority of Iranian voters were angry about Iran's domestic economy. Opposition to Amahdinejad came primarily from the ongoing poverty in Iran in the face of vast oil wealth, not an opposition to the Islamic theocracy. One reason that the blatant election fraud seems so strange is that Moussavi is also supported by, and a strong supporter of, the Islamic council that is the true power in Iran. It's really unclear to me why the Ayatollah (and the supreme council) chose to rig the election, since the real power (and control of the Republican Guard) would remain unchanged, regardless of who won a legitimate election. By engaging in such blatant disregard of the voters will, they've actually weakened their own position. The Islamic Republic was under no threat from Moussavi. Now they are under threat from the massive public outcry.
Second, there is the history of mass protest in Iran from 1979. Each death leads to an additional demonstration of mourning. The 1979 revolution only came about after almost a year of daily demonstrations. So crackdowns will continue to bring more people out into the streets, and further weaken the government control as family loyalties (the strongest bond in Iranian society) tax the guards loyalty to the government. The Shah lost when his guards defected to join their brothers and sisters in the Green Bands (side note to media pundits: the Green Bands were the Islamic militia in 1979; wearing green bands still symbolize support for Islamic law, not some sort of western ideal of "freedom fighters"). This may take a while to play out.
Thirdly, Obama seems to be doing the right thing, by trying to remain uninvolved. He's walking a tightrope, but faced with the history of American meddling in Iran, support for the protesters is bound to backfire. The Iranian government is already portraying the demonstrations as the result of foreign provocation. Regardless of America's preference, Obama will need to deal with the eventual victor, and any American endorsement will only poison future relations.
While I said earlier that this isn't "about us", it's certainly clear that America would prefer to see Amahdinejad out of power. Amahdinejad's bombastic anti-American and anti-Israel rhetoric has made it almost impossible to conduct any realistic dialog with him. He's created an adversarial relationship, and shrub and the neocons were perfectly willing to engage as adversaries. It's almost impossible to negotiate when both parties start by calling the other "evil". Moussavi is anti-American and anti-Israeli, but he's much calmer in his rhetoric than Amahdinejad, so there's a chance to open talks with a 'clean slate' (in reality, a less tainted slate), or at least without the baggage of recent years. I doubt that it will be a 'warm friendly' relationship, but it would allow us to pull back from the brink of war.
Added:

Those Mousavi supporters are using the slogans of the Islamic Revolution and it's my understanding that they are mostly simply seeking a return to the status quo ante, when their votes meant something in the half-rigged Islamic Republic's system. They're not looking to depose the mullahs and they're not looking to break the system that's persisted since 1979 - they just want it to work as advertised. Nowhere is this clearer than in their choice of leaders: Mousavi, Rafsanjani, Khatami, Montazeri. All members in good standing of the Iranian politico-clerical elite and all standing to gain nothing from a break-up of the existing system. As Trita Parsi writes:

What's often forgotten amid the genuinely awe-inspiring spectacle of hundreds of thousands of long-suppressed people risking their lives on the streets to demand change is the fact that the political contest playing out in the election is, in fact, among rival factions of the same regime. Ahmadinejad represents a conservative element, backed by the Supreme Leader, that believes the established political class has hijacked the revolution and enriched themselves and is fearful that the faction's more pragmatic inclination toward engagement with the West could lead to a normalization of relations that will "pollute" Iran's culture and weaken the regime. Mousavi is not really a reformer so much as a pragmatic, moderate conservative who has campaigned with the backing of the reform movement because it recognizes that he has a better chance of unseating Ahmadinejad than one of their own would have.

(from http://www.newshoggers.com/)

Last Weekend

A quick pic from last weekend's river play. We ran the Pagosa Springs stretch of the San Juan on Saturday, and the Animas on Sunday. That's me and Zymurgian in the front of the raft on the Saturday run. No big challenges on either run, but it was enough to test my shoulder and great to be back on the water.

USD hegemony over

Chris Hedges on the coming decline of the USD

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090614_the_american_empire_is_bankrupt/