Archives for February 2003

I am going bald.

Thanks for visiting this blog for the first time. Check out the home page for the most recent posts, or the archives if you're looking for something in particular. Here are some of our favorite posts, which you might enjoy:

If you like what you see, we hope you'll consider subscribing to the RSS feed.

homer7.gifLuckily, at my age, it’s still a voluntary matter. However, for some less fortunate kids going bald isn’t an option when they undergo cancer treatment. For three years now, a fundraiser for the National Childhood Cancer Foundation has asked volunteers to shave their heads to empathize with cancer patients — and to raise cash for the organization by having their friends and associates sponsor them to do it. So if you want to see me bald, read on.

The event is called St. Baldrick’s and it takes place the Friday before St. Patrick’s day. Last year shavees raised over $850,000 for childhood cancer research. You can find out more at www.stbaldricks.org.

Here in D.C., the event will take place at Fado’s Irish Pub in Chinatown. On March 14th, you can come down, enjoy a pint, and see me lose my locks. But I’m only doing it if you guys sponsor me! So click here to see my before and after pictures and make your donation.

I know that many of you are poor students like me, but any amount will help. If you can’t contribute, you can help out by forwarding this message to two people you know who might be able to give.

Thanks for your generosity and I hope to see all of you on March 14th!

Feb 25, 2003 | Comment

Strindberg and Helium

The cutest thing I have seen on the Web in a long time. Courtesy of Cindy Goh.

Feb 24, 2003 | Comment

Friedman tells the truth

Thomas Friedman (who supports war against Iraq) has a responsible column in the NYT today. He makes it clear that Saddam is not a threat to the U.S., he can be deterred, and he’s not connected to Al Qaeda. He then tells the Bushies that if they want a war of aggression, they should be honest about why. To tell Americans it’s because of a neoconservative neo-imperialist vision of spreading democracy in the Middle East with a sword through nation building. The problem is they can’t. I don’t think Americans would support a war if they weren’t scared or felt threatened.

Feb 19, 2003 | 1 Comment

When the Simpsons were great

I’ve been meaning to post this for a while, but the snow kept me from my computer. The Simpson’s super-hyped 300th episode ran last Sunday and it was a bit lame. The 301st episode that followed it was a little better. Like so many other red-blooded Americans, I’m a huge fan of the Simpsons and their intelligent sardonic humor. But after 14 years, the show left its apogee behind long ago.

Slate tries to figure out what went wrong with the show and doesn’t quite find an answer. Meanwhile, USA Today and Entertainment Weekly list their top episodes of all time. Although they had objectively excellent choices, I offer you my own subjective top five:

5) The tax-day episode is pure libertarian fun. It’s anti-IRS, anti-foreign aid, and they end up seeking refuge in Cuba. (”Mr. Burns, I think we can trust the President of Cuba!”)

4) The Homer gets a gun episode. Although it does make gun ownership look a little kooky, NRA members are portrayed as responsible people concerned with safety, and in the end guns save the day by stopping a robber. (”Five days?! But I’m mad now.”)

3) The episode where Marge becomes the listen lady gets to be on this list because of its very odd subplot: Mr. Sparkle. (”I’m disrespectful to dirt! Can you see I am serious?”)

2) The Frank Grimes episode. I just relate so much to Homer in this episode. It’s not our fault we get more than we deserve. Best part is Grimes dies violently in the end.

1) And the best Simpsons episode of all time without any doubt is the Hank Scorpio episode. Scorpio is basically a Bond-type supervillian, trying to take over the world. However, he’s also one of these dot-com era type managers who wants to keep the people in his organization motivated so he has a cubicle like everyone else and the company has a free juice bar and rec room, etc. He reminds me of Paul Orfaela, the founders of Kinko’s, where I worked for many long years. Best part is Scorpio takes over the East Coast in the end. (”Don’t call me that word. I don’t like things that elevate me above other people. I’m just like you. Oh, sure, I come later in the day, I get paid a lot more and I take longer vacations, but I don’t like the word ‘boss.’”)

What’re your favorite episodes?

Feb 19, 2003 | 1 Comment

France: Don’t surrender to the U.S.

surrender.jpgMy philosophical opposition to a war against Iraq demurs on the question of whether they have weapons of mass destruction. That said, I’m not sure how to feel about France.

On the one hand, it’s commendable that (whatever their motivations) the French are slowing down the Bush Administration’s blood-thirsty rampage. On the other hand, the fact remains that they helped draft and voted for UN Resolution 1441. I haven’t read it and I doubt you have either, but if in fact it calls for inspectors to be monitors of Iraqi “voluntary” disarmament (as the French and others seem not to contest), and not WMD-hunters, then Iraq is in clear breach. Colin Powell’s UN case was shaky at best on an Al Qaeda link and nukes, and superfluous when he talked about what a bad guy Hussein is. However, he did prove–at least to me–that Iraq is in violation of 1441. And although UN resolutions don’t have much weight in my mind, a breach of 1441 indisputably gives the U.S. and other countries “authority” to attack Iraq.

In contrast, the Germans didn’t draft or vote for the resolution (although they might have had they been on the Security Council–starting this month they are on it), and Gerhard Schroder has ruled out war under any circumstances. Although Schroder’s motivations are also suspect, the German government’s opposition to war seems to be more principled–or maybe I’m just being optimistically naive.

Beyond their likely primary motivations (oil and domestic approval), France and Germany have lots more at stake in their opposition to the U.S.’s war. Namely their last remaining shreds of influence on the world stage. Any influence they have is in their NATO memberships and France’s veto on the Security Council. However, the current situation exemplifies how these institutions have become nothing more than rubber stamps to legitimize American aggression (and this is apart from NATO’s obsolescence and the UN’s lack of moral integrity).

France is damned if it does, and damned if it doesn’t. If it vetoes any action against Iraq, and the U.S. goes in anyway, it risks making irrelevant the Security Council–its last foothold on influence. If it finally surrenders to U.S. demands, it also abdicates any influence it might have.

So I say to the French, don’t be “cheese-eatin’ surrender monkeys.” Don’t surrender to the U.S. Here’s your chance to exert influence by standing up to a superpower. You’ve got a lot of the world behind you. You can’t possibly accept 1441 as written and oppose the use of force at the same time. Introduce a new resolution calling for containment of Iraq and base your argument against war on the principled stance that the price is too high:

  • “CIA Director George J. Tenet warned yesterday that the ‘desire for nuclear weapons is on the upsurge’ among small countries, confronting the world with a new nuclear arms race that threatens to dismantle more than three decades of nonproliferation efforts,” reports the Washington Post today. No shit? You think the U.S.’s new policy of unilaterally and preemptively invading countries it doesn’t like has anything to do with this?
  • An excellent article in this week’s Economist explains the toll that a war will have on the Iraqi people as a consequence of indirect results. Among other things, “about 60% of the population, or 16m people, are 100% dependent on the central government for their basic needs; they survive only because the government provides them with a food ration each month.” Disrupt the government and thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands will die.
  • And I don’t think all this death and destruction will make Muslims all over the Middle East and the world too happy. Already Osama bin Laden is using the present conflict to foment Islamist violence. Meanwhile I’m the one in Bull’s Eye, U.S.A. around which anti-aircraft missiles have just been deployed. What I’m trying to say is, You don’t think American occupation of Iraq will be a huge boon for Al Qaeda recruitment, do you?

OK. I’ve said enough. “This is the last song I will ever sing… No, I’ve changed my mind again. Good night and thank you.“

Feb 12, 2003 | 3 Comments

It takes a Trotskyite

So far today, Lloyd Grove’s Reliable Source column for the Washington Post, the Drudge Report, and Slate’s Today’s Papers have all picked up an interview with Christopher Hitchens from the forthcoming issue of Doublethink. Doublethink, you might remember, is the quarterly publication of the America’s Future Foundation, for whom I work.

We’re pretty excited about this. There’s nothing like Hitchens saying Bill Clinton was a CIA plant at Oxford, or that he and Clinton shared a girlfriend who went on to become a radical lesbian, to get some press for our “right-wing” mag. God bless him.

You can read the whole interview here.

Feb 4, 2003 | 1 Comment

Columbia: Beginning and end?

rocket.gifYou have to read this article from a 1980 issue of Washington Monthly about the then-still-unlaunched space shuttle Columbia. It’s by Gregg Easterbrook, a journalist, sports columnist and Brookings fellow who also happens to be the brother of Judge Frank Easterbrook from the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals who teaches at Chicago and who my contracts professor clerked for. But I digress.

The article is very eerie. Easterbrook predicted Columbia’s fate 20 years ago and before it ever got off the ground. He also recounts what a terrible idea the shuttle program was then–and still is now.

It’s amazing that having had Ed Hudgins around me for so long I didn’t realize what a boondoggle the space shuttle is. Not only is it a incredibly unsafe (it’s surprising they don’t blow up more often), but also practically useless for the amount of money that’s been put into them.

Easterbrook has a new article in Time magazine this week. Without saying, “I told you so,” he proposes scrapping the space station and shuttle program altogether. And I have to say, he makes sense. I know a manned space program is a source of great national–and human–pride. I personally would love to go into space some day; I think it’s man’s destiny to spread out like pollen across the galaxy. But having a very expensive and unsafe government program for no better reasons than pride and pork isn’t kosher.

You’ll say, “There he goes again,” but, yup, I say privatize NASA and if and when manned spaceflight becomes viable, it’ll happen. We presently have other more important priorities here on Earth–like not blowing ourselves up. And don’t bring up all the scientific advances that can come only from massive national greatness “investments.” Cuba’s got a great health care system, sure, but at what cost?

Feb 3, 2003 | 2 Comments

  •  
  •