HinesSight

Republicans still kookie, even if Kos pollster is crooked

Often people say, "You can't trust the polls." Well, usually they're pretty accurate. But not if a pollster conducts fraudulent work, which is the allegation a leading progressive web site, Daily Kos, had made against Research 2000.

It's sort of difficult for me to follow the statistical evidence trail that strongly suggests Research 2000 made up results for the polls the firm conducted for Daily Kos the past few years.

However, the bottom line is clear. Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas says, "I hereby renounce any post we've written based exclusively on Research 2000 polling."

That includes a well-publicized Research 2000 survey of Republicans which found that an amazingly large percentage believed that President Obama was racist (31%), socialist (63%), and not a U.S. citizen (36%). Plus, about a quarter thought both that Obama "wants the terrorists to win" and their state should secede from the union.

This high degree of craziness from GOP'ers was embarrassing even to Fox News, which, if I recall correctly, attempted to discredit the poll with "consider the source" (Daily Kos) comments.

So Moulitsas realized that his lawsuit against Research 2000 would make the conservative crowd happy, since now his Republicans are Crazy finding had lost its reputability. This led to his post today, "R2K or not, Republicans are still nuts."

It provides evidence from other pollsters that supports many of the Research 2000 survey conclusions. Such as:

-- 42% of Republicans believe Obama wasn't born in this country
-- 52% of Republicans think ACORN stole the 2008 election for Obama
-- 67% of Republicans think Obama is a socialist
-- 57% of Republicans believe Obama is a Muslim
-- 38% of Republicans say that Obama is "doing many of the things that Hitler did"
-- 24% of Republicans say that Obama "may be the Antichrist"

Well, if Republicans wonder why they've lost political power in the last two national elections, it's because most Americans (thankfully) realize that our country can't be led by the Village Idiot.

There's plenty of room for honest disagreement about Obama's policies and which way forward is best for the United States. But so long as a large percentage of Republicans hold such crackpot ideas, the GOP deserves to be a minority party.

Men are wimps when sick, so I'm manly

Last week I got a flu/cold sickness from my three year old granddaughter, Evelyn, who probably caught the virus on her plane trip up from California. Evelyn had been coughing for a few days before my own symptoms appeared.

With no hesitation I started to let the world know about my pitiful condition.

Cough. Cough. "Ohhhhhh, I'm sick!"
Blow nose. "Ohhhhhh, I don't feel good!"
Cough and blow nose. "Ohhhhhh, where's the cold medicine?!"

It didn't take long for my wife, Laurel, to make an observation: "You're better at whining than a three year old." My utterly predictable reply: "Ohhhhhh, I'm sick! You have to be nice to me! I need care, not criticism!"

I thought I'd get more sympathy after I took my temperature. "It's 102.2. That's a serious fever!" Laurel said, "But what is it usually? Maybe that's normal for you."

Not exactly. I was feeling pretty miserable.

So I did what I usually, if not always, do when I get sick: hibernate in a back bedroom. I'd come out for a while to whine about how bad I felt, then go back to my fitful sleeping and feeling sorry for myself.

Now, I don't want to make my wife appear to be lacking in compassion. As a woman, she simply has a different attitude toward sicknesses of the fairly mild flu/cold variety.

In short, suck it up. 

That's what Laurel does when she gets sick. She does her best to keep on doing when needs to be done around the house. Even if, in my husbandly opinion, many of the chores could be put off until she feels better.

Me, I'm just the opposite.

If, when I'm sick, I do one thing during the day other than take care of myself -- such as emptying the dishwasher -- I feel as selfless as Mother Teresa. Then I return to my sick bed, or crawl under a blanket in front of the TV, and get back to feeling sorry for myself.

Often women say, "Men are wimps when they get sick." Well, they're right.

In between my whining and self-pity I summoned up enough energy to fire up Google and see whether there was evidence to support this oft-heard indictment of male fortitude in the face of sniffling, coughing, and a fevered brow.

Yup. There is.

A Scottish survey found that one in three men took time off work because of a cold or flu, compared to only one in five women.

That same Scottish survey found 72 percent of women believe men make an unnecessary fuss when they're sick, and 22 percent of women said men expected to be nursed. Only 12 percent of the woman said they felt sorry for them.

Then there's an online survey by Nuts magazine which found that 64 per cent of men had a virus that forced them to miss work last winter, while only 45 per cent of women said the same.

She has four children but often tells people she has "five, including my husband,'' because she believes men want to be coddled by their female partners especially when they're sick.

"Women, we are known as the nurturers of the family, so we tend to suck it up,'' she says. "When I'm sick, I still get up and I go to work because I know I can take some antihistamines or something, and I run with it.''

The Nuts survey revealed 82 per cent of men believe bed rest is the best treatment for the flu, while 66 per cent of women said the best tactic was simply to keep active and try to fight it off.

On the other side of the magazine gender divide, I found an article from Bust called, "News Flash: Men are Wimps."

First up: according to science, men tend to exaggerate sickness more than women. Dubbed the "man flu syndrome," men are more likely to describe a cold as a flu, or a headache as a migraine to gain "maximum sympathy." "Maximum sympathy" is just the kind of phrasing a man would use to say he wants to be coddled like a baby. So ladies, next time a man in your life asks for help while appearing sick, do not heed their call! It's all a big farce!

No, bad advice. At least when it comes to me. Hey, I had a temperature of 102.2! That's no cold, it's a potentially life-threatening feverish sickness! Sort of.

Anyway, what's wrong with maximum sympathy? At this very moment I'm still coughing. "Ohhhhhh, I'm sick" still echoes through my whining mind. At least I can take consolation in the fact that since men are wimps when they get sick, I must be mucho manly.

Images of 2010 Salem World Beat Festival

Yesterday was warm and sunny here in Oregon. But I was still kind of sick from a mildly feverish flu/cold my granddaughter had gifted me during a recent visit.

Still, I couldn't resist firing up my scooter and heading to the Salem World Beat Festival. This is my second-favorite local summer event, getting bested out only by the Salem Art Fair.

It was healing to catch my first glimpse of the main stage Amphitheater in the Riverfront Park. Seeing people having a good time listening to the Incendio (world guitar fusion) band made me feel better.

As did watching an attractive guitar player sway to a pleasing variety of music -- Celtic, Middle Eastern, and more.


The drummer was talented also. I didn't realize "he" was a "she" until I zoomed in with my Sony's powerful telephoto lens. Guess I always assume that drummers are dudes.


When Incendio got to their Middle Eastern beat, the lead guy said belly dancing would be entirely appropriate. Some young girls were the only ones who responded to the invitation.

Playful, energetic diversity. That's what the World Beat Festival is all about.


At the end of the song, the girls collapsed on the ground. Then got up to take a bow. I liked their uninhibited style.


I then headed to the exhibit section of the Festival. The "Back to Bali" booth is one of my favorite shopping stops. A batik shirt caught my eye. Trying it on, I got a couple of looks good on you comments from fellow shoppers. Didn't look for shills. Anyway, I liked the shirt regardless. Pleased to help the global economy.

Outside the booth, more meet-up diversity of the canine variety. The dog on the right was huge. And furry. I got a sense that standing in the hot sun wasn't his favorite thing to do.


Armed with a plate of vegetarian noodles and a cup of chai tea I found a spot on the grass close to Jake Duncan, a talented 18 year old didgeridoo player from close-by Albany, Oregon.

I filmed his last tune and put it on You Tube. Enjoy.

The World Beat Festival has all kinds of educational presentations, along with the music and shopping.

For a bit I listened to a monk speak about the little-known kingdom of Bhutan.

Leaving the World Beat Festival I encountered another exotically clad creature of the homegrown variety.

Colbert's hilarious take on Rand Paul not being board-certified

There's a good reason why, almost every night, my wife and I watch The Colbert Report before heading off to bed: Stephen Colbert is able to make us laugh about the state of the world, which, when we watch the regular news, usually is disturbingly depressing.

A few days ago Colbert revealed that Rand Paul, a libertarian ophthalmologist who is the Republican candidate for U.S. Senator in Kentucky (and son of Ron Paul) isn't board-certified in his medical specialty -- though Paul claims that he is.

Yes, it's true. 

The national panel that approves doctors as board certified said U.S. Senate candidate Rand Paul isn't on the list, even though he has campaigned as holding the endorsement.

The Louisville Courier-Journal reports that the American Board of Medical Specialties, which works with the American Medical Association, doesn't recognize certification by a group Paul founded in 1991 and heads.

Just what you'd expect from a Tea Party libertarian type. No need to go through the trouble of documenting to a bunch of experts that you're qualified to practice a particular sort of medicine.

Just form your own "National Board of Ophthalmology" and certify yourself. Colbert took this to its logical conclusion, declaring that he was equally free to perform lasik surgery on an intern... using a laser pointer and a cat.

Hilarious. After some brief ads, the Rand Paul segment extends to about the eleven minute mark. Enjoy.

Tea Party irrationality reflected in Statesman Journal commentary

The Salem (Oregon) Statesman Journal editorial board positions have gotten increasingly nonsensical and right-wing -- a redundancy of adjectives, I realize.

My suspected causes are the arrival of a publisher who used to be an editor at the Orange County Register, and the newspaper's increasing need to suck up to the Chamber of Commerce in order to maintain its advertising revenues.

Last Sunday, a commentary by executive editor Bill Church reached new levels of editorializing meaninglessness. Though titled "Obama, please give us reasons to stay hopeful," it didn't contain any reasoned arguments for being unhopeful.
Download Bill Church Obama commentary

Instead, Church talked about a conversation he had with two unnamed men who live in the Salem area and wanted to explain why, in the words of one, "I fear for our democracy."

Apparently they never got around to this topic, because there was nothing in Church's piece that would make me -- or anyone rational -- fear for the health of our democratic institutions in the United States.

No mention of voting fraud, unconstitutional power grabs, or scary stuff like that. No, the men simply didn't like how Obama was handling some issues, such as the Gulf oil spill and health care reform.

Wow. Two Tea Party types are upset with Obama.

How this is the basis for a prominently displayed opinion piece in the Sunday paper is beyond me. I assume Church will be as open to writing about our generally favorable views about the Obama administration if my wife and I request a similar meeting with him.

This line in the commentary caught my eye: "They talked about cap and trade, and whether it affects homeowners."

OK, so what?

I bet the Obama-bashers didn't mention that the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the cost of taking action to prevent a global environmental and economic climate catastrophe is only $15 a month per U.S. household, or 50 cents a day.

Plus, the CBO estimates that the cap and trade plan to reduce greenhouse gas pollution will reduce federal budget deficits by about $24 billion over ten years. So it looks like a no-brainer to go ahead with cap and trade, though stronger legislation would be even better.

Problem is, Tea Party critics of Obama don't use their brains the way they should. This was analyzed by philosopher J.M. Bernstein in "The Very Angry Tea Party" -- the best description of the Tea Party movement that I've ever read.

The seething anger that seems to be an indigenous aspect of the Tea Party movement arises, I think, at the very place where politics and metaphysics meet, where metaphysical sentiment becomes political belief.

...When it comes to the Tea Party’s concrete policy proposals, things get fuzzier and more contradictory: keep the government out of health care, but leave Medicare alone; balance the budget, but don’t raise taxes; let individuals take care of themselves, but leave Social Security alone; and, of course, the paradoxical demand not to support Wall Street, to let the hard-working producers of wealth get on with it without regulation and government stimulus, but also to make sure the banks can lend to small businesses and responsible homeowners in a stable but growing economy.

...What Lilla cannot account for, and what no other commentator I have read can explain, is the passionate anger of the Tea Party movement, or, the flip-side of that anger, the ease with which it succumbs to the most egregious of fear-mongering falsehoods.  What has gripped everyone’s attention is the exorbitant character of the anger Tea Party members express.  Where do such anger and such passionate attachment to wildly fantastic beliefs come from?

My hypothesis is that what all the events precipitating the Tea Party movement share is that they demonstrated, emphatically and unconditionally, the depths of the absolute dependence of us all on government action, and in so doing they undermined the deeply held fiction of individual autonomy and self-sufficiency that are intrinsic parts of Americans’ collective self-understanding.

Unfortunately, Bill Church fed these "wildly fantastic beliefs" by uncritically giving the two Tea Party guys a forum to express their feelings. Feelings can't be the foundation of national policies. Facts should be. 

In Newsweek, Sharon Begley expressed this imperative nicely in "Don't Just 'Do Something' -- we must put science first in the gulf." She discusses how Bobby Jindal's proposal to build sand berms along the coastline to keep oil out likely would harm the Gulf Coast, not help it.

Yet on right-wing talk radio we hear a lot of criticism that the Obama administration failed to approve this ill-considered plan immediately. Well, that's because the government is committed to doing things that make sense, not just feel right.

As Begley says, utterly correctly:

When a politician is faced with an economic or social mess, the “just try something” mentality can be justified. Policies on these fronts cannot be accurately predicted for the simple reason that human behavior is involved. No amount of science can reliably forecast the effects of, say, financial or health-care reform, so a reasonable case can be made for “do something.” Not so when we’re talking about the laws of physics and chemistry rather than human behavior. In these cases, ignoring the science makes politicians seem like petulant children.

Tea Party types also.

My tips for watching World Cup soccer

I've enjoyed the two World Cup soccer matches that I've watched on TV. Naturally they've both featured the United States team -- when they played England and Slovenia -- because I'm only interested in soccer on the rare occasions when the game means something to my national interest.

By "enjoyed," I mean that I followed the tips I shared in How to enjoyably watch hockey and soccer on TV.

(1) Record the event.

(2) Press "Play."

(3) Then -- this is really important, because life is short and you don't want to waste it on meaningless stuff -- immediately press the fast forward button repeatedly until it is at the fastest speed where the score being shown is still readable.

(4) Wait a while until you see the score has changed. Could be a long while, even at fast forwarding speed.

(5) Press "Play."

(6) Rewind/go back to fifteen seconds or so before the goal was scored.

(7) Watch the goal. Say "Nice, "Cool," "Crappy goalkeeping," or whatever else pops into your head.

(8) Repeat 3 through 7 until the game is over.

(9) Turn the TV off, content that you've watched hockey or soccer in the most efficient and enjoyable fashion if you're part of the 99% of humanity (in the United States, at least) who couldn't care less about the sports but sometimes want to act like they do, sort of.

This has enabled me to get the gist of the U.S. team's World Cup matches in considerably less time than the 90 minutes they last. Usually I fast forward until I see that a goal has been scored, then watch a minute or so before and after this rare event.

Given that the U.S. matches have been 1-1 and 2-2, it doesn't take me long to feel like I'm doing my patriotic duty to (halfheartedly) show some interest in my country's team.

Anyway, I have no idea what's going on in between the goal-scoring. A bunch of guys move the ball up and down the field with their legs, heads, and chests in some sort of mysterious fashion which isn't interesting to me.

Which brings me to my second tip: to appreciate soccer more deeply than the shallow way I've been watching the World Cup, I think it's necessary to embrace a philosophical world view that is at odds with how most Americans see things.

As an aid to getting into this frame of mind, I recommend watching some European films of the existential variety.

The kind that you can imagine Jean Paul Sartre positively reviewing. The kind where the closing credits come on and you slump in your seat with a despairing What the #@$%&! was that about? running through your head. (The original version of "The Vanishing" comes to mind.)

We Americans tend to like order, rules, and easily understood morality. Football (our kind, not soccer) and basketball have discernible plays/strategy. When an infraction is noted by a referee, the reason is clear -- even if not agreed with by a player or fan.

Contrast this with the United States vs. Slovenia World Cup match, where I watched more of the event than the tips above called for since I found the controversy over the disallowed goal that would have won the game for the U.S. was so fascinating.

The referee, Koman Coulibaly, never gave a reason for blowing his whistle. Unless he decides to speak up we'll never know what sort of foul he believed he witnessed, since soccer doesn't require the ref to explain himself, or even indicate which player was responsible for the no-no that cost the U.S. a win.

So in soccer the players run around in a seemingly quasi-random fashion for 90 minutes, often accomplishing nothing, no goal at all by either side, with arbitrary decisions by a laconic referee frequently determining the outcome of the match.

Wonderfully existential.

But frustrating to observe for those with a typical American mind set. Consider this marvelous quotation about the disallowed goal attributed to the president of FIFA, the international soccer organization.

"In perhaps every other sport, an explanation of a decisive play would have been provided. But Sepp Blatter, the president of FIFA, has ignored calls for video replay and has decided against putting additional referees on the end line, saying he did not want technology to rule the game. He has also said that he likes the debate that follows matches, believing that uncertainty and subjectivity boost the sport."

Yes, c'est la vie. Or as we put it, "shit happens."

It's a universal attitude. But for Americans, it's something to be resisted, fought against, a temporary unwelcome situation. For the international soccer culture, it's the way things are, no big deal.

Sign lies: Trader Joe's not coming to Keizer

Yesterday there was a lot of excited buzzing in normally sleepy Salem after the Statesman Journal ran a front page story about a sign going up at Keizer Station listing Trader Joe's as a retailer.
Download SJ Trader Joe's story

Sure, the story quoted a Keizer Station representative who said that the sign company screwed up, and there wasn't any deal with Trader Joe's. But I, like lots of other people, figured that this was an attempt to cover up the premature divulging of Trader Joe's imminent arrival in the Salem area.

Unfortunately, it looks like the Salem curse -- which keeps Oregon's capital city squarely centered in the boring cultural doldrums -- is still in play. KATU's Melica Johnson reported that this truly was a mistake by the sign company, and there is no plan for a Trader Joe's in Keizer.

But a Trader Joe's spokesman said the company is definitely interested in Salem. Good news. Question is, how interested? 

Not interested enough to choose Salem over Corvallis for a recent store location, even though we have three times more people in this area. And not interested enough to respond to the "Trader Joe's in Salem" visualizations that I asked people to psychically send out to the cosmos three years ago.

Last night I emailed Trader Joe's (again) via their store location request form. 

There's a rumor (based on a sign at Keizer Station) that Trader Joe's will be coming to the Salem, Oregon area. My wife and I passionately hope this is true. We would visit a Keizer store often, and know many other people who would do likewise. Make our day, and come to Salem/Keizer.

I also belatedly joined the "Put Trader Joe's in Salem Oregon" Facebook page, which has over 1,700 members. 

It's disappointing to learn that our area will be Trader Joe's-less for quite a while longer, apparently. However, it didn't seem right that a store would be located in Keizer Station, a soulless big box development.

Trader Joe's, south Salem is the place for you.

There's plenty of vacant properties that would be perfect for a store. And I also happen to live in south Salem, not that this has anything to do with my passionate urging for you to open a store in our area. It's simply the epicenter of health-minded folks who would flock to a Trader Joe's in droves. 

No more teasing. Next time a photo of a Trader Joe's sign appears in our local newspaper, it's got to be for real.

iPhone 4 ordering screw-ups -- bad AT&T omen

Eight days ago I was really excited about ordering an iPhone 4 -- Apple's newest must have techno-gadget.

Today, not nearly so much. I can personally confirm Gizmodo's reporting: "Apple's iPhone 4 pre-ordering is a total disaster."

I found it impossible to get any response from either the Apple or AT&T web sites when I tried to upgrade my 3G iPhone.

No, that isn't true. I got some curt error messages -- not exactly the sort of thing I've come to expect from the usually smoothly functioning world of Apple.

Apparently it is more AT&T's fault than Apple's, according to Gizmodo.

The reason for the long lines, however, is AT&T's ordering system. Readers in the comments are reporting that the systems are collapsed everywhere... Apple's processing system seems to be collapsed too. The reason: The iPhone upgrades depend on AT&T account server.

Ugh.

This fiasco is a disturbing reminder that AT&T is the only cellular service that currently works with the iPhone. Lots of iPhone users wish there were more choices, such as Verizon, given the long history of problems with AT&T.

I've been worrying that AT&T's creaky capabilities couldn't handle the new data-intensive video features of the iPhone 4. Now that AT&T has proven itself incompetent at even taking orders for the device, my enthusiasm for getting an upgrade has diminished.

Probably I'll wait a few weeks and let the early must have frenzy subside. By then, hopefully enough people will have reported on how the iPhone 4 works in the real world to reassure me that getting one makes sense.

Police don't deserve special thanks

I enjoy reading letters to the editor that make me say to myself, Wow, why didn't I think of that -- it makes so much sense.

Today's Portland Oregonian features a letter from Jim Sumser (of Vancouver) that garnered that Wow response. He points out that police officers and fire fighters are just doing a job, as are so many other people.

Letter writer Darryl Willis ("Respect for police," June 13) doubts that employees of the Red & Black Cafe would have had the courage to arrest a burglar in his home. It was hard for me to make sense of this. Are baristas expected to catch criminals? I thought their job was to make coffee drinks, not to protect the citizens.

On the contrary, the police are paid to do this. There's no reason to give them thanks. That's their job, and there's nothing moral about it. Same with firefighters, who have managed a publicity campaign over the years (especially since 9/11) that presents them as bystanders who happened by a fire and, by sheer force of individual magnanimity, put it out. No, they are paid to put out fires. This is why they arrive on the scene with all their trucks and hoses, and why police officers arrive with all their guns. The scenario is hardly comparable to some barista who, walking home from work, hears or sees something out of place.

When you're paid to do something, all references to morality, courage, sacrifice, etc. are ridiculous. It's quite another story if you find yourself in a position to do something exceptional for which there was no monetary compensation. Otherwise, all jobs are the same.

JIM SUMSER
Vancouver 

Yet we tend to elevate public safety professions and others -- such as soldiers -- into a strangely elevated moral sphere. Often I hear talk show hosts (usually conservatives) say to someone who mentions being in the armed forces, "Thank you for your service."

Hmmmm.

Why isn't the same thing said to teachers at inner city schools, medical researchers, or those who work in much more dangerous professions than public safety?

Police officers and firefighters aren't in the top ten of the most dangerous jobs in the United States. Fishing, logging, and flying have the highest fatality rates, followed by iron/steel workers, farmers/ranchers, and trash collectors.

So to all the fisherpeople, loggers, and pilots out there, thank you for your service. Of course, like Sumser says, you're getting paid for what you do -- just as police officers and fire fighters almost always are.

I admire people who put their lives on the line to provide the rest of us with some valuable service. We just need to remember that public safety work isn't the most dangerous occupation, and there's no reason to put any particular profession up on a pedestal.

[Update: I decided to check out how dangerous being in military service is. The death rate per 100,000 FTE's has been in the general range of the most dangerous civilian jobs mentioned above -- fishing, logging, flying -- even during the early stages of the Iraq  war. That is, between about 55 and 110 deaths per 100,000 FTE during the 1980-2004 period. So people in the military don't put their lives on the line more than people on a fishing boat do.]

Metolius trash spill makes me empathize with Gulf Coast

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Sometimes the morality of a situation is stunningly simple.

Only one word kept echoing in my head after I spotted some out-of-place debris as I was walking along the Metolius River in central Oregon, past the Riverside campground near the headwaters.

There's very little litter along the Metolius. People visiting the Camp Sherman area respect this marvelously beautiful spring-fed river, which I believe has an official Wild and Scenic designation.

So this trash was out of place. Unusual. Unexpected. And wrong. 

We usually come to the Metolius once a month from April through October, being 1/4 owners of a Forest Service cabin in between the Camp Sherman store and the headwaters.

Most evenings I take the dog for a walk upriver until we reach the private property just past the Riverside campground. I've done this for quite a few years. I'd never seen more than a discarded candy bar wrapper, or such, on the ground.

Staring at the scattered trash, I got some insight into how residents of the Gulf Coast must feel right now, with the BP oil spill despoiling the beaches and marshes. Like me, they're used to the land looking a certain way -- not fouled by human error and incompetence.

I took the dog back to the cabin, fed her, and faced a decision. I wanted to take a nap. But I could tell that I wasn't going to be able to relax until I did something about the debris lying in between the campground and the river.

I found some trash bags and gloves. Then I rode my mountain bike back to the scene of the environmental crime.

Inspecting the area for clues, I was surprised to find an unused black trash bag. There also was another bag with quite a few shredded holes. Probably some people ignored the "take out what you bring in" rule and left a bag full of garbage at their camp site, where a coyote, raccoon, or whatever dragged it away and then ripped it open.

It took me about twenty minutes to pick up the trash. I was meticulous. There were many tiny bits of plastic and paper scattered around. I'm pretty sure I found every one.

I felt like this was a small thing to do for the planet, for nature -- a sort of penance for all the environmental despoliation that I, and virtually every other American, create just by living the sort of lifestyles that we do.

When I finished, I felt satisfied. Like I'd done something right, right, right.

I wanted to find a piece of paper with some sort of identifying information on it, so I could track the people down and tell them about the mess they caused by their carelessness. Wasn't able to.

Gulf Coast residents do know who caused their land, and wildlife, to be covered with oily crap. I can understand their anger, their desire to kick some butt, their insistence that BP had got to pay for what the company has done.

There's nothing funny about the BP disaster. But I enjoyed laughing as I watched this video, "BP spills coffee." Good acting. And utterly believable, in an unbelievable way.

Lars Larson's lies about global warming

Even though I got satellite radio to avoid the right-wing talk shows that dominate the Portland, Oregon airwaves, occasionally I tune into Lars Larson (KXL) or Victoria Taft (KPAM) to check on the strength of my cranium -- since almost always what I hear makes me feel like my brain is going to explode.

I survived ten minutes or so of Larson a few days ago, but just barely. The combined scientific ignorance of Lars and a global warming-denying sidekick he had on, Chuck Wiese, was astounding.

And intensely disturbing.

Three years ago I criticized Larson for joking about how global warming is going to be good for Oregon. He's still up to his head-in-the-sand tricks. Now his brain-dead theory is that the Earth is cooling rapidly, so if big bad government limits our nation's carbon footprint, people are going to freeze to death when their furnace fuel is rationed.

Or something like that.

It was hard to follow the logic of Larson and Wiese, since they didn't use any in their blathering about how climate change/global warming science is a fraud.

Larson doesn't have any scientific qualifications, so far as I know. Wiese calls himself a meteorologist, but he only has a B.A. in Atmospheric Science. He says he's done weather forecasting for twenty-five years.

Well, obviously he never learned that short term changes in the weather are different from long term changes in the climate, because he and Larson kept saying that because Oregon has had an unusually cool spring, this shows that global warming isn't happening.

If idiocy spewed over the public airwaves could be taxed, our national debt would be wiped out by Lars Larson quickly. But, hey, I'm an optimist. People can change.

I wish Larson would read "What's the Worst That Could Happen?" by Greg Craven, an Oregon high school teacher who subtitles his terrific book a rational response to the climate change debate. He calmly and logically leads the reader through an analysis of climate change -- focusing on how to decide what to do, not the scientific facts.

Craven is a believer, as am I, in finding the most reliable sources of scientific information, and trusting them.

I don't have a particle accelerator in my house, nor the ability to conduct experiments in subatomic physics, so I trust the conclusions of experts in this field. Likewise, Craven lists the key organizations who agree with the scientific consensus: global warming is for real, humans are the main cause of it, and it poses a huge threat to human civilization. 

The U.S. National Academy of Sciences, American Association for the Advancement of Science, and National Research Council, for example. Along with the 2008 National Intelligence Assessment by all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies, among many other reliable sources.

But a right-wing talk show host and a guy with a B.A. in Atmospheric Science disagree, saying that efforts to reduce carbon emissions are some sort of Obama plot to turn the United States into a socialist state.

Or something like that. Again, it's hard to follow crackpot craziness.

Larson and Wiese were angry at those who want this country to take serious actions to stop, or at least slow down, global warming. Well, I'm angry too: at them, and anyone else who refuses to face the facts -- which are pointing toward a future for my granddaughter that will be much worse than what we're enjoying now.

It's utterly immoral and unethical to allow future generations to inherit a virtually uninhabitable world from us. As Craven demonstrates, the costs of doing nothing about climate change are vastly higher than the expense of acting to reduce carbon emissions.

Conservatives have a valid point when they criticize the rapidly rising national debt that will be passed on to our children and grandchildren, if nothing is done about it. They should be equally concerned about the environmental debacle that will be passed on if the Earth continues to warm as rapidly as it is.

In a recent issue of TIME magazine, William Antholis and Strobe Talbott wrote "Leaving a Good Legacy: Why the ethical case for combating climate change is one that should appeal to conservatives."

It should be another piece of required reading for Lars Larson. The article ends with:

Our concept of intergenerational equity holds that assets do not belong exclusively to those who have accrued them; rather, those resources should, to the extent possible, be administered and preserved for those who will inherit them and will, partly as a consequence of their inheritance, live somewhat better lives than those who came before. We come into this world in debt to our ancestors, and we leave it an incrementally better place, believing our descendants will come up with means of fending off or coping with whatever their age throws at them.

Down through the years, that has been the narrative of the human family. But global warming alters it in a basic way. We cannot leave those who come after us to their own devices. If we do not get the process of mitigating climate change started right now, our descendants, however skilled, will not be able to cope with the consequences. If we do nothing, we will likely bequeath to them a less habitable — perhaps even uninhabitable — planet, the most negative legacy imaginable. That is why there is no time to lose.

Apple, please get into the printer business (again)

I'm a fervent devotee of all things Apple'ish. I believe that if I buy enough gadgets from Apple, I will achieve perfect (roughly speaking) happiness.

I have an iPod touch, an iPhone, and a MacBook Pro, plus two Airport Extremes that smoothly and easily connect me wirelessly to the Internet and a printer. Which -- the printer -- I just replaced, again, after my Samsung decided that it would be fun to print half of a page, then stop dead, leaving the paper jammed.

I researched the issue via Google and learned that this is a common complaint of the Samsung CLP-315W, which otherwise has been a fairly decent performer for me over the past couple of years.

But when you're used to Apple products working way beyond the fairly decent performer level, it's more than a little frustrating to be stuck with a choice of printers that seem crappy by comparison.

I started my Apple love affair back in the 1980s, when I got an Apple II+ that was marvelously equipped with a floppy disk and a small green screen monitor. Soon I upgraded to early Macs -- along with the Apple Laserwriter, which debuted in 1985 and was discontinued in 1988.

I loved that printer. I've bought a lot of other printers over the last twenty plus years. My expectations have become depressingly low. Along, it seems, with almost every other computer user on the planet.

Yesterday I read through a lot of user reviews of various color laser printers, since I wanted to get a replacement for the Samsung as soon as possible. I was struck by how, on a scale of 1-5, it was extremely rare for a printer to earn more than a 3.8 or thereabouts.

Hardly anybody gets ecstatic over a printer, like Apple maniacs do over the iPhone and Mac computers. Complaints are ubiquitous, even with the more highly rated models. Clearly, there's something wrong in printer land.

It's the computer industry's neglected product.

But here's the thing, Apple: my MacBook laptop can be working flawlessly (as it is), communicating effortlessly with your marvelous Airport Extremes to connect me wirelessly with Qwest DSL -- yet when my printer screws up, as every printer I've owned for the past twenty years has regularly, my entire computing experience goes in the crapper.

And when I turn to the online Apple Store, I'm reminded that Apple leaves its customers to fend for themselves in the rough sea of printer choices. It's irritating. I wanted to be able to order an Apple printer that I knew would work reliably, simply, and well.

Instead, for an hour or two I had to wend my way through printer manufacturer, Amazon, Office Depot, and computer magazine web sites, searching for expert reviews, customer ratings, and what not.

Eventually I settled on the HP Color LaserJet 2025dn, which, pleasingly, was on sale at our local Office Depot. This morning I set it up and found that it plays nicely with my MacBook. The print quality and speed are superior to the Samsung (when it worked).

So I'm temporarily a happy camper. But I know that when it comes to printers, laser or otherwise, happiness is just a glitch away from turning into WTF frustration. Help me out, Apple.

Take a few of your geniuses off of their iPad or iPhone project and turn them loose on designing the world's greatest printer. I'd like a color laser variety. Make several kinds -- photo, high speed business, whatever.

Just make them as cool, reliable, easy to use, and Wow as the rest of your products. You'll sell a jillion of them. And make a whole lot of dissatisfied printer buyers, like me, even more devoted to Apple.

iPhone 4 -- the way to perfect happiness

Once again, this morning I found myself transfixed before my MacBook Pro, glued to Engadget's live blog of a Steve Jobs presentation of Apple's newest must-have techno-wonder.

The iPhone 4.

And this time it truly is a must-have for me. I was strongly attracted to the iPad when Jobs revealed its appealing features, but after the show was over I was left with a nagging feeling of "cool toy, yet what would I do with it that I can't already?"

Different reaction to the iPhone 4, for sure.

Currently I have an iPhone 3G which can't even capture video (unlike the 3Gs, a later model.) So when Jobs talked about how the iPhone 4 takes HD video and comes with a version of iMovie, so my video creations can be edited on the spot and uploaded to You Tube, or wherever, I was sold. 

The video chat ability, courtesy of the iPhone 4's front-facing camera also was way wow.

OK, it's a limited "wow" at the moment, given that you can only chat with someone who also has an iPhone 4, and only via wi-fi (not a cellular connection, undoubtedly owing to AT&T''s crappy capabilities), but the prospect for sharing events with friends or family by means of the back-facing camera is another reason for iPhone 4 lust.

Which explains why I kept checking to see if AT&T had added them to their upgrade options after the iPhone 4 rollout had been completed.

I got Twitterly excited when the wireless area of the AT&T web site was down for "maintenance," but maybe this was true -- since when it came back up there was no mention of the iPhone 4. The good news is that my wife and I qualify for early iPhone upgrades, even though our two-year contracts aren't up for quite a while.

Thanks, AT&T.

On the down side, AT&T is going to charge for the long-awaited tethering capability on the iPhone 4 (meaning, I can plug it into my laptop and connect to the Internet via a cellular connection -- no need for wi-fi when I'm out and about). This doesn't seem fair, since it shouldn't make any difference what device someone is using to access their AT&T cellular services.

This minor quibble doesn't have any bearing on the main theme of this post: I'm about to achieve perfect happiness! All I need is an iPhone 4, and my days will be sunny, worry free, and blissful forever. (Well, until I die, but that's "forever" enough for me.)

I feel that the iPad was a test of my Apple faith, a little bump in the road on the path that is leading me to an eventual surrendering of my life completely to Steve Jobs and all things Apple'ish.

Happiness isn't complicated. Today I simply felt good that the iPhone 4 and I will have an intimate relationship before too long (pre-orders start June 14, and they're available June 24, so AT&T upgrades should be possible before then).

When I got my iPhone a year and a half ago, I came to an important realization (echoed here). 

Jeez, here I am, sixty years old, and only now realizing that I've had it wrong for most of my philosophically-inclined life: notwithstanding the oft-heard adage, money really can buy happiness.

I know this, because I've become increasingly blissful the more dollars I send in Apple's direction.

For an iPod Touch. Then a MacBook Pro. Followed by an iPhone. Then my wife's iMac. And shortly a much-improved iPhone. With each swipe of my VISA card, my life becomes more satisfying.

I can only assume that the trend will continue, until -- praise be the day! -- every aspect of my existence has been embraced by the comforting presence of the most dependable entity I know: Apple.

Of course, I'm not alone in my worshipful stance. There's a Church of the Apple Mind. Plus the Cult of Mac. And this family shows in their video why the Church of Apple makes more sense than Catholicism. 

Apple, though, does its own best evangelizing. In the promo video for the iPhone 4 we learn that this isn't just another technological device, it's going to "have a lasting impact on the way we connect with each other."

Amen to that. See and believe.

Bend newspaper favors city sprawl, not sustainability

Bend is a great city in central Oregon. My wife and I have envisioned ourselves living there someday.

But the Bend newspaper, the Bulletin, should recognize that editorializing in favor of LA-like sprawl rather than sustainability isn't going to encourage environmentally-minded people to move to the area.

There's plenty of places in the country where subdivisions checkerboard the countryside and big box stores dominate the shopping landscape. In fact, Bend already has done a good (actually, bad) job of uglifying itself along its major highways.

Yet today the not-so-wise editorial board of the Bulletin whipped itself into a frenzy, castigating Greg Macpherson -- a member of the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) -- for daring to suggest that Bend's desire to increase the size of its Urban Growth Boundary by 40% needs some rethinking.

Here's some of what Macpherson said in a Bulletin opinion piece last Wednesday, which was republished today. (Annoyingly the Bulletin doesn't make its content freely available online. I had to fork out 50 cents to access the Macpherson piece and the editorial, which I've appended at the end of this post.)

Urban Growth Boundaries are a great Oregon innovation — one of the ways the state earned its reputation for environmental leadership. UGBs separate town from country, farm from shopping mall, and forest from subdivision. They also help ensure that cities carefully consider how to grow, to keep costs down while providing land for needed jobs and housing.

...The requirements of Oregon's statewide planning program can help Bend become an even better place to live. Infill of vacant space inside the existing UGB will cost residents less for new roads, sewers and water lines. More compact development will improve access to public transportation. Large undeveloped spaces will be preserved for the educational and industrial uses that enhance economic opportunity. Lower-cost public services will make housing more affordable. A reduction in the average vehicle miles traveled per resident will reduce dependence on fossil fuels. Oregon's statewide planning goals promote all these aims and more.

In any planning process, it's important to embrace the opportunity for positive change. In 30 years, Bend should not look like a larger version of just what it is now. It should adapt to a changing economy and evolving lifestyles. The decision on the size and location of its UGB is an important part of this process.

Not exactly a wildly radical statement.

The Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD), which is overseen by the LCDC, sent back Bend's Urban Growth Boundary expansion proposal for more work. The voluminous record of the review can be read here. A press release summarized why the proposal got an "incomplete" grade.
Download Bend UGB press release

When I scanned the 169 page DLCD order remanding Bend's proposal, a lot of good arguments for doing this caught my eye. Seemingly the city doesn't need anywhere near the amount of land that it wants to urbanize, choosing sprawl over sustainability for no good reasons.

Bend should realize that it is part of Oregon, not an independent principality run by the Bulletin, the Chamber of Commerce, and real estate developers. The editorial board got all huffy about -- gasp! -- applying state land use laws to Bend.

The DLCD has reviewed Bend’s proposal to expand its urban growth boundary and found it wanting. In a nutshell, the DLCD wants Bend to develop much more densely than the city’s residents and elected officials do, the ideal apparently being a miniature version of Portland bounded by mile after mile of forest and desert.

...Macpherson now lectures the benighted citizens of Bend about the benefits of land-use restrictions that will make their housing more affordable, their carbon footprints more dainty, their infrastructure cheaper and public transportation more workable.

Problem is, this would require Bend to develop in a way that most people who live here oppose, which is why their elected representatives on city council approved the UGB expansion they did. Macpherson glibly dismisses the desires of Bend residents by spouting pablum: “In any planning process it’s important to embrace the opportunity for positive change.”

Hmmmm.

So the Bend Bulletin editorial board apparently is in favor of unaffordable housing, more global warming, expensive infrastructure, and unworkable public transportation.

Wow, if I really believed, as the editorial claims, that this represents the desire of the city's residents, I'd immediately scratch Bend off of my list of possible places to move to one day.

What's also crazy about the pave it over attitude of the editorial board is this: the Bend housing market sucks. In 2008 it was the second most over-valued market in the country. Not surprisingly, in 2009 Bend crashed back to reality, hard. 

With one of the nation’s slowest housing markets, Bend has led the state of Oregon to the fifth-worst housing market in the country for default notices, auction sale notices and bank repossessions.

...Deschutes County — where Bend is located — experienced one foreclosure per 168 homes, 14 percent worse than Wayne, County, Michigan, home to Detroit and the troubled auto industry.

Jim Homolka, president of Re/Max Equity Group Inc., called Bend a classic example of a market that soared too high. “The market got overheated and overpriced and it just stopped,” he said. Last fall, Re/Max Equity Group elected to close its Bend office after concluding it will take too long for the market to recover.

Yet somehow the Bend Bulletin (which I'll bet is echoing it's lord and master, the Chamber of Commerce, given how advertising revenue drives newspaper decisions nowadays) concludes that the solution to overbuilding and urban sprawl is...(drumroll, please) more overbuilding and urban sprawl.

Well, hopefully the sensible citizens of Bend will pressure city leaders to do what is right for the long term, not what short-sighted politicians and business types are advocating.

Like almost everyone who loves central Oregon -- we're part owners of a cabin in Camp Sherman, about 45 minutes from Bend -- I don't want to see the Bend area become a miniaturized version of southern California, with the countryside eaten up by sprawling subdivisions and the city dominated by ugly strip malls, traffic jams, and a declining downtown. 

Sadly, this seems to be what the Bend Bulletin wants. Hopefully the state's land use planning process will continue to protect what the editorial board doesn't care about: a beautiful, sustainable, livable Bend.

Marion County subdivision vesting case in judge's hands

Beginning in 2005 our neighborhood here in rural south Salem (Oregon) has been fighting a proposed 43-lot subdivision that threatens our ground and surface water. Since my wife and I are leading the fight against what is usually called the "Laack subdivison," we're used to sitting through long meetings.

Planning Commission meetings. Board of Commissioners meetings. Hearing's Officer meetings. And today, a three hour Marion County Circuit Court hearing before Judge Nely Johnson (a retired Multnomah County judge who was brought in for this vested rights case).

The attorneys for our neighborhood's Keep Our Water Safe committee, Ralph Bloemers and Sean Malone, did a great job. Ralph focused on legal arguments, while Sean concentrated on facts. Vested rights cases in Oregon are determined on a common law basis. That is, judges' rulings on individual cases combine to form the law, rather than legislative statutes or executive actions.

Ralph said that all of the statewide (Oregon Court of Appeals and Supreme Court) vested rights cases are decades old, dating from before the passage of Measures 37 and 49, which altered land use law in Oregon significantly. Several Yamhill County vesting cases were argued before the Court of Appeals last January, so decisions are expected fairly soon -- which will add to the common law and clarify specific Measure 37/49 issues.

Naturally my main focus during the hearing was on the arguments being made by the four attorneys (the two on our side, and two who represented the would-be subdivision developers), and the questions being asked by Judge Johnson.

But now and then my thoughts drifted to a higher level of pondering: how marvelous it was that we Homo sapiens have evolved culturally into a species able to resolve disputes in such a civilized fashion. The attorneys were appealingly courteous to each other. Nobody raised his or her voice in anger or frustration. Facts and the law were being debated, not personal issues.

Lawyers don't get high rankings from the public. Gallup found that only 13% of people say that lawyers' honesty and ethical standards are very high or high. (Just 4% higher than members of Congress; ouch.)

Hmmmm. From what I saw today -- admittedly a tiny sample of lawyerdom -- that's a bum rap.

I admired the good arguments that were made on both sides. Sure, sometimes I disagreed with how some facts and case law were presented. But on the whole I was impressed with how all four attorneys and the judge were intent on discussing the key issues in the case forthrightly, openly, and intelligently.

In court cases, as in sporting events, there's a winner and a loser. Naturally that's important to the contesting parties. However, how the legal game gets played is, in the long run, the crucial thing. 

People get upset with judges and courts when they don't like a ruling. By and large, though, our legal system is respected -- as it should be. We don't have a King issuing edicts from on high, or soothsayers casting bones to discern what the Fates have decided.

After a few hours in the courtroom I got tired of sitting on a rather hard bench. But I never lost interest in the proceedings, which struck me as representing the American legal way: fight hard for what you believe in, play fair, and may the best legal argument win.

Salem's curse continues: riverfront development stalls

I've lived in and near Salem (Oregon) since 1977. That's thirty-three years of exposure to a city whose lifeblood is blah. I'm hoping that just as researchers have found that caloric restriction extends life, so does urban excitement deprivation.

Glancing at the front page of the Statesman Journal today, I was disturbed -- but not all that surprised -- to see that the Salem Curse continues. A promising effort to convert the downtown riverfront area into a mixed use development has stalled.
Download Salem Riverfront project stalls

So now, instead of staring at ugly Boise Cascade industrial buildings, we'll be treated to the sight of them half-demolished. But as a commenter on the newspaper story said, the vast expanse of barren land on the site makes for some Salem fun times.

Well at least it was being used this last weekend for a so called "demolition car sale". You know the ones were the dealer charges way more for the same cars than when they were actually on their lot..but seems to dupe a lot of normally sensible people..because its on a piece of wasteland and/or has a big tent.

I've come up with the Salem Curse theory because it explains why the city remains the zero point at the center of four engaging compass headings. I'm pretty sure that somewhere along the urbanization line Salem sold its soul and now is doomed to live with minimal spirit.

To the north is oh-so-trendy Portland. To the south is oh-so-hip Eugene. To the west is the beautiful Pacific Coast. To the east is the majestic Cascade Mountains. And in the middle sits...

Nowhere land.

It's well known that the "creative class" shuns Salem. Many professional types who work either in state government or the private sector live in the Portland area, choosing to commute a far distance in order to avoid spending more time in Salem than is necessary to earn a living.

This is why we don't have a Trader Joes, even though Corvallis (another nearby cool city) does, though it is three times smaller than Salem. We also don't have a Whole Foods Market, or any other large natural food store.

But we have lots of Subway shops, as I noted in another Salem-bashing post, "Why Salem sucks compared to Portland."

Something needs to happen to break the city's blah cycle, in which well-educated, high income creative class folks choose not to move to Salem because there aren't the amenities that well-educated, high income creative class folks expect to find in a city of this size, which makes it less likely that businesses who cater to well-educated, high income creative class folks will locate here, which ...

Leaves us with big box stores and Lancaster Drive. Whoopee.

A Salem bicycling blog hit this same theme recently in "Physician Recruitment: Salem is So-Lame."

While the Salem area is enjoying a bit of a renaissance among some younger professionals, creatives, and the tech savvy, it remains a difficult sell for many.

...Salem looks like a back-water to highly skilled professionals coming from more urban environments. There are many reasons for this, of course, and we cannot discuss them in any meaningfully comprehensive manner. But one element common to both New York and Chicago, and also now to Seattle with new Mayor and bicyclist Mike McGinn, is that all of these cities are more bike- and transit-friendly than is Salem.

Well, that's a possibility.

But like the post says, there are many reasons for Salem's blahness. (I've explored this subject here, here, here, and here. Pondering why Salem sucks is one of the most interesting things there is to do in Salem.)