Wampum

Return of the ... One True King (pt 6)

I've been writing a process series on the elections for the 7th Majlis (Iran's legislature), held on the 20th of this month. A running side-bar has been most of the American press coverage reduces to very, very few independent primary reports, they ran several days behind the European, Asian, and Middle Eastern press, and generally were conclusionary -- "here endeth the lesson" -- day after day. The lowest point personally (remember no one you actually know knows you blog) was when the paper of record for Southern Maine ran 500 words of editorial that elections were good and mullahs were bad.

In writing the Return of the ... One True King series I used sources from inside Iran, including the web site of the 6th Majlis, and began to read Iranian bloggers, both at home and in exile. I edited, redacted, munged, illuminated, and I'm sure I also obsured, text that originated in Iran. The point of writing about Iran and restricting oneself to texts that geographically originate "about, but not within Iran" eluded me, but today I've found that point.

I was violating US law. The "Return of the ... One True King" series of posts was a series of criminal acts, because it was ... Criminal Editing of the Enemy. I've been trading with the enemey. The Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control is letting publishers subject to its jurisdiction (which excludes Yas-e Nou and Sharq, already closed by Iran's Guardian Council exercising their jurisdiction) know that trading with the enemey (in the form of editing scientific publications, poetry or news) is ten years and/or $500,000.

Now much of what I wrote was the result of being up at all hours with Jonah (age 4, autistism, sleep disorder), so breathy, rushed, disjointed, like bird watching. I haven't yet tried the hard problem, of writing about, rather than observing others write about. I'll get around to it, after all, the cast of characters in Tehran and Washington are not going anywhere soon. More's the pity.

It is simply amazing to think about, for those of us who came up on Soviet mathematical and scientific publications and Soviet and Chinese military and political publications, collected, translated, summarized, digested, glossed, ... that the manuscript for a volumn of 17th century Persian poetry in Farsi, with an American English translation, can not be lawfully edited for publication within the confines of the United States. Neither for that matter can the debates of the 6th Majlis on reform of the law concerning the damages for wrongful deaths -- tort reform -- which currently contains a 10-to-1 statuatory disparity in the "blood money" valuation of human life along confessional lines.

If there are any Americans that want access to texts originating from Iran which are edited for publication, they will have to attempt that access exterior to the political jurisdiction of the United States.

Oh. IRNA reports today that it intercepted a Pushtu language broadcast that ...

-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Cherry <s.cherry@ieee.org>
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 08:36:30
To:dave@FARBER.NET, ip@v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: [IP] It's a crime to edit for publication...?

Dave,

As it happens, we at the IEEE had our semi-annual all-hands staff
meeting last week. There, executive director Dan Senese said that not
only is the license process obviously distasteful, it's also not
clear the State Department is granting them. At least, we still
haven't gotten one, and no one else seems to have either. We were
told that our attorneys continue to press our application.

Otherwise, the situation hasn't changed much since November, when
Spectrum magazine wrote up the story to date
<http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/WEBONLY/resource/nov03/1103nvs.html>.

I'm not the person to make official statements for the organization,
but I can tell you first-hand that it's been a very painful matter
for our volunteer editors, for the editorial staffs of the
transactions and the magazines, and for the Institute leadership to
have to treat Iranian articles differently.

Steven

Field of Dreams Wishful Thinking

A few weeks back, I took Washington Post journalist Jonathan Weisman to task for writing essentially an Op/Ed piece on Bush's re-election prospects due to the surging economy. Watching a non-editorial writer cheerlead is one thing, but when that cheerleading is based on facts not entirely in evidence, it's hard to keep quiet.

Weisman's support for Bush's stunning economy recovery was based on consumer confidence and housing numbers. However, neither of these factors could, at the time of the article, hold much water, as both were beginning a slow slide southward.

This week, it appeared that more lackluster, even downright bad, economic news hit the presses, but you wouldn't know that from the desk of the Associated Press. Reporting on economic news today, it took a decidedly Pollyanna-esqe approach:

Orders for Durable Goods Drop 1.8 Percent
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Filed at 2:27 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Factories saw orders for big-ticket goods drop by 1.8 percent in January, but much of that reflected huge declines in bookings for commercial and military airplanes.

The overall figure, released by the Commerce Department Thursday, obscured gains in other areas as the nation's manufacturers work to keep their recovery moving along.

The 1.8 percent decrease in orders for ``durable'' goods -- costly manufactured products expected to last at least three years -- came after a revised 1.6 percent gain registered in December, which was better than previously estimated.

Although economists were forecasting a 1.4 percent rise in new bookings in January, the decline actually appeared to overstate the weakness.

``Orders are bouncing around like crazy, but when you cut through the clutter, demand remains pretty good,'' said Joel Naroff, president of Naroff Economic Advisors. ``The general trend is still decent, but there is reason to be cautious as it would be nice to see a more consistent upward trend.''

...

Excluding orders for transportation equipment such as airplanes and cars, which tend to swing widely from month to month, all other durable goods orders increased by a solid 2 percent in January. That was up from a 1.7 percent advance in December -- and the biggest rise since October.

Orders for primary metals, including steel, fabricated metal products, electrical equipment and appliances, and communications equipment, all posted sizable gains in orders in January.

However, orders for commercial and military aircraft plunged by 27.9 percent and 34 percent, respectively, swamping the gains reported for other big-ticket goods.

How much do you want to bet that the AP reporter never even opened the Durable Goods report, conveniently found here at the Census Bureau? Calculator in hand it doesn't take more than a few minutes to figure out much of what is coming out of the Administration's spokesperson is spin, spin, spin. Yes, transportation (trains, planes and automobiles) took a big hit, dragging down the rest of the report. But these industries make up almost a quarter (23%) of durable goods orders. If things are bad in Seattle and Detriot, it means lots of workers are hurting. However, the author's assertion that the drop in aircraft orders essentially zeroed out gains in all other areas is plain bunk: The actual decline in civilian aircraft orders amounted to a mere 1.7 billion drop, while military plane orders decreased 1.3 billion. This is out of a 181 billion dollar report. However, if one is to take that tack, why no assertion that the 73% increase in communication equipment orders, amounting to an increase of 3 billion, balances out the 3 billion in aircraft losses?

The truth is that there are outliers on both extremes, and the remaining middle ground of the report is downright lackluster, particularly when viewed in the three month trend line it provides. Metals are in fact up, as AP reports, but machinery and computers, goods one expects to see rise in an economic upturn, were in fact down considerably. And non-specified goods, which account for more than 30 billion in orders, continued their three-month slide into negative territory.

But let's be honest: January's durable goods report was nothing to cheer about.

The Associated Press continued the full-court positive press by downplaying this week's existing and new home sale numbers, the latter now down for the fifth straight month. Of course, the article completely ignored this (and last) week's devastating consumer confidence numbers, which took their largest dive since the 1980s.

In the Great War, the French general staff adopted the offensive spirit approach to fortified German machine guns - Through sheer will alone could they defeat superior weapondry of the Hun. This Administration, and apparently some in the media, have taken the same approach with the purportedly healthy economic recovery.

If you will it, it will come.

[Update: typo correction]

Time to start playing Powerball?

Earlier this week, I speculated that skyrocketing gasoline prices might push down [farther] George W. Bush's poll ratings, particularly this summer, just as the campaign season heats up.

Last night, before heading off to bed, the 11 pm news teaser caught my attention: "Gas prices on the way up", the local broadcaster announced.

I thought the price hikes wouldn't really begin for a few months, perhaps after April 1, when OPEC production cuts are slated to take effect. Obviously, according to the news, I was caught napping, so I sent the Googling Monkeys (GMs) off to do their thing:

Price of gas rises 6 cents
Salem Statesman Journal, OR - 3 hours ago

Gas Prices Could Soar to $3 Per Gallon
KSL-TV, UT - 11 hours ago

Gas prices on the rise again
Pittsburgh Business Times, PA - 21 hours ago

Gas prices keep rising, rising, rising
Tri-Valley Herald, CA - Feb 25, 2004

Overnight gas prices jump 8 cents in Valley
Arizona Republic, AZ - Feb 25, 2004

Local gas prices reflecting hikes seen across SC
Greenwood Index Journal, SC - Feb 24, 2004

Gas prices on the way up
Newsday, NY - Feb 24, 2004

Before I cash in on my obvious newfound psychic talents and head down to Moran's Market for a Megabucks ticket, I have an insight or two for the Administration, just in case they're paying attention. While Republicans wrote off California and New York years ago, you really don't want to see too many headlines like these emanting from Arizona or the Carolina's, no matter how large Bush's margin of victory in 2000. It only takes so many straws to break that camel's back, and thus adding record high gas prices to massive job losses and inflated local unemployment rates might just turn one or more red states a shade or two bluer.

I wonder how long before we hear talk of tapping into the Federal Oil Reserve. I'll send out the GMs this weekend to see if my predictive abilities continue to hold up.

Sign Posts (Inbound links)

To our regular readers, a sign post to a story in this week's Portland Phoenix, which is running a story on blogs and politics and MB-as-candidate as a sample of size one.

To our new readers in-bound from the pages of the Portland edition of the Phoenix on-line, the campaign blog is here: www.williams4me.org.

More later.

Serving Waffles? Bring It On

Let’s Begin with a Quiz. Which of the following would constitute hypocrisy?

a) Madonna criticizing Janet Jackson for using sex to gain publicity;

b) Jesse Ventura criticizing Arnold Schwarzenegger for not having the background needed to become a governor;

c) Chris Matthews criticizing Howard Fineman for focusing on a candidate’s clothes; or

d) President Bush attacking John Kerry as a waffler.

If you answered "all of the above," you would be correct but the one I wish to discuss is d.

President Bush began his attack on John Kerry at a speech to the Republican governors:

The other party's nomination battle is still playing out. The candidates are an interesting group with diverse opinions," Bush said. "They're for tax cuts and against them. They're for NAFTA and against NAFTA. They're for the Patriot Act and against the Patriot Act. They're in favor of liberating Iraq, and opposed to it. And that's just one senator from Massachusetts.

Josh Marshall does not think that President Bush is a waffler:

Indeed, I'm really not sure you can say the president is a waffler at all. His policy positions remain fairly consistent over time. It's not his positions that change, but his facts.

I'd almost say that the president -- or the White House, more broadly -- is something like the inverse of a waffler. He continues with policies even after the factual arguments upon which he initially justified them collapse entirely.

Josh is surely correct that President Bush holds positions independent of any facts to support them. Mr. Bush’s contempt for facts does not imply that his positions remain constant. They have not. In fact, Bush’s record for waffling is long and broad. A few examples:

Fiscal Policy
In February of 2001, President Bush promised to retire “an historic $2 trillion in debt over the next 10 years.”

Now, President Bush proposes to retire no debt and in fact proposes to increase the national debt by more than $2.4 trillion for the period from 2002 through 2009.

In the 2000 campaign, Mr. Bush promised to devote the entire Social Security surplus to reducing the national debt, thereby helping to prepare for the retirement of the baby boomers.

Once in office, Mr. Bush has not used any of the Social Security surplus to retire debt but has used the entire surplus to fund the general operations of government each year since his first budget in 2002.

According to Mr. Bush’s budget projections (scroll to table S-12), the entire Social Security surplus will be used to fund the general operations of government through at least FY 2012. In total, Mr. Bush proposes to spend in excess of a trillion dollars of Social Security surpluses rather than retire debt as he promised.

Trade
In the 2000 campaign George Bush asserted that he was for free trade for “not just monetary but moral” reasons and pledged to make the expansion of trade a “consistent priority.” Once in office, Mr. Bush found it politically convenient to impose steel tariffs in order to help his election prospects in Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and other places.

When the European Union threatened trade sanctions, Mr. Bush
reversed course again and lifted the tariffs. The President’s insistence on imposing tariff’s on Pakistani textiles also conflicts with his free trade rhetoric.

Stem Cells
Mr. Bush has also waffled on the issue of whether or not frozen human embryos are human life. In his speech about stem cells, the President said:

Research on embryonic stem cells raises profound ethical questions, because extracting the stem cell destroys the embryo, and thus destroys its potential for life. Like a snowflake, each of these embryos is unique, with the unique genetic potential of an individual human being.

In accordance with that position, he barred the use of federal funds in research using any stem cell lines other than the ones existing at the time of his decision. Mr. Bush, however, has not barred in vitro procedures that destroy embryos. As Michael Kinsley has pointed out, his failure to do so is inconsistent:

George W. Bush claims to believe that (that a microscopic embryo is a human being with the same human rights as you and me), and you have to believe something like that to justify your opposition to stem-cell research. But Bush cannot possibly believe that embryos are full human beings, or he would surely oppose modern fertility procedures that create and destroy many embryos for each baby they bring into the world. Bush does not oppose modern fertility treatments. He even praised them in his anti-stem-cell speech.

Homeland Security Department
Mr. Bush waffled on the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. When first proposed by Democrats, Mr. Bush opposed the creation of the department. He later changed courses and supported it. He then argued that Democrats who supported the creation of the department but who favored permitting department employees to have Civil Service protection were “not interested in the security of the American people."

In essence, Mr. Bush argued that his previous position showed that he did not care about the security of the American people.

Carbon Dioxide Emissions
During the campaign, Mr. Bush promised to impose mandatory emissions reductions for carbon dioxide on the nation's power plants. Less than two months into office Mr. Bush flip flopped on the issue.

North Korea
The administration’s policy towards North Korea has been one big waffle. Josh Marshall has documented that the administration was openly contemptuous of the Clinton policy towards North Korea.

As Josh has noted, the administration has changed its position dramatically:

As I say, most conservative commentators refuse to recognize what is obvious to everyone with their eyes open -- that the Bush administration is now looking for a deal pretty much just like the one the Clintonites were working on.

In the last few days, we have seen that the shape of administration policy towards North Korea is, in fact, remarkably similar to the Clinton policy:

The informal agreement between Washington and its Asian partners on how to approach North Korea represents a partial retreat by the Bush administration, which has long insisted that it would not reward the North for simply freezing its nuclear weapons program...

An Asian official said the proposed aid program would resume fuel oil shipments that were halted in late 2002, after the United States discovered that North Korea had violated a pledge it made eight years earlier to freeze the nuclear weapons program in return for energy assistance.

Disarmament vs. Regime Change
Even with regard to the war in Iraq, the administration has waffled, at least rhetorically, over the issue of regime change vs. disarmament. Before the war, Mr. Bush explicitly stated that war could be avoided only if Saddam disarmed. See, for instance here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.

After the war, as it became clear that Saddam had no WMD to renounce, Mr. Bush waffled on the importance of that central rationale for the war.

There are no doubt many other issues on which Mr. Bush has waffled, equivocated, flip flopped or changed position. I did no systematic research and instead just listed the ones I could think of off the top of my head. Others could be listed. Mr. Bush was quite willing to share his daily briefings with Bob Woodward but has been much less willing to do so with the 9/11 Commission. He opposed the formation of the 9/11 commission as well as the commission investigating pre-war intelligence failures but changed his position in both instances. Mr. Bush’s position on nation building has changed more than a few degrees as well.

Mr. Bush’s attack on John Kerry as a waffler merely shows that Bush is without shame. If Mr. Bush wants to make consistency of position a central issue in the campaign, I think Kerry should turn to the waiter serving the waffles and yell, "Bring It On." Then he could begin to sing a certain song.

EasyBake ™ Recipies

The email reads:
Unless you pay us a tart, we will turn off your oven. The enclosed data from your computer proves our access to your oven control system. Pay up or wicked cold tarts! Sincerely, The Knaves

You look. You've got a banal PC with a banal cable-or-dsl ISP, so you know it "belongs" to the malware-of-the-month (this month's special is W32/Mydoom) and so long as the remote artists don't actually use your on-line banking access or install a pedo-porn server or install an IM server for registered members of the Al Quida heavy aircraft e-pilots network, or something really wicked bad, like install a peer-to-peer music shareware backend, say a Napster-clone, what the malware does with your always-on, always-accomodating box is your ISP's problem, assuming they care at all.

The oven runs on natural gas. There doesn't appear to be any wires connecting the computer to the oven. Maybe the 110 volt A/C circuit is a covert signaling path? Maybe the oven has an undocumented 802.11 feature, or maybe its BlueTooth capable and the laptop is too close to the coffee pot ... The roll of tin foil is in the kitchen ...

The rational response upon receipt of this message is to advocate a law that permits courts to issue nationwide search warrants for electronic communications, because these are "essential to any prosecution of cyberterrorism."

Cyberterrorism. Sounds pretty awful. Worse than extortion. Worse even than mistaking salt for sugar when preparing that first cup of coffee of the morning. Probably not quite as bad as spoofing the trusted time infrastructure, corrupting the dns root, injecting bogus data into the bgp mesh, shutting down the major smtp relays, or running edge-device acquisition tools, e.g., W32/Mydoom, but a tart is a tart and that's a start.

Thus do John Malcolm, deputy assistant attorney general at the Justice Department, and Keith Lourdeau, deputy assistant director of the FBI's Cyber Division argue before the Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing on cyberterrorist threats and capabilities. Ergo, these provisions in The Patriot Act are required goodness.

The acutal letter was from two munchkins using a cyber-cafe in Romania, who captured a box in a trucking company to grab data from an NSF box (as "secure" as any other box on a public network). The remote computer controlled EasyBake ™ they threatened to take down was environmental controls of a research station in Antactica, which should be shut down if anyone puts a computer in Arlington and all the intervening data paths higher-up on the food-chain than the manual switches on the directly-attached analog devices ... the fuel oil valve in particular ... in Antarctica.

Glaciologist: Did anyone pack matches?

Polar Meteorologist: Not me. The PM back in DC said we'd get e-matches. Have you gotten the Primus lit yet?

Glaciologist: No, and I am about to become one with my subject matter.

The institutional problem of delivering clue to law enforcement and/or other agencies seems to me to be non-tractible.

Wampum readers who are constituents of Senators John Kyl (R-Ariz.), chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Homeland Security, or ranking member Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) can drop them a note that the job of "Homeland Security" is slightly more complex than defending the EasyBake ™ installed-base from Knaves-Errant. The National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on the subject may be ... in need of reheating, or ...

I'm too polite. Malcolm and Lourdeau are bio-waste on a good day. After some future 7th of December somewhere, people will look back on this and simply be amazed that clinically brain-dead people were in policy positions. I used to have network security and operations students who identified only as "Department of Defense" -- Meadies -- in addtion to the "HQ.AF.MIL" and BigITCorp kinds of students. Clue delivery above GS-15 requires more than a foam bat.

Three Good Reads

Three recent items caught my eye.

First is a New York Times article entitled Lifting the Veils of Autism, One By One. The article details recent progress towards understanding autism and the beginnings of finding a cure. It also shows just how far we still have to go. My favorite quote from the article is from Dr. Fred Volkmar of Yale:

If you put 100 people with autism in a room, the first thing that would strike you is how different they are. The next thing that would strike you is the similarity.

John Kerry is being attacked not only from the right but also from the left. The criticism from the left takes the form of a fear that Kerry is linked to “Progressive Internationalism.” A recent Counterpunch article argues that:

Kerry and his comrades in the progressive internationalist movement are as gung-ho about U.S. military action as their counterparts in the White House. The only noteworthy difference between the two groups battling for power in Washington is that the neocons are willing to pursue their imperial ambitions in full view of the international community, while the progressive internationalists prefer to keep their imperial agenda hidden behind the cloak of multilateralism.

Rodger Payne thinks that analysis is ridiculous, being about as “fair as the Fonda/Kerry doctored photo.” Rodger does an admirable job of demonstrating why.

Via Making Light come Elmore Leonard’s ten rules for writers, Easy on the Adverbs, Exclamation Points and Especially Hooptedoodle.

All of the rules are interesting and wise but by far my favorite was number 10:

Try to leave out the part that readers tend to skip.

Unfortunately, for some of us, following that rule doesn’t leave very much to leave in.

Duke Football and the Bush Budget Deficit

My alma mater, Duke University, has perhaps the best college basketball program in the country. Football is a different story. Except for a brief period when Steve Spurrier coached at Duke, it has been a long time since Duke consistently had a good football team.

Perhaps the low point for Duke football was 1996. We got blown out by Northwestern, Navy and Army early in the season and the conference schedule was tougher.

Some Dookies were concerned that we might not win a game. I was not too concerned because we still had Wake Forest on the schedule. Wake Forest’s football ineptitude has been immortalized in Steely Dan’s Deacon Blue. Surely we would beat Wake.

As the clash of the non-titans approached late in the season, Duke was winless and Wake Forest was 2-7. Nonetheless, Duke fans were confident. At pre-game festivities, Duke fans were heard to chant “we want Wake, we want Wake.” One wag followed that up by beginning to chant “we’re not the worst, we’re not the worst.”

Alas, we were the worst. Wake prevailed on its home field, 17-16. Duke went on to a 0-11 season. All of which brings me to the subject of George W. Bush’s budget deficit.

Until the current administration was put in charge of fiscal policy, the largest budget deficit since WW II had been the $290 billion deficit under George H.W. Bush in 1992.

The son soon shattered the record of the father with last year’s deficit of $375 billion and stands ready to extend that dubious achievement with this year’s projected $521 billion deficit.

Like the Duke fans, administration supporters are claiming “we’re not the worst.” They contend that the dollar amount of the deficit is not the meaningful measure and that when measured as a percentage of GDP, Mr. Bush’s record is not the worst.

For instance, the administration makes just such an argument in its budget documents:

With Treasury receipts only beginning to reflect a recovering economy––and major ongoing expenditures in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere in the War on Terror––we still face a projected $521 billion deficit for the 2004 fiscal year. Although a legitimate matter of concern, that size deficit, at 4.5 percent of GDP, is not historically out of range. Deficits have been this large or larger in six of the last 25 years, including a peak of 6.0 percent in 1983.

In other words, the administration is chanting “we are 19th out of 25, go team.” Even that limp claim is as overly optomistic as Duke’s fans.

As a percentage of GDP, the largest deficit between the end of World War II and the Presidency of George W. Bush was run in 1983 under Ronald Wilson Reagan. That deficit was 6% of GDP.

The 1983 deficit was incurred before Mr. Reagan and Congressional Democrats agreed on a plan to save Social Security. When it became clear that the retirement of the baby boomers would wreak demographic havoc with Social Security, Mr. Reagan and the Dems agreed to raise Social Security payroll taxes well beyond the current expenses to create a Social Security surplus. Those surpluses materialized in 1985. Thus, Mr. Reagan’s 6% of GDP deficit was only for the on-budget operations of the government.

When the administration compares its deficit of 4.5% of GDP to Mr. Reagan’s of 6%, it is comparing apples to oranges. The proper comparison would be to compare on-budget operations of Mr. Bush with on-budget operations of Mr. Reagan.

Mr. Bush’s OMB estimates this years’ deficit at $521 billion. That estimate is for the net of the on-budget surplus and the off-budget (read “Social Security) surplus. The Social Security surplus is estimated by OMB to be $154 billion.

For on-budget items, Mr. Bush’s proposes a budget deficit of $675 billion.

That is the truth but not the whole truth. Mr. Bush’s budget for this year does not include money for Iraq. Mr. Bush intends to seek such funding in a supplemental Defense Department appropriation later this year. That supplemental request will be for at least $50 billion. When the costs of the Iraq war are included and the Social Security surplus subtracted, the deficit proposed by Mr. Bush for on-budget operations will be about $725 billion.

The OMB’s budget documents estimate GDP for FY 2004 at $11.612 trillion. A deficit of $725 billion for on-budget operations of the government (apples to apples) amounts to 6.24% of GDP, nearly a quarter of a percent higher than Mr. Reagan’s 1983 deficit.

Like the 1996 Duke football team, this administration really is the worst.

Beware the Ides of....July?

What should be keeping George Bush (and Karl Rove) up at night is not the continuing bad news out of Iraq or a lack of coherent policy to deal with the corresponding lack of job growth in the US. It's not the Justice Department's investigation into the Plame affair, or even the 9/11 Commission's investigation into his own actions before and after that fateful day.

It's the wrath of American consumers which makes the Administration quake in it's boot. The rage and frustration Average Joes and Janes in Tuscon and Memphis will feel every time they drive their gas-guzzling SUVs up to the gas pump and are faced with gas prices topping $2.00 a gallon. And we're talking regular, not premium.

While this scenario gained more credence last month when OPEC announced it would cut production on April 1st by 2.5 million barrels/day, events today may have pushed the gauge from "possible" to "probable". Both Shell and Marathon announced early today that technical problems caused the shutdown of refineries which process daily more than 400,000 barrels of petroleum into gasoline. This at a time when oil reserves are running 9% lower than last year:

The U.S. energy department said last week that gasoline inventories fell 700,000 barrels in January, when typically they increase by about 12 million barrels. It said that oil imports would have to increase to average 10 million bpd in coming weeks to help stock builds.

And what about all the promises of oil flowing like water out of a "liberated" Iraq?

Continued sabotage has also held back plans to boost Iraqi crude exports, holding back some more supply to the market. The head of oil affairs on the U.S.-led Iraqi governing authority told Reuters on Monday that no date was set for reopening the damaged Kirkuk pipeline, which once exported some 800,000 barrels per day to an export terminal in Turkey.

Weather delays have also curbed exports this month from Iraq's southern export route. Iraqi exports are running currently at 1.6 million bpd, compared with pre-war levels of 2.2 million bpd.

So can we really argue a correlation between a plummet in Bush's popularity and skyrocketing gas prices? Last September offers a clue: When gas prices increased 26 cents a gallon late last summer, Bush's favorable rating in the Gallup Poll dropped 10 points to 50%, his lowest number since early September, 2001.

Perhaps Bush should forgo his proposal for a mission to Mars and start pushing plans for a hydrogen Hummer.

Still Looking for Cracks In the Dam

For some time now, I have been looking for signs of cracks in President Bush’s base of support among Republicans and conservatives. For previous posts on that subject see here, here and here.

There are a lot of anecdotal evidence flying about that suggests that erosion of Mr. Bush’s support by his base may be occurring. Many people have blogged one or more of the various aspects of this potential story. Those people include the Talking Dog, Jeanne D’arc( here, here, and here), Atrios, Billmon and DHinMI at DKos.

I thought it might be helpful to pull all the strands together in one spot. Those strands include anecdotes suggesting erosion of Mr. Bush's support among both social conservatives and national security conservatives. In addition, the issues of immigration reform and education reform seem to be speeding the erosion along. I will look at each of those issues below.

Social Conservatives
The first sign of cracks in the dam come from the social conservatives. Via the Talking Dog comes a Moonie Times story suggesting that Bush’s relationship with social conservatives is suffering:

"It's not just economic conservatives upset by runaway federal spending that he's having trouble with. I think his biggest problem will be social conservatives who are not motivated to work for the ticket and to ensure their fellow Christians get to the polling booth," said Robert H. Knight, director of the Culture and Family Institute…

Their list of grievances is long, but right now social conservatives are mad over what many consider the president's failure to strongly condemn illegal homosexual "marriages" being performed in San Francisco under the authority of Mayor Gavin Newsom.

Top religious rights activists have been burning up the telephone lines, sharing what one privately called their "apoplexy" over Mr. Bush's failure to act decisively on the issue, although he has said he would support a constitutional amendment if necessary to ban same-sex "marriages." …

"I'm not blaming the president, but religious conservatives have been doing politics for 25 years and, on every front, are worse off on things they care about," said Gary Bauer, president of American Values. "The gay rights movement is more powerful, the culture is more decadent, the life of not one baby has been saved, porn is in the living room, and you can't watch the Super Bowl without your hand on the off switch." …

"What is at issue here is, will our folks be AWOL when it comes time for the election because they are just not energized and motivated?" said Family Research Council President Tony Perkins. "Social conservatives coalesce around strong leadership. That's what motivates and energizes them. And on their core issues, the leadership from the White House is not there right now."

The important point is the one made by Gary Bauer. Since 1980, social conservatives have given their time, energy, money and near unanimous support to the Republican Party in the hope of halting what they view as America’s moral slide. That support has helped elect three Republican Presidents and has helped elect majorities of both Houses of Congress. What has been the payoff for all of that loyalty?

From the perspective of the social conservatives, the answer is not much. The Republican Presidents the social conservatives helped elect have appointed a clear majority of the Supreme Court. Among those appointments, however, are Justices Suter and O’Connor who have steadfastly refused to outlaw abortion or affirmative action.

Evolution is still taught in public school. Creationism, generally, is not. Public school teachers still are not permitted to lead school children in Christian prayers. Social conservatives believe that Trent Lott was forced out as Majority Leader for being kind to an old man at a birthday party. President Bush proposes to increase the funding for the NEA. Popular culture remains subject to wardrobe malfunctions. Queer Eye for the Straight Guy is a hit. Vice President Cheney announces that gay marriage is a matter for the states and that the various states may appropriately arrive at different decisions. As the Talking Dog put it “the President hasn't called in troops to execute gays getting married in San Francisco…”

For decades the Republican Party has told social conservatives to be patient. For decades, Wall Street Republicans and country club conservatives have seen their agenda enacted by Republicans while social conservatives have had to settle for empty rhetoric. Is it any wonder, when viewed from their point of view, that social conservatives are feeling a little taken for granted?

Still, where do the social and religious conservatives have to go? They are unlikely to vote for a Democrat. They may stay home but in order for Mr. Bush’s base of support to really erode among social conservatives, a different alternative must exist.

Into that mix rides Roy Moore, the former Alabama Chief Justice known as the Ten Commandments Judge.

John Fund, writing in the Wall Street Journal, suggests that Judge Moore may run for President:

A big threat to President Bush's re-election could come if his conservative base chooses not to turn out and vote in large numbers this fall. That's one reason he told a congressional Republican retreat on Saturday that he supports spending caps on the exploding federal budget. But the president could also still face a challenge from a social conservative running as a third-party candidate.

In the past such candidacies have fizzled. But Roy Moore, the ousted Alabama Supreme Court justice who made headlines last year by refusing to remove a Ten Commandments monument he placed on public property, could make a difference in a close race. And just last week, he refused to rule out a presidential candidacy.

A lot of people want him to run. Last Saturday, Mr. Moore was a featured speaker at the Christian Coalition's "Family and Freedom" rally in Atlanta. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported he was "treated like a rock star, signing autographs and getting thunderous standing ovations." The week before that, Mr. Moore was the speaker at a dinner in Lancaster, Pa., sponsored by the Constitution Party, which has the third-largest number of registered voters in the U.S. and whose presidential candidate, Howard Phillips, was on 41 state ballots in 2000.

Tim Noah of Slate is promoting the candidacy of Judge Moore, although perhaps for different reasons.

The Nation explains the potential importance of a Moore candidacy:

Those in the Bush White House and its echo chambers on right-wing talk radio and the Fox television network, who have been delighting in the prospect of a Nader run, may not be laughing for long. Judge Roy Moore, the Alabama jurist whose fight to display the Ten Commandments on state property drew national attention last year, is being courted by the right-wing Constitution Party as a potential presidential candidate. (The Constitution Party was on the ballot in 41 states in 2000, and retains a solid network of activist supporters nationwide.) With growing numbers of core conservatives angered by Bush's policies on immigration, federal spending and individual liberties, a Moore candidacy could develop into a serious problem for the president. More than 20 percent of the voters in January's New Hampshire Republican primary cast ballots for someone other than Bush; more than 10 percent of Oklahoma Republican primary voters did the same. Come November, Moore could pose a greater threat to Republican prospects than Nader will to the Democrats.

All I can add to that is “Run, Roy, Run.”

National Security Conservatives
Grumbling within Mr. Bush’s base is not limited to social conservatives. National security conservatives are beginning to grumble as well. James Webb was the Secretary of the Navy under Ronald Reagan. He recently wrote a piece in USA Today extremely critical of Mr. Bush’s national security policies:

Bush arguably has committed the greatest strategic blunder in modern memory. To put it bluntly, he attacked the wrong target. While he boasts of removing Saddam Hussein from power, he did far more than that. He decapitated the government of a country that was not directly threatening the United States and, in so doing, bogged down a huge percentage of our military in a region that never has known peace. Our military is being forced to trade away its maneuverability in the wider war against terrorism while being placed on the defensive in a single country that never will fully accept its presence.
There is no historical precedent for taking such action when our country was not being directly threatened. The reckless course that Bush and his advisers have set will affect the economic and military energy of our nation for decades. It is only the tactical competence of our military that, to this point, has protected him from the harsh judgment that he deserves.

In addition to Mr. Webb, the New York Times ran a story about Mr. Bush’s problems with the base.

In the 2000 presidential election, Bill Flanagan a semiretired newspaper worker, happily voted for George W. Bush. But now, shaking his head, he vows, "Never again."

"The combination of lies and boys coming home in body bags is just too awful," Mr. Flanagan said, drinking coffee and reading newspapers at the local mall. "I could vote for Kerry. I could vote for any Democrat unless he's a real dummy."…

In dozens of random interviews around the country, independents and Republicans who said they voted for Mr. Bush in 2000 say they intend to vote for the Democratic presidential candidate this year…

In the interviews, many of those potential "crossover" voters said they supported the invasion of Iraq but had come to see the continuing involvement there as too costly and without clear objectives.

Many also said they believed that the Bush administration had not been honest about its reasons for invading Iraq and were concerned about the failure to find unconventional weapons…

While sharing a sandwich at the stylish Beachwood Mall in this Cleveland suburb, one older couple — a judge and a teacher — reluctantly divulged their secret: though they are stalwarts in the local Republican Party, they are planning to vote Democratic this year.

"I feel like a complete traitor, and if you'd asked me four months ago, the answer would have been different," said the judge, after assurances of anonymity. "But we are really disgusted. It's the lies, the war, the economy. We have very good friends who are staunch Republicans, who don't even want to hear the name George Bush anymore."…

George Meagher, a Republican who founded and now runs the American Military Museum in Charleston, S.C., said he threw his "heart and soul" into the Bush campaign four years ago. He organized veterans to attend campaign events, including the campaign's kickoff speech at the Citadel. He even has photographs of himself and his wife with Mr. Bush.

"Given the outcome and how dissatisfied I am with the administration, it's hard to think about now," he said. "People like me, we're all choking a bit at not supporting the president. But when I think about 500 people killed and what we've done to Iraq. And what we've done to our country. I mean, we're already $2 trillion in debt again."

If Mr. Bush’s support erodes among folks like those quoted in the Times, he could be in serious trouble.

The Immigration Issue
Mr. Bush’s proposed immigration reform has caused some consternation within the base. Via
Jeanne, comes this New York Times story:

Amid the crowded field of Republicans vying for a seat in the Senate here, Jim Oberweis seems a most unlikely insurgent. He is a wealthy supporter of President Bush who favors pinstriped suits, tax cuts and a constitutional amendment blocking same-sex marriage.

But in recent weeks, Mr. Oberweis, a plainspoken dairy owner, has become a leader in a widening conservative revolt against the president's sweeping plan to grant temporary legal status to millions of illegal immigrants.

"The president's plan is just plain wrong," Mr. Oberweis says in a radio advertisement and at public appearances that have drawn hundreds of supporters to his campaign. "I want to be the voice for Illinois voters to tell the president we think illegal immigration cannot be rewarded with amnesty."
Mr. Oberweis is a symbol of a simmering conservative uprising against one of the president's biggest initiatives. One month after Mr. Bush promised the most comprehensive overhaul of immigration law in nearly two decades, opposition to his plan is mounting among conservative Republicans vying for votes in House and Senate races in Illinois, North Carolina, California, Kansas and elsewhere.

Atrios brings us another example of the immigration issue eroding Mr. Bush’s base. From the Los Angeles Times:

An uproar over illegal immigration roiled the state Republican convention on Saturday as party leaders struggled to keep the rank and file united behind Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and President Bush.

Hundreds of GOP loyalists booed the president at a rally where U.S. Senate hopeful Howard Kaloogian and his allies denounced Bush's plan to give temporary legal status to undocumented workers.

Enough is enough!" the crowd shouted. "Enough is enough!"

A Kaloogian supporter, Republican Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado, told the crowd he knew a gynecologist who surveyed patients about the plan and found it rated "right below genital herpes."

Mr. Bush proposes immigration reform, in part, to reach out to Hispanic voters. Not only has the proposal not had the intended result, it appears to have softened Mr. Bush's base of support among conservatives and Republicans.

NCLB
The centerpiece of Mr. Bush’s Compassionate Conservatism agenda, No Child Left Behind is also not proving to be popular among conservatives. The New York Times reports:

It was 8 p.m., and Ken Meyer was smiling gamely from a gloomy high school stage at an audience of disgruntled teachers and parents to whom he had been introduced as "a bigwig from Washington," come to Utah to explain President Bush's centerpiece education law…

I've been in some, I don't want to say hostile, but very contentious environments" in recent months, Mr. Meyer said. "Places where I wondered whether I'd get out of there with my skin intact…

Mr. Meyer's trip this week was the second Bush administration mission in two weeks to Utah. A five-person delegation this month defended the law to lawmakers, but the Republican-controlled Utah House nevertheless voted 64 to 8 on Feb. 10 not to comply with any provisions not fully financed by federal money. That measure now awaits Senate action.

The Feb. 10 vote by the Utah House was the strongest action by any state legislature to date, but more than a dozen other states have passed or introduced laws or resolutions challenging the federal law or commissioning studies of the costs of carrying it out.

Last month, the Republican-controlled Virginia House of Delegates passed a resolution, 98 to 1, urging Congress to exempt Virginia from the law. That vote came after Rod Paige, the education secretary, and other administration officials met with Virginia lawmakers, said James H. Dillard II, chairman of the House Education Committee.

"Six of us met with Paige," Mr. Dillard, a Republican, said. "He looked us in the eye and said, `It's fully funded.' We looked him back in the eye and said, `We don't think so.' "

"We got platitudes and stonewalls, but no corrective action," he said…

"These are die-hard conservative Republicans, and they feel that this is like crying wolf when they see their school labeled for frivolous reasons," Mr. Norton said in an interview that he had told Mr. Meyer…

Russel Sias, a retired engineer and registered Republican whose daughter is a middle school teacher, said to a reporter at the meeting: "I feel like we're hearing the best vacuum cleaner salesman in the world. They're going to label every school in the country as failing, and they call it empowerment?"

Summary
Democrats, for once, appear to be united. They will perhaps not require ideological purity tests on their candidate. With Democrats united, our nominee will be free to pursue independent and swing voters in the general election.

Donkey Rising notes that the trend of independents toward the Democrats has already begun:

Democracy Corps also finds that independents and voters in swing areas are moving rapidly away from Bush. In their Bush-Kerry trial heat, independents favor Kerry by 11 points, voters in swing states favor him by 6 points and voters in swing congressional districts back Kerry by 4 points. And, on the question about whether the country should go in a significantly different direction, independents favor a different direction by an impressive 23 points (60 percent to 37 percent), voters in swing districts favor a new direction by 11 points and voters in swing states want the same by 10 points.

In order to win, Mr. Bush needs to reverse that trend, keep his base and reach out to swing and independent voters. The disgruntlement of Mr. Bush’s base is unlikely to cause wholesale defections of conservatives to the Democrats. That disgruntlement, however, may limit Mr. Bush’s ability to appeal to swing voters without alienating his core support.

Mr. Bush’s efforts to bring swing voters into his camp have failed so far. The Mars initiative fell flat. NCLB has become a liability. Immigration reform irritates the base without providing significant inroads to Hispanic voters. The war has not only ceased to resonate with voters but is starting to hurt Mr. Bush.

That leaves Mr. Bush with two options. First, is to slime the Democratic candidate to make the race a choice between evils. The second is to refocus the war on terror away from Iraq and onto Al Qaeda and Osama. I expect both.

Correction:

George Meagher, identified as a Republican in the New York Times article quoted above, is, in fact and independent. The Times published the following correction:

An article on Sunday about people who supported George Bush in the 2000 election and are considering a vote for the Democratic candidate this year referred incorrectly to George Meagher, who voiced dissatisfaction with the administration. As noted on Feb. 3 in an earlier account of his comments in the same interview, for an article about veterans leaning toward Senator John Kerry, Mr. Meagher is an independent, not a Republican.

I regret the error and am sorry to have so disparaged Mr. Meagher.

Kitty Kevorkian ™ riders again...(ACTION NEEDED)

Just when responsible Senators, consumer groups and POAs thought the Senate Majority Leader might have learned his lesson about sneaking "Eli-Lilly-Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free" cards into unrelated legislation, he's back at it. Once again, he uses his favorite patsy, Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire. The vehicle this time? S2061, innocously entitled, "Healthy Mothers and Healthy Babies Access to Care Act of 2003".

Frist has become a much better at hiding the obvious gift to thimerosal manufacturers this time. It took me two readings to find the offending sections, which read,

(1) IN GENERAL- No punitive damages may be awarded against the manufacturer or distributor of a medical product used in direct connection with the provision of obstetrical or gynecological services based on a claim that such product caused the claimant's harm where--

(A)(i) such medical product was subject to premarket approval or clearance by the Food and Drug Administration with respect to the safety of the formulation or performance of the aspect of such medical product which caused the claimant's harm or the adequacy of the packaging or labeling of such medical product; and

(ii) such medical product was so approved or cleared; or

(B) such medical product is generally recognized among qualified experts as safe and effective pursuant to conditions established by the Food and Drug Administration and applicable Food and Drug Administration regulations, including without limitation those related to packaging and labeling, unless the Food and Drug Administration has determined that such medical product was not manufactured or distributed in substantial compliance with applicable Food and Drug Administration statutes and regulations.

Many of my readers might be confused right now. Isn't mercury, in the form of the preservative thimerosal, only found in multi-dose childhood vaccines? Is vaccination during pregnancy even permitted?

Thimerosal, an ethylmercury-based preservative, was present in many childhood vaccines, until the FDA recommended phasing it out for the US market in 2000. (Thimerosal-ladened vaccines are still exported to other countries.) But it is still present in most flu shots, which are recommended for women in pregnancy. And then there are the RhoD products, including RhoGAM, administered to mothers who are RH negative, which, for some unexplained reason, also contain thimerosal. The argument the pharmaceutical industry put forth for the use of a preservative in vaccines and flu shots was that it was cheaper to produce multiple dose vials: Since the vial is no longer sterile once a needle in introduced, a preservative is necessary to prevent contamination of the remaining product. However, RhoGam was never distributed as multi-dose, which seems to support the alternative non-industry argument that thimerosal allows production and delivery of injected drugs and vaccines in non-sterile environments.

According to the well-respected Schafer Autism Report, "[a] recent study found that almost half of all children with autism were exposed to thimerosal during their pregnancy by RhoD products." While I'm away from the computer today, I will follow-up with the details of that study later this evening. It's possible that it is the same earth-shattering study released by researchers from Northeastern, Tufts, UNebraska and John Hopkins which we discussed a few weeks back.

Essentially what this law will do is put the onus completely on the federal government - if the FDA missed a side-effect of a drug, it's not the manufacturer's fault and therefore, they're no longer liable. Since the FDA does not require pharmaceutical companies to test on children or fetuses, this will wipe out nearly all liability, not only for thimerosal, but for any drug used during pregnancy.

Never content, Frist once again does his best to make sure BigPharma gets everything it needs.

(a) GENERAL VACCINE INJURY-

(1) IN GENERAL- To the extent that title XXI of the Public Health Service Act establishes a Federal rule of law applicable to a civil action brought for a vaccine-related injury or death--

(A) this Act shall not affect the application of the rule of law to such an action; and

(B) any rule of law prescribed by this Act in conflict with a rule of law of such title XXI shall not apply to such action.

(2) EXCEPTION- If there is an aspect of a civil action brought for a vaccine-related injury or death to which a Federal rule of law under title XXI of the Public Health Service Act does not apply, then this Act or otherwise applicable law (as determined under this Act) will apply to such aspect of such action.

[emphasis mine]

Since current law indemnifying vaccine manufacturers doesn't cover thimerosal (according to recent court decisions), and Frist failed twice with his own thimerosal bill, he figures he can once cover his benefactor's behind with such language slipped into an otherwise unrelated piece of legislation. And to make sure it passes, Frist is scheduling the bill for Super Tuesday, with the hope that John Kerry and John Edwards will be campaigning and unable to vote.

The Senators which will make the difference are Snowe, Collins, McCain, and Chafee. Please contact them TODAY and in the weeks leading up to the Super Tueday vote.

Collins, Susan (R-ME) 172 Russell Senate Office Bldg Washington, DC 20510
202-224-2523 Fax: 202-224-2693 http://collins.senate.gov/low/contactemail.htm

Snowe, Olympia (R-ME) 154 Russell Senate Office Bldg Washington, DC 20510
202-224-5344 Fax: 202-224-1946 olympia@snowe.senate.gov

Chafee, Lincoln (R-RI) 141A Russell Senate Office Bldg Washington, DC 20510
202-224-2921 Fax: 202-228-2853 http://chafee.senate.gov/webform.htm

McCain, John (R-AZ) 241 Russell Senate Office Bldg Washington, DC 20510
Phone: 202-224-2235 Fax: 202-228-2862
Email: http://mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=Contact.Home

Please remember that we won the first battle against the Senate Majority kitty killer back when he tacked on his thimerosal legislation to the Homeland Security Bill back in 2002. We can prevent this horrible legislation as well.

Put down that tabloid and no one will get hurt

The Sunday Express has run a story. In 18 hours this story has been picked up by by (according to Google) 129 other online media outlets, from the Voice of America to the Jerusalem Post to ... heck, even the Anchorage Daily News. It is gospel truth running a 110% mind-share in the press.

The Sunday Express ran a similar story. In three days that story was picked up by fewer than 20 online media outlets. It was gospel false running a 0% mind-share in the press, outside of France and Asia. I wrote about it here, the comments are especially fun. I should be euthenized is one of the best comments ever.

One story has US in-country G-2 not actually able to locate a particular pit-toilet, unless assisted by semi-friendly semi-unfriendly autonomous armed forces sharing the same area of operations. That story was obviously "wrong", as American military intelligence is above reproach and inerrant, at least by right-minded folks.

One story has US and UK remote intel assets actually able to locate a particular company-sized enemy unit operating in a fixed position. OK. Except two hours after the story broke there were "I'm not aware of" quotes from the spokesperson for Islamabad.

Woodrow Wllson, John Pershing, Pancho Villa and the Punitive Expedition, Fall 1916 (an election year). 111,000 US troops in Chihuahua State. 10,000 American and 9,000 Mexican troops in Chihuahua City when he captured the prison and the Carranza military barracks. In February 1917 General Pershing and his army had decided to call it quits and retreat back to the states without catching Villa, or engaging opposing forces. For a look at how November 1916 played out, in Red and Blue, see this. In April President Wilson asked Congress for a declaration of war on Germany.

Kevin Phillips Cancelled

It appears that Kevin Phillips, author of American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune, and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush, will not be coming to Atlanta after all. The Atlanta Journal Constitution reports:

Kevin Phillips, author of a best-selling book that is harshly critical of President Bush, said Friday that the Atlanta History Center had withdrawn an invitation for him to speak next Wednesday for political reasons.

Phillips commented as follows:

"My book has become extremely controversial," he said. "Three of seven book reviews have used the word 'devastating' [to President Bush]," he said. "It doesn't surprise me that people connected with the [Bush administration] in Atlanta or Washington are not interested in publicity for this book."

What is the connection between the Atlanta History Center and the GOP?

Phillips noted that Tommy Hills, Gov. Sonny Perdue's chief financial officer, is chairman of the board of the History Center and declared that the cancellation "doesn't sound like a complete coincidence."

Hills did not return calls to his office at the state Capitol.

The History Center contends that it is not playing favorites:

Phillips said he was told through his publicist, Yen Cheong of the Viking Penguin publishing house, that the History Center's board "had decided it wouldn't be appropriate to have a political book [author] in an election year."

Cheong said she was called by Lynn Rollins, manager of adult and community education at the History Center, and that "my interpretation of the conversation was they would have turned down Ann Coulter for the same reason." Coulter is a conservative commentator and author.

Of course, equating Kevin Phillips to Ann Coulter is like comparing Casablanca to Freddy vs. Jason. Sure, they are both movies but….

Registrar to Registrar :: Ending Blog Spam

Tim Ruiz
Godaddy
IANA Registrar id 146

Dear Tim,

I want to discuss how we registrars can cooperate, independent of Verisign (Registry or Registrar), even ICANN, if necessary, to police one aspect of internet theft. I propose we adopt a trial mechanim to alert the registrar-of-record, as GoDaddy is of casino-jp.com, when the name is used to steer traffic in a theft of service (spam, whether via SMTP or HTTP), or complete credit-card fraud schemes.

With this letter I'm informing you, registrar to registrar, RC member to RC member, that the URL casino-jp.com is being mechanically inserted into the comments of some political blogs I'm responsible for -- my wife's wampum and Lisa English's Ruminate This. This form of spam creates countable links in the victim web sites to the spamming beneficiary, which boosts the value of the spamming beneficiary. The general run of blog-abusing spam-bots is the usual casino, sex and drug product set.

In general terms, I propose we replace email and telephone calls between registrars with an EPP-like peer-to-peer protocol with and XML payload and end-point-is-a-registrar authentication. We can extend this to 3rd-parties who offer some pooled service, should any want to work that model, and to registries, should any want, or need to peer.

The send-side of the SMTP spam mechanism(s) does not rely upon names, neither does the write-side of the HTTP spam mechanism(s), so we can't do a damn thing about them. At worst, the writers into the SMTP or HTTP streams use disposable, captured hosts, which are harvested in the hundreds of thousands with every new release of an acquisition virus or worm. Where we can do something is on the use of persistant name to address mappings, where persistence means days or longer, in the furtherance of theft of service and credit card fraud.

Robo-scamming blogs is a major pain in the butt for the blog community, see Lisa English's post from last October. The "value" of each unit of spam is the persistence of the validity of the URL the spammer inserts into the comments area of the victum blog. We registrars can cut this off at the knees simply by agreement between ourselves to challenge the spammer-registrant and modifying the domain nameserver data to end the value of the spam-run to the spammer.

It comes down to this -- will you switch off a customer because I've asked you to, and will I switch off a customer because you've asked me to. If we can answer "yes", then we can build a service that someone can operate, and we can restrict the use of persistant names in the dns for the credit card fraud and theft of advertizing revenue and whatever next comes down the pike, to non-cooperating registrars and spam-friendly registries. Dan Jaye and I wrote an Internet-Draft for the distribution of content labels, and later privacy lables, with digital signatures, on HTTP cookies, with the intent to drive abusive commercial conduct "outside" of the US (and EU and OEDC) jurisdictions. The core set of principles in this draft were adopted by the W3C for privacy labels on cookies, and incorporated first by Microsoft into IE 6, and then into Mozilla/Netscape and other internet browsers two years ago.

I think we can do good, and make some money, and move that invisible line that deliniates "registry services" in the correct direction, by cooperating. I'll be writing to Ross and the others as well.

I look forward to seeing you next month in Rome.

Eric Brunner-Williams
Wampumpeag, LLC
Operator, USA Webhost
IANA Registrar id 449

Dear fellow bloggers. In real life wampumpeag, llc operates an ICANN accredited domain name registrar, USA Webhost. At present, ip blocking comment-bots is like plucking a cross between a hydra and a hedgehog. An alternative is toasting URLs used pervasively by spam-bots, and this is something (putting on the registrar hat) we registrars can do, if we can get over fear, doubt, and greed, and pull Verisign's thick fingers out of ICANN's institutional ears, and the ears of some registrars who only hear the sound of money. Interested readers can watch me start up a registrar at here.

Exile in Canada, again

Yesterday's Toronto Star ran a story about Jeremy Hinzman, his wife Nga Nguyen and their 14-month-old son, Liam. Mr. Hinzman sought CO status in mid-2002, seeking to fulfil his military service obligation in a non-combat assignment. During his rotation in the Afgan War, while his application was pending, his detail was KP -- dishwashing. His application was eventually denied, and anticipating that his unit would be rotated into Iraq -- a war he belives is unjust and was being fought over oil interests -- he, Nga and Liam drove from Fayetteville, N.C. to Canada.

PFC Hinzman is now AWOL from the 2nd Battalion of the 504th Brigade Parachute Infantry Regiment, 82nd Airborn Division, and subject to arrest within the jurisdiction of the United States.

During the Vietnam War, more than 30,000 men and women -- commissioned, enlisted, inducteed, or avoiding induction -- sought refuge in Canada from prosecution by military and civilian courts for war resistance. Hinzman's chances of receiving refugee status are slim, none of the 268 American applications to Canada's Immigration and Refugee Board last year was accepted.

Canada must decide if a U.S. Army deserter be considered a refugee?
America must decide if refusal to bear arms in this war is subject to prosecution, and how far the envelope of criminal liability extends.

Children interrupt, I'll come back to this.

Coverage in Canada:
Globe and Mail
Toronto Star

A One Word Description

I sometimes can not fathom the way autistic kids are treated.

When one 12 year old autistic boy in Perth, Australia became disruptive, his teachers would simply take him outside the classroom and put him in a cage.

A 12-year-old autistic boy was locked in a “cage” outside his Australian schoolroom several times a day when his behaviour became too difficult to control, the boy’s grandmother claimed today.

Mrs Sheila Simons said her grandson, Neil, was sometimes put in the enclosure for up to 80 minutes at a time over a period of months at the Kenwick School for disabled children in Perth. The boy did not have access to a bathroom or water. Mrs Simons said she was horrified when she saw the structure: “It was a cage. When I saw it I just cried.”

Our kids are autistic, they are not animals. They are not to be treated as animals.

While I have never personally experienced anything even remotely similar to having Bobby locked up in a cage, I understand that instances of autistic kids being tied down while at school have occurred in the United States even as recently as last year.

There is a word that I think should describe any teacher who locks any child in a cage or ties him to a desk or to any school administrator who permits such conduct.

That word is “defendant.”

The Irresponsibility Tax

Brad DeLong, notes that Ron Suskind’s book, written with the assistance of Paul O’Neill, quotes Vice President Dick Cheney as saying "Reagan proved deficits don't matter."

In at least one obvious way, deficits certainly do matter. When the government borrows money to finance the budget deficit, taxpayers must pay interest on that borrowing. Currently, interest on the national debt runs at about 4.5%. This year we will run a budget deficit of more than $520 billion. Taxpayers will be stuck paying interest charges of $23 billion on this year’s deficit. Those interest charges will be due each year until we run a surplus to pay off the debt.

That does not mean that it is always wrong to run a deficit. Budget deficits can be good. Deficit spending is the classical Keynesian way of stimulating the economy. If timed correctly, deficit spending can help pull the economy out of a recession or at least soften the blow.

What is irresponsible is to run deficits to stimulate the economy in bad times but not to run surpluses once the economy is humming. Such a policy just continually adds to the debt and forces taxpayers to keep on paying interest charges. One might term those interest payments an Irresponsibility Tax.

The NERB tracks the business cycle. The last full cycle, measured from trough to trough, ran from March 1991 through November 2001. As that roughly coincides with the two Clinton terms, I will call that the Clinton Cycle. How was fiscal policy handled in that cycle?

In the early part of the cycle, FY 1992, we ran a substantial (then record) deficit of $290 billion. That deficit was gradually decreased to balance and then surpluses were run until the next trough:

FY 92 -- ($290)
FY 93 -- ($255b)
FY 94 -- ($203b)
FY 95 -- ($163b)
FY 96 -- ($107b)
FY 97 -- ($21b)
FY 98 -- $69b
FY 99 -- $125b
FY 00 -- $236b
FY 01-- $127b

Over the entire cycle, the budget netted a deficit of $319 billion. I would prefer a net of zero but given that the cycle started with the largest deficit in history (in dollar terms), that is not too bad. The shape of the curve is almost exactly right. Run deficits in bad times to stimulate the economy then, as economic growth returns, shrink the deficit until finally running surpluses to pay off the debt incurred at the beginning of the cycle.

We are currently paying about $15 billion per year in interest for the debt incurred in the Clinton cycle. Thus, the Irresponsibility Tax imposed by fiscal policy during the Clinton Cycle costs us roughly the same amount as NASA.

The business cycle immediately proceeding the Clinton cycle ran, trough to trough, from November 1982 though March of 1991. I shall call that the Reagan Cycle. How did we do in the Reagan Cycle?

FY 83 -- ($207b)
FY 84 -- ($185b)
FY 85 -- ($212b)
FY 86 -- ($221b)
FY 87 -- ($149b)
FY 88 -- ($155b)
FY 89 -- ($152b)
FY 90 -- ($221b)
FY 91 -- ($269b)

We never got close to balancing the budget during the good times of that cycle. The result of that failure is that we never paid off any of the debt we incurred during the bad times and we have been left paying interest on that debt every year since. We will continue to pay such interest into the foreseeable future.

The Reagan Cycle deficits total about $1.77 trillion. At current interest rates, the Irresponsibility Tax imposed by Reagan Cycle fiscal policy is about $80 billion per year.

We have been paying that Irresponsibility Tax for 13 years now, meaning that we have paid almost a trillion dollars in Irresponsibility Taxes from the Reagan Cycle.

We recently had a debate about whether or not it was a good idea to spend $400 billion over 10 years for a prescription drug benefit for Medicare. The Irresponsibility Tax from the Reagan Cycle is about twice that expensive.

What about our current cycle? It began in the fall of 2001. We do not yet know when it will end. Mr. Bush has put forth a budget that projects out through FY 2009. That budget is widely seen as overly optimistic. Let’s be hopeful and assume that it is an accurate forecast. What, then, will be the Irresponsibility Tax from the Bush Cycle?

If we look at actual performance for FY 2002 and 2003 as well as President’s Bush’s forecast for FY 2004-09, we get the following:

FY 02 -- ($157)
FY 03 -- ($375)
FY 04 -- ($521)
FY 05 -- ($364)
FY 06 -- ($268)
FY 07 -- ($241)
FY 08 -- ($239)
FY 09 -- ($237)

Thus, if everything goes right and we do not slip back into recession before 2009 and we do not have any other wars, and there are no costs in Iraq or Afghanistan after this year, and we do not fix the AMT problem and Congress abides by spending recommendations, we will be approaching the end of the Bush Cycle with no hope of paying down any of the debt incurred at the beginning of the cycle. Indeed, Mr. Bush hopes that we will be paying interest on “only” an additional $2.4 trillion dollars. If rates remain fairly low and we can service that debt at, say, 5%, the annual Irresponsibility Tax for the Bush Cycle will be $120 billion each and every year until we begin running surpluses.

The total Irresponsibility Tax for those two cycles will be about $200 billion per year. To put that in perspective, the Irresponsibility Tax from the Reagan and Bush Cycles will be larger than Mr. Bush’s proposed discretionary spending for NASA, the Department of Agriculture, the Commerce Department, the Department of Education, the Energy Department, HUD, the Interior Department, the Justice Department, the State Department, and EPA combined.

There are about 100 million tax returns filed each year. The Irresponsibility Tax for the Bush and Reagan Cycles will amount to about $2,000 per year for each taxpayer and will continue every year. That payment of $2000 will buy the taxpayers exactly no military equipment, no homeland security, no veteran's benefits, no prescription drugs for grandma, no research for a cure for autism, no health care insurance, no meat inspectors, no air traffic controllers, no nothing.

Halliburton paid Mr. Cheney almost $50 million when he was CEO. Perhaps an Irresponsibility Tax of $2000 per year “doesn’t matter” to him. For a middle-class family trying to make ends meet and save for retirement and their kids' college, a $2000 per year Irresponsibility Tax matters a great deal.

Return of the ... One True King (pt 5)

New readers, this part 5 in a series. The most recent prior installment is Part (4), Part (3) has links to Parts 2 and 1. 789.

Old readers, I'm going to continue the update format, top-posting. viz [now][old][older][the press].

[Update 2/22 7am EST: Xinhua ran a good process piece, devoid of all the outcomes and actors. Most of the press has the "two elections" story, conservatives win on ballots cast, and reformers win on ballots not cast.]

[Update 2/21 7am EST: APF reports reformists may retain about 60 to 100 seats. 10:45am EST: I get my first piece of unsollicited mail from the underground radical Islamic organization Hizb-ut-Tahrir in Central Asia. Gosh a mickle and dill a pickle, now I'm probably on one of John Ashcroft's little black lists, just when I was booking a flight to Rome to moan to ever-supine ICANN about Verisign's latest attempt to sack the Net o' the West. Oh, they want help getting rid of Musharraf. Replace Generals with Mullahs. Everyone's agenda for the 21st Century. Not. Still, more entertaining than the usual Nigerian 419 traffic.]

[Update 2/20 6pm EST: "At polling stations in Tehran, some observers said turnout was lower on February 20 than it was for last year’s municipal election, when under 12 percent of eligible voters cast ballots. In many cities, shops remained closed throughout the day and streets were virtually empty. At dusk, the streets filled with people celebrating the boycott’s seeming success."
That from Eurasianet.org, so it is clear that in Tehran the conservatives failed, with all the resources at their disposal. Whether it is true or not, the fraud story has legs -- lots of them. The military is voting often. That's the kind of story you simply can't buy at the K Street K-Mart.]

[Update 2/20 11am EST: Voting is extended at least an additional 30 minutes, now that is a nice touch. It isn't just here in Oceania that the President is fabricating evidence to support war and domestic violence ... er ... vigilence. In Eurasia ... Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati (Sec. Guardian Council) delivered the following in today's sermon: "each ballot cast will fire a bullet into the heart of Bush". These guys should get together and free up one speach writer for something less redundant.]

[Update 2/20 4am EST: The candidate-stepped-down count is now at 1,179. The IIRC offices are sealed and its website is down. Next to go may be the Participation Front, led by the president’s brother, Mohammad Reza Khatami, and the Mujahideen of the Islamic Revolution Party. The WaPo has a nice piece on the last hours at Yas-e Nou.]

[Update 2/19 8pm EST: Albawaba.com reports that the number of candidates who have stepped down has risen to 888.]

[Apropos of nothing in particular, I've been ignoring the Bush Whitehouse's next slice of Niger Yellow Cake, but the sock puppets at VOA have Scott McClellan's on record that ``the Bush administration has "serious concerns" about reports that inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency have found previously undisclosed equipment in Iran that could be used to enrich uranium.'' First, under the IAEA rules, the equipment disclosure requirement is triggered when the gear gets dirty, not when its not, and the IAEA pointed out that the gear wasn't dirty. Second, the Bush Whitehouse passed on the NPT. Third, the rational "got fossil fuel, so all use of fissiles is weaponry" is wierd. Fourth, see the piece I posted on Lisa English's Ruminate This. Hold on to the handrails if the spinning makes you dizzy.]

[Update: 2/19, 4pm EST: Writing in Eurasianet.org, Ardeshir Moaveni has a good summary of the facts on the ground, both in the capital and outside. If you are going to read anything in the next 24 hours about Iran and the elections, from the Beeb/Reuters to NYT/WaPo, read this instead. This is what every educated person should know, not too little, and not too much, and no attempt to simplify or deconstruct the actors.]

Base: Elections in Iran are Friday. Yesterday the Letter-of-the-Hundred (my name for it) was made public. It is unsigned, but there are a hundred signatories. Jokes about Occulted Imams are not inappropriate at this point.

I need to steal some free time and write about what I think is the crux of the issue, the "conservative vs reform" and/or "secular vs clerical" dicotomies, which really are projections of the dominant trans-Atlantic culture's transition from one faith to another, is a dull mirror. [Do not wander into an extended essay on the limitations of Dualism in European discourse, or otherwise try to show off indigenous intellecutalism, which is a closely held secret. Keep the twenty cents. Ed] Speaking for the SCOTUS, Ayatollah Rehnquist ruled that the municipal elections committees of Miami-Dade were deviating from the Line of the Imam and were correctly arrested by Florida Provincial Executive Jeb Bush (younger son of the former Shah George Herbert Walker Bush), after the intervention of the American Revolutionary Guard Corps (ARGC - Pasdaran-e Inglish-qibab), dispatched by the Mullahs of the Lower House, lead by Mullah Tom DeLay ... It doesn't work. There are similarities, but it isn't As you like it, being performed by a sequence of high school drama clubs.

With that agreement with the future, here is what I know today. Two days ago the existance of the letter became public. The letter is consistent with the statement of Abu al-Fazl Rauf, et alia, that the legal basis for the acts authorized by Ayatollah Khamenei does not exist. Reuters caught the "violate[s] the legitimate freedoms and rights of the people" line, without catching the theological nuance, as if all the actors in this were differeing civil libertarians, rather than all or almost all, differeing Shi'i clerics.

Two newspapers published the letter, Yas-e Nou and Sharq yesterday. Today they were closed. I'll update as time and events conspire.

There is a wicked funny piece in what was the last, or next to last edition of Yas-e Nou, which is available here, at World Press Review On-Line. Read it and grin.

The media's alternative economic reality

I'm not exactly sure what alternative reality Jonathan Weisman of the Washington Post is writing on in yesterday's OP-ED article entitled, "Economy May Work in Bush's Favor: Housing Boom, Tax Cuts Buoy Many Voters, Despite Job Losses", but if he'd return from it to the real world, or at least Main Street, America, perhaps his piece might have read a tad differently.

Despite massive job losses effecting both moderate and low income workers, Weisman touted:

other facets of the economy may prove far better indicators of the sense of well-being that voters will bring to the ballot box in November, economic forecasters say. The booming housing market has given even struggling workers the ability to latch onto a tangible talisman of personal progress. Wage growth has been nearly stagnant, but thanks to Bush's tax cuts, disposable income has risen. And after nine quarters of slow but steady growth, the economy as a whole is poised to take off, giving some shaky households a sense of optimism about the coming year.

I'd offer that the optimism was just as shaky as the households from which it purportedly arises: Two reports in the past five days, the Michigan Sentiment and the Consumer Comfort Index, as reported by CNN:

Poll: Confidence plunges:
ABC/Money poll says a plunge in consumer confidence equals its steepest drop on record.
February 17, 2004: 6:31 PM EST
NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Consumer confidence plunged last week, matching its steepest drop on record in more than 18 years of weekly polling by ABC News and Money magazine.

The ABC/Money Consumer Comfort Index, based on ratings of current economic conditions, lost seven points -- a single-week fall that's been matched just twice before, in January 2001 and February 1990. In each of those cases, recessions followed.

Top that off with a housing market not quite as healthy as Weisman alludes. Back in January, I noted that both the new home sales and existing home sales were down for the months of October and November, and while existing home sales did recover slightly in December, new home sales continued their downward slide. To top off the bad housing news, today's reports on both residential building permits and housing starts were downright gloomy.

Debunking Weisman's trifecta of economic plusses purportedly in Bush's corner would not be complete without addressing the "personal income" myth. While "average incomes", which, of course include even those of the very wealthy, are growing slightly, and taxes, particularly on that aforementioned group have dropped, worker bee, i.e., hourly wage-earners have seen no income growth in the past 8 months. Factor in CPI, which on the whole has remaied relatively low, but has seen significant increases in food, housing and energy costs, and moderate to low income workers are in fact losing ground economically. Things are not expected to get much better. With OPEC cutting output, gasoline and heating oil prices are expected to break last summer's records, and a weaker dollar means that many consumer goods will in fact increase in price.

Ironically, Weisman chose to speak with Wisconsin residents on the eve of the state's Democratic primary. He sought to show that while "job, job, jobs" were one the minds of the many voters, the economy appeared healthy enough to defuse its use as a campaign issue against Bush. However, exit polls from yesterday indicated that the majority of Wisconsin voters disagreed with Weisman's analysis:

Exit polls: Economy top voter concern
Trade and loss of jobs apparently resonated among voters
Wednesday, February 18, 2004 Posted: 4:35 AM EST (0935 GMT)

(CNN) -- The economy was the top issue among voters in Wisconsin's presidential primary Tuesday, and trade in particular emerged as an issue that resonated with them, according to exit polls.

More than a third of those who responded to pollsters cited the economy as the top issue for them, and more than three-quarters said they thought the national economy was not good or poor.

I know that I'm probably being overly harsh on journalist Weisman, but the overt Bush bias, to the point of ignoring basic facts easily obtainable by the average Googling monkey demands some level of outrage. And while I'm not willing to predict an economic downturn looming on the horizon, it's quite clear that there are problems still unsolved from the last recession. So perhaps it's time for some of the WaPo political team to take off their blinders and start covering those issues.

Not Very Charitable

While reading my fellow Atlanta blogger, So Far, So Left, I found an Atlanta Journal Constitution article about charities.

Each year, Georgia’s Secretary of State, Cathy Cox compiles a list of charities operating in Georgia that spend the smallest percentage of their funds on actual charitable endeavors.

Among the worst offenders are those charities that purport to help policemen, firefighters and veterans. The Georgia State Lodge Fraternal Order of Police, for instance “raised $2.47 million but only 13.5 percent of that — $335,385 — went to charity programs.”

Others on the list include the Southeastern Paralyzed Veterans Association, the National Association of Police Athletic Leagues, the Vietnam Veterans Foundation of Georgia and the Professional Fire Fighters of Georgia. When those folks call, hang up.

What caught my eye, however, was information about one particular religious charity. According to Georgia’s Secretary of State, that charity raised over $725,000.

Presumably, the charity raised that money by touting its prior good deeds and offering the prospect of future charitable work. The problem is that the charity spent more than $666,000 on fundraising. Thus, more than 90% of the money raised was spend trying to raise more money while less than 10% was spent on good deeds.

What is the name of that religious charity? Some things you could not even make up. Promise Keepers.

Flashback Fri...er, Wednesday returns

Yesterday, while chasing down one Googling monkey or another