Posted 9:30 PM by Floyd

The San Jose Mercury News printed this opinion piece by Deanna Wulff called "Shut the door, save the state". I guess she wants a system of internal passports, because I came here from Indiana. And of my American friends, all but two came to the Bay Area from elsewhere: New Jersey, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Missouri, St. Louis, Michigan, two from Florida. (And two others came from less-populated regions in California.)

Wulff does attempt to dismiss this concern by stating

The fact is that most of this growth comes from immigration -- not Americans moving in and out of the state, but from foreigners. According to Californians for Population Stabilization, from 1990-1997, foreign immigrants and their offspring contributed 96 percent of California's population growth.

I don't see why I should trust this factoid when it's so obviously at variance with my personal experience. But even if we concede the point, there is a glaring logical flaw: All those Indians and Chinese and Mexicans emigrated here because there are computers to program and shops to keep and crops to pick. If we prevent immigration, there will still be tremendous demand for workers, resulting in migration from other parts of the country. All that Wulff would accomplish by doing this would be to depopulate other parts of the country, and to prevent a lot of smart, hard-working, motivated people from coming to America and making it a better place.

I have as much right to be here as Wulff does, even if she was born here and I wasn't. I found someone who wanted to hire me and someone who was willing to rent me a place to live. If that bugs Wulff, let her start her own planned community somewhere else.

Posted 9:14 PM by Floyd

Today I was wandering about downtown Palo Alto and saw a black BMW whose owner had created his own bumper stickers: Stark black lettering on narrow white strips. One said:

1776: Don't tread on us
2003: We'll tread on you

and the other said

How did all our oil get under their sand?

What I want to know is

How did the remains of their martyrs get under the ruins of our skyscrapers?

I was sufficiently annoyed that I created this maxim, which is too long for a bumper but perfect for a blog:

Anyone who has been attacked has the right to attack any of the forces arrayed against him. He is not obliged to strike back only at the enemy who assaulted him, nor is he obliged to deal with his enemies in order of their power or belligerency.

Posted 9:09 PM by Floyd

On Wednesday there was a report that the Crossgates mall near Albany, New York had ejected a shopper because he was wearing a Give Peace a Chance T-shirt. Many bloggers rushed to make asses of themselves complaining about suppression of free speech and condemning the horrible mall-owners. Had they done some more research, they would have found out that the person was ejected because he was stopping and bothering other shoppers.

Even considering all the facts you may say that the mall's actions were improper. But consider this: If I went into a restaurant and started prosyletizing diners, how long would it be before I was ejected? One minute? Two?

Greg Beato had the silliest commentary on the affair:

From President Bush: "[Anti-war protesters have] got all the right in the world to express their opinion. If they tried to do that in Iraq, they'd have their tongues cut out."

From MSNBC: "A Selkirk man says he was arrested Monday for expressing his objection to possible war with Iraq at Crossgates Mall. He says all he did was wear a T-shirt bearing a message of peace, which he actually purchased in the mall."

Imminent quote from President Bush?: "Yeah, but if he tried that in Iraq, he'd have his chest cut off."

Faux moral equivalence between dictatorships and the US has a long and disgraceful history. Twenty years ago it was "The Soviets had concentration camps? Well, we had unemployment." For Beato the motivation is not pro-Hussein sympathies or even anti-Americanism. He's just addicted to a sneering outlook on life and denies that anything has meaning. He should try to take one thing seriously per day, for maybe five minutes, and then extend that time as he builds up stamina.

Posted 11:11 PM by Floyd

You know what I figured out today? When you're cleaning a cheese grater, it's best to clean the side that doesn't have the metal prongs sticking out. It's easier on the sponge that way.

With reasoning skills like this, is it a crime that I'm unemployed? A crime? It's a fucking tragedy!

Posted 3:40 PM by Floyd

On Sunday I was driving down the freeway and saw a car with lots of bumper stickers on it. Of course they were all left-wing slogans. Are liberals the only people who cover their cars with bumper stickers, or is this just a kink of the Bay Area? Is there a car somewhere in Texas with fourteen separate denunciations of Bill Clinton?

Anyway, here were two of the bumper stickers:

War on Iraq? NO!

No one is free while others oppressed

How can those opinions be reconciled?

Oh, and the age of the driver? Quite old, at least 65. What else is new? Sing us another song about the sixties!

Posted 3:34 PM by Floyd

The latest from M. Simon:

Drug War: Interview with a Police Officer

I have been discussing the ramifications of the War On Drugs (WOD) with a Canadian police officer, John A. Gayder. He has started a group called Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP). It's most prominent American member is Sheriff Bill Masters of San Miguel County, Colorado who has been an elected Libertarian Sheriff since 1980.

John, tell me a little about your police career?

I am a currently serving Constable with the Niagara Parks Police Service in Niagara Falls, Canada. Having said that, I need to tell you right off that the opinions I express regarding drug policy reform are strictly my own! They may or may not reflect the official position of my employer.

The policing profession has always been a central part of my life. My late father was a career police officer who rose through the ranks to eventually become a Chief of Police. My sister was a police matron for a time. I grew up in a policing household. I was hired in June of 1989 and have almost exclusively worked uniform patrol, which I consider to be the best job in the whole field of policing. I am also a certified health and safety worker representative and am the services rope rescue team instructor and coordinator. A partial c.v. is viewable on the web. (http://www.vaxxine.com/scon/jagcv.htm)

What is your opinion on the war on drugs? What made you come to that conclusion?

The war on drugs is classic proof that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. It is a noble idea to not want people to ruin their lives through drug abuse. Unfortunately, the way society continues to go about achieving that aim via the WOD is not working. In fact it is making things worse. Almost everything we hate about drugs is a result of them being illegal.

I came to this conclusion via a lot of different evidence. I had seen people take drugs in public and high school and they didn't go nuts and start killing or raping folks. When I was about 8 yrs-old a very close family member of mine was arrested for international trafficking in narcotics. Naturally his actions were very unpopular within the family. It was a bad time - lots of anguish and embarrassment. Yet to me he was still someone who I loved unconditionally. I couldn't understand why he was in trouble for buying the oil of a plant. He hadn't hurt anybody or stole something. I had another relative who became addicted to FDA approved, Doctor prescribed happy pills that ruined her life - yet the Doctor worked out a full career and then retired to Miami. After I became a police officer, I saw more first hand examples that confirmed the laws weren't working.

What do you think about drugs being used as self medication?

This speaks to the heart of the very important question; why do people take drugs. The situation of people in chronic physical pain through injury or disease using drugs to relieve it speaks for itself and is a no brainer. We desperately need to stop interfering with these people. We are not helping them by arresting them.

The deeper question involves recreational drug use by seemingly otherwise healthy individuals. I'm no scientist, but I believe many people use drugs and alcohol to alleviate a whole host of what are widely referred to as anxiety problems. Whether the severity of these anxieties warrants drug use versus cognitive therapy, or better yet prevention, is a valid question. Another thing I wish I knew more about was whether or not these anxieties are part of a self-perpetuating cycle caused by drug addiction itself, or whether people are masking over a mental trauma or pathology. It may be a chicken or the egg scenario. I guess looking at it on a case by case basis would be the best approach, but our current response involves helping all the case subjects by arresting and then fining or imprisoning them. I wish there was more research in this area, although the point is kind of moot as far I am concerned& who the hell is society to tell people what they can or cant do to themselves, so long as they don't hurt others?

If you could say anything to all the children who have broken families due to non violent, drug related, law violating, what would you tell them?

Been there and done it. If its a case involving a hopeless addict who is unable to care for themselves and has sold everything in the house to buy drugs, I tell the kids that the person is ill. I tell them that their sickness has made them do crazy things. In some ways, that is the easiest situation to deal with.

The worse situation occurs when you are partnered with a gung-ho officer who insists on arresting a mom or dad in front of their children after he finds a small bit of marijuana or blow. What the hell can you say to a kid then? It is beyond hollow to tell them that their folks arent really bad people, its just that they've broken the law. What does that tell a kid about their parents? What does it tell them about the law? Its the police that are breaking the home up in that case. What a mess.

Tell a bit about LEAP. What is your member base? We started up in March of 2002. We recruit current and former members of law enforcement who believe the current drug policies have failed in their intended goals of addressing the problems of crime, drug abuse, addiction, juvenile drug use, stopping the flow of illegal drugs and the internal sale and use of illegal drugs.

The mission of LEAP is:

(1) To educate the public, the media, and policy makers, to the failure of current drug policy by presenting a true picture of the history, causes and effects of drug abuse and the crimes related to drug prohibition;

(2) To create a speakers bureau staffed with knowledgeable and articulate former drug-warriors who describe the impact of current drug policies on: police/community relations; the safety of law enforcement officers and suspects; police corruption and misconduct; and the financial and human costs associated with current drug policies;

(3) To restore the publics respect for law enforcement that has been diminished by its involvement in imposing drug prohibition;

(4) To reduce the multitude of harms resulting from fighting the war on drugs and to lessen the incidence of death, disease, crime and addiction by ultimately ending drug prohibition.

We went public with www.leap.cc in July and in eight months have gained over three hundred members. LEAP has twenty-five speakers scattered among 15 states of the U.S., and in Canada Australia, Colombia, and England. Concerned citizens who have no law enforcement background have also joined us as Friends of LEAP. We have had little time to recruit members because our directors and speakers were immediately invited to speak at international drug policy conferences in Albania, Austria, Belgium, Costa Rica, Italy, Mexico, Russia, and the United States. By the end of May 2003, we will have also conducted at least 82 speaking appearances at business, civic, benevolent, and religious organizations, as well as at universities and colleges.

What is the biggest obstacle preventing officers from changing their minds about the drug war?

Except for the most ardent drug warriors, a large percentage of officers will privately admit that the war on drugs is flop. Their minds don't need changing, they just need motivation and an outlet to do something about it enter LEAP.

For those who understand the failure of the WOD, there are a few factors at play that keeps them from admitting it publicly or doing anything about it.

Firstly, the policing profession is a paramilitary environment. There is a rank structure. Those wanting to climb the rank ladder require the approval of those above them on the ladder before they are allowed onto the next rung. Achieving and maintaining each position on the ladder is somewhat dependent upon toeing the line. (As an aside, I feel this requirement for conformity is a major, though hidden cause of work related stress for officers: knowing something is one way but having to say it is another is not good for your psycho-emotional health.)

Anyway, I guess the biggest obstacle to be overcome is to get officers to think about the consequences of the WOD in relation to the way it negatively affects their profession. Like Ben Franklin said, logic is often not the best persuader self interest is. Unconvinced officers need to see the harms to their image and profession that the inherently contrary nature of the WOD is creating.

(c) M. Simon - All rights reserved.

Posted 3:30 PM by Floyd

About once a year the typical big-city liberal newspaper will run an article on the prospects for an increase in student activism. Of course what is meant is really liberal activism, but then one of the perks of being a journalist is the power to ignore political opinions you don't like.

This article in the San Jose Mercury News is a typical example of the genre. In fact it is more than typical; it is so bland and recycled that the words "terror" and "Al Qaeda" do not appear at all.

The reporter, Becky Bartindale, is either biased or extremely lazy. She happily transmits activist's lame excuses for student disinterest, but never considers that the reason students may not participate in activism is that they consider it mistaken. Here are some of the reasons given why students do not rally:

One of the biggest obstacles to organizing is the time crunch students face.

As opposed to students in the 1960's, who never had to take tests or do homework. (I guess some subject matter was easier back then. In the 60's there were only 103 elements; now there are 114.)

The United States has been in conflict with Iraq for nearly all of Curtis Abbott's 19 years. ``I don't feel I can make a difference by protesting,'' the Santa Clara University student said. ``I just feel it's an inevitable thing.''

If you were a 19-year-old student protester in the year 1971, then the US would have been in conflict with Vietnamese Communists for ... nearly all of your 19 years.

Posted 2:48 PM by Floyd

Steven Den Beste has a touching if naive faith that the Bush administration's foreign policy decisions will exactly match his ratiocinations and, for that matter, his prejudices. Thus when told that the Turkish parliament had voted against cooperation with an American land attack against Iraq, Den Beste spent a few (for him) sentences bemoaning perfidious Anatolia, then snarled

One thing I do know: the Turkish government gets no big new aid package. They're not going to get a dime.

I don't object to Den Beste's opinion. I would be perfectly happy to see Turkey get the shaft in the form of no bribes and an independent Kurdistan. But the US State Department has a long history of trying to make people like us by sending them money with no strings attached, and of not having the slightest clue about who would constitute a loyal or useful ally. I expect that Ankara's slap in the face will not stop the flow of aid, nor will it result in self-government by Iraqi Kurds.

Foggy Bottom's predeliction for shooting American interests in the foot was interrupted briefly by Reagan's resolve. Perhaps Bush will do the same, but he will have to overcome two of his traits not possessed by the Gipper: His desire to reach out to everyone and make them like him, and his gut reaction to solve problems by throwing money at them.

Posted 2:31 PM by Floyd

I played a lot of bridge last week, considering that there were no tournaments in town. I played Tuesday at the club with Eric, and we finished second (a third of a board out of first). Thursday I played with George and we won handily. Friday I played with Sherry while Eric played with our friend Joel, who used to be one of our bridge crowd when he was at Stanford but moved away to Ann Arbor in 2001. And I played a few random hands at my friend Jon and Beth's house on Friday and Saturday.

The Friday night game is a barometer. There is a full set of boards for every two tables; on each round the odd table plays the odd board first and the even table the even board, then the tables swap boards and play them. The matchpoint scores from the previous round are posted on a big whiteboard on the side of the main playing area. The director also posts several of the leading pairs each direction and their scores.

We sat North-South and Joel and Eric started as our East-West opponents. They had two unfortunate results, playing 3N from the wrong side because they play weak notrumps, and then a trump lead picked up the suit for Sherry and allowed her to make five. This put us on the "leader board", tied for first. Bridge being a zero-sum game, our friends had achieved the "anti-leader board" and were tied for last.

Sherry and I had some spectacular results and some disasters. Here is my favorite board:

As dealer I held QJT8xx ATx — KQ8x. I opened 1 and Sherry responded 2 -- not game forcing, just 10 or more points. I raised to 3, which showed extras in our methods.

Sherry then bid 3, which I took as spade support. Now I really liked my hand and cuebid 4. Sherry came back with 4N. We don't play Blackwood; in a cue bidding situation 4N shows slam interest but nothing obvious to cue bid.

This suited my hand very well. I figured she had spade and heart values and shot the spade slam. LHO led a diamond and here was the dummy:

A KQJxxx Q9xx J9

Obviously Sherry thought 3 was a cue bid. I ruffed and led a spade to the ace, all following. What would you do?

I led the jack of clubs and overtook with the queen. This held and I led the Q. LHO won and RHO followed, so I was cold as long as he did not play a club back. He thought for a while and returned a diamond. I blew it up, pulled two rounds of trump, and threw my club losers on hearts. Making six! This was a tie for a top; I assume the other 980 was six hearts, which really should not make either as hearts are 3-1.

Sherry and I were on and off the leader board at fourth and third place. I kept a look out for Joel and Eric but they did not appear. Our last round was a disaster and we fell to 6th (out of 12 tables). Meanwhile, Joel and Eric won! The East-West race was very tight and with one round to go, third place was only a quarter board behind first. Joel and Eric had a huge last round to overtake them all.

Posted 2:10 PM by Floyd

I've never had a spam (even a Nigerian) offer me this much:

One Big, Long, Straight Line Downline

This one is only 4 days old. No sponsoring requirement to get paid. If you sponsor others, you'll get matching bonus. 2 x infinity pay daily.

What about my hits? Can I get 2 x infinity page views daily?