March 2005 Archives

From the Washington Post

Report on Global Ecosystems Calls for Radical Changes

Earth's Sustainability Is Not Guaranteed Unless Action Is Taken to Protect Resources, Experts Say

By Shankar Vedantam
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, March 30, 2005; Page A02

Many of the world's ecosystems are in danger and might not support future generations unless radical measures are implemented to protect and revive them, according to the most comprehensive analysis ever conducted of how the world's oceans, dry lands, forests and species interact and depend on one another.

The new report collates research from many specific locales to create the first global snapshot of ecosystems. More than 1,300 authors from 95 countries participated in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, whose results are being made public today by the United Nations and by several private and public organizations.

 Paging John McCain?

John Danforth, one-time minister, Republican senator, and Bush appointee, in the New York Times today:

I do not fault religious people for political action. Since Moses confronted the pharaoh, faithful people have heard God's call to political involvement. Nor has political action been unique to conservative Christians. Religious liberals have been politically active in support of gay rights and against nuclear weapons and the death penalty. In America, everyone has the right to try to influence political issues, regardless of his religious motivations.

The problem is not with people or churches that are politically active. It is with a party that has gone so far in adopting a sectarian agenda that it has become the political extension of a religious movement.

When government becomes the means of carrying out a religious program, it raises obvious questions under the First Amendment. But even in the absence of constitutional issues, a political party should resist identification with a religious movement. While religions are free to advocate for their own sectarian causes, the work of government and those who engage in it is to hold together as one people a very diverse country. At its best, religion can be a uniting influence, but in practice, nothing is more divisive. For politicians to advance the cause of one religious group is often to oppose the cause of another.

 and

During the 18 years I served in the Senate, Republicans often disagreed with each other. But there was much that held us together. We believed in limited government, in keeping light the burden of taxation and regulation. We encouraged the private sector, so that a free economy might thrive. We believed that judges should interpret the law, not legislate. We were internationalists who supported an engaged foreign policy, a strong national defense and free trade. These were principles shared by virtually all Republicans.

But in recent times, we Republicans have allowed this shared agenda to become secondary to the agenda of Christian conservatives. As a senator, I worried every day about the size of the federal deficit. I did not spend a single minute worrying about the effect of gays on the institution of marriage. Today it seems to be the other way around.

The historic principles of the Republican Party offer America its best hope for a prosperous and secure future. Our current fixation on a religious agenda has turned us in the wrong direction. It is time for Republicans to rediscover our roots.

From CNN

When President Clinton failed to get his health care plan passed in the mid-1990s, he experimented with portions of his program via executive order.

Similarly, if President Bush ultimately fails to persuade Congress (especially centrist Senators) to back his private account plan, he may sign an executive order for a smaller version of his plan, such as allowing federal employees to experiment with a heavily regulated form of private accounts. It clearly would not be his first choice.

He'd rather enact a broad national plan, passed by Congress and signed by him. But if he cannot get Congressional passage of an overall Social Security change plan (or even just the private account portion), President Bush just may use the executive order route to ensure that a test version is put into effect.

And while President Clinton was sometimes criticized for his bold use of executive orders, he had to be at least somewhat politically cautious because of the risk that Congress or the courts might overturn him. President Bush has less risk in that regard because of Republican dominance in both arenas. And thus, he may indeed be more aggressive in using the executive order to implement private accounts if his legislative efforts fail.

By the way, if President Bush uses the tool to change Social Security, it will be the fourth major arena in which he has meaningfully advanced policy using presidential directives. Indeed, he has almost single-handedly created his multi-billion dollar faith-based initiative through executive orders, allowing churches and religious institutions access to taxpayer money for drug treatment, mentoring and other social service programs.

Second, as The New Yorker's Seymour Hersh and others have reported, presidential directives have guided much of the covert war on terrorism. Third, President Bush has significantly relaxed regulations and oversight of a number of large business industries via executive order.

"This would be a lot easier if this was a dictatorship  — as long as I was the dictator." (Bush, December 19, 2000 at a meeting with the Democratic Congressional leadership)

This is an MIT student's project, an alarm clock that runs away from you and makes you get out of bed to turn it off. Isn't it cute?

Clocky is, quite simply, for people who have trouble waking up.

When the alarm clock goes off and the snooze button is pressed, Clocky will roll off the bedside table and wheel away, bumping mindlessly into objects on the floor until it eventually finds a spot to rest. Minutes later, when the alarm sounds again, the sleeper must get up out of bed and search for Clocky. This ensures that the person is fully awake before turning it off. Small wheels that are concealed by Clocky's shag enable it to move and reposition itself, and an internal processor helps it find a new hiding spot every day.

I don't like being told when to wake up but I've come to terms with the idea that I have to. In designing Clocky, I was in part inspired by kittens I've had that would bite my toes every morning. Clocky is less of an annoying device as it is a troublesome pet that you love anyway. It's also a bit ugly. But its unconventional look keeps the user calm, and inspires laughter at one of the most hated times of the day...

...Having the alarm clock hide from me was just the most obvious way I could think of to get out of bed.

I want one! Even though I'd probably try to kill it.

Sorry, bad pun. But I couldn't resist when I read on DailyKos that Terri Schiavo's parents authorized a Christian Right mailing list broker to resell the personal details of those who had donated money to the "save Terri" campaign.

From the New York Times:

The parents of Terri Schiavo have authorized a conservative direct-mailing firm to sell a list of their financial supporters, making it likely that thousands of strangers moved by her plight will receive a steady stream of solicitations from anti-abortion and conservative groups.

"These compassionate pro-lifers donated toward Bob Schindler's legal battle to keep Terri's estranged husband from removing the feeding tube from Terri," says a description of the list on the Web site of the firm, Response Unlimited, which is asking $150 a month for 6,000 names and $500 a month for 4,000 e-mail addresses of people who responded last month to an e-mail plea from Ms. Schiavo's father. "These individuals are passionate about the way they value human life, adamantly oppose euthanasia and are pro-life in every sense of the word!"

Privacy experts said the sale of the list was legal and even predictable, if ghoulish.

"I think it's amusing," said Robert Gellman, a privacy and information policy consultant. "I think it's absolutely classic America. Everything is for sale in America, every type of personal information."

Executives of Response Unlimited declined to comment. Gary McCullough, director of the Christian Communication Network and a spokesman for Ms. Schiavo's parents, confirmed that Mr. Schindler had agreed to let Response Unlimited rent out the list as part of a deal for the firm to send an e-mail solicitation raising money on the family's behalf.

I'm sure that progressive organizations do the same thing. Still, ick.

Also, if you go to Response Unlimited's website, it's exceedingly hard to find the Terri list (I haven't had any luck yet), but easy to find a bunch of other curiously named offerings...

• GLORIA STEINEM'S WORST NIGHTMARE (I think we're living in it. But thanks!)
• CHRISTIANS WITH A HEART FOR ISRAEL (No comment)
  
• ALAN KEYES UNIVERSE (It's a different one than the universe the rest of us live in!)
  
• CHRISTIANS SEEKING EXTRA INCOME (Jesus saves!)
  
• KEEP AMERICAN CHRISTIAN DONORS (from 1989?!?!) 

 Honestly...

From my homiez (NOT) at the American Family Association. They are obviously most upset about this, to the point that sometimes their sentences end halfway through, as if they couldn't bring themselves to go on.

Terri's Case: The Roe v. Wade of Euthanasia

Terri's father says the courts are in control of this country

Dear XXX,

 Now that the courts have ruled that a disabled person--Terri Schiavo--must die, who is the next disabled category to go? Those with Alzheimer's? Those with incurable cancer? Those who are paraplegic?

Remember, Terri committed no crime. She signed no will stating her desire to be starved to death. How her injury occurred remains a mystery. She was on no ventilator. She was not brain dead. Her parents offered to take her home and care for her at no expense to anyone other than themselves.

But her husband--the man who years ago abandoned her and moved in with another

[sic - Something is missing here]

TAKE ACTION BELOW!
Liberals have been salivating over a case like Terri Schiavo's to use in pushing euthanasia. The promoters for activist liberal judges are poised for major gains.

How arrogant and powerful have activist judges become? Here is what Robert Schindler, Terri’s father, said about the judicial system that sentenced his daughter to a slow, agonizing death by starvation: "What I think you're seeing now is a display where the judicial system is…flexing their muscles. They're showing who's in comma [sic]

The only body that can stop liberal activist judges from controlling this country is the U.S. Senate. In a few days the Senate will vote on ending the liberals' filibuster of conservative judges who see their sole responsibility to be that of interpreting the Constitution. What the liberals want are activist judges who will create laws they cannot get passed through Congress. The Constitution requires a simple majority of 51 votes. The liberals want to require 60 votes to end their filibuster.

TAKE ACTION NOW!
This will be the most important vote taken in this session of Congress. Tell your two U.S. Senators to vote to change the rule to a simple majority as the Constitution requires. If the Senate fails to do that, then a minority of 40 Senators and their cohorts on the bench can, and will, force their agenda on every American.

Some good Senators are sitting on th [sic]

 
Click Here To Email Your Senators Now!

Sincerely,

Don

Donald E. Wildmon, Founder and Chairman
American Family Association

 P.S. Please forward this to your friends and family and alert them to the importance of this vote. 

So... friends, family, and whoever else is reading this... this vote is important. That's why you should go to this page instead and tell your senators that the fillibuster, she is a good thing. (Republicans in their saner moments know this too.)

Edited to add: if that wasn't enough, they're also selling bumper stickers that say "REMEMBER TERRI"!

Order your bumper stickers today!

25 for $15

50 for $27

100 for $45

From Body & Soul:

Listening to right-wing evangelicals talk about a "culture of life" is a lot like hearing George Bush talk about "human rights." They're using words I've used all my life, but there seems to be no connection between what I mean when I use them and what they mean when they use them.

Stick to community colleges, kiddies! From Slashdot:

Berkeley Grads' Identity Data Stolen

yali writes "Did you get a graduate degree from Berkeley? Or maybe you just applied but didn't go there? If so, your identity may have been stolen. A laptop was stolen containing names, social security numbers, birthdates, and addresses of grad students, alumni, and applicants. University police suspect that the thief just wanted the laptop, but the irony of California's mandatory notification law is that the thief may now know they have something even more valuable. Berkeley has set up a website with information on the breach."

I work in downtown San Francisco, in an office with a crammed (and sometimes smelly) refrigerator in a small kitchen on a floor that can only be reached by elevator. I don't like microwaved leftovers, and let's face it, I'm somewhat lazy.

So I end up buying lunch a lot.

At first, I kept going to the same old places in the two nearby food courts, and the noodle place next door. But many of those places were just O.K. One of my favorite salad places went out of business. Two lunch places gave me food poisoning. Is this how they repay me for my patronage?

Thank goodness, my options have increased lately. Here's some of the places I've been to.

Arabi's (Rincon Center). Middle Eastern/Mediterranean food — hummus, falafel, etc. They also have this great combo salad plate that I order a lot. If I feel like I haven't been getting enough veggies lately, I go here. They're very friendly, too, and the prices are pretty good.

Yank Sing 2 Go (Rincon Center). This one is kind of a mixed bag. They are run by the main Yank Sing restaurant, whose dim sum is so fabulous, but the quality is just not as good. The exception is the won ton soup, which they serve on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. Fluffy shrimp won tons in a clear broth with a few scallions. So simple, and so good. But not as cheap as it should be. I also sometimes get the Yank Sing Light, which consists of not-bad chicken salad and four plump potstickers. (One time I got there too late, and they'd run out of potstickers. They had to substitute some siu mai and one of those peanut-and-pork dumplings. Made me want to eat lunch late more often.)

So... you can only eat at the same two places for so long. Luckily, the Ferry  Building came along! Unluckily, the places there are not cheap...

But they are good.

Lulu's. Sandwiches aren't bad, house-made potato chips are wonderful. I also like the beet salad.

Taylor's Refresher. They have good fries and I'd be addicted to their Ahi tuna burger... but at $12 a pop (which does not include fries), I can resist. Really good place but way, way overpriced. Especially when the San Francisco Seafood Company is just down the way in the same building. (Is it soft-shell crab sandwich season again yet?)

Delica-RF1. Weird name, great place. It's a Japanese deli. I got hooked on their Bento box lunches, which consist of a fried item (shrimp or scallop cakes usually) and three salads. They also had a wonderful squash soup for a while with little bits of fried taro on top. Again, not cheap. 

Mistral. They have a "meat-and-two-sides" deal. I've gotten some good fish and  brussel sprouts there. A friend tells me you can get a bunch of sides on their own for really cheap. Haven't tried that yet.

Out The Door. My new addiction, this place is the take-out division of Slanted Door. Very high-end Vietnamese food with prices to match, but I got addicted to their won-ton soup with noodles...  they also have tasty daikon cake and spring rolls, but everything is much more expensive than it would be in Chinatown. I haven't even gotten to try their rice porridge yet, partly because I got stuck on the won-ton soup, and partly because I found porridge at...

Tomo's Cafe (50 First Street). An ex-coworker just turned me on to this place. They have sushi with brown rice, which is a rarity. They have enormous noodle bowls. They have fresh and tasty spring rolls (the non-fried kind) with lots of mint in them. And they have chicken-and-ginger rice porridge — for less than half the price of Out The Door. And boy, was it good.

Other places...

Bocadillo's (on Montgomery near Columbus). A bit of a walk, but worth it. Tapas and the eponymous Spanish sandwiches that should be widely available here, but aren't. Cute place, excellent food.

This concludes this installment of food pr0n. You may now go about your business. Is it dinnertime yet?

This story about a town in Pennsyvania which is being roiled by "controversy" over teaching the "theory" of evolution in schools has been brilliantly eviscerated by others wiser than I, but I do love this quote:

Both sides acknowledge the political context of the debate over Darwinism, and the relation to the re-election of staunchly Christian President George W. Bush.

"Christians are a lot more bold under Bush's leadership, he speaks what a lot of us believe," said Mummert.

"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture," he said, adding that the school board's declaration is just a first step.

("Help! I'm being oppressed for being a total dumbass!" Funny. I always thought the goal was to become educated and intelligent. Shows you what I know.)

From yesterday's Matier & Ross column in the Chronicle

Muscle sag: After more than a year of stratospheric popularity, the Governator appears to be falling back to the land of mere mortals.

Two recent polls -- one commissioned by Democratic legislators and one by the labor unions -- show a double-digit drop in Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's popularity in the past month.

And while you may find the source of the polls suspect, even Arnold's advisers privately admit that tackling teachers, nurses and firefighters as "special interests" has taken its toll on the movie-star-turned-governor.

(In the same column is a story about a pamphlet on how to ingest crack safely, produced by the San Francisco Needle Exchange Program. Seems that the authors left out anything about, oh, how to quit using the drug. Oops. Maybe they were smoking... nevermind.) 

HAPPY BIRTHDAY KIMBERLY!

This is sad news.

Australian music is in shock today at news of the death of Paul Hester at the age of just 46.

The musician was found dead in a Melbourne park on Saturday night and websites are talking of suicide.

As a drummer, first for Split Enz and then Crowded House, Hester was counted among the greats of Australian popular music.

From tomorrow's International Herald Tribune:

A blend of risks makes dollar's outlook grim
 
By Daniel Altman
 
Monday, March 28, 2005

Traders' pessimism could bring sell-off
 
Is the writing on the wall for the U.S. dollar? Researchers at one big fund manager say it is, but the markets haven't read along just yet.

Since the start of March, Bridgewater Associates, a manager of more than $100 billion of institutional and hedge fund money based in Westport, Connecticut, has been issuing warnings in its daily reports. One on March 11, titled "The Breakdown of the Dollar System," said, "As we often say, we've seen this movie many times, and we know the ending."

There is indeed a volatile blend of risks surrounding the dollar.

President George W. Bush's new budget proposal would substantially expand the government's debt burden in the next decade, potentially raising doubts about the desirability of its IOUs. Some Asian central banks have declared that they will diversify their reserves away from dollar-denominated assets. If China decouples the yuan from the dollar, it will not need as many dollar-denominated assets to keep its currency from gaining value, nor will its competitors for export markets. In recent times, long-term interest rates have stayed stubbornly low, making it difficult for American companies to attract new investment from abroad.

These ingredients may just be waiting for the right catalyst...

Read the whole thing. (Not everyone interviewed agrees with Bridewater's Associates, but the article ends with "we're in for a bumpy ride.") 

One profiles two mothers: one who decided to end her comatose son's life support, and one who, at 77, continues to nurse her daughter who has been in a coma since age 16.

The other story is about a man who had a horrible accident as a result of a cherished home project he'd been working on for ages. His anguished family reluctantly decided to end life support, then sued a parts manufacturer for a flaw that they thought led to the accident.

(Oh, and the man's son is Tom DeLay, defender of Terri Schiavo's right to live and scourge of trial lawyers everywhere.)

From Reuters...

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush's approval rating slipped to a new low in the latest national survey with pollsters suggesting federal government intervention in the Terri Schiavo controversy may have been a factor along with growing concern about the economy.

The USA Today/CNN/Gallup survey released on Friday found 45 percent of the 1,001 adults surveyed Monday through Wednesday thought Bush was doing a good job, compared with 52 percent during three previous surveys in late February and early March.

The president's previous low since taking office in January 2001 was 46 percent in May 2004.

Bush's involvement in the Schiavo case in Florida "may be a major cause" for the 7-point drop, the Gallup Organization said.

----

Also possibly weighing on Bush's ratings slide is concern about the economy with new emphasis on rising fuel costs.

Fifty-nine percent of those surveyed believed the economy was getting worse, up 9 points from earlier this month. The overall figure is Bush's worst negative figure on the economy in two years.

Seventeen percent cited rising fuel costs as the most important economic problem facing the country, up from 5 percent a month ago.

Rising crude oil costs helped to push the national price for gasoline to a record $2.11 a gallon this week.

The American version of The Office is...

...actually really, really good.

Whoah.

Where did they go right? 

From the Washington Post

Army Documents Shed Light on CIA 'Ghosting'

Systematic Concealment Of Detainees Is Found

By Josh White

Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, March 24, 2005; Page A15

Senior defense officials have described the CIA practice of hiding unregistered detainees at Abu Ghraib prison as ad hoc and unauthorized, but a review of Army documents shows that the agency's "ghosting" program was systematic and known to three senior intelligence officials in Iraq.

Army and Pentagon invvvestigations have acknowledged a limited amount of ghosting, but more than a dozen documents and investigative statements obtained by The Washington Post show that unregistered CIA detainees were brought to Abu Ghraib several times a week in late 2003, and that they were hidden in a special row of cells. Military police soldiers came up with a rough system to keep track of such detainees with single-digit identification numbers, while others were dropped off unnamed, unannounced and unaccounted for.

The documents show that the highest-ranking general in Iraq at the time acknowledged that his top intelligence officer was aware the CIA was using Abu Ghraib's cells, a policy the general abruptly stopped when questions arose...

Full story

From the Washington Post

Army Documents Shed Light on CIA 'Ghosting'

Systematic Concealment Of Detainees Is Found

By Josh White

Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, March 24, 2005; Page A15

Senior defense officials have described the CIA practice of hiding unregistered detainees at Abu Ghraib prison as ad hoc and unauthorized, but a review of Army documents shows that the agency's "ghosting" program was systematic and known to three senior intelligence officials in Iraq.

Army and Pentagon invvvestigations have acknowledged a limited amount of ghosting, but more than a dozen documents and investigative statements obtained by The Washington Post show that unregistered CIA detainees were brought to Abu Ghraib several times a week in late 2003, and that they were hidden in a special row of cells. Military police soldiers came up with a rough system to keep track of such detainees with single-digit identification numbers, while others were dropped off unnamed, unannounced and unaccounted for.

The documents show that the highest-ranking general in Iraq at the time acknowledged that his top intelligence officer was aware the CIA was using Abu Ghraib's cells, a policy the general abruptly stopped when questions arose...

Full story

From the New York Times, a profile of the doctor who doesn't think Terri Schiavo is really in a persistant vegetative state...

Yesterday, in an affidavit supporting a petition by the Florida Department of Children and Families in the case, Dr. Cheshire said it was more likely that Ms. Schiavo was in a "minimally conscious state."

"Although Terri did not demonstrate during our 90-minute visit compelling evidence of verbalization, conscious awareness or volitional behavior," he wrote, "yet the visitor has the distinct sense of the presence of a living human being who seems at some level to be aware of some things around her."

Um, yeah, that sounds very scientific. NOT.

Mr. Bush called Dr. Cheshire a "renowned neurologist," but he is not widely known in the neurology or bioethics fields. Asked about him, Dr. Arthur Caplan, director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania, replied, "Who?"

Dr. Cheshire, who graduated from Princeton and earned a medical degree at West Virginia University, did not return calls to the Mayo Clinic seeking comment. The clinic said in a statement that his work on the Schiavo case was not related to his work at the clinic and that the state had invited his opinion. "He observed the patient at her bedside and conducted an extensive review of her medical history but did not conduct an examination," the statement said.

Dr. Caplan said that was not good enough. "There is just no excuse for going in and making any pronouncement about the state that Terri Schiavo is in unless you're going to go in and do some form of technologically mediated scanning that would overturn what's on the record already," he said.

Dr. Ronald Cranford, a neurologist and medical ethicist at the University of Minnesota Medical School who has examined Ms. Schiavo on behalf of the Florida courts and declared her to be irredeemably brain-damaged, said, "I have no idea who this Cheshire is," and added: "He has to be bogus, a pro-life fanatic. You'll not find any credible neurologist or neurosurgeon to get involved at this point and say she's not vegetative."

He said there was no doubt that Ms. Schiavo was in a persistent vegetative state. "Her CAT scan shows massive shrinkage of the brain," he said. "Her EEG is flat - flat. There's no electrical activity coming from her brain."

He doesn't support all types of research either.

He was also the author, with others from the Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity, of a paper opposing stem cell research.

At least he hasn't lost his sense of humor.

His papers show a fondness for puns, as in the title of a letter to The New England Journal of Medicine about a patient whose fillings caused an electrical current that made her condition worse: "The shocking tooth about trigeminal neuralgia."

Or his artistic streak.

He has also written poetry, including "Exit Ramp," a poem about the movement to allow physician-assisted suicide that uses the metaphor of a highway off-ramp to warn of a different kind of slippery slope:

Such killing fast degenerates,
Despite concern for patients' best,
Into a plot that terminates
Without explicit prerequest.

From the Independent

Iraq war: The smoking gun?

Foreign Office official's resignation letter reveals that Attorney General did change his mind on legality of Iraq war

By Colin Brown, Deputy Political Editor

24 March 2005

Documentary evidence has emerged showing that the Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, changed his mind about the legality of the Iraq war just before the conflict began. The damning revelation is contained in the resignation letter of Elizabeth Wilmshurst, a legal adviser at the Foreign Office, in which she said the war would be a "crime of aggression". She quit the day after Lord Goldsmith's ruling was made public, three days before the war began in March 2003.

The critical paragraph of her letter, published yesterday under the Freedom of Information Act, was blanked out by the Government on the grounds that it was in the public interest to protect the privacy of the advice given by the Attorney General. But last night the contents of the paragraph were leaked, and Tony Blair was facing fresh allegations of a cover-up. There has long been speculation that Lord Goldsmith was leant on to switch his view, and to sanction the war - and confirmation of that would be devastating for the Prime Minister. The Wilmhurst letter stops short of explaining what caused Lord Goldsmith to change his mind.

The revelations come two weeks after it emerged that there had never been a detailed dossier from the Attorney General setting out the case for military action before troops were committed, and that Britain went to war on the basis of nine paragraphs on a single sheet of A4 paper.

Last night's revelations - broadcast on Channel 4 News - showed that Ms Wilmshurst said the Attorney General had initially agreed with the Foreign Office legal team that a war on Iraq would be illegal without a second UN resolution.

There's more 

I'm posting about the Schiavo case again.

• Interview with a Jesuit bioethicist
• CBS poll showing how the Republicans have screwed themselves

As an aside, some people were making much ado about a memo of Schiavo-related talking points supposedly distributed the Republicans. While I disagree with all its points, there's nothing inherently sleazy or wrong with such memos. Hey, when you think your party has found an issue that will resonate with the American people (even if it's not getting the expected results), you want to communicate about it effectively, don't you? (We're certainly doing that with Social Security and I'm sure there are plenty of talking points and memos floating around.)

And, as always, there are questions being raised by right-wing bloggers about the memo's authenticity.

To sum up: writing a memo doesn't make the Republicans a bunch of assholes. Acting like a bunch of assholes makes the Republicans a bunch of assholes. 

From Reuters

WASHINGTON, March 23 (Reuters) - The financial outlook for the U.S. Social Security and Medicare program trust funds remained little changed in an annual report on Wednesday, providing little fresh momentum for the Bush administration's warnings of a looming crisis for the retirement system.

"I don't see anything in this report that says, oh my heavens, this is a crisis that we need to address tomorrow," said Kenneth Apfel, Social Security commissioner from 1997 to 2001 under former President Clinton.

"There is a moderate problem that we need to address, but radical restructuring is not called for by the size of the problem," he said.

The annual report of the fund trustees, who include three cabinet secretaries in the Bush administration, said there had been "no important change in the financial outlook for either Social Security or Medicare."

Two trustees who are not Bush administration officials said in a separate statement that the outlook for Social Security has in fact improved slightly over the last five years.

The report comes as President George W. Bush and his cabinet urge the public, in a series of appearances around the country, to support plans to overhaul the government retirement system as the U.S. population ages.

This made my blood boil:

Pinellas Park, Fla. -- Stretched out on the withered grass outside the shingled Woodside Hospice, Tatiana Scism, 6, copied the message of her mother's poster onto a large piece of red cardboard.

"Save Terri," Tatiana spelled laboriously with a blue marker, making a placard of her own. "Arrest Michael."

So what are these people teaching their kids?

Throw people in jail for doing something legal that you don't like?

Interfere in other people's private family matters?

Blue ink on a red background is legible and a perfectly valid design choice?

Feh. 

Oh well. At least little Tatiana knows that "arrest" has two Rs in it. 

The San Francisco Chronicle's "Two Cents" feature today has comments from people responding to the question, "Have you ever participated in the decision to remove life support?" Every blogger, reporter, and politician out there has weighed in on this subject. It's worth reading this piece for its first-person accounts by those who have actually wrestled with this problem firsthand and might actually know whereof they speak! Interestingly, there are a handful of accounts of people who decided not to "pull the plug" and the patients recovering seemingly miraculously. Sometimes, it's a matter of following your gut, I suppose.

(Apropos of nothing, is that the Peter Beagle in there among the two-centers?) 

Just a few minutes ago, on ABC's website, I saw this little box listing popular stories being forwarded.

The first two have an unpleasant synergy to them, somehow.

Or maybe it's just my tweaked little brain.

(Avoiding dairy products now.) 

If you're in or near San Francisco this weekend, this is worth a visit.

Eyes Wide Open, the American Friends Service Committee's widely acclaimed exhibition on the human cost of the Iraq war and commemorates all the lives lost.

The exhibit includes a pair of boots honoring each U.S. military casualty; a field of shoes and a wall of remembrance to memorialize the Iraqis killed in the conflict; and a multimedia display exploring the history, cost and consequences of the war.

http://www.afsc.org/eyes/about-the-exhibit.htm

http://www.afsc.org/eyes/details/050325-san-francisco.php

We always thought that my grandmother had a thing for bald guys. My grandfather started losing his hair pretty early on, but that seemed to only add to his allure. (Grandma picked him over a guy with red hair.) After his death, she had two "gentleman friends," and the one she preferred was also quite bald.

I thought of this today because I just came across this website which documents President Bush's fascination with the follicularly challenged.

In a word:

Disturbing. 

(Luckily, the people I know who have appealing heads wouldn't be allowed into a room with this guy for, er, other reasons, or else I'd be extremely concerned for their dignity and safety.) 

Excellent post at Lean Left pointing out that, yes, sometimes there is a point when you have to say that further care is futile. George W. Bush may very well have been right to sign that bill back in 1999. It was, after all, crafted very carefully and even the pro-life movement signed on to it and agreed to a reasonable standard of medical futility. "Killing patients to save money" is an oversimplified description of this law.

So maybe I was too hasty in my condemnation of Bush for signing that bill into law. On the other hand, it makes me even more annoyed with him for turning his back on reason now.

Excellent analyses of this case can also be found at Obsidian Wings and Alas, A Blog.

If you've heard that Terri Schiavo shows some signs of being responsive, you might want to listen to this NPR interview with a doctor who was briefly appointed as her guardian a few years ago.

Finally, if your family is having the same kinds of discussions ours is, you probably want to check out this Findlaw page about medical directives...

Edited to add: since I promised myself I wouldn't post any more entries about this case, I'm adding this excellent link here. It debunks many of the myths about this sad story.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/3/22/194615/400

Wish you could create masterpieces in the style of Get Your War On or My New Fighting Technique is unstoppable? Or at least with those little video game icons you see online sometimes? Now's your chance! You can make pixelart comics at Gnomz or if you're feeling more ambitious (and can read Japanese) you can make beautiful Hokusai-style manga here.

Edited to add: Is this cool or what!?!?! 

Via Atrios...

President Bush signed a law in 1999 that lets hospitals pull the plug on life support if treatment is deemed to be futile, even if the family doesn't want them to. Oh, and another deciding factor is whether or not the family has any money to keep paying for it.

Now what's he doing intervening in the Schiavo case?

Edited to add: DailyKos provides an excerpt from the full text of the law, and catches Scott McClellan in a L-I-E. 

So Congress and our President are moving heaven and earth to save Terri Schiavo from a death worse than... what exactly? 

Anyway, it sets a great precedent. I trust they will also be moved to action when, say, a small child with muscular dystrophy in Memphis loses her Medicaid payments that allow her to live at home with nursing care. Or that their compassion extends to people who go bankrupt taking care of their disabled children. Oops, except it doesn't.

Nonetheless, Terri's saga has provoked heart-searching and important conversations all over America, as spouses turn to each other to wrestle with the big "What Ifs" of life.

"Honey, if Tom DeLay should end up on life support in a vegetative state..."

...makes Andrew Lloyd Webber look very, very sad. Sorry, Evita is no Sunday in the Park With George. We won't even get into Starlight Express!

Anyway, there's a great interview and profile of him here, with some of his songs too. 

(Er, does anyone else out there like musicals, or is it just me?) 

"Volcanoes," released in 2003 and sponsored in part by the National Science Foundation and Rutgers University, has been turned down at about a dozen science centers, mostly in the South, said Dr. Richard Lutz, the Rutgers oceanographer who was chief scientist for the film. He said theater officials rejected the film because of its brief references to evolution, in particular to the possibility that life on Earth originated at the undersea vents.

A New Screen Test for Imax: It's the Bible vs. the Volcano, New York Times, March 19, 2005

Two years ago to the day, the United States starting major combat operations in Iraq. To mark the occasion, protests are taking place around the world and in the U.S., including San Francisco. I'm not joining the protesters in San Francisco, mainly because of having to get stuff done, but also because I really don't like International ANSWER. I don't understand how they got to own the modern-day antiwar movement, especially because they aren't particularly cooperative or peaceful themselves.

But there are going to be quiet candlelight vigils tonight, including one on the corner of Piedmont and 41st tonight at 6:30 in Oakland. I can get behind that (to misquote William Shatner.) 

 Honestly.

George Bush starts many of his Social Security roundtable conversations with the same awkward moment. He asks an economist to explain why the retirement system is in crisis and then interrupts him. "It's an interesting lesson here, by the way," said the President last Thursday of the Ph.D. sitting with him on stage. "He's an advisor. Now, he is the Ph.D., and I am a C-student—or was a C-student. Now, what's that tell you?"

No one is quite sure what it tells them. The expert is puzzled. The five regular Americans sitting with the President keep their curtain-rod posture and laminated smiles. Is the President insulting the professor? What is the message? Book learning just makes you an adviser, but sleep through a few tests and you too can be President?

George Bush gets a thrill from admitting that he was C-student. It may seems like an odd point to make in the middle of a battle for Social Security—especially when your plan is struggling. But that’s precisely why Bush does it. "For you C students out there, don't give up," he says.

It's a new twist on Bush's favorite message. He delights in defying expectations, and he can't resist tweaking the ears of all those who looked at his college transcript and voted him most likely to hawk siding. He also can't resist, because he's in the middle of prospecting for a bigger comeuppance: he'll show all those naysayer who claim his plan for Social Security is dead. " Someone said, 'It's a steep hill to climb, Mr. President,'" he told the audience at the University of Notre Dame a week ago. "Well, my attitude is, the steeper, the better—because when you get up top, you realize you have left a significant contribution behind."

 Yeah, and my parents' dogs frequently climb steep hills and leave behind  "significant contributions" for the pooper-scoopers.

 I found this man's blog through DailyKos today. And I'm very disturbed. OTOH, how often do you get to encounter a Constitutional Law professor who thinks we should allow torture 'cause it's fun?

Why would my humanity be diminished by participating in the killing of a monster (he had sexually abused and then murdered at least about 20 children), or even by deliberately inflicting pain on him? It seems to me that this is the reaction to a natural, understandable, and laudable human impulse to avenge (even if in a ridiculously inadequate way) the abuse and death of so many innocents. Why shouldn't one say that our humanity is diminished if this monster is allowed to live on, or even to die a painless death, when his victims and their families endured unimaginable pain?

 

I'll tell you why, dumbass. When you go into attack mode, it releases all kinds of nasty chemicals into your bloodstream and rewires your brain. Soldiers who have fought wars overseas have a great deal of trouble leaving those wars behind. Part of them is still primed for violence. It has nothing to do with how much the bad guy deserves it; it is profoundly destructive to the one committing violence.

Oh, and then there's the part about if you figure out later that you ripped the wrong person into little tiny bloody pieces, there's no "oops" and no taking it back.

I can't believe I live in the same country with this prick. He makes that Ward Churchill guy look like Albert Einstein. 

A group of religious supporters fell to their knees and began praying, led by Rob Schenck, president of the National Clergy Council.

''We're going to pray that God intervenes, to beg his foregiveness [sic],'' Schenck said. ``Holy God have mercy on our country, we have all failed.''

What is the baseball/steroid scandal doing splashed across the front page of every newspaper? Why is Mark McGuire's forehead taking up the top half of the Chronicle's front page? Why is there a tiny story squeezed in on the side about how Americans just don't really get excited about the Iraq war? Why is "Steroids BAD" the only thing that Congress can agree on? Why are we wasting so much time on this?

Why are Senate Republicans so up in arms about one brain-damaged woman? It's not like they've shown great compassion for the millions of Americans who can't pay for health care, or who have declared bankruptcy because of their hospital bills. 

Why is nobody talking about Darfur? Or the Congo? Did you know that things are even worse there? (I didn't!) Notice how the tsunami disaster just... went away? Does everyone really think that because Iraq had elections, everything's magically all better now? (They don't really, but that conversation's kind of hard to have right now, what with SteroidGate and all.)

Why is President Bush wasting his "political capital" on this Social Security crap? He could be saving lives, not just mouthing his claptrap about a "culture of life", but oh no. Wasted opportunity. A shame and a scandal.

What is wrong with us? 

The Beastie Boys did "In a World Gone Mad." Green Day did "American Idiot." Even Eminem did "Mosh." But those were all quite straightforward little numbers.

I mean, I've been listening to the Fiery Furnaces for a few weeks now, and I never noticed until I read the lyrics just now that "We Got Back the Plague" was about the Bush administration.

That easy-going man of blood
Mucking out in the McLennan county mud
If you're hoping he won't well of course then he must
Driving his truck through the McLennan county dust

I read in my book on Sunday afternoon
So it's easy to think the end's coming soon
But though sometimes the signs from heaven are vague
Early November we got back the plague

While beautiful Laura's sweeping the porch
He's teleconferencing up his operation torch
And I don't care if he bombs Babylon to hell
Except for he's building Babylon here as well

Waking up in Cedar Rapids asking for allies
Praising his leeches and looking for likewise
Down in St. Charles local talent he hawks
Smirking and sowing the winds as he talks

In Northern Virginia on their excursions
L.U.V. in with all their diversions
Horns for hounds and spurs for horses
Release the committed 72-hour task forces

Bentonville and Dallas with gasoline douse
Then back to Crawford going over to the firehouse
Behind the curtains not turning much of a trick
Sicking ourselves to make ourselves sick

That easy-going man of blood
Mucking out in the McLennan county mud
If you're hoping he won't well of course then he must
Digging us down under the McLennan county dust

Really, it's the first surrealist protest song of the Bush era. 

So exciting!

A California judge has opened the way for the nation's most populous state to follow Massachusetts in allowing same-sex couples to tie the knot, but both sides in the same-sex marriage debate predict a vigorous court fight first. San Francisco County superior court judge Richard Kramer ruled Monday that while withholding marriage licenses from gay and lesbian couples has been the status quo, it constitutes discrimination the state can no longer justify. "The state's protracted denial of equal protection cannot be justified simply because such constitutional violation has become traditional," Kramer wrote. "Simply put, same-sex marriage cannot be prohibited solely because California has always done so before."

But of course there will be a backlash. (Hey, I'm sure that the KKK saw a jump in its roster count when schools got desegregated and the voter rights act got passed.)

I can't find a biography of Judge Kramer, but apparently he's Catholic, a registered Republican, and an appointee of either Deukmajian or Wilson. So not exactly your typical wild-eyed liberal. 

It all comes down to what he said. To repeat:

"The state's protracted denial of equal protection cannot be justified simply because such constitutional violation has become traditional. Simply put, same-sex marriage cannot be prohibited solely because California has always done so before."

I'm jumping the gun here, but my friend Leila's cat Luna was being particularly cuuuuute... so I had to share.

Awwww.

This one was made for a friend who is a caterer. The photo isn't that great but the objects I made are a cleaver, a frying pan with eggs and bacon in it, and a three-pronged fork. I got the beads at— marvelous place — Long's Drugs over on Pleasant Valley. Their art aisle rocks.

Rachid Taha is an Algerian rock musician living in Paris. I'm only just now starting to get acquainted with his work (including one really excellent song: "Kelma") but I noticed this interview with him in the New York Times.

...It's a song that puts Mr. Taha in mind of those archetypal combatants, Osama bin Laden and George W. Bush.

"The irony is, they're so similar - they're twin brothers," he says. "They're both wealthy religious fundamentalists from oil-producing desert states. It's like watching an argument between two Bedouins. The only difference between them is one drives an S.U.V., the other rides a dromedary."

 I don't know if he was the first one to come up with it, but, damn. I like it (and how many other people would use the word "dromedary" in a sentence these days?)

Should Taxpayers Be Forced To Give Nearly A Half-Billion Dollars A Year To Support PBS? Columnist George Will Says No. Do You Agree?

Dear XXX,

Recently, at the request of Secretary of Education Margaret Spelling, PBS cancelled a program called Postcards From Buster.  The program, aimed at small children, featured a lesbian couple.

In addition, PBS featured an extended interview with Fenton Bailey and Randy Barbato discussing their documentary Inside Deep Throat which is about the porn movie Deep Throat.  PBS officials thought that the porn movie was so important that they just had to give it great publicity on their network using our tax dollars.

It is accepted fact that PBS is the most liberal network in America.  PBS has for years pushed the liberal agenda.  Yet PBS stations get nearly a half billion dollars a year in tax money to support their operations.  The bulk of these tax dollars go to a small number of PBS stations located in major markets in the Northeast, Midwest and West Coast.

PBS viewers are small in number and financially affluent.  Their average age is 58.  But all of us are taxed to support their programs.
 
PBS was created in the 1960's when there were a relatively small number of radio stations and only three TV networks.  Today there are hundreds of TV channels and over 12,000 radio stations.

By contrast, all other non-commercial stations receive no tax dollars and must depend on their listeners and viewers to raise the operating funds.

Columnist George Will says it is time to stop forcing taxpayers to fund PBS.  To read his article, click here.

Give us your opinion so we can share it with members of Congress.  Cast your ballot in this on-line poll.
 
Click Here To Take the Poll


Sincerely,

Don

Donald E. Wildmon, Founder and Chairman
American Family Association

P.S. Please forward this poll to family and friends.

That poll link is http://www.afa.net/petitions/supportpbs/TakeSurvey.asp .

 
So I decided to take the poll. "Push poll" doesn't do it justice...

Should taxpayers be forced to give nearly a half-billion dollars a year to support PBS? Columnist George Will says no. Do you agree?

Please fill out the form below and click the submit button.

Should taxpayers be forced to fund PBS, or should PBS raise their money like all other non-commercial stations? 

- No, taxpayers should not be forced to support PBS. PBS should raise their money like all other non-commercial stations.

- Yes, taxpayers should be forced to support PBS. PBS should not have to raise their money like the other non-commercial stations.

So I picked door number 2, of course.

Thank you for being one of the 5521 participants in this poll.

Tell-a-Friend
Click here to send an e-mail message to everyone in your address book asking them to take action on this issue. The text is provided for you in the subject line and body of the message. Please feel free to edit it as you desire. (If you use a web-based e-mail program such as Hotmail, click here instead.)Your help is greatly appreciated.

Have you visited our other sites?
NoGayMarriage.com
Sign a petition showing your support for a federal marriage amendment which protects marriage as between one man and one woman.

Yeah.

Anyway, take this unbiased, scientifically based poll yourself. I'm not going to spam all my loved ones, but hey, you can use a disposable email address and avoid getting bugged by them too much.

Or you can use your real email address and be kept up to date on what the cultural conservatives think is really important.

Because personally, I find it very interesting and significant that during everything that's been going on, from the torture allegations  to the tsunami to the crisis in Darfur, they waste their time quivering in fear that our children are going to get the idea that it's cool to be nice to gay people. Heavens forfend.

Ah well. At least these people seem to get the bigger picture... 

A couple of recent discussions with friends about dating in general and online dating in particular led me to look up the "Rules" ladies. For those who missed the 1990s, The Rules was something of a publishing phenomenon, claiming to show women the surefire way to snag a man, through such revolutionary and avant-garde methods such waiting for him to call and pretending to be busy all the time.

Well, it would appear that they've updated their message for the cyber-age. Here are the new Rules (same as the old Rules). My comments are in italics.

All rules are based on three premises: A man must initially feel a spark for a woman; the man must pursue the woman; and all men love a challenge.

Here are their "Rules For Online Dating;"

1. Don't answer men's ads or email them first. - Answering a man's ad is to pursue a man; it's no different from approaching a man at a party or a bar, calling him, and asking him out. He knows you like him and the party is over. If he does end up dating you, you'll never know if he's dating you because it's easy and convenient for him or because he's really crazy about you. But wouldn't it work the other way around? Shouldn't guys be afraid that their women are just going out with them because it's easy? Maybe I'd better check with my husband and see if he married me just because it was easy and convenient and not because he's really crazy about me. After all, I did invite him over to my house for dinner when we first starting going out...
   
   
2. Create a good screen name. Yeah, good idea. - Pick one that is not boring but not too sexy, not too ho-hum but not too marriage minded. How about Iaminterestedinmeetingsomeone Imreallycoolandwhosdesperate notmenosireebob! Do not go to the other extreme either and attract a man who is just interested in sex. So bigolehooters is right out, then. Strive for something in the middle. Be descriptive.
   Good examples:
   BlondBeauty50
   PetiteBrunette34
   If those were good examples, I'd hate to see bad ones. Sorry, those are just crying out for tons of messages from guys with names like SlickWilly123 saying things like "What's your bra size?"
   
   
3. Less is more when writing your ad. - When answering the questionaires an online Web site requires, give the impression that you just threw some answers down with a cute picture on your way to the gym or work. Yeah, convey the impression that you don't give a shit. While you're at it, leave a few typos in your post. Guys dig that. After all you are very busy. Shades of Bridget Jones. And, do not answer questions that you would not answer on a first date. Fair enough. But some people volunteer information on a first date that you'd wish they'd keep to themselves! Mistakes: Women who say they are looking for love or marriage or who are willing to relocate; women who post more than one ad on the same web site (desperate); women who post three or four photos in the same ad;eWomen who write long answers that have a Hallmark touch to them. OK, I can see not offering to move, and posting more than one ad on a site is ludicrous. I agree that posting too many pictures is probably counterproductive and that writing a cheesy message is worse. But a profile is a chance to summarize yourself briefly. If you want to get married, why disguise that fact and risk getting together with someone who doesn't believe in marriage? And by the way, people who don't believe in getting married should probably say that too.
   
   
4. Post a smiling photo. - Men don't focus on what you write as long as they like your photo. Don't worry your pretty little head about all them big words! Don't use anything too provocative.
   For the women who don't want someone to know about their new hobby: get over it and put up your picture, it's really not a big deal. Ads with pictures get more responses. This is true for men and women. On the other hand, I think women get cyberstalked more than men do!
   
   
5. Wait 24 hours to respond. O.K., hate to say but I'd probably end up doing that myself.
   
   
6. Don't answer on weekends or holidays Ditto.
   
   
7. Write light and breezy Emails. - Do not respond to a man who sends his profile or photo only. If an email comes with no photo, respond "Would love to see a photo. Thanks." That's it; nothing else. If he refuses to send a picture, there is a reason. When he does send the picture, if you like it, answer with a: "Thanks!" no "Nice abs" or "Cute Pic". Don't tell him that you read his ad. Do not respond to anything that was in the ad, such as i.e. my brother is also an accountant. What? No "Nice buttocks?!" What if they have a really cool tattoo or unusual piercing?
   
   
8. Never Email a man a second time if he neglected to respond to your Email. If you get an angry Email that says he wants more than three lines in an email from you, press DELETE and refer to rule #13. Yeah, angry emails that early on = troubled soul you don't want to deal with. But on the first point, emails do get lost sometimes, so I don't see what's wrong with writing one more time.
   
   
9. For the first three months, don't initiate an Email, only respond. if he sends you jokes and "did I tell you how cute you are?" notes, do not respond. Wait for third one and only then write back. Apart from the horrible grammar here ("wait for third one"?) if I was writing to some guy for three months a) I'd be really annoyed if he never emailed back and b) I'd wonder why the heck we didn't just meet in person.
   
   
10. Block yourself from Instant Messages. From everybody? Or just random weird guys on the Internet?
    
    
11. Don't volunteer your phone number first. Yeah, numbers should be exchanged at the same time. Or women should get the number first. Safety concerns, you know...
    
    
12. If he doesn't ask you out within four Emails, Delete/Next Yeah. Meet in person sooner than later, so as not to drag things out.
    
    
13. Screen out Mr. Wrong Well, DUH. Now how does one do THAT, Mrs. and Mrs. Einstein?
    
    
14. Don't waste your time on time-wasters More priceless pearls of wisdom!
    
    
15. Don't force the relationship from Email to phone Now that's just DUMB. You can't tell a thing about a person from emails except he is a good (or bad) writer. If they don't want to talk on the phone to you, something's not right.
    
    
16. Put safety first Again with the universe-shattering brilliance!
    
    
17. Don't ad-interrogate on dates  "So do you REALLY like Pina Colatas? And getting caught in the rain? Are you as into champagne as you said you are? YOU LIED TO ME YOU SON-OF-BITCH!"

OK so that's that. It's amazing people end up getting together at all, if you ask me. For your further edification and reading pleasure, there's this article in Wired:

Last year, Janet Lever, a sociologist at California State University at Los Angeles, conducted a survey on cybersex and romance. "(We found that) a lot of people used the dating sites who never wanted to meet anyone," she says. "Women especially had to learn how to distinguish between guys looking for flirty and dirty talk from the men who wanted to meet. And it turns out that an almost equal number of people met someone through erotic chat rooms."

I can attest to the fact that erotic chat rooms and online dating sites are not as far apart as one might expect. Hooking up with someone from an adult chat room did tend to presuppose that we would have sex, while dating someone from online personals was not as much of a sure thing.

But overall, the combination of verbal foreplay and actual sex follows similar patterns regardless of where you start...

 I guess nothing ever really changes. Humans are humans, even with technological enhancement.

Ladies and gentlemen, are you ready to rock? Get ready for the hardcore sounds of...

PUBIC ZIRCONIA!!!

(Yes, there's a story. Don't ask.) 

From ABC today:

COEUR D'ALENE, Idaho Mar 9, 2005 — A teenager has agreed to admit to three counts of disturbing the peace after anonymously sending semen-frosted brownies to a fellow student. The recipient shared the treat with two other teens, police said.

They said the 17-year-old Coeur d'Alene High School student was upset after a prank in which the other student put peanut butter in his cheese sandwich days before. He told a school resource officer that "he hated peanut butter and it made him more mad than he could explain," according to the police report.

The teen later told School Resource Officer Jeff Walther that he got the idea of putting his semen on the brownies from the movie "National Lampoon's Van Wilder," in which characters send pastries filled with dog semen to a fraternity house.

Doing them over and over and over again can be really taxing. All of us who provide abortions believe in what we're doing and think it's a good thing and a right that needs to be available. But when you're in the clinic and in that group of people doing it, it can be tough, and you can get really tired. I don't think it'll ever make me stop doing terminations, but it can move people to tears. And it's not just me -- it extends to the nurses and the people who help us in the operating room. It's not unusual that you'll have only a couple of nurses who will help you out with it. There are nurses that will say, "No, I won't help you take care of this patient." I even know people who feel they can't tell their families what they do; their families think they work on labor and delivery.

It really frustrates me that there are so few providers. I've asked my friends who are doctors if they do abortions. Some women I knew were providers in residency, but they don't provide now because their current medical practice doesn't. It's upsetting that some friends don't fight harder to provide it. But I've also had friends who've stepped up and said, "I'm going to do medical abortions; would you teach me how?"

As providers, we give all options, including adoption and carrying the child to term. I always ask a patient "Are you sure about this?" I've had people change their minds, which is totally okay. We want that. Or sometimes we'll advise them that they have more time to decide what to do. I would feel worse terminating a wanted child than not being able to terminate at all. It's very important that a woman knows what she wants to do either way. I have no problem with a woman walking out. I always find those are good days -- when a woman walks out and says, "No, I'm keeping it."

I have the utmost respect for life; I appreciate that life starts early in the womb, but also believe that I'm ending it for good reasons. Often I'm saving the woman, or I'm improving the lives of the other children in the family. I also believe that women have a life they have to consider. If a woman is working full-time, has one child already, and is barely getting by, having another child that would financially push her to go on public assistance is going to lessen the quality of her life. And it's also an issue for the child, if it would not have had a good life. Life's hard enough when you're wanted and everything's prepared for. So yes, I end life, but even when it's hard, it's for a good reason.

Read the whole thing

I ordered a computer item on March 8 in the afternoon when I realized I wasn't going to be able to get to the store in time to pick it up directly. Amazon's confirmation message to me indicated that the item would probably ship on the 13th.

I used SuperSaver shipping, which is free, but not supposed to be particularly fast.

It's now five minutes past noon on March 10, and one of my coworkers just walked in and handed it to me.

Wow.

(Yep, just another one of the many fascinating insights on my blog!) 

Today's headline in the New York Times and International Herald Tribune:

"Bush to Stay on Diplomacy Offensive"