The Interocitor

Burning it would be OK, though

Clarence Thomas' father-in-law wants to fly the US flag. His retirement community board says that he cannot. Now, if this were government telling him this, it would be clearly unconstitutional -- flying a flag is as much speech as burning one, and is constitutionally protected (except maybe in the 9th Circuit). But this is a private entitly with local governing power, agreed to by contract, so the only recourse is to make them look so stupid they either get replaced or change the rule to avoid being replaced.

Said strategy is working.

Day After: Why the US Never Ratified Kyoto

To listen to the propaganda being presented by former VP Gore and others regarding global warming and the eco-fantasy movie "The Day After Tomorrow", one would think that only George W Bush stands between the world and salvation. After all, it was President Bush who declared the Kyoto Treaty dead and refused to submit it to the Senate. Right?

Wrong. It was President Clinton who failed to submit Kyoto to the Senate -- because he knew it would be overwhelmingly rejected. As the negotiations at Kyoto were concluding, the Senate passed the following Resolution (S.RES.98, 105th Congress, 1997):

Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that--

(1) the United States should not be a signatory to any protocol to, or other agreement regarding, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change of 1992, at negotiations in Kyoto in December 1997, or thereafter, which would--

(A) mandate new commitments to limit or reduce greenhouse gas emissions for the Annex I Parties, unless the protocol or other agreement also mandates new specific scheduled commitments to limit or reduce greenhouse gas emissions for Developing Country Parties within the same compliance period, or

(B) would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States; and

(2) any such protocol or other agreement which would require the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification should be accompanied by a detailed explanation of any legislation or regulatory actions that may be required to implement the protocol or other agreement and should also be accompanied by an analysis of the detailed financial costs and other impacts on the economy of the United States which would be incurred by the implementation of the protocol or other agreement.

The vote? 95-0. One would have to assume that VP Gore knew this, being President of the Senate. Perhaps he just doesn't recall.

[Source: thomas.loc.gov]

Paris Airport Observation

A few weeks ago my business partner, a CalTech-trained engineer, passed through the section of the Charles de Gaulle international airport that collapsed Sunday. Having nothing better to do, he spent some time looking at the structure from the inside, and then turned to his wife and said "I have no idea what is holding this thing up. It looks like a really bad idea."

The problem it seems, is that concrete is particularly brittle and the squashed-oval shape, with much of the strucure punctuated by large openings, leaves very little load-bearing structure, and that little is under horrendous stress. The stress comes from both the many openings in the walls and by the fact that nealy all the gravitational tension is concentrated in the deep bend half-way up. Where steel or aluminum will bend quite a bit before failing, concrete either holds or comes apart.

Struts and guys and other supports won't fix it either -- it will just increase the stress (at the attachment points). They already had tried adding bands around it -- these failed. There is no choice but to tear it down.

When I pointed out in the article on the collapse that the architect had "no idea" why it had collapsed, he said "Obviously not." The blame should fall on the architect, the civil engineers, and probably the government, but watch them blame the construction firm for this design failure.

A nation of scofflaws?

The Daily News headline article this morning declaims the shockingly low percentage of Californians who admit to owing sales tax on out-of-state purchases. Only 1 in 1000 state income tax returns show any amount on the new line for reporting out-of-state purchases. Imagine that!. My betting is that only tax accountants and others who fear professional repercussions are the least bit concerned about the state's new demand.

The rest of us probably feel like I do -- that the state has no part in these transactions and is not entitled to a cut. If anyone has a claim to taxes earned, it's the seller's state, not the buyer's. On top of that, the impostion of sales tax, coupled with shipping costs, would doom even the strongest online or mail-order retailer. Not paying these increasingly high taxes is one of the prime motivations for many people who shop online. Of course, local retailers may well want such an outcome, for the same reason they fight to have big-box and other national chain competitors barred from their local markets.

[Not that I fail to pay all these taxes, of course.]

According the the Daily News article, the state asserts that $1.2 billion is owed each year on out-of-state sales, yet they collected only $766,000 on the new Form 540 declaration line. Seems like the people have spoken once again, but Sacramento can't hear. Rather than trying to enfoce the utterly unpopular, the Legislature should repeal the tax on interstate sales. As should every other state.

Having said that, I offer two alternatives:

1. Each state should tax, as it will, those who sell to out-of-state customers. As with retail sales taxes, a levy on the seller is difficult to evade. It would have the additional benefit of causing the state to foster online businesses. The "downside", of course, is that buyers would gravitate towards sellers in states without a sales tax, and the sellers would follow.

2. Federally abolish all state taxes on interstate sales (buyer or seller), and impose a moderate federal sales tax (say 3%), with most of the money returned to the states on a per capita basis. This has the advantages of making the taxes simple to retailers (quick, what's the sales tax rate in Macon County, GA?), allows the consumer to abide by the law without having to hire an accountant, creates a flat playing field for online retailers, (hopefully) limits the tax to a reasonable amount, and actually provides considerable revenue where today there is almost none. Downside: People would pay some tax where they now pay none. It may be considered an unapportioned direct federal tax, and be unconstitutional (see Constitution Art I Sec 2.2; Art I Sec 9.4 (9.5?) and Amendment 16).

But of course, the politicians won't do any such simple thing. Instead they will use audits to scare people, lawsuits to scare retailers, and pass lots of new laws to poke through financial records to collect their 8+%.

UPDATE: The Daily News printed my letter

They laughed when he sat down to govern

I must admit, the term "Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger" didn't pass the laugh test last year, even here. But either Gray Davis was so incompetent that Bozo the Clown would've been an improvement, or Arnold is a far better governor than anyone imagined. Possibly both. Things just keep getting better, in a state that had all but given up a year ago. From Reuters:

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A leading Wall Street ratings agency on Friday raised California's credit rating, citing an improving economy, the first such upgrade in four years and a move that promised to bring down the state's borrowing costs on $44 billion in debt.

Analysts saw the unexpected credit upgrade by Moody's Investors Service as an endorsement of the steps Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has taken to bring California back from the brink of a fiscal crisis that drove its credit ratings near junk levels and had threatened to effectively shut the state out of the bond market for new borrowing.

I'm wondering if the Democrats will be able to find someone to run against him in two years. I'm hoping for Maxine Waters.

Spyware Warrior threatened by anti-spyware vendor

Suzi, who came to xrlq's rescue in removing the scamware Spywiper, and whose blogging over at Spyware Warrior focuses on fighting spyware, has been threatened by Enigma Software Group, the purveyors of "Spy Hunter", for posts she (and commenters) have made on her site regarding their software's true purpose and business practices, notably this one.

Enigma is accused (by more than just Suzi) of providing a commerical Trojan that itself spies while deleting some other common spyware, and which is marketed through deceptive means (such as popup "warnings" designed to scare new users).

The unfortunate thing is that malware disguised as anti-malware is widespread. Suzi has a series of posts on the subject here, here, and especially here.

This oughta do it

AP reports that the FTC is now requiring sexually explicit email to be labeled for easy deletion:

Sexually explicit Internet spam must now carry a warning label. A Federal Trade Commission rule went into effect Wednesday requiring that unsolicited commercial e-mail that contains sexually oriented material include the words "SEXUALLY EXPLICIT" in the subject line.

The rule also bars graphic images from appearing in the opening body of the message. Instead, the recipient must take some action in order to see the objectionable material, either by scrolling down in the e-mail or by clicking on a provided link.

I guess this gives the FTC some fining authority should they actually catch someone ignoring the rule, but until the source of email is verifiable, this won't do a darn bit of good. Where is that "Caller ID" Mr. Gates?

Buchanan on Brown

Pat Buchanan, in an attempt to become the ur-Conservative, assails Brown v Board of Education. While some criticize Brown over its reliance on social research rather than Constitutional arguments such as Justice Harlan's dissent to Plessy v Ferguson, Buchanan appears to criticize it for overturning Plessy and segregation:

But that May day in 1954, the Warren Court crossed a historic divide. It had executed, in the name of the 14th Amendment, a coup d'etat. It had usurped power over state schools that had never been granted to federal courts either in law or the Constitution.

The 14th Amendment had been approved by the same Congress that presided over the segregated schools of D.C. Thus it was obvious to all that that amendment did not outlaw what its authors had approved. But the Warren Court, impatient at the torpor of the democratic process, had established itself as a dictatorship of nine judges, and ordered the nation to do as it demanded.

Ah, the good old days....

"Victims" demand justice. They should get it.

AP reports that some of the Abu Ghraib "families" want the accused prison guards executed if convicted:

If they actually committed such offenses, they should be executed," said Odai Ibrahim, 55, as he waited in a line with hundreds of other Iraqis to visit relatives at the prison on the western outskirts of Baghdad -- notorious as the site of executions and torture during Saddam Hussein's regime.

Hmmm. Just like those arrested for insurrection should have been shot, if found guilty by a tribunal, I guess. But no, they didn't argue that point. Matter of fact, I've failed to find one iota of press anywhere discussing who these prisoners were and why they were arrested, other than anecdotes from prisoners who all claim innocence.

I have to think that the response of Americans would be generally different if these prisoners were charged with blowing up mosques, schoolbuses and American personnel. Or, as Condi Rice described them, "the Klan." Probably why the press just leaves them as uninvestigated "victims." Don't want to run the risk of spoiling the outrage against Bush. They do find room for this, though:

The International Committee of the Red Cross, which inspects prisons in Iraq and elsewhere, has said up to 90 percent of Iraqi detainees were arrested by mistake. A 24-page Red Cross report also cited abuses, some "tantamount to torture," including brutality, forcing people to wear hoods, humiliation and threats of imminent execution.

Now this is a damning accusation, worthy of a serious investigation. Why isn't it happening? Who are these people? Victims or thugs and killers?

It matters. Justice demands it.

Judges write laws?

The LA Times print edition [link valid today only] has a front-page photo of a gay couple who were the first married under the new court-ordered same-sex marriage rules. The Times' caption reads:

Surrounded by supporters, Susan Shepherd, left, and partner Marcia Hams exult outside Cambridge City Hall shortly after midnight today after becoming the first same-sex couple to obtain a marriage license under the state’s new law. [Emphasis added]

Only problem with that is that the state's Legislature did not pass any such law. In fact, the Legislature has voted to overturn the court order by Constitutional amendment, an apparently lengthy and Byzantine process in MA if done by non-judges.

I guess that the LA Times' editors either can't tell the difference between a law and a court order, or simply long for the day when activist courts actually do write the laws.

I thought we were past this...

In an editorial today denouncing the expiration of the semi-auto gun ban, the LA Times leads with

Just under four months from today, Americans will be able to walk out of a gun store with an AK-47 rifle, an Uzi or other weapon of mass murder under their arm.

Now, I suppose they mean semi-automatic versions of these weapons, not their normal machine-gun versions. But reading this, especially the term "weapon of mass murder", one would think that machine guns are once again to be available for sale -- ending the 70-year-old Roosevelt-era ban.

Probably just an oversight by the Time's editors -- or just active ignorance -- and not an intentional half-truth intended to mislead.

Great Minds Think Alike

GB Trudeau and Universal Press Syndicate seem to think that a Sunday strip showing a severed head would normally be tasteful, but, after al-Qaeda thought much the same thing, Trudeau's publishers are now having second thoughts. Considering that Doonesbury has been nothing but hateful bile for the last few years, why is anyone surprised?

Link via Dean's World

Museum of Treason

We need a Museum of Treason. Just hink of all the things that we could put in it: the sorry history of Lord Haw-Haw, Jane Fonda in Hanoi, the Wayback archive of Indymedia, and of course, most of Ted Rall's recent rants. I hear that Ted's selling his "comic" that trashes Pat Tillman. That would be a good first entry, don't ya think? I think his stuff would fit right between Tokyo Rose and Alger Hiss.

MT 3.0 License Scheme Under Review

From an email by Six Apart:

Based on feedback we've received, we've also made some changes changes to the licenses that will be posted later tonight.

Thank you for being patient with us, and for the goodwill you've shown us for the past two and a half years. We appreciate your help and your contributions to our new version of Movable Type.

MT 3.0 Costs Money? Tough.

I've seen, here and there, numerous complaints about MoveableType 3.0 not being free anymore. I have no sympathy. None.

To begin with MT 2.x wasn't actually free -- a donation was requested. Which I happily sent along, as it was worth it and software authors, like other human beings, deserve to get paid for their work. They are not slaves. Further, they are still offering a free limited edition of MT 3.0 for single authors to run up to 3 blogs. Seems pretty decent actually -- they aren't even asking for a donation anymore, so in that respect it's cheaper than before. Just limited.

IMHO, anyone who is running a group blog, or is running more than 3 blogs, can durn well pony up $70 for the software or go hungry. Or go find another vendor with a better price. This sounds to me like the self-centered whining of the same folks who think that music and video artists ought to provide free stuff, too, and copy steal it when it's not given to them at a "reasonable price" (i.e. free).

That having been said, I'll stick with my (paid for) copy of MT2.66 for a while -- even though I'd qualify for the (free) MT3.0 LE version. Not only do I not want to change anything I don't have to, but the new features in MT3 aren't enough to worry about. Now, if they had spellcheck, validation of poster's asserted domains, and a far less tedious HTML editor, I'd be interested. Then again if anyone else has such, I'd also be interested, so long as I didn't have to rearrange the world to use it.

God, but I hate whining by people who ought to know better.
UPDATE: MT's original announcement is here, along with over 500 trackbacks.

Manned X-Prize Test Flight

Space.com is reporting that Burt Rutan's Scaled Composites has flown a sucessful powered flight of SpaceShipOne, reaching an altitude of 41 miles with all systems operational.

With pilot Mike Melvill at the controls -- following release from the White Knight turbojet-powered launch aircraft high above the Mojave, California desert -- SpaceShipOne punched through the sky today boosted by a hybrid propellant rocket motor.

Scaled Composites of Mojave is the builder of SpaceShipOne, an effort led by aviation innovator, Burt Rutan. The financial backer of the project is Microsoft mogul, Paul Allen.

In a post-flight statement from the company, the SpaceShipOne team reported that their space plane flew to 212,000 feet altitude, almost 41 miles. NASA awards astronaut status to anyone who flies above 50 miles in altitude.

According to the Scaled Composites website, this is their 3rd powered flight. Looks like the next 2 flights might be the real deal.

Thanks to Frank Martin for the pointer.

How many jobs lost, Mr Kerry?

John Kerry likes to rail about all the jobs lost under Bush, and asserts that only He can create the new jobs Americans need. Unfortunately for Kerry, the record shows that 1.1 million jobs have been added in the US over the past year and new jobless claims have long since peaked. Charts courtesy of the Congressional Joint Economic Committee.

We Want Names!!

Glenn quotes from a Spectator piece (reg req'd) by the Daily Telegraph's correspondent Toby Harnden:

The other day, while taking a break by the Al-Hamra Hotel pool, fringed with the usual cast of tattooed defence contractors, I was accosted by an American magazine journalist of serious accomplishment and impeccable liberal credentials....

But then she came to the point. Not only had she ‘known’ the Iraq war would fail but she considered it essential that it did so because this would ensure that the ‘evil’ George W. Bush would no longer be running her country. Her editors back on the East Coast were giggling, she said, over what a disaster Iraq had turned out to be. ‘Lots of us talk about how awful it would be if this worked out.’ Startled by her candour, I asked whether thousands more dead Iraqis would be a good thing.

She nodded and mumbled something about Bush needing to go....

There's been several other stories of this type regarding Iraq, but never are the crooked journalists exposed. Instead we hear blather by famous editors how there is no bias (or how it's all on the Right) -- which is hard to refute as the profession seems intent on covering for itself. While I appreciate Mr. Harnden's revelation, it would be much more useful if the name of the reporter and her magazine were exposed. Doing that would be, well, journalism.

One day, such hidden bias by journalists will be as unacceptable as overt racism is today, but as it stands journalists have the same attitude towards their crooked fellows as do cops. Ignore it, cover it up, but never, ever speak ill of a fellow. No wonder Jason Blair lasted so long.

Give us the names!!!

UPDATE: Truth Laid Bear reports that the unnamed reporter sounds like this one, but the details seem different (magazine vs NPR). Oh, and thanks Glenn for the link.

I'm Waiting....

Considering the forests being felled to print all the news stories about the mistreatment of prisoners in Iraq, perhaps some enterprising reporter could investigate just who these "victims" were.

Possiblity 1: These were oridnary Iraqis swept up by the US in group arrests merely on suspicion of association with insurgents, or ordinary criminals serving time for petty offenses. For people like this to be subjected to the humiliations being displayed would, of course, be unforgivable, and heads should roll, including Rumsfeld's.

Possibility 2: These were persons captured duing firefights with US soldiers, people found in possession of bombs, Ba'athist torturers, al Qaeda terrorists and others who should have been tried by martial law tribunal then shot. Were this the case then my only objection is that they are still breathing and the unforgivable part is that anyone considers them victims.

So, which is it? I'm waiting. But I don't think I'll hold my breath.

58% CA tax hike for 2004

Wondering when that California Disability (SDI) Tax line will disappear from your pay stub? As recently as March 2000 the rate was $231 per year (0.5% on $46,327 max). Then reform started. Reform, in California, usually means I pay more. Well, here's what's been happening the last few years:

The State Disability Insurance (SDI) Contribution Rate for 2001, 2002, and 2003 is 0.9% (.009). The SDI taxable wage limit is $46,327 per employee for calendar years 2001 and 2002, $56,916 for 2003.

Which makes the 2001-2003 maximums respectively $417.94, $417.94 & $512.24 -- more than doubling the tax from 2000 to 2003 on the middle class. Even minimum-wage workers saw their percentage rate climb from 0.5% to 0.9% during this period. But wait...

The State Disability Insurance (SDI) withholding rate for 2004 has been announced as 1.18%, which includes 0.08% for Paid Family Leave. The SDI taxable wage limit is $68,829 per employee for calendar year 2004. The maximum to withhold is $812.18.

So, in the last year, while the car tax was going down, this payroll tax on the middle class was going up 22% in 2003 and then 58% in 2004. Even a minimum-wage worker with much less than the maximum income saw a 31% jump in this tax compared to last year.

A PDF with all the details is here.

Newest Gehry Eyesore

Thank God it's in Massachusetts. Did I mention I don't much care for Gehry's stuff? One happy thought: Noam Chomsky has to work there, but then again he probably likes it.

Rocket Summer

Apparently 26 other teams are going to compete against Rutan for the X-Prize this summer. I hope that all of them can launch sucessfully, and that NASA's days of impeding space travel are finally numbered.

California NOT a Lock for Kerry

According to a May 5-6th SurveyUSA poll, Kerry leads Bush by only one point (46-45) in California. Statistical tie, as they say. And Arnold hasn't been free to campaign for him yet!

But here's the real kicker

OF BUSH VOTERS, 80% SAY THEY ARE VOTING 'FOR' BUSH. OF KERRY VOTERS, JUST 35% SAY THEY ARE VOTING 'FOR' KERRY. 61% OF KERRY VOTERS SAY THEY ARE VOTING 'AGAINST' BUSH.

So, of the 46% who are voting for Kerry, only 35% actually want him as President. That's about 16% of the total survey who want Kerry. Hillary's phone must be ringing all the time about now. Same with John Edwards. I bet you even Jesse Jackson could get better support numbers.

1996: Dole Because It's My Turn!
2004: Kerry Because I'm Not Bush!

Joschka Fischer Visits US May 10-12

David's Medienkritik reports that German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer is coming to visit Bush over the next few days. Considering the open hostility between Fischer's Green Party and Bush (they openly call for German Greens to work for Bush's defeat) and their opposition to the overthow of Saddam, I wonder if he's going to get the public greeting he so richly deserves.

Why does Bush keep inviting these jerks over so that they can diss him at joint press conferences?