Good Tuesday morning, where eggs and smoke bombs are sold separately, at the entrance to the Ukraine Parliament.
Not sure what is wilder, that news, or Hugh Hefner chipping in $900,000 to help buy the land the "Hollywood" sign is on, in order to prevent it from being taken down. Does he get the bunny logo in places of the "l"?
Many things happened yesterday, with many more to happen today, so what is the top headline in the New York Times? This really is awesome:
Yes, apparently PowerPoint, the wildly popular Microsoft presentation program, is the bane of the US military. Thy name is no longer "woman," but "PowerPoint." Seems a little ridiculous, right? According to the story, the military uses PowerPoint just about ever chance it gets. Said one general: "It's dangerous because it can create the illusion of understanding and the illusion of control. Some problems in the world are not bullet-izable."
The irony of that statement, in a war zone no less, is not lost on me.
This apparently goes back to a slide shown in a presentation in Kabul last summer, which was meant to portray the complexity of American military strategy. The article (which is headlined by the actual slide) says it, "looked more like a bowl of spaghetti." General Stanley A. McChrystal quipped, "when we understand that slide, we'll have won the war."
At which point Bill Gates will assume the throne.
--
- The daily well-known news update obviously comes from the financial reform bill, which hit the expected hurdle in the Senate yesterday. The body held a cloture vote yesterday, which is technically a vote to start debate, but amounts to voting to vote. Every present Republican voted against it, joined by Nebraska's own Ben Nelson.
In an interesting piece of procedural action, and something I understand from a class I took at UW, Majority Leader Harry Reid switched his vote at the last minute, to vote against the measure. Why? If you are on the winning side of a vote, whether it be yes or no, you can call for a repeat vote on the measure, something expected as soon as today. Had he voted yes, the issue would technically have been settled. I stress, technically. As one congressman said recently, "there ain't no rules around here. We just make 'em up as we go along."
- There is an interesting look at South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham in today's Times. Maybe the best quote came from Senator Joe Lieberman, in response to Graham being called a "Mini-John McCain." "He's a maxi-Lindsey. He's not a mini anybody."
The Senator is obviously working with Lieberman, or was, as well as John Kerry, on energy legislation. More on that later.
- Or right now. Graham met with his two counterparts last night, in an effort to continue pushing the stalled energy legislation forward. Kerry continues to be positive, in public at least, while Graham has made his stance pretty clear: scrap immigration or I'm outta here.
I explained yesterday just why immigration has even come up. It isn't going anywhere. But Graham, who made it clear this was about a promise made to him, not his ability to do more than one thing at a time, may have a point. Energy may be the toughest bill any congress passes. Tougher than health care, immigration, even Social Security. There are just too many competing interests. The fact that an oil rig can explode in the Gulf, spilling 42,000 gallons of oil a day into the ocean and killing 11 people (and the fact I said it in that order), just weeks after a coal mine exploded, killing 29 (yet an executive at Massey is quoted today as saying the air in the mine was normal just 10 minutes before the explosion) and not cause an immediate outcry for energy reform, should be enough to get this point across. If not, realize that only 6,000 people are employed by the coal industry, yet the number one issue with the legislation is the loss of coal jobs.
I came up with an idea yesterday: let's re-employ these people. I can't wait for my Republican friend's responses here, but hear me out. The fact is that these 6,000 jobs are going to go the way of the more than 25,000 that came before them. The coal industry employs 1/5th of the workforce it did 70 years ago, despite producing the exact same amount of coal. Mechanization, as I keep saying, has changed the industry, for the better, unless you're a worker.
So let's move them. It's only 6,000 people. We will take our investments in clean energy, train these workers to work at wind farms or manufacturers, and help them stay just as financially stable as they are right now, if not better. If they need to move to do it, fine, we'll move them. It's 6,000 people. We aren't talking about moving Boeing here. The US government once made a living displacing populations larger than that. This time we'll just pay for it. Think we won't get a return? Oh yes we will. We'll have qualified, trained workers, building wind turbines and installing a smart grid. They will be in cleaner, healthy conditions, meaning less liability for government health care programs and, unfortunately at this point, mine regulation. We will do it phases, sure. But it needs to be done. And it should start with Massey workers.
If you're actually interested in that, I'll flush it out more in another post. Let me know.
Anyway, check out the Graham piece. He's an interesting guy, but by far my favorite Republican in congress. Yes, more than nuclear-charged Lamar Alexander. Here's a quote from Graham: "I'm in the mid- to high 60s [polling], and my negatives are in the 20s," he said. "Now, what I've done is, I used to be in the 80s. But what's the use of being here if you can't move the ball forward."
Think that's rhetoric? He voted for Justice Sonia Sotomeyor, has been censured three times in his own state, has a legislator (I think) in his home state calling for him to "come out," and was once lumped in with President Obama in a treason charge by a constituent. But there he is, humming along with John Kerry, one of the most liberal members of congress, trying to "move the ball forward."
--
- You have absolutely no reason to care about this whatsoever, but I do. As I was searching for the orgin of the quote the Times parodied in the headline above (it was Hamlet I think, but I first heard it spoken by Sam Seaborn in West Wing), I came across this 2001 profile of Aaron Sorkin, the creator of my favorite television show, written right after he rewrote season three to coincide with September 11.
- When it comes to business, gender aside, Maria Cantwell is not someone I would want as an enemy, period. When you can finance your own campaign against an entrenched Republican and unseat him, you've done some things right in your life financially. Just sayin'.
- In the Fix morning notes there is a look at a new poll on just how uninterested youth are in the upcoming election. In a shocking development, 18-29 year olds really don't care. Sarcasm aside, the Fix points out that the actual percentage of young voters hasn't actually changed much, only the party they voted for did. Obama won the 18-29 vote 2-1.
- Finally, this is the University of Oregon. Painful.
Comments
0 Response to 'Temptation, I Have Named Thee...PowerPoint?'
Post a Comment