Strawberry Fields, Crocodile Dundee and the Rockettes

We're in NYC for a few days of vacation. For the past few days we've been up & down 5th Avenue a few times and spent more time in stores than I generally care to do. But my daughter likes to shop.

I got up early and went over to Rockefeller Center to watch the production of the Today Show with all the groupies and hangers-on and star-struck. I saw all the people on the show and shook some guy's hand and spoke with a couple of the "stars." I have no idea who they are. I thought it was intriguing to see that I was in the background on a couple of the shots. My wife & daughter saw me on TV back at the hotel. However, what was really interesting to me was watching how they put the show together - the technical roles, the directing & management, the organization, the professionalism, and the really really great gear - cameras, lighting, cabling, monitors, sound gear, etc. were all top of the line stuff and they had extra stuff waiting just in case something broke. Great stuff.

After that we grabbed a quick bite at a pastry shop and then went up to Central Park to look at The Dakota (where John Lennon lived and died) and to see Strawberry Fields in Central Park where there is a tile mosaic monument with the word "Imagine" in the middle. We walked through quite a bit of the park and took photos of Bethesda Fountain and a guy playing the sax and ice skaters and a bridge and I don't know what else.....

Later we went to see the Rockettes Christmas Spectacular at Radio City Music Hall. The show was pretty good. The Rockettes can dance and there were two organists that were really good. They did the best living nativity scene that I've ever seen. I was sitting there with 3,000 people in the dark and it really provoked an emotional response from me. I don't know about the other 3,000 folks.

And we went to Macy's this evening. There must have been 300,000 people in that store. It is big, but my goodness, it was crowded.

Two thoughts have recurred since we've been here. First, I wonder just what the massive orgy of shopping and partying and lights and more have to do with the birth of a baby in a faraway village in a faraway time. The second thought came to me today. In one of the Crocodile Dundee movies, Crocodile Dundee made a comment that New York must be the friendliest place in the world - why else would so many people want to live so close to each other.

I'm not sure that humans make much sense. I'm pretty sure that all these people are not here because they want to be friends and I'm also not certain that all of this hullabaloo really has much connection with the birth of a poverty-stricken baby in Bethlehem. But it is kind of fun and interesting to watch and experience NYC during this season.

What's Gonna Happen in Iraq?

I've read a few books and I watch the talking heads on the idiot box (TV) and I have a store of thoughts of my own. So with this limited information, what do I think is going to happen in Iraq?

The simple answer to that question is chaos.

Will we send in more troops? Maybe, but it might take another 300,000 soldiers to truly shut down lawlessness and sectarian fighting. (Geez - sounds like Johnson and Nixon escalating the Vietnam war to finally achieve "victory.") There are some real challenges for a plan of that magnitude. First, an occupying force of that magnitude requres reinstating the draft. It also requires a massive increase in defense spending. It probably means that we have to walk away from other obligations around the world - Asia, Europe, you pick. And even with a huge increase in the occupying force there is a strong chance that shortly after we leave (in 10 or 20 years) the chaos will return. And while we are deployed in this fashion we will be loathed by the rest of the Islamic world.

Should Iraq be split into pieces? If so, I'm not sure there is really a homeland for the Sunnis. And without a Sunni homeland, the Saudis will be very unhappy. An unhappy Saudi royal family is a big problem. The question assumes some sort of right or wrong choice and I'm not sure it's going to matter. It looks to me like Iraq may split into pieces regardless how the question is answered.

What should we do? My first thought is that we probably ought to apologize to Israel, the Iraqi people and the rest of the world for starting down this path without having a clue as to what we were doing and for making such massive and stupid decisions that contributed to this mess. We probably ought to apologize to the United Nations for standing in front of them and telling them we were going to disarm a mad man, but then having no plan for the aftermath. After that, I think we ought to plan a 6 to 10 month exit for our military forces. And we ought to put our diplomatic corps to work trying to find political solutions to the numerous problems that will surely follow our withdrawal.

What will happen in Iraq? Most likely chaos. The real question is what should happen after the chaos. It's time to start concentrating on what a partitioned Iraq will look like. If we don't, we will effectively cede all influence to Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, sub-national groups (ala Hezbollah and Hamas in Lebanon) and pan-national groups (think Al Qaeda).

We will soon have a worse and more intractable problem than that of the Palestinians.

The more academic question is what might have happened?

It still seems to me that if the American people had been:

1) told the truth from the start that we wanted to export democracy, that such an effort would require time, treasure, and some of our youth;
2) led by someone that would unite the country behind a strong common vision - a person that could have convinced the American people of wisdom and need for investing ourselves in this effort; and
3) represented in key offices in Washington and Iraq by men and women that were not blinded by pure inbred ideology;

there might have been a chance for success in Iraq. Unfortunately, none of those things are true. And what is worse large-scale national efforts rarely rise above their initial strategic vision. Our initial vision and strategy was not well explained and allowed many different visions to grow up around the effort - get Sadam, get WMD, spread democracy, get the oil, threaten Iran, respond to Islamic terrorism, respond to 911, establish the principles of unilateralism and preemption. When you build a vision the same way you build an election year political coalition, you run a very big chance of having that vision fall apart if major elements of the vision prove false or begin to conflict with one another. For that reason, visions need to be much better understood and much more coherent.

Christmas Time is Drawing Near

Well...... I've been a bit swamped the past week or so.

Last week I was immersed in Waco Christmas Celebration (WCC). WCC is an annual Christmas pageant produced by our church, Columbus Avenue Baptist Church. This year I headed up stage crew for stage left. It's a lot of work, but I think it is a lot of fun. Seeing the kids in their costumes and working in a small group within a larger context brings some camaraderie, sense of purpose, and annual tradition (or ritual) to life. That's all good.

I haven't had as much time to read this past week, but I have read little snippets of the Carter book and little bits of the Brock book that I've been working on for awhile. I'll make some more progress in the next week.

Next week our family is going to New York for a Christmas-time vacation. We've never done anything like this at this time of year so we're looking forward to it. I'm sure we'll do all the "touristy" things - tours, pictures, shows, shopping, etc. I sent a note to Comedy Central to see if we could sit in while they produced the Daily Show, but we've never heard back from them. That's a little disappointing. Still the trip ought to be fun.

Well, we're off to dinner tonight and then maybe I'll help get the Christmas cards finished up. If I procrastinate on that long enough, my wife will get them all done.....

If I don't get back to the blog in the next week or so because of vacation and whatnot, everyone have a Merry Christmas!

The State of the World Today

So, it looks like Gates will be confirmed as the new SecDef incredibly fast. I've been watching the talking heads discuss and report on the confirmation hearings and such. They drag out the Iran contra thing every so often. They talk about all kinds of stuff about him. I guess they have to fill the time. In reality, why is this guy going to get confirmed so fast? He is not Don Rumsfeld. It's that simple. Congress would confirm Robert McNamara, Jack in the Box, or Snow White at this point.

Job Posting - Secretary of Defense Qualifications - Not Don Rumsfeld and not named Bush (Everyone else welcome.)

Carter's book that I mentioned earlier is pretty interesting so far. Lots of good background on the Palestinian v Israeli situation and Carter always seems to say what he has to say in a pretty straightforward way. Good stuff. I know the country hated him when he was president, but we sure could use someone like Carter right now.... smart, dedicated to peace, a mediator, willing to talk to anyone in order to learn and find common ground, willing to say what he thinks, not running for anything.

I'm pretty sick of hearing about Russian spies and assassins and whatever.... The Tsars, Romanovs, Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, and on and on now to the current regime..... Russias leaders have tended to be ruthless and despotic and their secret police don't really change much from one era to another. It's bad stuff, but none of it is all that surprising. I don't know the etymology of sanguinary, but it definitely won't be a surprise if it is Russian.

The US budget deficit right now is a disgrace. If we were really paying to fight a global war on terror or cure poverty or really fight aids or really trying to find an alternative fuel source, it might be understandable. Or if we even fully funded the No Child Left Behind initiatieves, that might be more understandable. Unfortunately, we seem to be just puttering around with that stuff and dumping tons of money into military and security in Iraq, a gigantic prescription drug giveaway program that is nothing but corporate welfare, and massive growth in other medical costs along with gigantic amounts of pork that are used to get anything passed. I don't know why we don't use the traditional terms for this pork - baksheesh, fragrant grease, or bribery?

And former President George H W Bush broke down and cried in a speech about his son (the governor) yesterday. You're kidding me. This is news? Who cares? And the attempts to tie this to Baker trying to help out the son (the president) or some kind of description of how similar or different the father is from the sons or the sons from one another. Bush fatigue resulting in Bush the senior crying. Geez. Bad reality TV this stuff.... time to change the channel.

Nancy Grace? Worthless. About 15 seconds is all I can take.

I've been watching TV for a lot of the last 48 hours. I've been home nursing allergies. And wow, this stuff is bad. I did see an old movie about Mark Twain/Samuel Clemens. That was pretty good. But most of the rest of it... and the news may be the worst - not slanted - not prejudiced - just a case of never has so much been spent to say so much and accomplish so little. There are bits and pieces of worthwhile reporting, but Comedy Central may have the best stuff out there. The "mainstream" news is hard to take seriously when you see some of this junk on TV. I need to go back to reading books again.

Formal Announcement - The List of non-Candidates Continues to Swell

In keeping with the times and the precendent set by various individuals around the country, I want to take this moment to make an official statement.

In recent weeks there has not been any speculation regarding my political intentions and having heard absolutely no rumors or receiving any inquiries; and having not consulted with family, friends and close advisors; and having not prayed about it; I will not be seeking the 2008 nomination of any party as a candidate for the office of President of the United States. Further, in keeping with the tradition of a Texan who came before me, I will not accept any party's nomination as a candidate for the office of President of the United States for the 2008 general election. Finally, I have no intention of running as a third-party or independent candidate and will not be forming or authorizing any exploratory committees at this time.

If you have any questions regarding this decision or announcement, please feel free to leave a comment below. If you are one of the millions that have refrained from participating in rumors or speculation, I want to say thank you.

Faith and Belief

A few days ago I made the following comment in Meanderings on Faith, Reason, and Loneliness, "And, I’m not so certain about this, but I’m not sure that faith and belief are really the same thing." I did think about this a little bit more and concluded that faith & belief really aren't the same thing. At least not for me.

For me, faith is belief in things unseen or unproven. There are many things that I can see and observe and recognize as reality. And I can believe in those things. I can believe in the building in which I am sitting and typing right now. And I can believe in the tree outside the window. (I'm sure there are those that may argue that in some philosophical sense none of this can be proven to be real, but for now, I'm going to assume that my senses - sight, touch, smell, hearing, etc. are giving me a true representation of reality.) So, I can believe in the building. It exists.

I can perhaps have faith that the building won't fall down any time soon, but that is based on the fact that the building has not fallen down and it still looks pretty strong. That is also based on observations and apparent facts. I would probably put this in the category of belief rather than faith.

However, the faith that I am considering is not based as strongly on observable reality. It is some mix of knowing and perhaps feeling and perhaps even an act of the will to choose to believe in something when the preponderance of observable facts don't necessarily support the belief. Also, I'm not thinking of a choice to believe the unbelievable either. If I see a building fall down, but choose to believe that it is still standing, then that may just be foolhardy wishful thinking. The faith of which I am thinking is stuff that falls in between strong proofs one way or another. There are many things that are not knowable with certainty. And a choice to believe in one of those "things" is what I am describing as faith.

So, given all those caveats, that is what I mean by faith and belief not being exactly the same thing.

Also, as long as I'm keeping score.... I did finish the Harris Book, Letter to a Christian Nation. I also managed to finish up The Greatest Story Ever Sold. Now I can give myself permission to start something else. It will probably be Jimmy Carter's new book, Palestine Peace Not Apartheid.

Finished One

Okay, I finished the Miller book. Pretty interesting. I think his style is intriguing and he certainly brings a different viewpoint to Christian writing. While I find him to be interesting and think that he's something of an intellectual, there seems to be a lack of depth to the work. Miller says, "I think loving Jesus is something you feel."

In the same chapter he describes Jesus as someone that would interact with Miller around a campfire,

"He would ask me to sit down, and He would ask me my story. He would take the time to listen to my ramblings or my anger until I could calm down, and then He would look me in the eye, and He would speak to me; He would tell me the truth, and I would sense in His voice and the lines on His face that he liked me. He would rebuke me, too, and he would tell me that I have prejudices against very religious people and that I need to deal with that; He would tell me that there are poor people in the world and I need to feed them and that somehow this will make me more happy. I think He would tell me what my gifts are and why I have them, and He would give me ideas on how to use them. I think He would explain to me why my father left, and He would point out very clearly all the ways God has taken care of me through the years, all the stuff God protected me from."

When I read this passage I decided that Miller was creating a Jesus that he wanted to exist. I've ended up rather suspect of Mr. Miller. Just a few pages before, Miller admits that when he read through the 4 Gospels, Jesus left him confused.

"And I read through Matthew and Mark, then Luke and John. I read those books in a week or so, and Jesus was very confusing, and I didn't know if I liked Him very much, and I was certainly tired of Him by the second day."

He does go on to say that he ends up loving Jesus in the process, but I still suspect that Mr. Miller may be inventing a Jesus that he can understand and to whom he can relate. I even started to suspect that Mr. Miller was actually trying to manipulate me in some fashion. However, I'm not certain he's so much trying to manipulate me as he is working out his own faith through his writing. In the end, it is intriguing watching him work it out, but it isn't necessarily much of a guide for others. I do find some of his thoughts on the human condition to be very interesting and enlightening, but his understanding of Jesus seems to be wishful thinking. I'm not sure I could offer a better description of an evening with Jesus, but then again, I'm not certain that I would want to do so.

Meanderings on Faith, Reason, and Loneliness

I’m still working on a couple of the books from my previous list, but I started on a couple of others as well.

Letter to a Christian Nation by Sam Harris is a letter from an atheist to all Christians (especially conservative or fundamentalist Christians). The book begins, “Thousands of people have written to tell me that I am wrong not to believe in God. The most hostile of these communications have come from Christians. This is ironic, as Christians generally imagine that no faith imparts the virtues of love and forgiveness more effectively than their own. The truth is that many who claim to be transformed by Christ’s love are deeply, even murderously, intolerant of criticism. While we may want to ascribe this to human nature, it is clear that such hatred draws considerable support from the Bible. How do I know this? The most disturbed of my correspondents always cite chapter and verse.” Personally, I think Christians everywhere ought to read this work. It points out many weaknesses of Christianity as it is practiced and lived today.

I stopped halfway through that little book to start Blue Like Jazz: Nonreligious Thoughts on Christian Spirituality by Donald Miller. It is a collection of essays by a Christian author, but he is not your standard late 20th early 21st century Christian writer.

The two books being read together create an interesting mix and confluence of thoughts. I’m not very certain that I have fully processed even the parts of the books that I’ve finished so far. However, there are a couple of things that seem to recur.

First, I have struggled with a sense of borderline depression for a number of years. I think that at least a part of that is loneliness. “Tony the Beat Poet says the words alone, lonely, and loneliness are three of the most powerful words in the English language. I agree with Tony. These words say that we are human; they are like the words hunger and thirst. But they are not words about the body, they are words about the soul.” Miller’s words seem true to me.

Second, we have words and very large concepts built around the terms God, Man, reason, science, faith, religion, and belief. It seems to me that we have equated science and reason. And we have equated God and religion. And we have equated faith and belief. And it seems to me that we have decided that Man is trying to come to terms with God/religion vs. science/reason vs. faith/belief. It seems to me that some want to present us with choices – choose one as true and the others as false – or choose one as preeminent and the others as lesser.

Well it seems to me that God & religion aren’t necessarily the same thing at all. And it seems to me that science and reason are not the same things either. And, I’m not so certain about this, but I’m not sure that faith and belief are really the same thing. God is, in my opinion, beyond understanding. Religion is one way that some people try to go about understanding God. And it turns out that Religion at times also tries to be a lot of other things. Religion is bound up in man. It is full of culture, man’s culture. And, it seems to me, that because religion is oriented at helping to understand something as unknowable as God, it is also used to explain all kinds of things that are currently unknown. I suspect that this is where the religion vs. science problem starts. Once science helps us understand a previously unknown aspect of the universe it may run afoul of religion’s previously incomplete or inaccurate description.

And just because science relies upon reason to arrive at hypotheses and conclusions, doesn’t really mean that there is not reason outside of science. Science didn’t invent reason and doesn’t own the monopoly today. It seems that a lot of folks want me to choose between religion and science. The religion argument tends to be trust God and your faith and trust what the religious traditions have taught you. And the science argument tends to be trust reason. And my answer to both is, okay. I agree. But I don’t really see or sense the need to choose definitively and for all times. Sorry folks, I’m going to choose issue by issue, and item by item. I’m going to flip-flop.

• Is the universe infinite? I don’t really know, but science is probably better equipped to answer/describe this.
• Is there a God? Yes. And I also think that science helps us learn more about the universe around us which provides us with some clues about God, but that isn’t the same as proving one way or another that God exists.
• Can I prove that God exists? Nope. I’ve got some evidence that is pretty convincing to me, but I doubt that it would convince many skeptics.
• Is Christ the only way to God? I don't know for certain.
• Have a lot of bad things been done in the name of religion? yes
• Does that mean religion is a great evil? Bad things have been done in the name of science. Bad things have been done in the name of religion. Men have done bad things. I don't think getting rid of any of those is the right approach.
• Can we discover a great deal about our universe by assuming that everything is rationale and explainable through science? Yes.
• Is there such a thing as evolution? Yes.
• Is it possible that God guided, programmed or otherwise devised humans through the process of evolution? Sure. Who am I to say what God can or cannot do?
• Is there something wrong with abortion? Probably.
• Can we firmly establish when life begins? Not in my opinion.
• Should we outlaw abortions? Probably not.

And on and on and on…….

And a third thought that is swimming around in my head after reading all of this…. Is happiness really the objective? It seems to me that Harris, the secularist, ultimately judges the effectiveness of religion by claiming that lots of unhappiness stems from it. Yes, Harris does speak of moral or ethical truths and rights and wrongs that can be perceived without religious instruction. However, it seems to me that his moral compass is largely guided by what produces happiness and unhappiness. And it seems to me that many Christian writers discuss feelings to such an extent that it scares me. Feelings? What are they and do we even mean the same thing when we describe feelings of love or happiness or whatever? Is happiness really what it is all about? I’m not opposed to happiness, but I’m not convinced that it is the ultimate guide. There are other choices – species survival for example.

A final thought - I've got to finish some of these books. Next time I post, I'll have finished at least one of them and hopefully two.

Recapping the Pre-election Day Polls

A couple of things today, but I only have time to get to one issue. More later, when I have a minute.

I kept on working with my two models for predicting the results in the House of Representatives. They looked like this on the days leading up to the election.

Election Day
Model #1
Democrats - 224
Republicans - 205
Tossups - 6

Model #2
Democrats - 238
Republicans - 194
Tossups - 3

Day Before Election Day
Model # 1
Democrats - 220
Republicans - 208
Tossups - 7

Model #2
Democrats - 230
Republicans 191
Tossups - 14

For the 3 days prior to this, see my previous post - The Election is Upon Us

So, by the time we got to election day, my models showed Democrats ending up between 224 and 238. If we assume that these are a perfect bracket, then I would have projected 231 Democrats, 200 Republicans, and 4 too close to call.

And as of today, it looks to me like the House is going to end up 232 Democrats and 203 Republicans. So, the basic message is, that the polls leading up to the election were, on whole, a pretty good predictor of the overall results. It's easy to pick apart an individual poll, but in total they were pretty good.

The Election is Upon Us

I've found myself more interested in this campaign season than any in a long time. I find the avalanche of public opinion polls and TV talk shows and gasping-breath news reports and cynical pseudo-news and unbelievable television ads to be overwhelming and massively entertaining.

I was just looking at the latest news articles about late movement in public opinion polls.
Bloomberg
ABC News
Washington Post – ABC News Poll

Some of the questions that are included in the polling are pretty interesting and they got me to thinking.

I went in and voted early this past week. When I went in to vote, I intended to cast votes in only a couple of races - governor, US representative, a local bond referendum, and a few others. Those are the only ones where I really know the candidates and issues and have a strong opinion.

A funny thing happened to me in the voting booth and that relates to my interest in the poll results. If you had asked me several of those poll questions before I stepped foot in the voting booth and then asked me after I stepped out, I would have given different answers.

When I first stepped in that booth I scrolled to the contests in which I planned to vote and skipped the others. Then I scrolled through again, just to make sure I didn't miss anything and didn't make any inadvertent mistakes. As I was scrolling along it really struck me that I had an opportunity and in fact a responsibility to make a choice and send a message. And that is what I decided to do. I wonder how many others will find that they feel stronger about issues when confronted with the reality of a ballot in front of them?

So, if I were going to answer some of these interesting poll questions:

1) What is the most important issue facing the country today? Iraq
2) Is your vote in the current elections influenced by your opinion of George W. Bush? Yes
3) Is this election a referendum on George W. Bush? Yes
4) Is the country headed in the right direction? No

All of those answers are the same today as they were a week or more ago with the exception of question 3. If you had asked me a week ago if I thought that on a national scale, this was a referendum on George W. Bush, I would have said yes. However, if you had asked me if I would cast my votes specifically to send a message about the leadership of George W. Bush, I would have said no. Before I stepped out of that booth last week, I changed my mind and cast every vote as a reflection of my opinion on the Bush presidency. I thought through those four questions above and made my decision and cast my votes. Is that an intelligent way to vote? I don’t know. You can criticize me all you want, but that is what I did.

It is intriguing for me to see those same four questions in one form or another listed in a number of the polls that came out today.

It will be interesting to see if the national opinion machine is really detecting an anti-Bush tsunami or just another weak Democratic Party attempt to take on a superior political machine. We'll start to know Tuesday night.

Because I have been so interested in all of this polling information, I started following the House of Representative projection polls. http://www.electoral-vote.com/ publishes a web site that uses all of the available public polls to project what will happen in the Senate and House races. Because new polls are released daily, the overall projections on that site also change daily. It seems to me that the Senate is pretty close to a tossup. It could end up anywhere from a Republican to Democratic majority with no more than a majority of 4 (meaning 52 to 48 for one side). The House of Representatives on the other hand looks much more predictable. The site mentioned above lets you download a spreadsheet with all of the poll results for each of the house and senate races where there are available public polls.

So, being a nerd, I decided to do my own analysis/projections based on the available polls. So, for each of the last three days, I have taken all of the house poll data from that site and plugged it into a couple of projection models. For each day, I assume that the closer we get to election-day, the lower the chance of movement in the polls (I assume greater accuracy). Further, I have one model that more heavily favors incumbents - it gives them the benefit of the doubt in many close races unless there is a lot of recent data to override that default assumption. The other model just takes the most recent poll and assumes that it is the best predictor. Well, whatever, I've been plugging in my numbers for the past three days and came up with these results.

TODAY - model that favors incumbents
Democrats - 219
Republicans - 206
Tossups - 10

TODAY - model that does not assume an advantage for incumbents
Democrats - 223
Republicans - 188
Tossups - 24

YESTERDAY - incumbent advantage model
Democrats - 217
Republicans - 206
Tossups - 12

YESTERDAY - no incumbent advantage
Democrats - 221
Republicans - 185
Tossups - 29

FRIDAY - incumbent advantage model
Democrats - 217
Republicans - 208
Tossups - 10

FRIDAY - no incumbent advantage
Democrats - 217
Republicans - 179
Tossups - 39


So, based on this, I'm willing to make a few generalizations.

1) It looks to me like the Democrats will take control of the House. That control could be as low as a razor thin 2 or 3. Or that control might be a pretty commanding 40+. Of course that assumes that these polls are an accurate reflection of what will happen on Tuesday. There are lots of flaws in polls and there are even more flaws in my predictor modeling (I put no weight on projected voter polls versus other general polls and I assume in some models that the most recent poll is the most accurate without examining the actual polling methods. In another of the models, I assume that a poll from 3 moths ago has as much value as a poll from last week. I don't claim that I have a good model at this point. I'm just trying to do some quick analysis.)
2) If it is possible to spot a trend in these few samples, it seems to me that the Republicans have been closing the gap in the past few days, but probably not fast enough.
3) In each of the models the Democrats seem to have a very solid number of seats around 217 to 223. It is Republican seats that seem to vary between being a tossup or a Republican projection. If those tossups split evenly between the parties, then the Democrats will have a majority around 30.
4) It looks to me like it would take a miracle for the Republicans to end up with control and it would be a worthy accomplishment for the Republicans to keep it really close. The most likely outcome is a strong Democratic majority in the House.

It is the question of what way these tossups will go that makes my experience in the voting booth from last week relevant. I think it is going to come down to the prevailing mood in the country and just how angry people are over Iraq and George Bush. I believe this vote is a referendum on George W. Bush and our policies in Iraq.

Still Studying the Swamp

Well, I've finished the Woodward and Ricks books from my list on my The Swamp is a Mess post. They have not much changed my thinking from that post.

I will say this, though. I'm pretty hacked off at Bob Woodward. I had doubts and questions about Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney when they first started off on their military adventures. Both the lead up to the Iraq war and the execution there gave me great pause. The conduct of the Afghan war and the poor execution on hunting down Osama made me worry about these guys. However, Woodward's first two books made me think that I was be unfair in judging the Bush team's performance. Woodward convinced me to give them a pass for at least two years.

Now in his third book, it looks like Woodward is saying - oops, I made a mistake. I guess in those first two books I just accepted the White House spin hook, line & sinker. Now, I'm really telling you the truth. Unhappily, I do suspect that he is telling the truth now, but it's a little late in coming.

In truth, I can paint several scenarios that might explain what Woodward is doing/has done in these books.

1) One theory is that he simply wrote and published his books based on what would sell the most. When Bush is up in the polls, write flattering books. When Bush is down in the polls write a negative book. I hope this is not the case, but Woodward is certainly open to this criticism.

2) He really tried to do his best and was simply duped by the spinmeisters. In that case, it makes Woodward look like a tool and fool. If he was a Bush tool the first time around, then it makes me wonder whose tool he is this time.

3) Maybe Woodward's current book is either payback from Woodward or someone else. Maybe Armitage or Powell are hacked off at the lack of loyalty Bush showed to them. Maybe Woodward is pissed that Rumsfeld or others mislead him. Maybe Tenet is using Woodward to express his frustration. Regardless, the book can be criticized for being a payback. Of course that is due mainly to the fact that Woodward is trying to either take back the first two books or atone for those mistakes.

Regardless, I'm glad Woodward wrote this book. But I'm also pretty disappointed in him for having to try to undo the damage he did in acting as an apologist for the Bush administration in his first two books about Bush at war.

Moonlight Madness

We just got in from Baylor's Moonlight Madness event - the official start of practice for men's & women's basketball. The attendance was not great, but it is Fall Break and most of the students are gone. With it being Friday night high school football areound town, very few students, and the poor results for men's basketball the past few years I guess the crowd was actually pretty good.

I can't really comment a lot on the women because we didn't see them do too much. I thought Jhasmin Player had a nice shot from 3 point range.

On the men's side, we look to be very athletic. I don't suppose we ever had three 7 footers before. Dou, Lomers & Jari are big. Lomers is really big. All the guys have been working out. The biceps, shoulders, and general upper body development on all the returning players was noticable to me. We're clearly a lot better. And to me Lomers and Thiam were the best surprises. I don't know how much Thiam will be able to play, because he is so rail thin, but he is an incredible athlete. He's 6 foot 10 inches and plays like a guard. I think Lomers will be able to contribute this year. He's a big body, moves fairly well, and had a nice looking shot. Best of all, I thought he had pretty good hands. It was great to see Bruce completely healthy. I think we have a chance to be decent this year.

Wednesday at Ferrell

I had the opportunity to see part of the Baylor volleyball team’s match against the Aggies last night. I’m sorry to say that it wasn’t pretty. I don’t claim to know much about volleyball, but a few things bothered me. First, we lost. Second, it seemed like we got blocked at the net a lot. I did get a chance to take a short tour of some of the remodeled space down under the stands. Baylor just finished an addition to the Ferrell Center and that freed up some room underneath. It’s a bit of a maze down there, but the new media room looks great. Also, I got to see the new weight room with all the gear setup. I had seen it during the open house a few weeks ago, but most of the equipment wasn’t set up at that time. It sure looks good.

ARGH!!!! Undoing equations with rounding makes my head hurt.

I've spent much of the morning and the entire afternoon working on the Freshman Scholarship Calculator for the Baylor web site. The trouble is not in calculating the actual scholarship, it is in calculating the little hint on how to improve your scholarship or how to become eleigible for a scholarship. The combination of rounding and certain obscure rules, make this way more difficult than it looks. The 2006 version of the calculator has been up for months. Right now, I'm trying to finish up the last bits on the version for the 2007 year. Maybe tomorrow will be a better day.

The Swamp Is a Mess

I've been reading quite a bit in the past few months. It has been an interesting education and I'm sure many would find fault with what I'm reading. For the first time in years I am reading current non-fiction.

At the moment I'm reading the following books:

FIASCO: The American Military Adventure in Iraq by Thomas E. Ricks
State of Denial: Bush at War, Part III by Bob Woodward (I read the first two parts when they came out several years ago.)
The Mighty and the Almighty: Reflections on America, God, and World Affairs by Madeleine Albright
The Republican Noise Machine : Right-Wing Media and How It Corrupts Democracy by David Brock

I've finished these in the past eight months:

Conservatives Without Conscience by John Dean
Worse than Watergate: The Secret Presidency of George. W. Bush by John Dean
Our Endangered Values: America's Moral Crisis by Jimmy Carter
Against All Enemies: Inside American's War on Terror by Richard A. Clarke
A Pretext for War: 9/11, Iraq, and the Abuse of America's Intelligence Agencies by James Bamford
Whose Freedom?: The Battle Over America's Most Important Idea by George Lakoff
Blinded by the Right: The Conscience of an Ex-Conservative by David Brock
Take It Back: Our Party, Our Country, Our Future by James Carville and Paul Begala
America at the Crossroads: Democracy, Power, and the Neoconservative Legacy by Francis Fukuyama
The One Percent Doctrine: Deep Inside American's Pursuit of Its Enemies Since 9/11 by Ron Suskind
American Gospel: God, the Founding Fathers, and the Making of a Nation by Jon Meacham

And I have the following waiting on the bedside table:

American Theocracy: The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil, and Borrowed Money in the 21stCentury by Kevin Phillips
The Greatest Story Ever Sold: The Decline and Fall of Truth from 9/11 to Katrina by Frank Rich

So where am I after reading all this? To what profound conclusions have I come? I'm not sure I have fully arrived at conclusions, but I do have some thoughts that seem to recur.

1) America is not comfortable as the world's sole super power.

2) Many of the ideas that have been kicked around (pre-emption, unilateralism, rendition, torture) are more appropriate for a true imperium. And the citizens of the US are not truly committed to an imperial presence in the world.

3) The conservative Christian powers within the US (and I am most comfortable being identified as a Baptist - who are generally pretty conservative in the protestant world) have managed to fall into a number of traps. And in my opinion, these include a lack of hubris; a remarkable ability to forget our own history as many try to force their beliefs onto the political and social structures of our society; and a foolish alliance with political powers that have agendas and modes of operating that compromise our Christian witness.

4) It is funny to me that from the very beginning of our conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq I have generally been and continue to be intrigued by the possibility of using a US military and civil occupation/dominance to impose or develop democracy in both or either of those countries. However, I also believed that such an effort:

a) would be very difficult, because we would not be greeted as liberators;
b) needed to be run as a civil/political operation where the military was used in a very limited role (winning over the people is the objective);
c) must be explained honestly and conservatively to the US people as a 10 to 20 year commitment;
d) had to be funded in a massive way that would strip other significant federal spending programs resulting in economic and other hardships on the American people; and
e) would be contingent upon a dialogue with and overwhelming support from the people. The American people do not tolerate being misled and they do not like long entanglements.

Telling them it would be short and simple when that was not accurate was a political time bomb..... which is exploding before our very eyes.

5) The marriage of conservative social values and politics via a disaffected conservative Christian bloc was a brilliant short term political strategy for the Republican party, but was bound to fall apart. If man is fallen (and that seems pretty certain), then no organization of ambitious, powerful men (and women) is likely to avoid massive values oriented meltdowns (see Mark Foley, Jack Abramoff, etc.).

6) The Democratic party is fundamentally bereft of leadership. Personally, I like Hillary okay and Gore is okay I guess, but where is the charismatic, visionary leadership. The people of this country don't like either of those characters and the Democratic party can't seem to mount an effective campaign to convince people to like and trust them. Mostly, the party just doesn't play in Peoria.

7) So, it is time for the protests... time for the independent and 3rd party candidates... time for the satirical folk songs, web sites, radio shows, etc. It's time for a Jeffersonian revolution. And unfortunately, those oft-times lead to their own excesses.

8) Worst of all, we are at a moment in history when the collective economic progress on the planet gives us a rare moment when we could cure extreme poverty in our time. Jeffrey Sachs' The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for Our Time lays out a compelling case for ending extreme poverty, but in my opinion it requires US leadership..... And we can't lead right now, because we're going to examine our collective navel while we try to figure out who we are and what we're doing. In 2002, we had the opportunity to make a choice - compel democracy in selected countries around the world over a very very long term plan or try to cure poverty and indirectly reduce terrorist threats also requiring a very very long term plan. In my opinion, we had to choose, because we couldn't do both. Well, we chose, and we've managed to screw up the one we chose.

So, that's where I am right now. More as I continue my exploration.