obama is most certainly electable

there are lots of people who say that obama is too young, he is unexperienced, and just not electable. to all of those people i just have to say, watch this video of him at google:

what i found most interesting when watching obama in this video was the clarity in the way he spoke about things. like any politician he hedges his answers, but he is able to create a vision which excites. he doesn’t do this by drowning one in statistics and data like hillary, because it is too early. he understands that as president he is not chief doer but chief leader, and only bad leaders do all the work (you probably know this from those micro-managing bosses at work, which i assume hillary would be).

also, and probably most importantly he is the first president that understands the age we live in. he not only understands the power of the internet to collect campaign money and spread his message, but unlike any other canidate or politician he is looking at how to use these new technologies in a way to spread governance and politic making.

mccain still bush’s lapdog … and why it is even more important for obama to win nomination

i just saw this video of a speech mccain gave today at tpm

looks like mccain s adopting the bush strategy of “if we repeat something over and over again it will become true.” i guess things are just hunky dory over there in iraq, just like the time he visited a market and was able to freely walk around (with the help of helicopters and soldiers securing the whole area and half of the market blowing up the next day). and now even politically things are looking up … i just wonder where is found that news?

in a way though this speech shows just how important it will be for obama to win the democratic nomination and not hillary. obama will be able to tell mccain that it was dead wrong to invade iraq. that only that stupid invasion gave al qaeda a save heavan in iraq, a country where it didn’t have a foothold, but over the year was able to create training grounds and more importantly was able to get the kind of press that it need to attract new recruits. in this failed policy that mccain supported and is still blindly supporting is making america less secure. it is this blind “we have to win” mentality combined with the dire need to for once “win a war” just like bush’s father generation did, but that bush junior and mccain failed to win in vietnam that is sending more and more troops to iraq. there has to be a point were a responsible leader cuts his/her losses and accepts defeat … something even nixon was able to do but neither bush nor mccain are able.

are the democrats on a path to self-destruction?

looking at all the talk shows from this weekend and the news stories from the last couple of weeks, it is becoming very clear that the hillary - obama fight is going to be quite ugly.   i hope that especially the clinton camp (which is behind in the popular vote and as it looks like will also be behind in the popular vote by the convention) will come to the conclusion that it is better for the party to survive and for the party to be the home of millions of new young voters than to “win” the election and in the process lose any respect the party has been able to build up during the last eight years. 

since when are dogshows a sport?

the other day i browsed around the ny times site and found out that a beagle won the westminster kennel dogshow in ny. what really surprised me was that the story was in the sports section of the times.

now i agree that dogs (at least some) are cute and can be fun (i also admit i don’t have a dog and am not a dog person), but to put this into the sports section is a bit strange. there is not a lot that happens with the exception that the owners run around in a circle for a little bit. this is like putting a miss universe show into the sports section.

muslims in denmark showcase their disregard for the values of the country they choose to live in

in light of the new demonstrations by muslims in denmark about the re-print of the cartoons from last year after danish police found out about a plot to kill one of the cartoonists i thought i add a picture of the cartoon in question (the second picture in the top row is by the cartoonist who was supposed to be killed).

behavior like this bya large chunck of the muslim population in denmark doesn’t really make it easy to have any sympathy with them. my main question is: if they do not want to adopt local values, why don’t they leave?

hopefully hillary will get to her senses and not destroy the democratic party just to be the presidential nominee

it seems that it will be very hard for hillary to win the democratic primary by elected votes. tpm has a good analysis of the different number scenarios: what i hope won’t happen is that she does go through and wants to win with the help of the super delegates. if she does that she will maybe win the primary, but will lose the election. by doing so she will have pissed off any independent voter, will have proven the point that washington is all about power and individual enrichment, and will have unillusioned thousands if not millions of young voters who have just gotten into the democratic party (just gotten into politics in a lot of cases).

links for february 12, 2008

• in case you still don’t know which of the candidates you support, take a look at how they voted today on providing amnesty to telecom companies that ignored existing data privacy laws (Obama was against amnesty, mccain was in favor of offering amnesty to those company, clinton was not at the senate)
• new study on the future (or the lack of a future) for lake mead (the lake that provides water and energy to las vegas and la) 
• interesting story about what might happen once the cease fire moqtada al-sadr had agreed to last year runs out this month. this could mean a return to increased fighting in iraq
• the re-emerging plague – mostly in asia and africa 

the district police would make george orwell proud

it is not 1984, and i guess we are not living in a policy state. but sometimes, these days, here in the united states of america it is hard to be sure neither is the case. the current administration has done anything it can to turn 1984 into non-fiction (trying to spy on any communication even between americans, sending even americans into prison camps in some case indefinitely). and for the policy state, well if you walk around nearly any large city in this country you will find police everywhere. today the police here in the nation’s capital, washington dc, has started to use 73 newly installed surveillance cameras (also known as CCTV) all over the city. 

Since August 2006, the city has installed 73 cameras across the city, mostly on utility poles, at a cost of about $4 million. But until recently, officers were using them mainly as an investigative tool — checking the recordings after crimes were committed in hopes of turning up leads and evidence. 

 here is a map of all the locations of the cameras, which according to the police are located in high crime areas. and this is not all, more cameras are planned

Police hope to add about 50 cameras in the next two years and make other upgrades, at an estimated cost of $4.5 million. Of the 73 cameras in neighborhoods, police can get live feeds from 54, officials said. Eventually, they plan to have the capability to get live images from all of the cameras.  

 and these cameras are not just any of those old surveillance cameras according to the post article they have state of the art zooming capabilities, which would be used to zoom into private apartments. some years ago i watched a bbc program about the london experience (where they have half a million cameras). and police there mentioned success stories like this one here in washington dc

Police have directed one arrest from the command center, a drug deal they spotted at a Northwest Washington gas station a few weeks ago. Officers called in vice units that surprised the suspect.  

 but what was an interesting learning from the london experience was that if at all they were able to just address petty crime, never where they able to prevent a serious crime (like murder), in those cases the camera could only be used after the murder had happened. more importantly there was little evidence of the deterrence impact of the cameras. and when they looked at what police officers where monitoring a majority was looking at women and blacks. unlike london washington though has a real crime problem.  and i doubt that these cameras will make a dent in the statistics if there is not going to be a dramatic change in the way the police operates. for example the cameras are located in high-crime areas. what happens if those crime areas move? maybe just around the corner? crime moves, what is a peaceful place today might be a drug deal area tomorrow. you might catch a criminal here and there, but just like speed cameras do not get rid of speeding they just move the crime to another area. that is why successful cities have put police on the street. and most of the police in DC sits usually in their car. just last night is saw a car parked on a side street of harvard street with a police officer sitting inside reading a paper (btw, in that area a drive by shooting happened in halloween with 41 shots being fired and a police officer sitting in a car a block away not hearing the shots). i know it is cold outside, or it might be raining, or it might be humid, but if you want to fight crime you can have police officers sit in their cars, or as they usually do, speed across town with speeds that don’t allow them to see anything going on around them. so safe the $4 million and get officers on the street. let me for once see a couple of police officers stroll down a street like you see them in london. if i can see the same officer in my neighborhood for a couple of weeks in a row, someone who gets to know people and store owners then we will make progress, not when we hang up cameras.  

senator hutchison, please keep your fucking texan hands out of DC politics

as most of us know the supreme court is going to decide on the district of columbia’s right to ban handguns. one of those that is pushing for the legalization of handguns is a senator from texas. senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (oh, yes, she is a republican). she went as far as to introduce the “District of Columbia Personal Protection Act” — at least that is how she calls it. she says she has always had a handgun in her drawer and would like to have the same right while in the District that she has down in texas. now i am fully aware of the extremely high quality of public servants that the great state of texas has provided this country, just take a look at the white house, but this is a senator. not a president. so please ms. hutchison keep your hands out of the district’s business. i don’t care what you do in texas because i couldn’t give two shits about that state, but you were not elected here in the District, and i doubt you would ever get elected here. you can go to texas and shoot and be shot as much as you like, but please care about your own stuff and let us that have to live here care about our things.

this is a decision the district and the people that live here have to make, not you, some third rate senator from the sticks. so, please, pack your stuff (make sure you take all your guns) and go back to where you come from, there you can do what you want.

an economic stimulus plan that is all show in an election year, but the wrong thing to do

so the senate passed the economic stimulus plan today after a little debate about adding a bit more money for seniors and veterans. in total the whole plan will be worth about $168 billion. here is what the plan will do:

 As passed by the Senate and sent to the House, the program calls for rebates ranging from $300 to $1,200 for most taxpayers, payments of $300 to people who paid no income taxes but earned $3,000 or more from Social Security or veterans’ disability benefits, and various tax incentives for businesses.

but even more important than the checks going out to american consumers are the photo ops today in the senate for three potential next president. would be fun to see all three of them posing for more photo ops when the checks are actually delivered — hillary handing over a $300 check by herself.

but what is the impact of this? so there will be another $168 billion added to the economy some point during 2008.  to put that into perspective, the gdp of the US is $13.13 trillion, which mean that the $168 billion will only be a little blimp on the radar of the US economy. on top of this, it is not even clear how much of the $168 billion will end up back in the economy since some of the recipients of the money will decide to save it (something quite likely in a time when the economy is not doing well). and even of the money that will be spend, some will end up outside of the US, very likely in china, paying for some product that has been sold at wal mart of target.

encouraging spending is the wrong message to send 

while i think that the stimulus plan won’t have a big impact on the economy, i think it also sends the wrong message. americans already spend way beyond their means. one of the reasons we are in this situation is that americans spend too much, and they spend too much money they didn’t have. so to tell them, please spend more is not addressing the actual problem, it will only lead to even bigger problems down the road.

what should be done? 

now there are probably a ton of solutions to address the current economic situation. one might be to do nothing and as most republicans always like to say “let the market take care of it” — (interestingly those very republicans don’t seem to have very much faith in the market right now, screaming for this stimulus package and for all kinds of help for the banks).  but there is one thing that is in dire need of more money, that will pay the bills for thousands of americans, and that will make america more attractive for foreign investors — what i am talking about is the US infrastructure. and i am not even talking about the internet, the information highway or the like, no, plain old streets, bridges, water ways, harbors …the bridge disaster last year in minnesota as well as the blast of an 83 year old steam pipe in ny show that the existing infrastructure is crumbling, with:

One-in-four U.S. bridges need repair; one-third of roads are in substandard condition; one-third of dams are considered hazardous; and aging sewer systems spill 1.2 trillion gallons of sewage annually… 

and  one study has the cost to repair existing infrastructure at more than $1.6 trillion. now you might say that the $160 billion would not be enough to pay for that, but some government spending is already going towards those $1.6 trillion and the $160 billion would get the country closer to having a 21st century infrastructure.

so investing the money in repairing the american infrastructure has a couple of benefits

• it would employ thousands of construction workers, a group that is extremely hard his due to the current housing slump
• construction needs a lot of other products a lot of which are built in the US — just think ford f-series trucks
• a healthy infrastructure will cut cost due to a crumbling infrastructure (reduction in insurance payments, emergency clean ups …)
• a healthy infrastructure will make environmental sense
• a healthy infrastructure will make the US more interesting from an investment perspective (which is especially right now with the weak dollar quite good)

the one downside with this infrastructure investment solution as a stimulus package might be that it will not kick in as fast as the consumption checks, but then nobody knows the actual impact of those checks and with no checks americans might start to learn to spend their money a bit more wisely.