October 2005 Archives

Unbelievable hit of the day: former Talking Head David Byrne and former Housemartin Norman Cook (a/k/a Fatboy Slim) are writing a musical about Imelda Marcos. Who would have thought it, from the queen of footwear?

Slightly less strange, but still freaky, an audio quiz on the best of 70s Lite Rock (or, as one commenter calls it, "yacht rock"). Again, unbelievable. I haven't had a chance to play yet, but I didn't want to keep others from the atrocity exhibition.

Three quick bloghits today.

First up, an interesting analysis on Google's move into free WiFi in San Fran and beyond -- it's all about the advertising.

Next, from the "WP Express," a quick look into the Jenna Effect (see page E22, 54 of 64 in the linked PDF). I guess this doesn't apply to quiet dinners with friends, however -- my wife introduced herself to the twins at Spices in Cleveland Park about six months ago and even invited them to attend a private yoga or pilates class, but we haven't seen any noticable uptick in popularity.

And finally, a hearty AMEN to E.J. Dionne in today's Washington Post -- demonstrating once again how America has EXTREME attention-deficit disorder. In less than 60 days, we've gone from Ray Nagin (audio, transcript) and Aaron Broussard completely breaking down in the wake of physical and operational destruction to a "very special episode" of Reba tonight on the WB. What is this world coming to? ... "yes, the rhythm, the rebel, without a pause, I'm lowering my level..."

I promise we'll get back to standard issue music and technology one of these days... but for now, I'm too riled up (or burnt out) to think coherently about music.

• The now infamous (and smurftastic) UNICEF "atrocities of war" public service announcement with two sources for the video...
• Six Degrees of Rollins? (from DW the elder)
• Courtesy of the wacky Brits, the SMS-activated Electric Tea Kettle.
• The State of Missouri confirms its retrograde status by tracking drivers via cell-tower triangulation -- and just wait 'til they disable your ability to turn off the GPS chips...
• It's good to be right once in a while with one's predictions and hopes.
• For all the turbo-geeks in the house, the zooming zip code map (from Tina).
• And just in case you need a laugh -- spend a few minutes with Lambuel and his cuddly pals (from JGP).

Next up -- can I write like a Founding Father?

Just a thought -- instead of relying on the "penumbras and emanations" of the Ninth Amendment (all rights not assigned to the feds reside in the people) to find a right to personal privacy and freedom, maybe it's time for a formal amendment enshrining the right to privacy. Like any good amendment, make it short and broad -- Congress and the courts can fill in the shifting parameters, informed by our history with an amorphous right currently found in a shadow of an unenumerated right.

A well-drafted amendment would enshrines the libertarian, rugged individualist ethos that many Americans currently mistake for a core value of the Republican Party. It would also provide explicit support for cases like Griswold and Roe and even Lawrence v. Texas (striking down criminal sodomy laws that target consentual behavior), insulating them from further attack.

The Amendment would also provide the explicit textual test to flush out Scalia and Thomas as conservative ideologues. A clear right to privacy strips them of the nominally-objective robes of "original intent of the framers" and "strict constructionism." I'm not objecting to their presence on the Court (in this context) -- I just want them to be honest with themselves and with the country when it comes to their judicial philosophies.

Courtesy of the Boston Globe: A Catholic moment of truth. I feel a great deal of anger and sorrow in the impending witch hunt -- not only is it a bad idea, but it's also a betrayal of the principles that are supposedly at the heart of the religion. What ever happened to "love thy neighbor" and to seeing the goodness and essential humanity in each person? Didn't Jesus spend his time in the Gospels showing compassion and justice to the poor and the sick and the outcasts of society? More GRRRRRRRRRR. October is really shaping up to be one heck of a month.

(Just to clarify -- I am a lapsed Catholic, and this kind of garbage is a big part of why I'm lapsed. Belief in the universal divine as expressed through humanity has nothing to do with cults of personality and authoritarian control over every last detail of personal conduct. I struggled with this frustration for about ten years before personally giving up on the Church as an institution. I'll always have some facets of Catholicism in my life, but I can't put up with the hypocrisy, the triviality, and the refusal to endorse pragmatic efforts to achieve social justice. There are so many good things the Church can and should be doing to continue Jesus' teachings -- and yet they're wasting the opportunity because the leadership is more concerned with some artificial purity tests.)

Courtesy of the BBC: "The Kinder child comes out as a man." Seriously, I couldn't make up a headline like that... I guess it's the German equivalent of Mikey, the Life Cereal kid."

I'd like to have at least one more funny note here, but I'm still pretty annoyed about the whole SCOTUS thing and pulling 70-hour weeks at work. Grrrrr.

So, White House Counsel Harriet Miers has been nominated to fill Justice O'Connor's seat on the Supreme Court. The early reports tell us that she was the first woman to be a partner in a Texas law firm, first woman to be elected President of the Texas Bar, and W's personal attorney in private (and now public) practice.

And with that, the latest transformation of government is complete -- patronage and ideological rigidity really is the only way left to the top. Miers is the bow on the gift-wrapped "permanent revolution," purchased with funds from folks like TRMPAC in support of the "K Street Project" to drive all dissenting voices out of Washington.

As the Washington Post reports, the last member of the Supreme Court to have no prior judicial experience was the late William Rehnquist. Before that, it was Abe Fortas, widely derided as one of the weaker picks in the modern era to the Court (and a product of LBJ's patronage in his own right).

I'm reminded of a West Wing episode from a few years back, where Glenn Close plays a liberal appellate judge whose nomination is paired with that of a well-known, well-respected conservative. The point was that the Court works best when there are sharp advocates of differing opinions and backgrounds on the Court. The Supreme Court is the guardian and interpreter of the living document we call the Constitution. There are bound to be legitimate discussions on its scope and applicability -- stifling one side of the argument within the Court is a disservice to the nation and to the Constitution. Without sharp intra-Court debates, often disclosed in the form of dissenting opinions, we lose the opportunity to flesh out issues that may be related to the case at hand but not squarely presented (due to the vagaries of appellate law and the overwhelming expense of litigating a case all the way to the top).

If the only way to get a justice confirmed today is to pick someone who hasn't demonstrated the capacity to serve as a judge (litigating is very different), then I'd rather be in an explicit monarchy. Roberts had served as a judge, and it was damn near impossible to say that he was somehow unqualified to express a voice on the court. Miers is a blatantly cynical pick, and I hope that Arlen Specter calls the President's bluff.

In the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, some intrepid souls have dared to suggest that the US needs better public transit. I have no idea how much longer either piece will remain available, but I wanted to call them just in case...

• Baltimore Sun Op-Ed: Transit missteps leave us trapped (registration required; the Sun is a Tribune paper if you've already got dummy accounts for Chicago or other cities).
• New York Times Op-Ed: The Little Engine That Could (registration required, of course).

There's not much I can add to the argument in terms of being able to move people efficiently within and between cities. Having lived in some places with rather limited public transit options, I definitely appreciate the impact a well (or at least decently) designed and implemented system has on a community. I support any movement to make it more convenient and acceptable to use mass transit instead of cars. The New Urbanists don't entirely capture the point, but they're clearly advocating the right kinds of changes. (I much prefer revitalization of existing resources to massive new construction that knocks down 20 square miles of forest or meadow or field to build another exurban "Towne Centre.")