Obama had the votes...

For a 64-64 split of the Michigan delegates according to MSNBC, but his team decided to instead go with the 69-59 split (favoring Hillary) in order to secure a larger majority on the Rules & Bylaws Committee.

Unity?

The resolution:

By a vote of 27-0, Florida's delegation restored, each with a half vote, based on the primary results last January (105 for Clinton, 67 for Obama).

By a vote of 19-8, Michigan's delegation restored, each with a half vote, with a Clinton 69 delegate, Obama 59 delegate split.

This is a net gain of 24 delegates for Clinton.

Note that each of these proposals are the ones that were put forward by the state Democratic Parties as their best ideas for resolving the dispute. So it's interesting that the Clinton campaign was seeking more from the committee than the states themselves were.

Harold Ickes, an RBC member and top Clinton adviser, used a lot of inflammatory language before the Michigan vote, saying democracy was being "hijacked." And he reserved Clinton's right to forward the matter to the Democratic Party's Credentials Committee.

Clinton supporters in the crowd made a large amount of noise, continuing throughout the voting process and despite multiple requests to restore order. At one point the Chair asked security to secure the doors. Methinks Hillary is not going quietly, sigh.

No word on the Florida and Michigan superdelegates... I may have missed the resolution of that issue.

(UPDATED) The net result: a candidate now needs 2118 delegates to secure the nomination. MSNBC believes Obama needs 62.5 to reach that number. He remains 175.5 delegates ahead of Clinton (Obama 2055.5, Clinton 1880). She'd need to win roughly 75% of the remaining of the 200+ uncommitted superdelegates to pull even with Obama.

And despite Ickes' strong language, even had he prevailed with his position--that Clinton get 74 full delegates from Michigan and Obama none--Obama would still maintain a significant lead.

Thoughts on the DNC Rules & Bylaws Committee Meeting (open thread)

I've been watching Florida state Senator Arthenia Joyner on C-SPAN make the case on behalf of the Clinton campaign for seating Florida's delegation.

My reaction: the Obama folks are definitely in a more difficult situation. I'm not speaking about the merits of their argument. Rather, they are having to respond to a governing body about someone else's complaint. Given the court-like setting, they are cast as the prosecutors when that isn't their role at all. Their task will be to honor Florida and Michigan's voters, reinforce the reasoning behind the DNC rules, and make a gesture toward seating the delegations in some manner that sounds fair and magnanimous.

Congressman Robert Wexler has just begun to make the Obama case. Let's see if he's up to the challenge.

Wexler just made an interesting point: Florida was the only state so far in the primary season where Republican turnout was higher than Democratic turnout, a fact he says that is due to the fact that many Democrats stayed home believing their presidential preferences wouldn't matter. (Actually, Michigan's Democratic turnout was lower than the Republican as well. More here.)

His proposal: that the committee support the Ausman petition that would restore 50% of Florida's delegation and give Florida superdelegates each 1/2 vote.

And on being challenged on "wouldn't unity better be served by seating the entire delegation," he responded with passion that no one supported voter rights in Florida more strongly than he (he championed Florida during the 2000 presidential debacle) but that the rules must be respected.

Shifting to Michigan now...

It's clear that many of the committee members have walked in with their minds made up. Almost half of the 30 are declared Clinton supporters (Harold Ickes is one of her senior advisers!); 8 are in the Obama camp. And the case for restoring Michigan's full delegation is being made by the Michigan state Democratic Party head... who himself sits on the committee!!!

Senator Carl Levin is speaking. I was disinclined to hear him positively given what I already knew about his position, but I have to say he makes a good case. He's clearly articulated the path by which Michigan arrived at its decision to hold an early primary.

One point he's made: the DNC rules were updated in the past few years and actually state that several states should hold their primaries (or caucuses) between Iowa (which should remain first) and New Hampshire, but the RBC gave New Hampshire a waver which allowed it to remain in the second position this year.

Assuming he's accurately reflecting the rules, I understand Michigan's position, not to mention frustration, much better now. And I understand what Senator Levin and the Michigan Democratic Party are trying to do: hold Michigan Democrats together for the sake of what the party stands for. My hat off to them.

(I feel your pain, Sue!)

Former Michigan Congressman David Bonior is speaking on behalf of Obama, arguing for a 50-50 split of the delegates. (The Michigan state Democratic Party's position is 69-59.) Not sure why the Obama campaign isn't just supporting that...

The most complete explanation from Hillary I've found for why she didn't take her name off the ballot last fall is here.

Just read this blog post that suggests what's most important about this committee meeting is not the specific outcome but Hillary's reaction to it:

There’s a lot of bad blood. And what’s really "baddening" that blood for Clinton supporters is the idea that she’s being cheated out of the nomination.

And that’s where Clinton herself comes in. Her supporters will follow her lead. If she acknowledges that her defeat was legitimate (regardless of how much she actually campaigns), then I think the party will unite. If, by contrast, she spends the next few days (or god forbid, months) alleging that it was illegitimate, then that reaction will leave lasting damage. Not just among pro-Clinton bloggers, but among her core supporters, particularly older liberal women.

The perception of legitimacy is essential to party unity. Accordingly, her reaction to tomorrow’s outcome will likely determine how her supporters will perceive her defeat. If she has no intention of going to Denver, then there’s a way of signaling that. She shouldn’t stir up Zimbabwe and all this other garbage strictly to gain leverage to pay off loans or to receive chits. The time for negotiations is over — there’s too much at stake now. The initial reaction is what the supporters will look to. If things have to get settled by superdelegates two weeks from now, or on appeal to a DNC committee, the damage — the irreversible damage — will have already been done.

Florida DNC member Allan Katz, an Obama supporter, just made two great points:

• The Rules & Bylaws Committee (RBC), the very committee that is meeting today to decide the Florida and Michigan disputes, is the one that approved the rules for primary scheduling and that also penalized Florida and Michigan for violating the calendar. And by doing so, they sent a clear message to the candidates. Candidates, like Obama, who acted accordingly should not now be penalized by receiving zero delegates (as the Clinton campaign is arguing for).
• The current situation is not analogous to what happened in Florida in 2000, and suggesting that voters are being disenfranchised in a similar way is disingenuous.

Wow. Donna Brazile, an RBC member and uncommitted superdelegate, is making herself heard now. She cautioned Former Michigan Governor Jim Blanchard not to use the term "disenfranchisement" loosely given the long history of voting rights problems in this country. Blanchard mentioned his mother during his opening statement, and Brazile continued: "My momma taught me to play by the rules." Full quote:

My momma taught me to play by the rules and respect those rules. My mother taught me, and I'm sure your mother taught you, that when you decide to change the rules, middle of the game, end of the game, that is referred to as cheatin'.

She went on to say that when you try to change the rules in the middle of the game, it's considered cheating. She is invoking LBJ and the civil rights movement as the foundation for what the RBC is trying to do: act in good faith to make and enforce rules that support full Democratic participation.

She just earned the longest applause of the day.

Apparently Big Brother works for an ad company

One more step toward Orwell's telescreens: billboards that watch who is looking at them.

There's a price to be paid from being watched 24x7.

Remember this moment

Three years ago I read "Making Memories Stick" in Scientific American magazine (it's available for purchase here but I found a PDF version on a professor's website.) The article, written by R. Douglas Fields, summarizes his recent research on how and when neurons know to strengthen their connections to other neurons, thus creating a memory.

Our neurons fire constantly, and far more information passes through our brains than we can consciously process. So out of all of the data coming in through our senses, and out of all of our conscious experience, how is it that some things get laid down as memories and some don't?

Memory is one of the things that I find most fascinating about the experience of being human. The mechanism that Fields described was so simple, beautiful, and elegant that I cried. And I phoned my mother to share how the wondrous nature of who we are humbles me to the point of tears.

YESTERDAY I was in my anatomy and physiology lab, and the topic for the day was the study of two types of tissue: connective tissue and nervous tissue. We watched a video with images of microscopic views of cells, including neurons, and then we looked at slides ourselves.

Watching that video, I once again found myself on the verge of tears. "There I am," I thought. That little cell, along with billions other like it, reaches out and touches its neighbors. And over time, they build up a neural network, out of which whatever it is that I am arises.

I'm not getting into the argument about whether or not there's more to me than the things I can see on a slide. I'm not discounting a soul that's somehow separate from the physical.

All that I am saying is that out of an evolutionary process too convoluted to possibly understand–triggered by chance or coaxed into motion by God–a thing of unbelievable beauty exists.

Think about that.

CNN: Obama bandwagon?

While I try to avoid CNN when I can, when I'm on the stairclimber at the gym, it's either that, Fox News, or ESPN. :-)

This afternoon I caught a report from Bill Schneider which found growing evidence of a nationwide shift towards Obama.

In their May 8-13 nationwide "poll of polls" analysis, Obama was leading Hillary 49% to 42%. In the latest period, May 15-29, he's doubled his lead: 54% to 40%.

Hillary won California back on February 5: 52% to 43%. In a May 16-27 Field Poll, Californians now prefer Obama 51% to 38%.

Similarly, she won New Jersey on February 5: 54% to 44%. But a poll conducted there April 24-28 found Obama leading, 45% to 38%.

Also in their "poll of polls" analysis, both Obama and Hillary are leading John McCain, albeit by the same 3% margin.

And swing states? CNN finds that Obama does better than Hillary against McCain in 12 states, four of which are considered to be in play in the general election.

Hillary does better than Obama in only five, three of which are swing states.

The full video report here.

Carbon, carbon, everywhere

Carbon. It's the building block of life.

But sometimes it ends up in the wrong forms and the wrong places.

The chemist who shared the Nobel Prize for linking CFCs to the destruction of the ozone layer is concerned that CO2 levels may hit 1000 ppm. That's far above the 450 ppm threshold that climatologists worry may seriously alter the planet and the current 385 ppm level.

Why is he concerned? One reason is the lack of focused research to address the problem, as evidenced by the slow progress being made on carbon sequestration for coal power plants.

AND NOW RESEARCHERS ARE WARNING that carbon nanotubes, incredibly tiny structures with the capacity for revolutionizing many technologies, may be as dangerous as asbestos. To date there's been little regulation of new products coming out of the emerging nanotechnology industry.

Is Barack Obama a Muslim?

There's a whole website dedicated to the question with links that confirm the answer is "No."

And for a little humor on the subject, here's that Washington Post cartoon again.

:-)

This is a serious issue, though. Obama has been particularly adept at organizing and fundraising on the internet. But technology cuts both ways, and viral e-mails that question his Christianity or his patriotism are common and difficult to counter, let alone track to the source.

United Nations report on food prices

A new report from the United Nations agency responsible for food and agriculture is predicting that food prices will drop a bit but remain above average for the next decade:

The expected causes of higher-than-average prices during the next decade include a doubling of biofuel production, higher fuel costs that increase the cost of producing crops and transporting food, and greater demand for food and animal feed in richer developing countries where incomes are rising, the report says.

Prices for vegetable oils are expected to remain the highest, 80 percent above the average from 1998 to 2007; wheat, corn and skim milk powder are anticipated to be 40 to 60 percent higher; sugar, 30 percent; and beef and pork, about 20 percent. Biofuel production should account for about a third of the expected increases in prices for vegetable oils and grains. [emphasis added]

The Bush administration has argued that using corn to make ethanol is only responsible for 2 to 3% of the rise in global food prices.

How did Florida's primary get moved up?

I've heard a number of people argue that it "wasn't the Democrats' fault" because it was the Republicans who moved up the date of the Florida primary, resulting in both the Democratic and Republican parties sanctioning the state.

Well, I wondered about that, and so I checked.

The Florida Senate voted 37-2 in favor of the measure on April 27, 2007, and the House voted 118-0 on May 3.

So despite the warnings from both parties, Florida Republicans and Democrats made the decision to move the primary.

The bill's history is here, and a New York Times article about its passage is here.

And even after the Democratic National Committee followed through on its plan to sanction Florida, Florida Democrats reiterated their support for the primary date change.

MICHIGAN UPDATE

Michigan is a bit different. In the Senate, Michigan Democrats were unamimously opposed to the change, but 50% of Democrats in the Michigan House voted in favor of the change, along with 73% of Republicans.

UPDATE

The Los Angeles Times has a good summary of the Florida and Michigan situation here.

Biology notes

Had my first anatomy & physiology exam today. Actually, I've got one every two weeks until August! Luckily I'm really enjoying the course. :-)

A couple of items caught my eye today: Stanford has digitized a collection of anatomical photographs and made them available on the web, and researchers have for the first time developed a technique for visualizing the assembly of new viral particles (in this case, HIV).

The danger of a networked world

While the internet has certainly made a lot of things easier (how did we ever goof off at work before it arrived?), it has also created a vulnerability to which most Americans remain oblivious.

Specifically, now that just about every business, every industry, and every agency of our government are networked and absolutely reliant on their computer networks, a lone hacker--or a foreign government--can wreak unimaginable havoc without leaving the comfort of their home or office on the other side of the world.

Counterterrorism expert Richard Clarke discusses the danger on NPR's Fresh Air, and this article raises the possibility that the Chinese were behind the 2003 power outage that was the biggest ever in the U.S.

I'm not one to worry specifically that "the Chinese are coming," but as someone who worked in the computer industry for nearly 20 years, it's definitely the case that the danger to our economy and national security is real, whether it be an attack from China, a terrorist group, or your neighbor's teenage son. And as we becoming increasingly dependent on computers for just about everything, the risk increases.

Might it end next week?

In an effort to head off a nominating race that could bleed into the Democratic National Convention in August, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid are asking uncommitted superdelegates to choose between Obama and Clinton by the middle of next week. And Reid believes Obama has enough superdelegates in his pocket to secure the nomination once and for all.

The big 4-0

Today is Kylie Minogue's 40th! :-)

Why winning states matters

The way we elect presidents in the United States--with the electoral college rather than the popular vote--often comes under fire as being outdated, and Hillary is attempting a similar argument with this year's Democratic nominating process.

Without a doubt, one can make good arguments for abolishing the complicated systems in place and replacing them with a simple popular vote metric.

But there's a reason the electoral college--and the Democratic and Republican Parties' state-by-state processes--were chosen in the first place: they help to ensure that the states with smaller populations are not excluded from the equation. As has been clear from this year's primaries, the perspectives and predilections of voters in the 50 states vary considerably. If we relied simply on a popular vote, winning the huge population centers of the coasts would be sufficient, and the voices of those in less populated, more rural areas would be lost.

Like much of our government which the Constitution defines, the electoral college is a compromise: an effort to balance the will of the majority with the rights of minorities.

Today's Las Vegas Review-Journal had this to say:

"We're going to fight as hard as we can in these states. We want to send the message now that we're going to go after them, and I expect to win them," Sen. Obama said Monday.

Sen. McCain responded Monday that Obama "has no experience, no knowledge or background" on Western issues. "I believe as a Western senator I understand the issues, the challenges of the future for these ... states," the Arizona senator told The Associated Press.

Unstated in all this is the way such mathematics bear out the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in establishing the Electoral College, in the first place.

If presidents were elected "at large" by a straight majority of the national popular vote, it's unlikely the concerns of a few thousand Westerners would draw much more than the occasional bulk-mailed flier.

The real electoral battle would be for major population centers in California and east of the Mississippi, where the campaigns -- even more than is already the case -- would likely turn into huge potlatches, the candidates viewing the rural states as little more than cash drawers, suffering silently as the parties poured their looted largess into the vote-heavy cities.

Make no mistake, the candidates are here, asking what concerns residents of the rural West, only because Americans cast their presidential ballots state by state.

Studying the arctic tundra

My friend Ryan is heading to the Arctic on Friday. He'll be stationed at the Daring Lake Tundra Ecosystem Research Station for the next three months. One of the major objectives there is characterizing the role of the tundra in the global CO2 cycle and its impact on climate change.

I'm encouraging him to send lots of reports on life there, what the scientists are learning, and photos!

Friendly flora part 2

Another reminder that the microbes we share our body with are often our buddies. This time, in the intestinal tract.

Dry gets dryer, wet gets wetter

A climate change report has found that arid parts of the western U.S. are already getting dryer, while wet parts of the eastern U.S. are getting wetter. Higher temperatures in some areas are likely to decrease crop yields.

AIDS/LifeCycle 7

AIDS/LifeCycle 7 begins this Sunday. Around 3000 cyclists and nearly 1000 volunteers will hit the road on the 545-mile journey from San Francisco to Los Angeles.

I did the ride this year, but my bicycle will be stationary this year. I'm in summer session and can't get away for a week. I will, however, be at the finish line in LA to greet friends as they arrive.

I still have some donations to make. For more information, check out the LifeCycle website. (And if you don't know anyone riding but would like to make a contribution, email me and I can point you at a specific rider.)

And you can always buy one of these for a cyclist. :-)

A RECAP OF MY RIDE LAST YEAR:

The 2007 AIDS LifeCycle is over! This year's 2300 riders set a new record by raising $11 million for HIV/AIDS services and prevention in California.

What an experience... it's hard to explain succinctly. From the first morning I could tell it was going to be one of the craziest trips I've ever had. It was also the most physically challenging thing I've ever taken on.

I rode every one of the 545 miles from San Francisco to Los Angeles, and the biggest mechanical problem I had was needing some minor adjustments to my rear derailleur. No flats! As far as my body, my biggest ache was my butt. A lot of the time I rode as fast as I could, partially to push my limits but largely to maximize my time off the bike seat at the rest stops. Altogether, I spent 31 hours and 20 minutes in the saddle.

The days varied in length from 42 miles (day 5, the day when most participants wear red dresses) to 105 miles (day 2). Some how I thought after that long day 2 that all of the remaining days would be significantly shorter, but there were two more 90+ mile days.

A typical day began at 5am. My alarm would go off before dawn, and my tent mate Justin and I would rise, throw on some clothes, and crawl out of our dew-soaked tent to head to the dining tent. A lot of the mornings were cold with temperatures in the low 40s.

Huddling in our hoodies, we'd snarf down huge breakfasts before heading back to get dressed for the day, pack up our tent and gear, and head to our bikes. We were typically on the road by 7:30am.

On most days there were four to five rest stops plus a lunch. I'm guessing I ate about 6000 calories a day, and I lost four pounds during the week. The rest stops were my favorite part of the ride. Each one had a different theme: the seven deadly sins, Dreamgirls, the DMV, spa treatment, etc. The roadies who hosted the rest stops did an amazing job of feeding, hydrating, and entertaining us, and they did all of the decorations and costumes out of their own pocket. I loved catching up with friends and meeting new people while giving my body a rest.

The people on the ride came from a broad cross-section of society. There were many gay men in great shape, but there were also plenty of people who were overweight, dressed in street clothes, or otherwise appearing to be ill-suited for the challenge of the California hills and Central Valley winds.

This aspect of the ride amazed me more than anything else. The ride was hard for me. Yes, I was definitely pushing myself and enjoying going beyond what I thought I could do. But here was a woman in her 60s making her way up the same hill. Many people were "sagged" each day, catching a ride to the next rest stop or back to camp on a bus. Yet there they were back again the next day, pushing their own limits.

One day at lunch, Justin and I talked about the disconnect between how people appear and what they are physically capable of. To get to the ride, it's a safe bet that every rider had done some level of training. And there we were: people looking like athletes, people looking like couch potatoes. It was humbling to share the road with so many people who were going so far beyond what anyone might guess they were capable of. My guess is that many of the people who looked like the natural athletes were in their own way having as difficult a time as those who were carrying an extra 60 pounds.

What spurred us all on? For me, it was mostly a competitive spirit and a desire to see how far I could push myself. But others on the ride had experienced the loss of loved ones: lovers, sons, daughters, friends who they memorialized with pictures on their bikes. Over ten percent of the riders were HIV positive.

There were many highlights. One unforgettable one was a candlelight vigil on a southern California beach... a moment to remember loved ones lost to AIDS and to renew our faith to press on until there is a cure, a vaccine, or both.

Another Bush aide targets the White House

In the latest "tell-all" book, former White House press secretary Scott McClellan alleges that the administration misled the American public about the need to invade Iraq:

McClellan stops short of saying that Bush purposely lied about his reasons for invading Iraq, writing that he and his subordinates were not "employing out-and-out deception" to make their case for war in 2002.

But in a chapter titled "Selling the War," he alleges that the administration repeatedly shaded the truth and that Bush "managed the crisis in a way that almost guaranteed that the use of force would become the only feasible option."

"Over that summer of 2002," he writes, "top Bush aides had outlined a strategy for carefully orchestrating the coming campaign to aggressively sell the war. . . . In the permanent campaign era, it was all about manipulating sources of public opinion to the president's advantage."

McClellan, once a staunch defender of the war from the podium, comes to a stark conclusion, writing, "What I do know is that war should only be waged when necessary, and the Iraq war was not necessary."

It just leaves me wondering: how did these folks sleep while they were still working at the White House???

May 31: D-Day

"D" for delegate, that is. :-)

On Saturday the 31st, the Democratic Party's Rules and Bylaws Committee will meet and make a determination as to the fate of Florida and Michigan's delegates. Party lawyers have advised the committee that, according to the party's governing bylaws, they can restore no more than half of delegates from those states. Fully seating their delegations would require a vote at the national convention in August.

In any case, seating any or all of them would be insufficient to erase Obama's delegate lead.

Hillary is depending on Puerto Rico

Got this from Hillary today:

This Sunday, voters in Puerto Rico will go to the polls and make their voices heard -- the first time the island has played such a vital role in selecting our party's nominee. At this critical moment, I am depending on you to help me make sure they have a choice. We are depending on the voters of Puerto Rico in our fight to secure the nomination. [original emphasis]

The voters of Puerto Rico are U.S. citizens but aren't allowed to vote in presidential elections. So while they do get to participate in the Democratic nominating process, it's seems a little odd to stake your hopes for becoming president on voters who can't vote in November.

But in this race, she'll make any argument...

Obama returns to Vegas

Obama was in Vegas yesterday for a town hall meeting; it was held at the Cheyenne campus of my school, the College of Southern Nevada. He also met with a couple to discuss their mortgage woes.

Nevada has seen some of the highest home price declines in the nation, and the last time I checked we had the dubious distinction of having the highest foreclosure rate as well.

Obama supports the Dodd-Shelby bill that would help homeowners facing foreclosure and improves oversight of the mortgage industry:

Under the bill, the Federal Housing Administration would back as much as $300 billion in new mortgages, allowing lenders to refinance the most threatened home loans. The cost of failed loans would be covered not by taxpayers but by fees paid by mortgage originators to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the federally chartered companies that buy mortgages from banks and other lenders.

Lenders would have to refinance the loans at less than the home's current value, taking significant losses. Borrowers would be required to split any profits on the eventual sale of the house with the government.

For more on Obama's plan for addressing the mortgage crisis, see his website.

Back from San Francisco

Well, we made it back from our long weekend in SF, but just barely! Happy hour yesterday was so much fun that we pushed our return flight back until 6:30am this morning. Waking up at 4:30 was painful.

We got to see a lot of friends but not a lot of sun. But hey, that's SF this time of year.

I did require a bit of nursing yesterday. ;-)

Bill's '92 presidential run

An interesting re-cap of Bill Clinton's '92 run for the Democratic nomination. While he technically didn't wrap it up until June, it was considered highly improbable as early as April that he'd fail to become the nominee due to the delegate math.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/article;jsessionid=8F36D98BAC17CCB7C88FA82D3B96F054.w5?a=169155&f=77

A link for political junkies...

Who are also math junkies. :-)

A blogger at DailyKos explores the numbers--and Michigan's 36 "uncommitted" delegates--in depth.

The popular vote

Issac Chotiner makes an astute observation about Hillary's "popular vote" strategy:

The problem with the Clinton strategy--and I don't mean in political terms--is not that it shows her willingness to change positions in the name of political expediency. Rather, it's that if the popular vote had been the metric all along, Obama would have used a different strategy that did not rely so heavily on caucus states and their (generally) small populations.

2008 is not a case of a repeat of 2000. Al Gore lost to George W. Bush because the re-count of the votes in Florida was suspended before it was completed, and the count at that time had Bush ahead. He consequently won the necessary electoral votes to become president.

At no time did Gore try to make the argument that he had won the popular vote and that that should somehow trump the Constitutionally-defined electoral college process.

There is no analogous situation this year in the Democratic nominating race. The delegate count is the the defined path to the nomination. Suggesting that a different metric should be used once the primary season was underway is a disservice to the Democratic Party and to the nation.

And to create the impression that an injustice has occurred when you're losing by the rules? Shameful.

Obama's commencement speech at Wesleyan University

An excerpt, full remarks here:

Each of you will have the chance to make your own discovery in the years to come. And I say “chance” because you won’t have to take it. There’s no community service requirement in the real world; no one forcing you to care. You can take your diploma, walk off this stage, and chase only after the big house and the nice suits and all the other things that our money culture says you should by. You can choose to narrow your concerns and live your life in a way that tries to keep your story separate from America’s.

But I hope you don’t. Not because you have an obligation to those who are less fortunate, though you do have that obligation. Not because you have a debt to all those who helped you get here, though you do have that debt.

It’s because you have an obligation to yourself. Because our individual salvation depends on collective salvation. Because thinking only about yourself, fulfilling your immediate wants and needs, betrays a poverty of ambition. Because it’s only when you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you realize your true potential and discover the role you’ll play in writing the next great chapter in America’s story.

Video here.

Hmm...

An interesting comment about how presidential candidates usually exit the race... and how it differs from what Hillary is doing.

http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2008/05/clinton-campaig.html

Scratch that bit about VP Clinton

Her behavior baffles me.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/article?a=168323&f=19

Friendly flora

Fascinating article about the bacteria that live inside the crook of your arm.

Health care charge in SF

A new 5% charge is being added to restaurant checks in SF to provide health care for all residents.

No longer a Virgin America virgin

Victor and I flew Virgin America today on the first weekend of our "summer California tour": SF this month, LA next, San Diego in July, and Palm Springs in August.

I have to say I'm rather impressed. Web checkin was smooth, no line to drop off our bags, and a generous 70 lb. per bag weight limit. On board we were given coupons for free cocktails (and they served Bombay Sapphire :-). Well done.

VP Clinton?

I agree with Andrew Sullivan with regard to Obama's taking on Hillary as his vice presidential running mate: what a difficult situation for Obama to navigate.

But I am beginning to believe that doing so may be the smartest path.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/05/team-of-rival-3.html

Anatomy and physiology

So I started my first semester of human anatomy and physiology this week, and I'm really enjoying it so far.

I had lab today, and while a lot of my fellow students were trying to get out of there as fast as possible, I took my time, enjoying every minute of gazing at tissue samples under the microscope.

And on my way to the parking lot, I was reminded of the book I checked out most often from the grade school library. It was titled something simple like, The Human Body, and it had an overview of all of the systems (e.g. digestive, nervous, endocrine) that I'm studying in more detail now.

I love this stuff. How did I ever get off track and spend all those years working in the software industry?

Let's just say it feels good to be on this new (but old) path. :-)

Oil woes

Two items caught my eye today...

First, as the price of oil rises, nations are mining more coal, which is by far the worse greenhouse gas offender.

And secondly, the International Energy Agency is preparing a new estimate of worldwide oil reserves, an estimate that is sharply lower than the current consensus.

Harvey Milk to be honored at SF City Hall

With a bust at the top of the grand staircase. More here.

AND MORE FROM TOWLEROAD on Portland's new gay mayor, Sam Adams.

My FL/MI rant

This will be my last political post for a few days as we're heading to SF tomorrow for Memorial Day Weekend. Can't wait to see all my buddies!

I also can't wait for resolution of the problem of Florida and Michigan's delegations to the Democratic Convention. Frankly, I've grown disgusted by the rhetoric. Hillary's comparison of the current situation to the civil rights movement is over the top, as is her campaign's suggestions that Obama should get none of the uncommitted delegates from Michigan where he wasn't even on the ballot.

And all of that is especially jarring when her husband seems to think that seating half of the delegates is an appropriate penalty.

Come on, let's get real. Of course Florida and Michigan voters deserve a say, now and in November. But they aren't being penalized for being black, people of color, women, etc. They are being penalized because they broke the rules.

Hillary is fond of sports analogies and talks about "not stopping the game" until every minute has been played. But if a team breaks the rules--recruiting violations, fouls, etc.--the team is penalized. And it may not be the players' fault!

Let's say the coach breaks the college recruiting rules. Is it the players mistake? No, but THE TEAM is penalized, perhaps with no post-season play, as a deterrent to a repetition of the behavior and to ensure that the teams who played by the rules aren't put at a disadvantage.

Hillary likes to talk about this race for the presidency as if we are "hiring" someone. Well, run with that workplace analogy... imagine you're facing some merit-based situation at work: a job promotion, a sales contest, etc. Should the individual or department that starts a week early and gets the jump on everyone else be rewarded for it? What would you think was fair if you lost out because someone broke the rules while you played by them?

Is the current primary/caucus process the best way to select a nominee? Should Iowa always be first? Good questions. Debate them! But don't change the rules after the fact. If she felt this strongly about the issue, she should have made her case before they voted. Pledging not to campaign in those states because they broke the rules was hardly standing up for the "civil rights" of those voters... how can she make this argument with a straight face?

And face it: Hillary is only talking about Florida and Michigan now because it matters to her own self-interest. Had she dropped out a month ago, do you honestly believe that she'd still be making this case as vociferously?

If John Edwards was out jumping up and down about the rights of the voters in Florida and Michigan, I'd applaud him for it. He'd have nothing to gain from it personally. But Hillary? Hmm.

I'm in a great mood today but this issue is one thing that gets me hot and bothered right now. Every time I start to have some respect for Hillary again, she slips back into this "scorched earth" mode. The only thing I've seen that makes any sense of it is this...

Who knows.

The fate of Michigan and Florida's delegations

The folks over at the 2008 Democratic Convention Watch blog have posted five possible scenarios for what will happen to Michigan and Florida's Democratic delegations:

1. Do not seat Florida or Michigan. Current Official DNC rules
2. Seat FL 1/2 vote, MI 69-59 split and supers full vote.
3. Seat FL/MI all half votes, pledged and supers
4. FL/MI, pledged half vote, supers full vote
5. Seat FL & MI based on the elections that have taken place. This scenario is in the left sidebar.

More details on how each scenario affects the delegate counts here.

Mirror, mirror, on the wall: What's the greenest plan of all?

Wired magazine has a list of ten green "heresies": suggestions for fighting global warm that go against the typical green mindset.

My thoughts (in italics) on a few of their "Inconvenient truths" (with summaries borrowed from the New York Times):

Shun organic milk. It takes 25 organic cows to make as much milk as 23 industrial ones, Joanna Pearlstein reports: “More cows, more cow emissions. But that’s just the beginning. A single organically raised cow puts out 16 percent more greenhouse gases than its counterpart. That double whammy — more cows and more emissions per cow — makes organic dairies a cog in the global warming machine.”

Definitely a case of juggling priorities... sometimes what may be best for the planet may not be best for one's health. But what they don't talk about here is how all the pesticides, hormones, etc. used for the conventionally-raised dairy cows affect the environment. They also ignore the benefits, including higher yields, from intensive multiple crop agriculture as compared with the standard monoculture model used on most American farms. And key to this discussion, as they mention, is whether agricultural products are consumed locally or shipped long distances.

Farm forests. Rapidly growing young trees suck up carbon dioxide, but mature trees absorb much less, and when they’re allowed to die and rot, their carbon is released — which means that an old-growth forest can be a net contributor of CO2 to the atmosphere. Matt Power suggests clearing out the oldest trees to make room for seedlings, landfilling the scrap, and turning the usable wood into furniture and houses that will lock in the carbon. “It won’t make a glossy photo for the Sierra Club’s annual report,” he writes, “but it will take huge amounts of carbon out of the atmosphere.”

Again, they ignore the benefits of old growth forests for maintaining biodiversity. Smarter forest management has to be part of the solution here, mixing old-growth and new growth in a way that produces a net positive effect on reducing CO2 release into the atmosphere.

Don’t sweat the A/C. While Thoreau’s spiritual descendants in New England may deplore the “wasteful” air conditioners in the Sun Belt, the Yankees are the ones with the big carbon footprints. Heating a typical house in the Northeast with fuel oil produces 13,000 pounds of CO2 annually, Mr. Power notes, while cooling a similar house in Phoenix produces only 900. Nationally, heating American’s homes produces eight times more CO2 than cooling homes.

Wow, this one surprised me, but I feel a little better about living in Vegas now! (Except for the water (lack of) part...)

Don’t go back to nature. A cabin in the woods isn’t as green as an apartment in the city. “Urban living is kinder to the planet, and Manhattan is perhaps the greenest place in the U.S.,” Mr. Power writes. “A Manhattanite’s carbon footprint is 30 percent smaller than the average American’s.”

Not sure about the cabin in the woods, but urban living definitely trumps suburban living (on many counts :-).

Accept genetic engineering. “California-based Arcadia Biosciences is already peddling genes for nitrogen-efficient rice that the company reckons could save the equivalent of 50 million tons of carbon dioxide a year,” Spencer Resiss writes, and adds, “What some greens deride as Frankencrops are also the only serious hope for biofuels.”

Again, there is a price here. Our choice to depend on a few, human-engineered crop varieties is not a smart long-term strategy for avoiding famine. Mother Nature will kick us in the rump hard at some point...

Embrace nuclear power. “Every serious effort at carbon accounting reaches the same conclusion: Nukes win,” Mr. Resiss writes. “Only wind comes close — and that’s when it’s blowing.” He also notes, “One of the Kyoto Protocol’s worst features is a sop to greens that denies carbon credits to power-starved developing countries that build nukes — thereby ensuring they’ll continue to depend on filthy coal.”

I have to agree with this one. One article I read reached this conclusion: storing or disposing of nuclear waste is a manageable problem given the relatively small amount that is produced by nuclear power plants. Climate change is a problem that is multiple orders of magnitude more challenging.

Two Pinocchio's for McCain

McCain has earned two Pinocchio's from the Washington Post's FactChecker for his statements suggesting that Obama's openness to negotiations with our enemies veers from the presidential norm:

McCain is distorting history when he suggests that Barack Obama is bucking American presidential tradition in expressing a willingness to meet with the leaders of countries hostile to the United States. Hitler apart, U.S. presidents have held meetings with some of the greatest mass murderers in history. It is also incorrect to suggest, as both McCain and President Bush have done, that the mere willingness to meet or negotiate with foreign dictators constitutes "appeasement," a term used to describe actions such as the surrender of the Czech Sudetenland to Nazi Germany in a desperate bid to avoid World War II.

How America was destroyed

Dad sent me this cartoon about the Obama/muslim meme... perfect. :-)

I mean, really... what are people thinking!?

Mayor Sam Adams

Sam Adams was elected last night as Portland, Oregon's, first gay mayor.

I remember Sam from my years in Portland when he was longtime mayor Vera Katz's chief assistant.

Congrats, Sam!

Biofuels 2.0

Here we go again. Since the whole corn ethanol experiment hasn't turned out all that well, a move is on to try a different set of crops for use as biofuels. One problem: some of the proposed replacements are invasive species and carry a risk of invading surrounding areas as weeds. And while the claim is that they are hardy enough to be used on marginal lands that aren't rich enough for growing food, what's to stop farmers from planting them on prime farmland if the price that these new crops fetch is high enough?

... Biologists and botanists are warning that they, too, may bring serious unintended consequences. Most of these newer crops are what scientists label invasive species — that is, weeds — that have an extraordinarily high potential to escape biofuel plantations, overrun adjacent farms and natural land, and create economic and ecological havoc in the process, they now say....

“With biofuels, there’s always a hurry,” said Geoffrey Howard, an invasive species expert with the International Union for Conservation of Nature. “Plantations are started by investors, often from the U.S. or Europe, so they are eager to generate biofuels within a couple of years and also, as you might guess, they don’t want a negative assessment.”

Earthquake risk in Oregon schools

A geologist employed by the state of Oregon, Yumei Wang, warns that 1,000 or more schools in her state are vulnerable to collapse in an earthquake similiar in magnitude to the recent one in the Sichuan province of China.

Talking to your enemies

Former Secretary of State James Baker echoes the Obama position (or the other way around :-) regarding negotiating with our enemies: "You don't just talk to your friends."

Here's an excerpt from an October, 2006, interview:

Are we at the peak?

Peak oil is the term that marks the point at which we've taken half of all the world's petroleum out of the ground. And while that may not seem like such a bad thing--hey, we've still got half of it left--it's a problem for two reasons.

The first is that we're now using oil at a far faster rate than the average for the period when we pulled out the first half. So even if it was just as easy to get the rest of the oil as it was to get what we've already consumed, it wouldn't last nearly as long.

But the second problem compounds the first: it isn't as easy to get at the remaining oil as it's been up until now. In the early days of the petroleum age, you dug a hole and the oil gushed to the surface. Now what's left is often difficult to extract. It's in the nooks and crannies of the oil fields that have been in production for years, permeating porous rocks and soil. It no longer bubbles to the surface; sometimes an injection of steam or water is required before it can be pumped to the surface.

An analyst at Goldman Sachs who predicted $100 a barrel oil a few years ago--to a chorus of laughter--is now predicting it will reach $200 before long.

For more on peak oil, check out The Oil Drum.

Where the race stands

MSNBC's First Read has a good summary.

Change is coming to America

Obama's speech in Des Moines tonight... congratulating Hillary... taking on McCain... moving into the next phase of the campaign now that he has won a majority of the delegates from primaries and caucuses.

And talking about change in America.

It's been a long road since that ecstatic night in Iowa last January. And here we are. :-)

Yes, we can! Si, se puede!

Oregon puts the exclamation mark on the night

MSNBC just called Oregon for Obama!

Here's a link to Obama's remarks earlier tonight in Iowa... where it all began!

The road here has been long, and that is partly because we’ve traveled it with one of the most formidable candidates to ever run for this office. In her thirty-five years of public service, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton has never given up on her fight for the American people, and tonight I congratulate her on her victory in Kentucky. We have had our disagreements during this campaign, but we all admire her courage, her commitment and her perseverance. No matter how this primary ends, Senator Clinton has shattered myths and broken barriers and changed the America in which my daughters and yours will come of age.

Some may see the millions upon millions of votes cast for each of us as evidence that our party is divided, but I see it as proof that we have never been more energized and united in our desire to take this country in a new direction. More than anything, we need this unity and this energy in the months to come, because while our primary has been long and hard-fought, the hardest and most important part of our journey still lies ahead.

We face an opponent, John McCain, who arrived in Washington nearly three decades ago as a Vietnam War hero, and earned an admirable reputation for straight talk and occasional independence from his party.

But this year’s Republican primary was a contest to see which candidate could out-Bush the other, and that is the contest John McCain won. The Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Americans that once bothered Senator McCain’s conscience are now his only economic policy. The Bush health care plan that only helps those who are already healthy and wealthy is now John McCain’s answer to the 47 million Americans without insurance and the millions more who can’t pay their medical bills. The Bush Iraq policy that asks everything of our troops and nothing of Iraqi politicians is John McCain’s policy too, and so is the fear of tough and aggressive diplomacy that has left this country more isolated and less secure than at any time in recent history. The lobbyists who ruled George Bush’s Washington are now running John McCain’s campaign, and they actually had the nerve to say that the American people won’t care about this. Talk about out of touch!

I will leave it up to Senator McCain to explain to the American people whether his policies and positions represent long-held convictions or Washington calculations, but the one thing they don’t represent is change.

Majority!

OBAMA!!!

CNN has just reported that, by their count, Obama has won a majority of the pledged delegates awarded by Democratic primaries and caucuses. And despite getting blown out by Hillary in Kentucky, it was the bluegrass state that put him over the top.

Now, on to Oregon... and the convention!

From the Obama campaign:

The polls are closed in Kentucky and votes are being counted in Oregon, and it's clear that tonight we have reached a major milestone on this journey.

We have won an absolute majority of all the delegates chosen by the people in this Democratic primary process.

From the beginning, this journey wasn't about me or the other candidates. It was about a simple choice -- will we continue down the same road with the same leadership that has failed us for so long, or will we take a different path?

Too many of us have been disappointed by politics and politicians more times than you can count. We've seen promises broken and good ideas drowned in a sea of influence, point-scoring, and petty bickering that has consumed Washington.

Yet, in spite of all the doubt and disappointment -- or perhaps because of it -- people have stood for change.

Unfortunately, our opponents in the other party continue to embrace yesterday's policies and they will continue to employ yesterday's tactics -- they will try to change the subject, and they will play on fears and divisions to distract us from what matters to you and your future.

But those tactics will not work in this election. They won't work because you won't let them.

Not this time. Not this year.

We still have work to do to in the remaining states, where we will compete for every delegate available.

But tonight, I want to thank you for everything you have done to take us this far -- farther than anyone predicted, expected, or even believed possible.

And I want to remind you that you will make all the difference in the epic challenge ahead.

Thank you,
Barack Obama

Not quite the straight dope

Matthew Yglesias has a couple of good posts here and here on how John McCain's "straight talk express" has been doing a lot of twisting with statements Obama has made on Iran.

A quote from Obama:

Here's the truth: the Soviet Union had thousands of nuclear weapons, and Iran doesn't have a single one. But when the world was on the brink of nuclear holocaust, Kennedy talked to Khrushchev and he got those missiles out of Cuba. Why shouldn't we have the same courage and the confidence to talk to our enemies? That's what strong countries do, that's what strong presidents do, that's what I'll do when I'm president of the United States of America.

ACLU's Blog of Rights

The American Civil Liberties Union has launched a new blog. You can find it here and on my Blogroll at the right.

It's been a hot, hot day...

And I've had the A/C on for most of it.

Where's the power coming from? The Las Vegas Sun reported today that the Nevada Power Co. is retiring a number of older natural gas generation units and is replacing them with three new and much more efficient "peaker" units, also gas-fired:

Over the past year the power company has demolished old gas-burning units capable of providing enough power for 130,000 homes and replaced them with 600 megawatts of state-of-the-art gas “peakers” that can generate enough electricity for 450,000 homes. They’re called peakers because they are intended to kick in and provide a boost of electricity during peak use times — on the hottest days of the year, for example.

Although they will provide more than three times the electricity of the old units, they will emit less pollution, according to the company.

Instead of running constantly in a sort of stand-by mode, the peakers will shut down when they’re not needed, saving on fuel costs, which are passed on to consumers. The new units take only 10 minutes to turn on, compared with half a day for the old plant, which was unable to start up in a hurry if demand suddenly spiked on a spring day....

Overall, between the new construction and upgrades, air pollution from the plant will be reduced by 46 percent and its energy production will increase by 65 percent, officials said. Before upgrades and new construction, the plant coughed out about 15,000 tons of federally regulated pollutants each year. Once all three sets of peakers are online at the end of this year, the plant will release 8,100 tons a year of those pollutants, including nitrogen oxides and tiny dust particles.

The utility also installed three solar panels at the same power plant. And given the amount of sun we get, we're perfectly positioned here in Vegas to take advantage of improved solar plants coming to market soon. Nevada already has the third largest solar plant in the world, SolarOne, in Boulder City.

MEANWHILE IN TEXAS, T. Boone Pickens is backing wind energy, investing billions of dollars in order to build what will likely be the world's largest windfarm, producing enough electricity for 1.3 million homes.

Quote for the day

"The central conservative truth is that it is culture, not politics, that determines the success of a society. The central liberal truth is that politics can change a culture and save it from itself."

-- Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Something I didn't know I didn't know #1

(And I say "#1" only because I just started counting. :-)

So my first big "gulp" and "Wow, I did not know that" while reading Fareed Zakaria's The Post-American World came in chapter three when I learned about the ships in Imperial China's fleets in the early 1400s.

Beginning in 1405, Zheng He led a number of naval expeditions with ships as long as 400 feet, easily dwarfing European ships of the day. Compared to Columbus' expedition to the Americas roughly 85 years later, Zheng He had up to 100 times more ships under his command... and as many as 28,000 sailors compared to Columbus' 90.

More from UCLA and NOVA, including an animation from the latter.

What comes next?

Writing for the New Yorker, George Packer wonders in "The Fall of Conservatism" whether the conservative movement has run out of ideas. He ends his long (nine page) piece with a look at the candidacies of Obama and McCain and their respective abilities to connect with the voters who will ultimately determine the electoral results in November.

And it occurs to me only now that by Packer's analysis, I've lived my entire life inside the age of conservatism that he now claims is dying:

The era of American politics that has been dying before our eyes was born in 1966. That January, a twenty-seven-year-old editorial writer for the St. Louis Globe-Democrat named Patrick Buchanan went to work for Richard Nixon, who was just beginning the most improbable political comeback in American history.

Perhaps this reading of history helps to explain my strong attachment to Obama's candidacy and it what it represents.

And maybe it also serves to clarify my own misgivings about what comes next and my reservations about what government can and should do.

We live in a different time from that of FDR, when economic depression and international events presented clear and immediate threats to the well-being of our nation and its citizens. Nor are we faced with the threat of life ending suddenly and awfully all around us, a fear that lasted from the 50s through the 80s (one night in '83, I wondered for a bit whether distant lightning was a nuclear first strike... the threat seemed that close at hand). And we're no longer living in the 90s when, for just awhile, it seemed like the world was on a wholly different path and maybe we really were living in the best of all possible worlds.

We're somewhere and "somewhen" else now. I believe that we're soon going to be facing the sorts of challenges that will require a strong national resolve, just as we did in FDR's time. I fear that technology and interconnectedness is making it more possible every day for the world to again fall under the shade of calamity and collapse. And I think that in some sense that that golden path of the 90s was a distraction, a party that let us believe that things were going to be a lot simpler than they've turned out to be.

Obama is right when he speaks to the uniqueness of this time that we live in and "the fierce urgency of now" that calls upon us to come together and solve these growing challenges that we face.

Whether any leader is up to this task I can't say. Whether we are as a people is also arguable. We've done it before. Doing it again will require that we give something up, and that's not an ethic that's been cultivated much in America the last few decades.

Now is a time to be questioning our assumptions and opening our minds.

Not so much thinking big as thinking wide.

Investment in crop research has plummeted

Over the past several decades, investment in crop research, especially by the developed world, has plummeted. Some donors believed the food problem was solved, and other priorities crowded out continued efforts to find better crop varieties. Today we're see soaring food prices, more people going hungry, and the potential for new crop disease strains and tougher pests to catch us off guard.

The New York Times reports on the problem, noting that, "Adjusted for inflation, the World Bank cut its agricultural lending to $2 billion in 2004 from $7.7 billion in 1980."

Also, even in the midst of the current crisis:

... Cuts in agricultural research continue. The United States is in the midst of slashing, by as much as 75 percent, its $59.5 million annual support for a global research network that focuses on improving crops vital to agriculture in poor countries. That network includes the rice institute.

But a big risk is that we'll respond with a strategy that actually reduces the long-term resiliency and viability of our own food chain. Planting a few varieties of a only few crops and transferring genes between species are approaches to the problem which endanger the biodiversity that we've historically depended on to feed ourselves.

And if history is any guide, we're not as smart as we think we are...

(Background on genetically modified organism (GMO)-foods and the environment here, as well as a recent article about softening opposition to GMO-foods in the face of rising food prices.)

AN ARTICLE IN SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN also warns about growing instability as a result of rising food prices and recommends more agricultural research as one of four steps that are urgently needed.

In addition, the article notes the increasing amount of agricultural production that is fed to livestock. If you're not a vegetarian and have no desire to become one, you can at least make smarter meat choices. Chicken and pork are both significantly better choices than beef in terms of the amount of feed that is required to produce a pound of meat, as well as environmental impact.

This alternative, however, is simply revolting... PETA recently announced a $1 million prize for the first scientist to develop an in vitro meat that would "mimic flesh." Please, people... let's stick with real food.

Big crowds in Portland

The last time I saw a crowd this big in Portland...

was back in March of 2003: a peace rally before the Iraq War. Which seems very fitting.

Waking up at the Red Rock

Wow... 75,000 gather for Obama in PDX

Obama draws a crowd estimated at 75,000 in Portland. I remember watching the dragon boat races along the Willamette... wish I was there with them today! (Though poolside wasn't bad. :-)

http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/thecaucus/5159

Poolside

Celebrating the end of finals poolside at the Red Rock Hotel & Casino.

8-)

Final Nevada results

The Nevada Democratic Party convention was held this weekend, and the final delegate results are 14 for Obama, 11 for Hillary. That's an improvement for Obama over the 13-12 split in his favor that was predicted back in January.

Graffiti animation

Super cool.

MUTO a wall-painted animation by BLU from blu on Vimeo.

Hillary's legacy

Whatever happens, Hillary Clinton has irreversibly altered the American political landscape and women's place in it. While there are still sexist individuals who will not vote for a female presidential candidate, the strength of her campaign has proven that the nation is ready for a woman in the Oval office. And the nation is better for it.

From MSNBC:

"What Hillary has done — win, lose or draw — has permanently changed the picture," says Marie Wilson, president of the White House Project, which trains women to run for office. "Next time, we're not going to have to prove that the public will vote for a woman. We won't have to prove competency. She has succeeded at that level."

The dangers of flying

Body piercing jewelry is not a security risk on airplanes. The TSA needs to get a clue and stop harassing people.

I've had piercings come and go over the years and never had any problems flying. But I do know people who have, and I'd be hopping mad if it happened to me. Flying is enough of a pain already.

(Which reminds me of one of my favorite greetings cards of all time:

The illustration shows a woman, cocktail in hand, seated on a plane that is clearly in a steep dive.

The caption reads:

JENNIFER'S LAST THOUGHTS...

The bubble above the woman's head:

First the wrong vodka, now this!!!!!!!!

:-)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24576641/

She is right

I agree with Hillary on this one: Bush looks foolish asking the Saudis to pump more oil.

Hillary Clinton ratcheted up her criticism of President Bush today, mocking him for simply “begging” Saudi Arabia to increase oil supplies rather than having a real plan to deal with the energy crisis.

“I don’t think it is a good energy policy to depend upon the kindness of the Saudis … while businesses and individuals are trying to figure out how they’re going to afford nearly $4 a gallon gas and nearly $5 a gallon diesel,” she said. “The impact is really beginning to ripple dramatically through the economy.”

Clinton’s comments came during a roundtable discussion with local residents about a host of problems facing the country today, primarily economic ones.

“I think it’s very important that we do something more dramatic than going to have tea with the Saudis,” she said. “The Saudis may decide, well we better do something to help out President Bush, but that’s a short term fix. It is not going to have any long-term consequences. And we just have to take a different approach if we’re going to begin to get serious.

It sort of leaves you wondering, though, why she was pushing the gas tax holiday idea. It's just another short term fix.

Bush's approval rating

Sad but true...

But who are the 28% of people who approve of his job performance?

And the price of oil over the same period:

More on the Strategic Petroleum Reserve

The Energy Department has decided to temporarily halt purchases of oil for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve given concern that Congress may pass a law requiring such a move (see my post). But note this:

The Strategic Petroleum Reserve, located underground at four sites in the salt caverns bordering the Gulf of Mexico, was built in the 1970s after the first oil embargo to protect the country against a sudden drop in oil supplies.

The Bush administration has been filling the reserve since 2001, boosting the reserve from about 540 million barrels to 702.7 million, enough to protect against a disruption in imports for about 58 days, said Barnett.

Seven hundred and three million barrels... and we'd go through it in 58 days. Think about that. If stacked one upon the other, they'd reach to the moon... and half way back again.

Obama responds to Bush & McCain

Obama responded strongly this morning to Bush's comments yesterday (subsequently echoed by McCain) that Democrats are akin those who appeased Nazi Germany in the '30s:

Video here.

McCain's hypocrisy on Hamas

From the Washington Post:

But given his own position on Hamas, McCain is the last politician who should be attacking Obama. Two years ago, just after Hamas won the Palestinian parliamentary elections, I interviewed McCain for the British network Sky News's "World News Tonight" program. Here is the crucial part of our exchange:

I asked: "Do you think that American diplomats should be operating the way they have in the past, working with the Palestinian government if Hamas is now in charge?"

McCain answered: "They're the government; sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them, one way or another, and I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy towards Hamas because of their dedication to violence and the things that they not only espouse but practice, so... but it's a new reality in the Middle East. I think the lesson is people want security and a decent life and decent future, that they want democracy. Fatah was not giving them that."

For some Europeans in Davos, Switzerland, where the interview took place, that's a perfectly reasonable answer. But it is an unusual if not unique response for an American politician from either party. And it is most certainly not how the newly conservative presumptive Republican nominee would reply today.

Given that exchange, the new John McCain might say that Hamas should be rooting for the old John McCain to win the presidential election. The old John McCain, it appears, was ready to do business with a Hamas-led government, while both Clinton and Obama have said that Hamas must change its policies toward Israel and terrorism before it can have diplomatic relations with the United States.

And while McCain tried to give a "big" speech yesterday, it was overshadowed by Bush's cheap comments about Democratic "appeasement." Joe Klein at Time magazine comments on McCain's address.

The California decision

Okay, the nap is over, and this is too important to not echo a few things I've read elsewhere about the California Supreme Court's ruling today that the state's laws barring same-sex marriage were unconstitutional:

1. First, a few conservatives have already rung the "unelected judges" bell when decrying the decision. But in California, while all Supreme Court justices are appointed by the Governor, they must be regularly re-confirmed by a vote of the people. All seven justices have been so confirmed, and all with overwhelming majorities. Note that California voters have previously recalled Supreme Court Justices, starting with Rose Bird in the 1980s.
2. The California legislature has twice passed laws approving gay marriage. Both times Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed them.
3. Today Mr. Schwarzenegger stated that he supported the Court's decision.

More from the New York Times.

My only concern is that this is once again used as a wedge issue to energize the Republican's conservative base with unfortunate results this November. One glimmer of hope: John McCain today said that he respected the right of the state of California, like all states, to find its own path on this issue. Potential Libertarian challenger Bob Barr concurred.

Time has passed. Let's see if Americans, starting with Californians, are ready to offer their gay and lesbian brothers, sisters, sons, daughters, parents, friends, co-workers, and strangers the same rights and blessings that their straight counterparts enjoy.

So Happy It's Thursday

:-)

It's a busy news day... the California Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage (yea!), the impact of Edwards' endorsement of Obama, the Bush/McCain and Obama controversy over what the former are calling "appeasement" and what I consider "intelligent, pragmatic foreign policy," Hillary's defense of Obama on that particular matter, and so on.

But I just finished final exams for my first semester back in school, and I'm #1 exhausted and #2 a little giddy! Even though my summer classes start on Tuesday, I've taken so many quizzes and exams these last few weeks--and spent so many hours studying--that even this long weekend seems like a vacation.

All the work paid off, though, as I'm happy with my results so far. And Victor has been great and soooo supportive... thank you, bobo! ;-)

So instead of blogging about anything else I'm going to take a nap. Later we're going to the opening of the new Kerry Simon restaurant over at Palms Place. Then... who knows.

If you're interested in what I might have written about, check out what I was reading while I was at the gym. The stories are listed in the pale pink box titled, "What I'm Reading...".

ONE THOUGHT

Obama has now been endorsed by three of his former rivals for the Democratic nomination: Chris Dodd, Bill Richardson, and John Edwards.

Is there a Mr. Biden in the house?

Going to the chapel... CA Supreme Court rules on gay marriage

The California Supreme Court ruled today that state laws banning gay marriage, including Proposition 22 passed in 2000, are discriminatory:

The state high court's ruling was unlikely to end the debate over gay matrimony in California. A group has circulated petitions for a November ballot initiative that would amend the state Constitution to block same-sex marriage, and the Legislature has twice passed bills to authorize gay marriage. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed both.

The long-awaited court decision stemmed from San Francisco's highly publicized same-sex weddings, which in 2004 helped spur a conservative backlash in a presidential election year and a national dialogue over gay rights....

Today's ruling by the Republican-dominated court affects more than 100,000 same-sex couples in the state, about a quarter of whom have children, according to U.S. census figures. It came after high courts in New York, Washington and New Jersey refused to extend marriage rights to gay couples. Only Massachusetts' top court has ruled in favor of permitting gays to wed.

UPDATE

Analysis from Andrew Sullivan here and here.

And just one family's story of the impact HERE.

Email from Obama re: Edwards

Just received this:

I have some very exciting news.

My good friend John Edwards is endorsing our campaign and joining our movement for change.

We're here in Grand Rapids, Michigan -- and if you receive this message in time, you can probably turn on your TV and be part of the moment.

I'm deeply honored by John's support. He is a true leader who dedicated his career to improving the lives of ordinary Americans.

John ran a strong, principled campaign for president, focusing on a number of important issues where we share common ground -- universal health care, bringing our troops home from Iraq, and eliminating poverty in America.

The way he ran his campaign was also important. He ran in a way that reflected our shared conviction that we need to fundamentally change politics.

Like our campaign, John's campaign never accepted donations from Washington lobbyists or special interest PACs.

Let's welcome John Edwards to the campaign with an outpouring of the kind of grassroots support that is bringing our political process back to the people.

Make a donation of whatever you can afford now, and if you choose, include your own note to Senator Edwards. I'll make sure he gets them:

https://donate.barackobama.com/edwards

Thank you for all that you're doing,

Barack

And Edwards says...

"Democratic voters in America have made their choice and so have I."

Short video clip here, full endorsement here.

From the "Better late than never!" category: Edwards to endorse Obama

The rumors have been circulating all morning... and it's now confirmed: John Edwards will endorse Obama tonight in Michigan.

Wonder if this means that Edwards' 19 pledged delegates from Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada will now move into the Obama column? Probably decided on a case-by-case basis... (More on that here.)

I'm not sure, but I don't believe Edwards himself is a superdelegate. Didn't see him on the list at Democratic Convention Watch...

By the Obama campaign's count, Obama is now 25 pledged delegates away from having won a majority of the pledged delegates currently sanctioned by the DNC and 133.5 delegates away from securing 2025 delegates to secure the Democratic nomination.

Yee haw!

Clinton hasn't completely lost her bearings...

And says that anyone who votes for McCain instead of Obama (should he be the nominee) would be making a "grave error."

"Anybody who has ever voted for me or voted for Barack has much more in common in terms of what we want to see happen in our country and in the world with the other than they do with John McCain," Clinton said on CNN's "The Situation Room."

"I'm going to work my heart out for whoever our nominee is -- obviously I'm still hoping to be that nominee, but I'm going to do everything I can to make sure that anyone who supported me ... understands what a grave error it would be not to vote for Sen. Obama."

Early exercise makes a difference

New research reinforces the benefits of exercise, in this case with a finding that exercise during the teen years can help protect girls from adult breast cancer:

Women who were physically active as teens and young adults were 23 percent less likely to develop premenopausal breast cancer than women who grew up sedentary, researchers report Wednesday in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

The biggest impact was regular exercise from ages 12 to 22.

"This is not the extreme athlete," Colditz cautioned.

The women at lowest risk reported doing 3 hours and 15 minutes of running or other vigorous activity a week or, for the less athletic, 13 hours a week of walking. Typically, the teens reported more strenuous exercise while during adulthood, walking was most common.

Why would it help? A big point of exercise in middle age and beyond is to keep off the pounds. After menopause, fat tissue is a chief source of estrogen.

In youth, however, the theory is that physical activity itself lowers estrogen levels. Studies of teen athletes show that very intense exercise can delay onset of menstrual cycles and cause irregular periods.

The moderate exercise reported in this study was nowhere near enough for those big changes. But it probably was enough to cause slight yet still helpful hormone changes, said Dr. Alpa Patel, a cancer prevention specialist at the American Cancer Society, who praised the new research.

I've got one teenage niece and one who'll be there soon... and, incidentally, it's their mother's birthday. Happy Birthday, Molly!

California Supreme Court to rule on gay marriage May 15

I just got a tip that the California Supreme Court will be issuing its ruling on gay marriage tomorrow, May 15, at 10am.

Background here.

And here's confirmation.

NARAL Pro-Choice America endorses Obama

Wow... a little surprised but happy to hear this news:

NEW YORK (AP) - Democrat Barack Obama has won the endorsement of NARAL Pro-Choice America. The leading abortion rights advocacy organization has supported rival Hillary Rodham Clinton throughout her political career.

The organization was set to announce the endorsement of its political action committee Wednesday.

NARAL president Nancy Keenan said in a statement: "Today, we are proud to put our organization's grassroots and political support behind the pro-choice candidate whom we believe will secure the Democratic nomination and advance to the general election. That candidate is Senator Obama."

Officials said NARAL's political committee board was about evenly divided among Clinton and Obama supporters and that the decision to endorse was hard fought. Ultimately, the board voted unanimously Friday to support the Illinois senator.

Obama and Appalachia

John Marshall at Talking Points Memo argues that Obama doesn't have a problem with white voters or blue collar voters... but he does have a problem with voters in Appalachia (which includes significant portions of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Tennessee... and all of West Virginia. (But, notably, not enough of Virginia, the Carolinas, Georgia, or Alabama to offset his strengths elsewhere in those states.)

And the counties where Hillary has won big (65% or greater) coincide quite well with the Appalachian region. From Marshall's post:

There's been a lot of talk in this campaign about Barack Obama's problem with working class white voters or rural voters. But these claims are both inaccurate because they are incomplete. You can look at states like Virginia, Ohio, Pennsylvania and other states and see the different numbers and they are all explained by one basic fact. Obama's problem isn't with white working class voters or rural voters. It's Appalachia. That explains why Obama had a difficult time in Ohio and Pennsylvania and why he's getting crushed in West Virginia and Kentucky.

If it were just a matter of rural voters or the white working class, the pattern would show up in other regions. But by and large it does not.

In so many words, Pennsylvania and Ohio have big chunks of Appalachia within their borders. But those regions are heavily offset by non-Appalachian sections that are cultural and demographically distinct. West Virginia is 100% Appalachian. If you look at southeastern Ohio or the middle chunk of Pennsylvania, Obama did about the same as he's doing tonight in West Virginia.

For Marshall's analysis of why Obama has trouble in this region, read his full post here.

Also, here's the New York Times' article on the West Virginia primary.