218!

So I've been listing too much of the raucous debate in the house about health care on C-SPAN.

Politico provides the best analysis of the behind-the-scenes action in what led to where we are:

The rebirth of the reform effort is the result of a little luck, insurance company avarice, a subsiding of post-Brown panic among party incumbents and the calculation by many Hill Democrats that going small or giving up was just as politically perilous as going big.

But the main reason the bill has made it to the floor has as much to do with the complex, occasionally tense, ever-evolving partnership between the first African-American president and the first female speaker.

and

Publicly, the White House seemed to send a different signal each day.

In the space of two weeks, Obama or his top advisers suggested breaking the bill into smaller parts, keeping it together in one comprehensive package, putting it at the back of legislative line and needing to “punch it through” Congress, as Obama himself said at one point.

At a fundraiser in early February, Obama described the “next step” as sitting down with Republicans, Democrats and health care experts, describing a process that could take weeks, if not longer. He also seemed to acknowledge for the first time that Congress may well decide to scrap health care altogether — an admission that blunted his repeated and emphatic vows to finish the job.

Behind the scenes, Obama had, in fact, already settled on a strategy.

He would invite Republicans and Democrats to a summit, to give them one last chance at compromise, knowing they wouldn’t budge. And privately, he had decided that his favored approach was a comprehensive bill.

However, what I've been thinking about over the last few days is the similarity between how health care reform, Hillary, and McCain were handled by the Obama team. See my from October 08 where I mentioned an Andrew Sullivan article of how Obama's calm (and sometimes perceived weakness) lures the opponents into a false sense of victory and incites them. It was easy to doubt him during the primary (why wasn't he more aggressive against Clinton) and during the Summer of 08 (why did he take that stupid trip to Europe) but in all cases (assume this goes through) he pulls it off.

Will this really make a difference? I don't know and I really don't care. I knew enough to support it: the exclusions about pre-existing conditions (which impacted my family first hand) was good enough for me, although I know how much I paid for my plan at Cisco a decade ago, probably 1/5 in a comparable-sized company. As if the campaign of 2008 (the selection of Palin) didn't prove it enough, the GOP continues to show it's true colors and they don't match mine anymore. Even though I have elected more Republicans than Democrats over the years (not like you really have a choice in Texas) it is hard to know whether the GOP is really that ignorant or are they just that deceptive in order to go "downscale" Republican base that Bush built. As always, I'm a political reactionary. For me, just as my vote for Bush in 2004 was more a vote against Michael Moore and his kind, my support for this bill is just as much about giving Limbaugh and Beck the finger as passing needed reforms. And the former is a lot more certain than the latter.

Did the Stimulus Work?

Spending 2-3 hours on the D.C. beltway (yeah it took me that long to get from Rockville to Ellicot City tonight) does not put you in best frame of mind, but I took a break from tech stuff and catch up on some politics, for a change and actually blog instead of tweet. Apart from the campaign-style movie above, there is Judging the Stimulus by Job Data Reveals Success with the key argument as

The case against the stimulus revolves around the idea that the economy would be no worse off without it. As a Wall Street Journal opinion piece put it last year, “The resilience of the private sector following the fall 2008 panic — not the fiscal stimulus program — deserves the lion’s share of the credit for the impressive growth improvement.” In a touch of unintended irony, two of article’s three authors were listed as working at a research institution named for Herbert Hoover.

Of course, no one can be certain about what would have happened in an alternate universe without a $787 billion stimulus. But there are two main reasons to think the hard-core skeptics are misguided — above and beyond those complicated, independent economic analyses.

The first is the basic narrative that the data offer. Pick just about any area of the economy and you come across the stimulus bill’s footprints.

In the early months of last year, spending by state and local governments was falling rapidly, as was tax revenue. In the spring, tax revenue continued to drop, yet spending jumped — during the very time when state and local officials were finding out roughly how much stimulus money they would be receiving. This is the money that has kept teachers, police officers, health care workers and firefighters employed.

Then there is corporate spending. It surged in the final months of last year. Mark Zandi of Economy.com (who has advised the McCain campaign and Congressional Democrats) says that the Dec. 31 expiration of a tax credit for corporate investment, which was part of the stimulus, is a big reason.

Let's hope so.

Pansy or Victim?

So unfortunately some who I [used to] follow over on @frednecksec cited an article over on prisonplanet.com which allowed me to check out the cool sponsors such as the one pictured above but don't forget Silverlungs.

To each his own, I inhaling gaseous gold myself. Much better preparation for the "End Times," the "New World" or whatever the "elites" have in store for us.

Some Gems (however heavy) from Peter Rollins

I'll take slice and dice some memorable statements from ‘Why Do I Do What I Do’, or ‘The Horror of Relationships’ (focusing more on the why do I do what I do what I do, than the relationship part, although my wife and I just celebrated our 16th anniversary this weekend) from the end:

It is today very common to see reason opposed to faith in popular literature (with reason or faith being the better depending on which side the apologist sits). The point is not that they are opposed but rather that reason is saturated with faith. In other words, all real decisions, no matter how reasonable, involve a faith act. Neither the facile liberal nor the crude fundamentalist examples mentioned above allow for the anxiety of making a real decision about love, politics or prayer. While the former only ever minimally commits (not making a full blooded decision), the latter knows what to commit to in advance of doing it (thus not making a real decision, as one can only ever make a decision when one does not know what needs to be done – thus making a choice).

Which is teed up near the beginning

The question ‘Why do I do what I do’ disturbs the smooth running of our lives because it involves a certain amount of anxiety. Yet, far from seeing its manifestation as a minor disturbance in our ongoing life, perhaps we should see it as a site of truth. As a moment in which the foundations of our decisions are momentarily manifested to us in their underlying contingency.

Most of us do not feel the full force of this question either because we never fully commit to a cause (choosing to travel through life without real investment – allowing the TV we watch and papers we read to experience life on our behalf) or because we attempt to ground our theological/philosophical/political projects, or romantic ones, in some absolute (God, Reason, Destiny, Historical Necessity etc.). In the former we never truly make a radical commitment to some cause, while in the latter we never experience the fear and trembling which such a commitment should engender.

Yep, "sites of truth." I like it.

Grampa, where did you live during the "Long Depression" that started in 2008?

Richard Florida's article How the Crash Will Reshape America captures a lot of what has been on my mind (and occasionally blogged about) since we left Skokie last June. 

From the packing up and leaving what my son called "best house ever" (the shaky footage is his) without a sold sign out front to some motel thoughts on the trip to premonitions of the impending collapse back to July (more specifically the non-sustainability of suburban sprawl) to the "discussions" my wife share on how long we should rent and when and where we should buy a common thread is that where you live matters.

It matters a lot. A hell of a lot. Your future may depend on it.

In October, less than a month after the financial markets began to melt down, Moody’s Investor Services published an assessment of recent economic activity within 381 U.S. metropolitan areas. Three hundred and two were already in deep recession, and 64 more were at risk. Only 15 areas were still expanding. Notable among them were the oil- and natural-resource-rich regions of Texas and Oklahoma, buoyed by energy prices that have since fallen; and the Greater Washington, D.C., region, where government bailouts, the nationalization of financial companies, and fiscal expansion are creating work for lawyers, lobbyists, political scientists, and government contractors.

Back in September, in the early days of the of the financial crisis, I thought about it a lot as I would look out into the Catoctins from the little park in our subdivision while my kids played (oblivous to what was on the radio) and I started to feel the first hint of Fall, that reminded me of 1987, my first Fall back in the states after living in Malaysia for 2 years. 

It was scary. With dozens of showings since our house went on the market on April 15th, 2008 yet not a single offer the constant talk of the forelosure crisis on the NPR, to say that it was stressful, it was an understatement.

Why did we buy in Chicago when we did? Why did we buy in one of the most overpriced suburbs on the Chicago North side? Well, because we couldn't afford Evanston or Winnetka and because of Skokie's diversity. We did not want our adopted Chinese daughter to be "the Chinese girl" in her pre-school class. Yes the schools were full of industrious recent immigrants. Immigrants that didn't care for the red brick Cape Code with the master bedroom where I sometimes bumped my head on the ceiling or the hardwood floors. All they wanted was space.

Multiple generations would fill the ugliest split level boxes you can imagine adjacent Crawford or Dempster. We heard from our realtor only the split levels were selling and how the demographics of the visitors were "different" (she was trying to abide by some regulations)  between our house and the those on nearby streets. Yes, so much was different between Austin and Skokie. Our first house two blocks from North Lamar (and where you could hear the music from Threadgills) sold on the first day. Those were different times and different places. 

Mostly white folks in their late 20s and early 30s. The hint of pot when you walked down the streets, some which had sidewalks some that did not. Certainly a larger percentage of Gay/Lesbian couples than in our previous neighborhood in San Antonio. Small three bedroom houses (if you were lucky) built in the late 40s and early 50s during the postwar boom. Aging water mains under streets and periodic electric outages. DSL was just starting to roll out. 

I remember seeing the street literally explode in front of our house on Brentwood: the last affordable neighborhood south of Anderson lane. Stay at home moms with graduate degrees. At the Elementary School meetings I felt out of place because I was sans tattoo. If I recall, our first night in Austin was on Halloween of 1999. The dotcom boom was in still in full swing and drcoop.com still held prime real estate overlooking MOPAC. 

We sat in the swings in Pease park that Thanksgiving, childless, awaiting what would be our final referral from Russia that would arrive in a matter of weeks and we would discuss it at the Little Deli on my lunchbreak, short 5 minute drive from the Southwestern Bell office on Huntland, adjacent to I-35. 

And all that we now know was still ahead of us: the letdown of Y2K, the NASDAQ crash in the Spring (I remember a day-trading colleague who had just joined from Dell) losing a lot that spring. I joined Cisco right after the last stock split in May 20o0 and I remember someone from SBC saying something about how I "was set" and could "retire." 

Yes, Austin is/was one of Florida's poster children for these new creative cities.

Thirty years ago, educational attainment was spread relatively uniformly throughout the country, but that’s no longer the case. Cities like Seattle, San Francisco, Austin, Raleigh, and Boston now have two or three times the concentration of college graduates of Akron or Buffalo. Among people with postgraduate degrees, the disparities are wider still. The geographic sorting of people by ability and educational attainment, on this scale, is unprecedented.

The University of Chicago economist and Nobel laureate Robert Lucas declared that the spillovers in knowledge that result from talent-clustering are the main cause of economic growth. Well-educated professionals and creative workers who live together in dense ecosystems, interacting directly, generate ideas and turn them into products and services faster than talented people in other places can. There is no evidence that globalization or the Internet has changed that. Indeed, as globalization has increased the financial return on innovation by widening the consumer market, the pull of innovative places, already dense with highly talented workers, has only grown stronger, creating a snowball effect. Talent-rich ecosystems are not easy to replicate, and to realize their full economic value, talented and ambitious people increasingly need to live within them

Returning home right before noon on that fateful blue September morning in 2001 after we watched both towers Fall live in the conference room. Watching the Reserve and National Guard Intelligence units gradually get activated and a getting a call from my XO down in San Antonio saying my name was on the list to deploy to Fort Belvoir. Packing my duffel bag, sitting around the table of our retro kitchen table and trying to explain to a toddler that Dada was going to go away for a while. Of course the orders were rescinded but my son and I were baptised in the Episcopal church anyway that Fall. There was more to it than that of course, but that was Austin. 

Years later I would grow restless and leave Cisco and work (virtually) from coffee shops on Lamar, Burnet, and Anderson and from my hot home office that used to be a kitchen and where supposedly a previous resident had died.  From the heat and the solitude I would slowly go crazy and would start looking to find a new job where I could work in an office again. I would strike out in Seattle (yeah I wrote that after bombing my AMZN interview, badly) but cool clarity would come soon. 

Giving up on big West coast software companies, I dug into the SCADA Plugins and a recruiter from Hewitt called, offering crazy money, a chance to run/develop Open Source security boxes in a large company and not do vuln work which I'd grown, a sweet relocation package,  and a way to escape the Texas heat. 

* * *

We will see if it is true but one of the more important (and troubling) charactization of our current malaise, elswhere Florida says our depression has more in common with the "Long Depression" of the late 19th century than the Great Depression:

Economic crises tend to reinforce and accelerate the underlying, long-term trends within an economy. Our economy is in the midst of a fundamental long-term transformation—similar to that of the late 19th century, when people streamed off farms and into new and rising industrial cities. In this case, the economy is shifting away from manufacturing and toward idea-driven creative industries—and that, too, favors America’s talent-rich, fast-metabolizing places.

And on the importance of geography:

To a surprising degree, the causes of this crash are geographic in nature, and they point out a whole system of economic organization and growth that has reached its limit. Positioning the economy to grow strongly in the coming decades will require not just fiscal stimulus or industrial reform; it will require a new kind of geography as well, a new spatial fix for the next chapter of American economic history.

Suburbanization was the spatial fix for the industrial age—the geographic expression of mass production and the early credit economy. Henry Ford’s automobiles had been rolling off assembly lines since 1913, but “Fordism,” the combination of mass production and mass consumption to create national prosperity, didn’t emerge as a full-blown economic and social model until the 1930s and the advent of Roosevelt’s New Deal programs. 

And, among other things, the foolishness of the American Dream of owning your own house. Thank God we're still renting.

On one level, the crisis has demonstrated what everyone has known for a long time: Americans have been living beyond their means, using illusory housing wealth and huge slugs of foreign capital to consume far more than we’ve produced. The crash surely signals the end to that; the adjustment, while painful, is necessary.

But another crucial aspect of the crisis has been largely overlooked, and it might ultimately prove more important. Because America’s tendency to overconsume and under-save has been intimately intertwined with our postwar spatial fix—that is, with housing and suburbanization—the shape of the economy has been badly distorted, from where people live, to where investment flows, to what’s produced. Unless we make fundamental policy changes to eliminate these distortions, the economy is likely to face worsening handicaps in the years ahead.

Suburbanization—and the sprawling growth it propelled—made sense for a time. The cities of the early and mid-20th century were dirty, sooty, smelly, and crowded, and commuting from the first, close-in suburbs was fast and easy. And as manufacturing became more technologically stable and product lines matured during the postwar boom, suburban growth dovetailed nicely with the pattern of industrial growth. Businesses began opening new plants in green-field locations that featured cheaper land and labor; management saw no reason to continue making now-standardized products in the expensive urban locations where they’d first been developed and sold. Work was outsourced to then-new suburbs and the emerging areas of the Sun Belt, whose connections to bigger cities by the highway system afforded rapid, low-cost distribution. This process brought the Sun Belt economies (which had lagged since the Civil War) into modern times, and sustained a long boom for the United States as a whole.

But that was then; the economy is different now. It no longer revolves around simply making and moving things. Instead, it depends on generating and transporting ideas. The places that thrive today are those with the highest velocity of ideas, the highest density of talented and creative people, the highest rate of metabolism. Velocity and density are not words that many people use when describing the suburbs. The economy is driven by key urban areas; a different geography is required

Of course a lot of this (as well as the stimulus package) hinges on whether or not the era of manufacturing jobs is truly gone.

Khe Sanh?

Yep, that stood out for me as well, but this is as good as an exchange as I heard/read today.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Belief comes last

My wife turned me on to this...

Forest and Trees?

Along with the neverending drumbeat from ElasticVapor on CyberSecurity, now even Tom Peters is bullish on the idea of a CyberSecurity czar and an increased focusing on "CyberSecurity" in the next administration.

While Mr. Bush did increase spending on cyberthreats, much, much more emphasis is called for—and the topic is too important to bury in DHS.

But if if you "create a new White House office to protect cyberspace from hackers, thieves and foreign agents, coordinating security efforts across U.S. military, intelligence and civilian agencies" isn't that creating another DHS?

The problem is not coordination (of all things) we don't need another figurehead or another advocate for "CyberSecurity."

The issue is implementation. This is dirty, tedious work that creation of another agency or czar is not going to solve.

Trisano: Open Source & National Security

As opposed to my previous blog Trisano would be a real example (if it does what it say) that Open Source improves national security:

TriSano™ is an open source, citizen-focused surveillance and outbreak management system for infectious disease, environmental hazards, and bioterrorism attacks. It allows local, state and federal entities to track, control and ultimately prevent illness and death.

Military Industrial Media Complex

From the NYTimes this morning. Not surprising, but still troubling...

Through seven years of war an exclusive club has quietly flourished at the intersection of network news and wartime commerce. Its members, mostly retired generals, have had a foot in both camps as influential network military analysts and defense industry rainmakers. It is a deeply opaque world, a place of privileged access to senior government officials, where war commentary can fit hand in glove with undisclosed commercial interests and network executives are sometimes oblivious to possible conflicts of interest.

Few illustrate the submerged complexities of this world better than Barry McCaffrey.

General McCaffrey, 66, has long been a force in Washington’s power elite. A consummate networker, he cultivated politicians and journalists of all stripes as drug czar in the Clinton cabinet, and his ties run deep to a new generation of generals, some of whom he taught at West Point or commanded in the Persian Gulf war, when he rose to fame leading the “left hook” assault on Iraqi forces.

But it was 9/11 that thrust General McCaffrey to the forefront of the national security debate. In the years since he has made nearly 1,000 appearances on NBC and its cable sisters, delivering crisp sound bites in a blunt, hyperbolic style. He commands up to $25,000 for speeches, his commentary regularly turns up in The Wall Street Journal, and he has been quoted or cited in thousands of news articles, including dozens in The New York Times.

His influence is such that President Bush and Congressional leaders from both parties have invited him for war consultations. His access is such that, despite a contentious relationship with former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, the Pentagon has arranged numerous trips to Iraq, Afghanistan and other hotspots solely for his benefit.

At the same time, General McCaffrey has immersed himself in businesses that have grown with the fight against terrorism.

The consulting company he started after leaving the government in 2001, BR McCaffrey Associates, promises to “build linkages” between government officials and contractors like Defense Solutions for up to $10,000 a month. He has also earned at least $500,000 from his work for Veritas Capital, a private equity firm in New York that has grown into a defense industry powerhouse by buying contractors whose profits soared from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. In addition, he is the chairman of HNTB Federal Services, an engineering and construction management company that often competes for national security contracts.

Many retired officers hold a perch in the world of military contracting, but General McCaffrey is among a select few who also command platforms in the news media and as government advisers on military matters. These overlapping roles offer them an array of opportunities to advance policy goals as well as business objectives. But with their business ties left undisclosed, it can be difficult for policy makers and the public to fully understand their interests.

Cloud Wars, Russia/China v. DoD, Digital Pearl Harbor's and other things that don't keep me up at night

Elasticvapor is hyperventilating about the latest cyberattacks (what is it about the term "cyber" that makes me bilious)

This current attack on the DoD is a relatively minor diversion in comparison to what a full out, planned network centric attack could actually do. Think about the potential fall out if the US electrical grid, cell / phone network and financial infrastructure was to be attacked in unison and taken offline all at once. Combine that with if it were to happen during the midst of an actual "crisis" such as what we're currently seeing in India this week. The turmoil would be unprecedented.

Nod. Been there done that, why nail assets from other critical infrastructure sectors (air, rail, chemical, various pipeline) while you are at it? A threat-modeler's wet-dream.

Yep, the more things change the more they stay the same -- like Richard Clarke's Digital Pearl Harbor (yeah you read that right, that is from 2000)

On coming to office, the next president will find that several nations have created information-warfare units, Clarke said.

"These organizations are creating technology to bring down computer networks. Some are doing reconnaissance today on our networks, mapping them," he said.

The horror, the horror andt here is some other good stuff from pre-9/11 days when (if you believe Vmyths) there was too much focus on Cyber and not enough on physical.

Another way to improve security throughout the Internet is to create secure lines of communication between the technology industry and the government, Clarke said. That way, they could share information about hackers and viruses without worrying about the public learning about it.

Others at the conference expressed the same notion. Harris Miller, president of the Information Technology Association of America, said that a nonprofit organization of 18 companies would be created early next year to share information.

That wouldn't be the genesis for those pesky little ISACs we keep hearing about.

Speaking of public information if you look at the latest press on the attacks against DoD. you'll see the typical meaningless say-nothing article (with a few juicy-sounding leaks from DoD employees) that undermine the credibility of the whole story and reinforce how little is known in the open press. Channeling Rumsfeld (are these known unknowns or unknown knowns?), here are all things that are not known by defense officials:

From LA Times

The defense official said the military also had not learned whether the software's designers may have been specifically targeting computers used by troops in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Military electronics experts have not pinpointed the source or motive of the attack and could not say whether the destructive program was created by an individual hacker or whether the Russian government may have had some involvement. Defense experts may never be able to answer such questions, officials said.

Officials would not describe the exact threat from agent.btz, or say whether it could shut down computers or steal information. Some computer experts have reported that agent.btz can allow an attacker to take control of a computer remotely and to take files and other information from it.

Or maybe, despite the headlines, it is not a cyberattack at all?

So, to distill what is available in public news sources:

• It might (or might not) be W32/Agent.BTZ (hence, the USB angle) which has been around for months
  
• Central Command networks have been infected and perhaps others, possibly to gather information about logistical systems
  
• Both China and Russia are mentioned with no direct evidence of their involvement
  
• Portable storage devices were banned on 17 Novemeber
  

Yeah I'm a hell of a lot more worried about the link between breastfeeding and peanut allergies that any of this stuff. Note to self: don't accidentally give the peanut butter-filled Nilla wafers your 5 your old didn't eat to your 11 month old.

Update: Dave Lewis also mentions the article, so it must be serious ;)

Sophocles, Soldiers, PTSD

Heard In Ancient Dramas, Vital Words For Today's Warriors on NPR this evening:

It's a three-day gathering designed to help military personnel — from enlisted men and women to generals — deal with war's emotional toll.

Brig. Gen. Loree Sutton, who runs the Pentagon division behind the conference, says that despite the graphic horrors depicted in Sophocles' tragedies, today's warriors can find comfort in them.

The plays can reassure a soldier, she says, "that I am not alone, that I am not going crazy, that I am joined by the ages of warriors and their loved ones who've gone before me, and who have done what most in society have no idea our warriors do."

The power of the real American network

Some patriotic Americans at Verizon was keeping tabs on our Marxist, Socialist, Terrorist, Muslim President Elect, according to CNN

Records from a cell phone used by President-elect Obama were improperly breached, apparently by employees of the cell phone company, Verizon Wireless said Thursday.
An Obama spokesman said the transition team was told Verizon Wireless workers looked through billing records.

An Obama spokesman said the transition team was told Verizon Wireless workers looked through billing records.

"This week we learned that a number of Verizon Wireless employees have, without authorization, accessed and viewed President-Elect Barack Obama's personal cell phone account," Lowell McAdam, Verizon Wireless president and CEO, said in a statement.

Mac was Back!

Apart from the booing goons in the crowd, I must say McCain did an awesome job tonight. Natural and authentic, no longer strained like the past few weeks and months. Remembering Gore's concession in 2000, what is it about concession speeches that are so flattering?

CyberSecurity Change you can believe in?

From Partnering for Cyberspace Security (Washington Post, 11/3/08)

By Walter Pincus
Monday, November 3, 2008; Page A19

In two recent speeches that have attracted little notice, Donald Kerr, principal deputy director of national intelligence, has called for a radical new relationship between government and the private sector to counter what he called the "malicious activity in cyberspace [that] is a growing threat to everyone."

Kerr said the most serious challenge to the nation's economy and security is protecting the intellectual property of government and the private sector that is the basis for advancements in science and technology.

"I have a deep concern . . . that the intelligence community has still not properly aligned its response to what I would call this period of amazing innovation -- the 'technological Wild West' -- by grasping the full range of opportunities and threats that technology provides to us," he said at the annual symposium of the Association for Intelligence Officers on Oct. 24.

Wild West? I though the late 90s were the Wild West?

Palin's Closing Counterfactuals

So how many in that crowd of Florida actually bring home a quarter mil?

Socialism, as in nationalizing the banks and federalizing the auto industry socialism?

Nah, we don't want to "experiment" with that. And the less that is said about J-the-P the better.



Tuesday can't come soon enough.

Dole's ^H^H^H^H^H McCain's Closing Argument

As one of my faithful readers (a Romney supporter, IIRC) predicted when McCain won New Hampshire. Romney is looking pretty good right now, given the selection of Palin. Oh well, hindsight is 20/20.



Let's hope the results are the same as '96, since Sarah Palin is no Jack Kemp.

Would this happen at a Palin rally?

This goes out to all my white boys that say "they don't like either candidate." And I've heard this from a lot of folks, actually.



If you really believe that...

Keep it real and vote for Ron Paul or Bob Barr

or stay home on Tuesday.

Back to SCADASEC when the Election is Over?

So I heard about the fun thread on one-way communication over on SCADASEC-L (by the way I turned off "Safe Renew" on scadasec.net so I won't make the same mistake as last year) so maybe by next Wednesday I can quit going to five-thirty-eight and the Huffington Post so often. Or perhaps not if Palin-McCain somehow manages to pull an upset, not only will I be praying for McCain's health, but I will be whetting my lips for 4 years of Palinisms and looking forward to the Daily Show's coverage of that frightening woman from Alaska (who my wife thinks is actually less articulate than Joe the Plumber).

It's on you

In the last twenty years I only voted in two presidential elections. Four years ago I voted against the obnoxious Michael Moore left and cast a ballot for W, voting against my Central Austin neighbors with their Impeach Bush stickers. And, first, in 1988, when I came back from basic training, and voted for his father.

I sat out the 90s, cynical, and still complained, believing the line about if you don't vote, you can't complain was utter bullshit. (I still believe that actually)



When I cast my vote for Obama in the Illinois primaries it was more a vote against Clinton than for Obama. On that snowy day in Skokie, I still had respect for McCain.

When I go to downtown New Market, past all the McCain-Palin, signs, and vote against, once again, in the minority, I won't be voting against anyone.

Once in your lifetime, you can lose the cynicism, fear, and apathy and believe again, if only for a little while.

It doesn't hurt, much. At least not right now.

Do the Right Thing.