Two Years Later in the Big Easy

Cleanup not quite done -- Picture courtesy Wikipedia

by blogSpotter
New Orleans in 2007 still retains much of the desolation caused by the 2005 Katrina disaster. The hurricane actually missed the city, but caused the levees to be breached. The resulting flood took 1500 lives and destroyed 200,000 buildings. Portions of the original city were built on high ground such as the French Quarter and Uptown -- they avoided serious damage. But newer sections were built in low-lying areas close to the levees: Ninth Ward and Bernard Parish. These neighborhoods still are flattened. Debris and abandoned cars have been hauled away, and a smattering of reconstruction has taken place. New Orleans now has 260,000 people about 60% of its pre-Katrina head count. The most badly damaged areas just happened to be occupied by low-income racial minorities. There is speculation that this is what has hindered recovery – lack of insurance or personal savings. Even so, there should be recovery and remediation for anyone affected, regardless of personal income.

So what is the prognosis for the city as a whole? Many residents are still waiting for state or federal assistance. Kathleen Blanco’s Louisiana Recovery Authority and the Small Business Administration are offering financial assistance to displaced people, but the progress is extremely slow. There has been continued bickering about sources of repair funding; the state of Louisiana would like the federal government to dip into its General Fund (which gets a lot of money from Louisiana petroleum leases) to help rebuild the wetlands and the levees. The Army Corps of Engineers repaired all the breaches and pumped out the water shortly after Katrina. All they did was repair things to previous specifications and safety standards – which is to say that it could all happen again. Nothing preventive was done; nothing was done to make the flood prevention technology more robust. The very worst prospect is the one that’s playing out. People are starting to rebuild in the most vulnerable low-lying areas. They’re building small, frame houses – not elevated and not built for any flood considerations. Much like children making a sand castle with buckets of sand, these residents are banking against the wrath of Mother Nature – and she’s already shown us her wrath.

This poor city still suffers from misguided leadership at multiple levels. It appears that no particular entity wants ownership or involvement. I think the federal government should contribute to the wetland repair. Far-reaching improvements should be considered. But I also think that local state agencies like Kathleen Blanco’s Recovery fund should speed up their activities. Why so many delays? The most vulnerable areas should probably be turned into national park land and made strictly unavailable for development. Transitional spots should require new structures to be built with high ground clearance and water resistant material. New Orleans is a beautiful, historic city – a national treasure. Under no circumstances should this beautiful city be allowed to fade away.

© 2007 blogSpotter

Reflections in the August Sun

Heat wave ruminations -- Picture courtesy Wikipedia Press

by blogSpotter
I haven't done a retrospective blog in a long time, and now it's that time again. My home right now is a cat hospice for my beautiful 14 year old calico, Maui. She was diagnosed with bladder cancer last week and the vet thinks that I should probably have her put to sleep. If she's not suffering, I'd rather have her here in familiar surroundings. I've been giving her Whiskas cat milk and she's hanging in there so far -- in fact today she's perked up a little bit.

I've talked at length about Iraq -- and as of today's Sunday talk shows, things are as murky as ever. John Warner thinks we should cut the number of troops in half, but Hillary Clinton thinks we should take a slow, gradual approach. Bush himself has recently indicated he thinks we need a surge on the surge. I think Iraq is going to face religious, civil strife no matter what we do -- we should do what we can to keep it from exploding into a regional conflict and save American lives where possible.

I blogged recently about iPhones and Apple TV. Finally succumbed to the commercials and bought an Apple iPhone. The minimal AT&T rate plan is $59.99/month plus taxes and fees for a two year contract. I used an internet 'hack' to activate mine and use it only as an iPod/PDA. I don't need to indenture myself to AT&T. iPhone is a killer device and makes other phones look prehistoric. The Apple TV is actually great entertainment. Am surprised by how much I've enjoyed the feature that lets you view all the movie trailers -- eliminates the need for a couple of my entertainment periodicals. I want to buy the new 20" iMac, but am waiting until October when they come preloaded with the Leopard operating system. They should also have Bootcamp which enables dual boot to Mac or Windows.

One reader was a bit shocked by my 'soft core' photo illustration of the American Prude blog. He should be glad that I reduced its size -- originally it was twice as large. Had to shrink it because if an illustration is too wide for its template 'zone', it will force the entire blog content to come at the bottom of the advertisements -- looks like my blog has no articles. That's happened a few times inadvertently; just scroll to the bottom if it looks like my blog has turned up empty.

The cat is sleeping now. Have no illusions about her situation but every additional day with her is a blessing. Writing from 'hospice house' and hoping everyone has a good Labor Day weekend next week. Our 2008 election is shaping up to be interesting and should provide great grist for the blog in upcoming months -- stay tuned here.

© 2007 blogSpotter

Time Travel with Vonnegut

Mixing Sci-fi and WWII -- Picture courtesy Delacort Press

by blogSpotter
Today's blog is another entry in my "Boomer Lit" series -- a quick review of Slaughterhouse Five. I never before read this book and was surprised by its content. Slaughterhouse is a Kurt Vonnegut's semi autobiography about an American WWII POW in Dresden, Germany. I'd say that it's set in 1944, except that the unusual premise of the book merges in science fiction and time travel. It's set in 1944, 1967, 1976 and far into the future. It tells the story of Billy Pilgrim, a tall, frail POW and his travails being moved about to different German prison camps. Vonnegut describes Pilgrim as a friend but I think he's basically a representation of Vonnegut himself. The German guards and officers are depicted somewhat humanely and not as stereotypical Nazi police dogs. "Slaughterhouse Five" is the street address of his last prison location -- an old slaughterhouse being used to house prisoners. Vonnegut (who passed away earlier this year) was antiwar and his book served to publicize the inhumanity of the Dresden bombing. In his book he claims 135,000 people died (@ 60K more than Hiroshima) but Wikipedia places the number more at 35,000 -- still a huge number. Toward the end of the book, Vonnegut describes in some detail the horrors of the bombing.

Vonnegut describes Pilgrim as an avid science fiction fan, whose favorite author is Kilgore Trout. Kilgore Trout is another alter ego of Vonnegut himself; I suspect that Vonnegut believed some of the sci-fi scenarios to actually be true. He expressed his "far out" ideas in the guise of science fiction, through the voice of a cheesy sci-fi pulp fiction writer. Here are some of the ideas conveyed:

o A civilization far advanced over us exists -- millions of light years away on the planet Tralfamadore.
o Tralfamadorians can visit us easily using Time Warp.
o Tralfamadorians can also travel through any other time (the 4th dimension).
o Tralfamadorians have actually 7 sexes, although 4 of them can only be seen in the 4th dimension.
o Tralfamadorians know that everyone who has ever lived is actually still alive in some Time segment that can be revisited.

In the book, Billy Pilgrim is actually abducted by the Tralfamadorians for some time and used in a Zoo exhibit of Earthlings. Slaughterhouse never makes it exactly clear whether Pilgrim is mentally ill or if he really has been abducted. One other review I read suggests that the sci-fi events are hallucinations and that Billy suffered injuries that made these happen. Because so much of Billy's time travel mirrors what he read in the Trout novels, you have to suspect he's been strongly influenced by the sci-fi reading.

I must say the book was an interesting read, but I'm left scratching my head. The sections about WWII are very impactful, much as any antiwar book like Diary of Anne Frank or All Quiet on the Western Front. The sci-fi sections which are thoroughly interlaced seem like non-sequiturs but may be seen as a literary device -- showing how our barbarism might come across to a more advanced civilization. As stated above, I can't help but wonder if Vonnegut was a time travel proponent, and Slaughterhouse Five was his way of presenting it to a mass audience. I cannot say that this book has altered my life in any way, or hugely expanded my consciousness. I will say that it's a very quick and interesting read and it will provoke you into thinking about war if not time travel.

© 2007 blogSpotter

Evil Architect

Bush's "Turd Blossom" departs -- Picture courtesy Wikipedia

by blogSpotter
When White House Deputy Chief Karl Rove resigned last week, I was surprised. Rove has been at Bush's side since day one, and he's one of the few campaign strategists who had parlayed his role into White House Advisor. In fact Rove made up one third of the Evil Triumvirate -- Rove, Rumsfeld and Cheney. All three men wielded a huge influence on W Bush, and a toxic combination it was. Rumsfeld exited the stage one day after the 2006 midterm elections; his concept of "War Lite" had not played out well in Iraq. Cheney was thought to be the mastermind behind much of the post 9/11 strategy -- he oddly lost credibility not over his wrong strategies but rather the hunting accident where he shot his lawyer. The GOP Base may not understand the intricacies of Middle East policy, but by God they understand the rules of quail hunting.

Rove himself had predicted a long-standing Republican majority and came up short in the 2006 elections. His upcoming departure is not due to that however -- Rove will be helping the Bushes set up their library at SMU in Dallas. Strangely enough, Rove is a self-professed agnostic; that did not prevent him from playing to the evangelical GOP base in both the 2000 and 2004 elections. His method of political warfare could best be described as "scorched Earth" and "take no prisoners". He steered both elections to victory by fear-mongering and blatant divisiveness. He created false bogeymen out of the ashes of 9/11, and also did much the same with gays, feminists and ecologists. Much as I get angry with Rove, I have to realize he succeeded because of a large, gullible public that responds more to fear and insecurity than to anything else. Rove has described 2006 as a minor bump in the road; I can't help but wonder if he's right since the American mind works as it does.

As far back as his college days, Rove engaged in dirty tricks. He took stationery from an opponent's headquarters and printed invitations to a beer bust "orgy" to make him look bad. Roll forward to 2003, and Rove was implicated in the outing of a CIA operative. In most cases, he left no fingerprints but his Machiavellian techniques are well noted. I even said in 2004 that John Kerry should be so lucky as to get a Rove of his own -- at the very least someone who would fight fire with fire. Unfortunately, Kerry was determined to have his Swift Boat sunk once and for all by unscrupulous Republican operatives.

What can we say in conclusion about Rove? His impact was to give us arguably the worst President ever, an Iraq quagmire and a giant deficit. Worse than that, Rove helped to dramatically polarize our nation. We're probably more polarized than we have been at any time since the Civil War. Instead of "North/South" we define our allegiances as "Blue/Red". The ideas of moderation and reasoned compromise seem to have flown the coop. That Rove was a political "genius" no one will deny. That his total contribution was helpful to America's well-being is laughably wrong. Mr. Rove, just don't let the door hit you ....

© 2007 blogSpotter

American Prude

Can Americans ever be this free? -- Picture courtesy Wikipedia

by blogSpotter
Why are Americans so prudish? There are many reasons to wonder. Europeans are more relaxed in every respect with regard to body image. They have topless beaches and the European men are much more inclined to wear skimpy Speedos, regardless of body shape. When I was in Europe, I watched a bit of "Euro TV" in various hotels -- sometimes late at night, or during the day between museum forays. I was amazed that they showed what we would consider R-rated movies for general audiences after 10:30PM. Even the daytime TV commercials showed more than Americans see at a peep show. The same relaxed attitude also extends to print media, where Europeans flaunt what they have in weekly news magazines aimed at the general public. In Amsterdam, one of the nicest most historic canal streets is in the "red light" district. They don't see a need to set aside any other area for “the world’s oldest profession”.

Americans are prudes by any measure. American men wear boxy, down-to-the-knee swim suits. Women have even flirted with a return to one-piece suits -- Hello Miss America 1923. We fastidiously put V-chips in every TV and have several agencies that enforce censorship and movie ratings. America has a few nude and topless beaches, but they're more the subject of silly jokes than serious sunbathing. Magazines with adult content are in wrappers or covers partially concealed and proof of age is required to buy one. Red light districts are usually in a bad, physically remote part of town -- somewhere near docks or warehouses.

That people might "have needs" is seen as a heinous evil that should only ever be met with monogamous, marital coupling and prayer sessions if needed. Particularly the American South (the "Bible Belt") has a problem with things like sexually oriented businesses, massage parlors and condom stores. Mind you, the presence or need of such things hasn't gone away -- America simply chooses to indulge its appetites privately, furtively, under the cloak of darkness. A part of the American psyche says, "It's not a sin if I don't get caught". The very concept of "getting caught", that sex is a crime -- is American as Apple pie. When you think about it, we’re not much better than the Communist Chinese, who claim to have eradicated all sexual promiscuity in their country with Socialist ideals. We’ve just done it with Jesus (and as effectively, which is to say not at all).

How did we get to be this way? We were founded by an assortment of chaste religions -- Puritans, Amish, Shakers and Quakers. The irony is that our nation was founded on secular principles but the secularity was more to protect religions from each other than to banish them per se. We were and still are an amalgam of strongly-felt religions, where Europeans are becoming bored and blasé with their own monolithic and traditional religions. In America, Christian soldiers have forged onward with crazed determination while in Europe, sophisticates have become cynical and agnostic; they give alms and say prayers more to satisfy cultural expectations than to satisfy a burning spiritual need.

Will America ever be less uptight about sex? Can we ever “get real” about human nature and the human condition? It may well come to pass, but we will probably have to be as old as Europe and as burned by religion as they have been. Rome wasn’t built in a day, and the Church of Rome did not lose its glorious patina all in a day. Can sex and spirituality coexist in the same philosophical plane? I think so, but Americans will have to learn to “think different” to borrow from an Apple commercial.

© 2007 blogSpotter

Piecing it Together

New dimensions in Boomer lit -- Picture courtesy Scribner

by blogSpotter
Two months ago, Newsweek magazine ran an article called "Boomer Literature". In it, they talked about books written in the 50's, 60's and 70's that are now considered modern classics: Catch-22, Slaughterhouse 5, A Separate Peace, Lord of The Flies, Confederacy of Dunces, etc. There were easily 50 titles on the Boomer list, only a handful have I actually read. Feeling very sadly deficient, I've purchased about 10 of these books and intend to buy another 30 or so from Audible.com if I can be disciplined enough. The thing is, these books are now being assigned to high school kids and I can't "be there" to discuss a hallmark of my own generation if I haven't read the book. Toward this ambitious end, I just finished A Separate Peace and now I can share my own viewpoint of John Knowles' poignant tale.

Set in 1943, Separate Peace is the story of two teenage boys who are roommates in a northeast prep school, Devon. They are both popular and out-going but one of them, Gene Forrester tends to be more quiet and academic while Phineus (aka Finny) is a popular, accomplished jock. The boys become best of friends while at the same time developing a fierce competition between them to see who can be the most popular well-rounded athlete. Warning -- something of a plot spoiler follows. The love-hate spirals out of control when the two boys undertake a dare devil stunt together -- diving off of a high tree limb into a river; Gene deliberately undermines Finny and causes him to have a serious accident (a crippling fall from the tree). The rest of the book examines the way all the young men at Devon deal with this tragedy and other life traumas, all against the backdrop of World War II which looms large for 16 and 17 year old boys. The book's title partly comes from the fact that Devon is an insular environment for these young men, not old enough to be drafted into war.

Do not bother to get out the Cliff Notes -- blogSpotter will give you the two major themes of this book.

RELIGIOUS OVERTONES

Devon has been likened to the Garden of Eden and the jumping-off tree has been likened to the Apple Tree with forbidden fruit. Gene and Finny have been directly compared to Cain and Abel from the Bible. The fall of Finny has even been likened to the Fall of Man. These symbolic connections probably played some part in the author's subconscious, but they weren't to me the predominant theme.

SUBTEXT

Some reviewers have said that the book might have a "homosexual subtext". To these people, I say "Oh, please". It's not even a subtext, it is the text. This book is soft, gay pornography circa 1959 when the book was written. How gay is this book? Let me count the ways...

First of all, the book has virtually no female characters. There are brief mentions of a night nurse and one boy's mother, but the characters are overwhelmingly male. The author speaks through the character of Gene, and gives extremely precise descriptions of other boys' clothing and anatomies. Much is said of pink shirts, khakis, gym shorts and tee shirts. More is said of long arms, lanky legs, stocky builds and certain shapes of buttocks. A story being spoken through the vantage point of a straight man would give nary a mention to these things, much less paragraph-long elaborations.

The description of the boys' feelings toward each other is more telling than anything. I may paraphrase a bit from the actual text. Each day together is a joy, a victory, a rebirth. Gene cannot imagine a life more exciting than with Finny as his room mate. This culminates in a spur-of-the-moment bicycle outing to the beach where the two boys play in the sand and "sleep" under the stars. The studious Gene even skips studying for a Trig test he knows he'll fail to do this outing with Finny.

Much later in the book, after Finny has recovered from his accident and returns to school, Gene puts off his plans to run away and enlist in the navy. His heart beats faster and he is elated that Finny is back in his life. He changes his whole course of athletic training and physical development per Finny's instructions. At the very end of the book, Finny finally realizes that Gene deliberately pushed him from the tree, and he speaks harshly to Gene. Gene walks around the Devon campus in a daze and sleeps under a bridge, he is so distraught. Now most straight boys, however much they like a male friend do not experience "joy and renewal" from each day of togetherness. They don't sleep under the stars or go into a tragic tailspin over harsh words. The behaviors and feelings described in the book are those of love-sick puppies, deeply in love.

Some of the comments made by other characters such as classmate Brinker are rather pointed and insinuate more than just a jouncing of the tree limb. The end of the book features a mock trial which some people have described as an "outing" of the relationship between Gene and Finny.

CONCLUSION

A movie was made of Separate Peace in 1972. Movie critic Leonard Maltin rated it as a bomb and then dissed the novel by saying it was overrated. Mr. Maltin is probably letting his phobias show through. The book is still a good read, though it is a little chaste as 1950s soft porn goes.

© 2007 blogSpotter

Bill and Hill's Excellent Adventure

The Bill and Hill Show -- Picture courtesy Wikipedia

by blogSpotter
Was thinking of how it might play out if Hillary Clinton wins the Presidency in 2008. The GOP was so rankled by three terms of FDR, they enacted the 22nd Amendment in 1951, barring any person from serving more than two consecutive terms. Now if Hill and Bill come back to town, Americans may get eight more years of the "Hill and Bill" show. They'll swap name tags, but who can say that the result will differ by much. Assuming that Hillary is over that Monica thing, I'm guessing that the Clintons at least share a bed -- if only just for sleeping. Even so, they share common political views and I can't help thinking what their "Pillow Talk" will be....

"Did you take your cholesterol pill?"
"Yes Honey"
"Would you be a darling and turn out the light"
"Certainly"
"And what do you think I should do about Immigration?"
"Well, I think the John McCain compromise wasn't half bad -- it could probably be floated by the American people one more time ..."

So much for True Romance. This is the ultimate power couple and each needs the other one for intense, passionate, hot, sweaty policy wonk discussions. If they never do much more than air kisses and butt pats, they still have an impressive marriage.

Bill has said that as "First Gentleman" he will gladly do some of the things done by traditional First Ladies. He'll decorate the White House Christmas Tree, help entertain Heads of State and maybe even sponsor improvement programs like "Reading is Fundamental", "Just Say No" or "Beautify America". He's a social, convivial man and in truth he may have the best of all worlds -- freedom to roam while still wielding enormous influence over public policy. (As a "damn Liberal" that doesn't bother me too much. :-)). I can't imagine what Bill would say "No" to, and he would probably prefer to beautify America more with leggy women than with blue bonnets and wild flowers.

This last speculation makes me wonder about how Hill will situate Bill's office. If I were her, I'd put him in the West Wing, just down the hall. She should put hidden cameras and mikes everywhere -- tell him it's a requirement of the Secret Service. Maybe put a tracking device on his leg, to make sure where he is at all times. To be honest, Bill was such a horn dog that it's questionable whether he could make it all the way to the men's room or the water fountain without having an affair. At minimum, it seems like he would "honk" a woman's breasts somewhere in the hallway. A last good measure would be to give him either a male secretary or a much older, wiser female secretary. And don't allow interns anywhere near him. It might be that Hillary has "reasoned it away" and doesn't really care what Bill does as long as he's discreet.

Talk show comedians and trashy news magazines are the least of the beneficiaries -- all of America would up the entertainment ante if the Hill and Bill show were to come back for an eight year encore. Let’s see what happens – “Billary” might even enact some good policy, rebalance the budget and get us out of Iraq.

© 2007 blogSpotter

Delusional About God?

Who do we blame for life? -- Picture courtesy Bantam Books

by blogSpotter
I'm listening to Richard Dawkins' book, The God Delusion. Dawkins is a well-known British science professor best know for his strident atheism; two of his other best-sellers are The Selfish Gene and The Blind Watchmaker. Much of his book targets organized religion rather than God per se. He describes the God of the Old Testament as a "sadomasochistic, capricious malevolent bully". He lambastes the Gospels of the New Testament, saying that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were cherry-picked from eight other Gospels that had their facts provably wrong. Dawkins says that the four Gospels chosen are inconsistent about such things as the whereabouts of Joseph and Mary. (Were they in Nazareth, going to Nazareth, why did they have to go to Bethlehem?) He says the translations from Aramaic are fraught with serious translation problems. The word for "virgin" also means "young lady". The word "carpenter" can also mean "learned man". And so forth ... I myself am not a fan of organized religion, so much of the critique made sense although it might be a bit on the nasty side.

Now Dawkins seems to be upset with scientists such as Michael Faraday or Fred Hoyle who have some kind of God belief. Fred Hoyle is noted for saying that life evolving on Earth by Natural Selection is about as likely as a wind blowing though a scrap yard, assembling a Boeing 747. Dawkins says that Hoyle knows nothing about Natural Selection (NS) and that NS is anything but chance. He waves the term NS around describing it as "elegant" and "beautiful" but never says to anyone's satisfaction how the molecular mutations are anything but chance. There's no suggestion as to why a collection of molecules has a motivation to grow, mutate or do anything in particular. What I'd say of Darwin's Natural Selection is what I once heard said of New Jersey -- "There's no there there". Even if you tried to go with that theory, there is some type of implied intelligence in something that does the "selecting". Fred Hoyle was absolutely right and he doesn't have to be talking about anything as advanced as a cricket. A complex protein or virus would never happen purely by random molecular collisions. I submit that Neo-Darwinists are a delusional group unto themselves.

Dawkins' other main argument is that someone would have to design God. I have a reply of sorts. Can you imagine the intelligence it would take to create you, fallible though you are? It might not take someone infinitely intelligent to create your cerebral lobes, etc but it would take someone pretty damned smart. Let's set our own goal as being merely that smart -- not at all smart enough to create the Universe. Now -- once we have achieved that state of awareness I submit that you only have to be a tad smarter to understand what created the creator. We answer one question at a time, and then we come closer to answering the Ultimate Question whatever that may be.

A second delusional group are people who are willing to ignore a mountain of geophysical and fossil evidence to claim a literal embrace of the Bible. This same group claims an all-powerful, omniscient, supernatural God who is external to the Universe. They believe that God created us like play dough figures, all in a single, highly productive swoop. Now, there are some problems with that idea. If we were an original handicraft why did God give us vestigial organs? We have an appendix which is a remnant of a herbivorous ceccum. We have a coccyx (tailbone) which is a remnant of a monkey tail. We also have ear muscles no longer in use. Not only is there monkey business here, but God also made some big "fubars". The human anatomy is full of mistakes -- many of them related to our recent bipedal status. We have hip joints ill suited to bearing the weight of the trunk. It leads to hip degeneration and even femoral neck fractures. We have knees with inadequate tibial cartilage, leading to frequent knee problems. The female pelvis is too small for the human baby's head leading to frequent birth problems (probably due to rapid evolution of head size). If starting from scratch, wouldn't God have done it flawlessly? As a computer programmer, I'm well aware of putting Band-Aids on old systems to add on something new. Because of time and budget constraints, we programmers don't get to "start fresh". Humans look like the product of corporate evolution, not instant infallible creation. As H.L. Mencken said, it's obvious that life was designed by committee.

So, what kind of God are we left with? One that is finite, fallible and within the Universe. If that is so, why can't we see Him? It could be that this Intelligent Wumpus doesn't want to be found -- he could be victimized by his own clumsy creations. It could also be that he exists in a different scale or dimension that makes him invisible to us anyway (though nevertheless real). Is he a God of magic and supernatural abilities? No -- he is more likely a God of practical approaches, frugal with resources and gradual in his achievements -- very much like us, his creations. The "miracles" to behold are those that you already see -- highly complex, organized matter.

© 2007 blogSpotter