“When the lord calls me home, whenever that day may be. I will leave with the greatest love for this country and eternal optimism for its future”-Ronald Reagan November 5, 1984

Former President Ronald Reagan has died.

Born on February 6, 1911 in Tampico, Illinois, Ronald Reagan played football and acted in college. First a radio personality, and later an actor, Reagan parlayed his celebrity to become president of the Screen Actors Guild. Embroiled in battles over Communism’s penetration of Hollywood, Reagan became a conservative, and a political icon was born.

Reagan was elected Governor of California in 1966 and oversaw many of the state’s most tumultuous years. Later he ran against Jimmy Carter, the malaise that afflicted America, and Communism. On January 20, 1981, Ronald Reagan took office as the President of the United States. A radical form of conservatism was reborn, and America’s political landscape was changed forever.

Perhaps the least appreciated or most subtle part of the Reagan legacy is his unbounded optimism and faith that America's future is bright as long as America remains true to its principles. To Reagan, as he reiterated at the 1992 Republican National Convention, America can be forever young.

But a renewed sense of the possible wasn’t the only legacy left by Reagan.

-The “Reagan Doctrine” believed that the Soviet Empire needed to be ended for the peace and prosperity of the globe. He spent billions of dollars to wage a militarily cold, yet economically hot, war against the “Evil Empire”. Reagan’s policy of “Peace through Strength” hastened the end of the Soviet Union and ultimately brought democracy and capitalism to the far corners of the world.

-Reagan strongly believed that the size and scope of the government should be reduced in non-essential areas. Second only to military rearmament, tax cuts were the priority of the early Reagan administration. He worked to reduce the marginal tax rate to spur economic growth. While deficits occurred over the short term, he brought in an era of unprecedented growth and economic vitality. He oversaw an economic expansion that lasted for 93 months. The expansion continued for the length of his taxation policy, ending once his successor George Bush deviated from the Reagan economic textbook.

-The Reagan years were also marked by the scandal of the Iran-Contra affair. Selling arms to Iran in exchange for a release of seven U.S. hostages held in Lebanon was in direct conflict with the administration’s stated position. When the clandestine trade was exposed it was discovered that some of the funds had been siphoned off to support the Contras in Nicaragua. While there were clear violations of law, and the President’s image had been tarnished, Reagan remains the most popular modern President.

President Reagan survived scandal and assassination attempts. He battled the Evil Empire and the crushing weight of American self-doubt. Through it all he always believed in America and her ideals. A patriot in the most generous sense of the word, Ronald Reagan gave generations of Americans a new perspective from which to view the world.

We've done our part. And as I walk off into the city streets, a final word to the men and women of the Reagan revolution, the men and women across America who for 8 years did the work that brought America back. My friends: We did it. We weren't just marking time. We made a difference. We made the city stronger, we made the city freer, and we left her in good hands. All in all, not bad, not bad at all.
-President Ronald Wilson Reagan, Farewell Address to the Nation, January 20th, 1989.

We pay orthodontists an average of $350,000, and no one would say that their impact on the lives of kids is greater than a teacher's.

Dave Eggers writes another Heart Breaking Tale, this one about teachers. Why does America, he wonders, have such a conflicted relationship with teachers? On one hand they are viewed as saints, caregivers, custodians of our collective futures, on the other, they get paid less than many other professions that have relatively less impact on societal well being.

The latest statistics put the average teacher's salary at about $46,000; some teachers earn a little more, some a little less (the average teacher's salaryÂ?not the starting salaryÂ?is $38,000 in Kansas, $36,000 in New Mexico, and $32,000 in South Dakota). Overall, that's about the same that we pay pile-driver operators ($45,980) and about $8,000 less than the average elevator repairman pulls down. Meanwhile, a San Francisco dockworker makes about $115,000, while the clerk who logs shipping records into the longshoreman's computer makes $136,000.

Some of the conflict in people's minds may stem from the view that teachers and their unions are more concerned with their job security than with educating the young. Other's consider salary not to be the true indicator of the esteem in which we hold various professions, (noting that the President of the US gets paid less than the man who greenlighted The Swan). Eggers retorts, "When teachers are forced to tend the yards of students' homes, to clean houses, or to sell stereos on nights and weekends, the quality of education is diminished, the profession is disrespected, and we parody the notion that we hold our schools and teachers in the highest regard."

Finally! Donald Rumsfeld's words have been turned from poetry to song.

The Unknown

As we know,
There are known knowns.
There are things we know we know.
We also know
There are known unknowns.
That is to say
We know there are some things
We do not know.
But there are also unknown unknowns,
The ones we don't know
We don't know.

From the "I don't know whether to laugh or cry" department; Last April Don Emilio Fulci, a shadowy terrorist, made it to the top of the government's daily threat briefing. The FBI discovered he planned chemical attacks on London and Washington D.C. When the attacks never came an enterprising staffer Googled Fulci and was surprised to find he was actually a character from the video game Headhunter.

Amazing and shocking photos from Iraq.

Michael Jordan was one of the greatest basketball players of all time. Endowed with seemlessly endless athletic prowess, he was humbled by the intense hand-eye requirements of hitting a breaking ball. Rugby players, collegiate wrestlers, hoopsters, and armchair QB’s have long argued which sport is the most difficult. ESPN has set out to settle this issue once and for all.

Jim Caple described the challenge facing the committee:

What is the most important element in athletics, anyway?

Is it strength? Endurance? Speed and quickness? Hand-eye coordination? The ability to withstand physical pain and mental stress? Ability to block out nerves and fear to focus on the task at hand when 50,000 fans are screaming? A combination of all those? If so, what combination?… We polled Olympic trainers and multi-sport athletes. We created a spreadsheet ranking 60 sports and breaking each into 10 categories of athleticism. We asked players who they thought were the greatest athletes and what the most amazing thing they ever saw another athlete do (we heard a lot of Bo Jackson stories).

The athlete’s arguments for their sports are telling and poignant, and further reflects what a difficult task it is to quantify athletic prowess. So while ESPN.com has proven that boxing is the most difficult sport, and Jim Brown the greatest all-around athlete, I’d like to hear your views.

"They don't have to worry because I do not pose any danger. I deserve a fair chance."- Cary Verse, recently released sex offender.

California communities are struggling to balance justice and fairness with community safety. A number of recent, and soon to be released, violent sexual predators are looking for places to stay. Not surprisingly, many of the communities where these ex-cons are placed are fighting to keep them out of their town and away from their children.

The battle over the placement of recently paroled sex offenders took an ugly and unusual turn with the spill over from the Cary Verse situation. After being shuttled from city to city, Verse ended up in Oakland’s St. Patrick's Abbey. The Rev. Donald Weeks uses the abbey as a halfway house, helping slews of ex-cons gets their footing and ideally working their way back into society. When local residents found out that Verse would be staying at the Abbey (which until recently, was located across from a school) the predictable outrage ensued. Oakland City Council President Ignacio De La Fuente saw an issue with legs and led the ensuing campaign against St. Patrick’s Abbey and the Rev. Donald Weeks. First a variety of code violations were levied against the Abbey. When the Rev. vowed to stay and fight the Councilman he was arrested on child molestation charges. The abbey was closed and the ex-cons, including Verse, were dispersed. Soon afterwards the charges against Rev. Weeks were dropped when a cursory investigation proved that the accused wasn’t in California at the time of the alleged incidents. Though Weeks was released from jail the police maintain, “the book on the case is still open”. Week’s attorney John Burris considers the case little more than a witchunt, noting, "Any reasonable investigation by the Oakland Police Department would have shown that it could not have happened in the location or the time period in which the allegations were made,'' Burris said. "There was no crime. There was no underage victim. This all could have been proven without arresting Father Weeks and ruining his life.''

Few people, (and even fewer with children) would like to live near a sexual predator but California is increasingly confronted with the issue of placing convicted sexual deviants once they are paroled. As Rev. Weeks discovered, forgiveness isn’t always free.

California lawmakers are attempting to head off a crisis in the worker?s compensation system by authoring bipartisan legislation intended to cure the increasingly problematic system.

California's 91-year-old system has been troubled for the better part of the past decade. But with premiums doubling and tripling, the economy stagnant and businesses threatening to leave the state, fixing it has become a priority for lawmakers and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

The system is costly (payments have increased from $6.4 billion in 1997 to an estimated $25 billion in 2003), confusing, and rife with fraud and mismanagement. California employers pay the highest workers? comp premiums in the nation and yet payouts fall well short of most other states. Legislators have been cajoled by the governor to come up with meaningful changes or face a ballot initiative mandating structural changes. While all sides agree the current system is unworkable, the details of the reform are hotly contested.

Some of the hottest sticking points are:
--Stricter guidelines for permanent-partial disabilities Permanent disabilities makes up to an estimated 80% of all costs. Employers desire stricter oversight in this area.
-- Physician choice Employers want more say over the doctors who make treatment recommendations.
-- Rate regulation and immediate benefits Labor would like the anticipated cost savings of reform passed on to employers rather than to insurance companies.

Schwarzenegger wants to require doctors to use "objective medical findings" to determine if an employee has a work-related injury. Injuries would have to be "reproducible, measurable or observable." He also wants to require employees to show that a cumulative injury -- one that develops over time -- was substantially caused by work.

Another troublesome factor is the disproportional payouts for different industries. For instance, the payout for workers in the construction industry or farm workers are considerably higher than many white collar professions, like the currently depressed IT industry. This discrepancy is so worrysome that some industries are examining their own, separate solutions.

While late word has lawmakers close on general terms, it appears that the major overhaul demanded by most won't occur in this proposal.

At this moment in time, like "Seinfeld" before it, "Arrested Development" is an under appreciated slice of comedic perfection, its writing so good as to be staggering and the acting both subtle and wildly physical, a meshing of words and deeds we haven't seen since, well, since "Seinfeld."-Tim Goodman, San Francisco Chronicle

Critically praised, but lightly watched, Arrested Development is struggling for its life on Fox. The laugh-track free show centers around Justin Bateman’s straight man Michael Bluth. He's a responsible widower who works to raise a son and run a business while the company’s founder (and Michael’s father) sits in prison awaiting trail for corporate malfeasance. Such notables round out the cast as Mr. Show’s David Cross (who is a never-nude), Jessica Walter as the deliciously drunken WASP Kitty Bluth, and Portia de Rossi as Michael’s twin sister Lindsay.

Fox is well known for taking critically acclaimed shows off the air before an audience can be found and replacing it with cheaper, more profitable programming. The wit and relative depth of the show isn’t making it any easier. Bateman describes the challenge well, Bateman says: "The show is unpredictable, and it takes time to get it. You miss a word in the first act, and four jokes in the third act aren't going to pay off. That's one of the reasons we are having problems building an audience."

So folks warm up the Tivos, and catch what just might be the funniest sitcom in some time before it’s gone for good.

In the wake of Clarke's apology to families of 9/11 a reporter apologizes for the media's tepid response to the ramp-up to war.

The F.B.I. and D.H.S. are creating a program that will allow private companies to screen individuals against their terror database. (I'm sure there is no cause for concern)

Booger eaters rejoice! It's good for you.

The folks who brought us the Scopes trial have passed a measure making it illegal for homosexuals to live in Rhea County.

The Bush Administration has come under heavy criticism for a series of television spots that defend the President's position on Medicare. Unlike typical campaign commercials, these segments are intended to look like news broadcasts. The Department of Health and Human Services is releasing the segments, complete with fake reporters and talking points for local newscasters. Home Front Communications, which produced the segments, offers guidance to news agencies:

In one script, the administration suggests that anchors use this language: "In December, President Bush signed into law the first-ever prescription drug benefit for people with Medicare. Since then, there have been a lot of questions about how the law will help older Americans and people with disabilities. Reporter Karen Ryan helps sort through the details."

(It appears that Karen Ryan is an actor rather than a reporter)

The GAO is investigating if the videos are actually "covert propaganda". Kevin W. Keane, a spokesman for the Department of Health and Human Services claims this is not a new practice, "The use of video news releases is a common, routine practice in government and the private sector," Mr. Keane said. "Anyone who has questions about this practice needs to do some research on modern public information tools."

With even some conservatives concerned about the soaring cost of Medicare, the issue appears to be important to the coming campaign.

The financially battered West Contra Costa schools were in an uproar Tuesday after the school board became the first in California to pull the plug on high school sports in a sweeping series of cuts that will also close school libraries and eliminate music programs.

The cuts came shortly after voters in the district shot down a new round of funding for the schools. It wasn't long after the ruling that the impact was truly felt. Fiscal woes have beleaguered the district for some time, but they are not alone in the region. The Mt. Diablo school district is considering charging kids $100 to participate in after school sports. (an idea currently in use by other districts around the country.)

Some consider sports to be a trivial pursuit. Others suggest the loss of access to teams and competition that fuel personal development to be something that is desperately needed by those most at risk. Some have attempted to rally professional athletes and local sports organizations for help. (No word yet from musicians or librarians). Since this story plays out in various versions again, and again, what can be done?

The uber-powerful pension fund California Public Employees' Retirement System said it will withhold its votes for Disney CEO Michael Eisner. This is a staggering blow to Eisner's efforts to retain control of the media giant.

Rap is corny. What once was a vital, interesting subgenre of music has become little more than, in the words of Slate?s Sasha Frere-Jones, ?a retread of Mafia clich?s, letters to Penthouse, or Rolex commercials.?

There are some buzz worthy exceptions, including the rising star Kayne West, whose stylings are anything but ?corny?.

?West is a comedian, social critic, hedonist, and Christian?, an earnest satirist who seems to enjoy poking fun at himself as much as he does rap conventions.

From the other side of the pond comes East London?s Dizzee Rascal. Widely successful and a genre buster Dizzee is leading the way with a style called Eskimo Dance (or Eski, or more commercially, Grime).

Dizzee and his peers are descended from the U.K. garage scene. But garage, a light, syncopated blend of house music with flashes of American R & B and Jamaican music, is suited to the sweet and sincere?Sweet and sincere do not describe Dizzee particularly well?The tempos are faster than hip-hop's. Jay-Z, for example, favors the 100 beats per minute range. Grime lives around 130 BPM, a zone of urgency and movement. 50 Cent sounds like Simon and Garfunkel next to Dizzee Rascal.

Dizzee and West may be interesting but they are clearly different from what?s going on in hip-hop in general. Is there a way out of the artistic and stylistic morass mainstream rap has found itself in? Maybe it needs to embrace the fact that for now, rap is pop.

You can spread some sunshine to couples waiting to get married outside of City Hall in San Francisco; send them flowers!

A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of Saint Thomas Aquinas, an unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal and natural law.-Dr. Martin Luther King

Civil disobedience or just plain disobedience? San Franciso Mayor Gavin Newsom's stunning announcement to offer marriage licenses to same sex couples is causing some to wonder if he's not losing whatever moral high ground he held. His Hounour has made no bones about the fact that his intent is to force the legality of bans against same sex marriage, a law he clearly feels is unjust. While some argue that he's engaged in the sort of noble act that would make Dr. King proud others say he's actually usurping the will of the people he has sworn to uphold. Comparing Newsom to Roy Moore Rod Dreher wonders:

why was it wrong for Judge Roy Moore of Alabama to unilaterally declare federal law wrong, and defy it by installing a Ten Commandments monument in a courthouse rotunda ... but it's okay for San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom to unilaterally declare state law wrong in prohibiting same-sex marriage, and defy it by issuing marriage licenses to gay couples?

An Afghan boy who was at Guantanamo reports that he had a good time.

If this isn't the worst toy ever, I don't know what is.

Man dies from too much weed. Drug warriors rejoice!!

The World Economic Forum decides to chill as they plot world domination.

FIFA president suggests ways to raise interest in the women's game.

One of the most significant side effects of 9/11 is how international travel has been impacted. The ability for a variety of people around the word to meet, recreate, and conduct business was a vital and robust part of economic and cultural exchange. The delays and headaches of travel since that fateful day have been well documented, and the fallout continues.

The United States, in an effort to better track the comings and goings of foreign visitors recently implemented a program to fingerprint and photograph many who enter the country with a visa.

Despite significant concerns, the travel industry appears to be mollified that the system works well. Logistically most were pleased “the problems were minimal and that the procedure added perhaps a minute at most to immigration processing.”

As always in matters such as these, some wonder if the delicate balance between liberty and security was tipped in a dire direction. Also cause for concern is how this might impact America’s perception by other nations. Brazil recently began a retaliatory fingerprinting program aimed at American tourists entering their country. The program is being lobbied against heavily by Rio and other tourist-centric Brazilian cities. Ironically proving once again how desperately people thirst for unfettered travel.

America’s efforts to bring terror suspects to trial has suffered some embarrassing setbacks in recent weeks. The decision to try some suspects in special military tribunals and other’s in federal courtrooms has been perceived by some to be unfair or unjust and certainly has the taint of arbitrariness. The conundrum, as Thomas Powers writes, is that there is a need for openness and due process that is at odds with the premium placed on secrecy.

Ordinary criminal courts are not designed for trying terrorism suspects. As a practical matter, they do not routinely provide the kind of security for witnesses, judges, and jurors that is required where terrorist attack and reprisal are a concern. More important, they cannot meet the need for secrecy that may arise from the use of sensitive testimony derived from confidential sources.

He suggests that a third way should be embarked upon, federal terrorism courts.

To deal with terrorism cases that could be handled under the ordinary criminal law (as were, for example, the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the Oklahoma City federal building bombing, and the case of Zacarias Moussaoui), Congress should create a new specialized court. This terrorism court would incorporate special security measures, protect the secrecy of sensitive information and sources, and make provision in its evidentiary rules for the peculiar situations arising from operations on a battlefield or its equivalent. Terror suspects should know the charges against them, have access to attorneys (specially trained, with the proper security clearances), and enjoy a right of appeal. To ensure independence from executive branch influence, federal judges with lifetime appointments should fill the bench. A terrorism court would provide a framework for the emergence of a body of precedent and the development of a cadre of specially trained expert judges and lawyers. There is some precedent for a roughly similar arrangement in the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, created in 1978 and expanded under the Patriot Act.

If the rule of law is to be used to combat the horrors of terrorism is there a way to balance the need for secrecy with the desire for justice?

Strike three, life sentence, for cheating on a driver's exam. Only in America.

While there is no shortage of threats to life and liberty -- from international terrorism to poverty-inducing trade barriers to the deadly war on drugs -- these are indeed high times for a magazine devoted to exploring the promises of "Free Minds and Free Markets." For all of its many problems, the world we live in is dizzying in its variety, breathtaking in its riches, and wide-ranging in its options. Malcontents on the right and left who diagnose modernity as suffering from "affluenza" or "options anxiety" will admit this much: These days we’ve even got a greater choice of ways to be unhappy. Which may be as close to a definition of utopia as we’re likely to come.

Reason loves freedom, and in that spirit they have created a list of the 35 people they feel have made significant contributions to the cause since 1968 (the date of Reason’s birth). As lists are intended to do, it’s fodder for controversy and discussion with a diverse group of honorees.

John Ashcroft, Jeff Bezos, Curt Flood, William Burroughs, Milton Friedman, Les Paul, and Ayn Rand all make the cut.

Since we are free to disagree, I ask who has been left off of the list and who should be cut?

The absolute abortion that is the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) has committed its latest crime against humanity. Like a bad plot twist from T3, or a Matrix prequel, the computer that decides college football's championship game has decided that Ohio State is a better football team than USC. Both teams have one loss and are aiming to play Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl to decide the championship. Never mind that USC has absolutely destroyed their opponents and defending national champs Ohio State have barely eked by the competition regardless of ranking, the computer has decided that Ohio State is the second best team in all the land. (The "flawed" other polls which are based upon human assessments of talent have Ohio State as the 4th best team and USC the in their rightful place at number 2)

If there is one thing we know from the movies, the computers begin by corrupting the "small" things and continue until they reach their ultimate goal of destroying mankind. Be warned, if USC doesn't play in the Sugar Bowl this year, it will be the beginning of the End Times.

We've discussed the Simpsons a couple of times before, but like Iraq or Bush's IQ it's a topic that's never tiresome. The good news is that the Simpsons are back!

After too many seasons of lo-brow, over-the-top humor, John Bonne writes:

The show has finally evolved into a modern incarnation that retains its heart without feeling tired or bouncing from gag to gag like Homer tumbling down the side of Springfield Gorge.

Moving away from an all-Homer all the time format into one that allows other characters to shine and in the process offers more of the subtle satire and soul that infused earlier seasons. Part of the credit goes to Al Jean who has returned as executive producer.

So is this a renaissance of the Simpsons or a short-lived blip in the cartoon's inevitable creative demise? And for that matter are the Homer-heavy episodes of the recent past really so bad?

Kinsley on the incoherence of Bush's stem-cell stance:

It's not a complicated point. If stem-cell research is morally questionable, the procedures used in fertility clinics are worse. You cannot logically outlaw the one and praise the other. And surely logical coherence is a measure of moral sincerity.

Just in time for Christams. Ann Coulter dolls....

Dead Company Walking! How Skype may be the final nail in Verizon's coffin.

Rummy is bearish on the War on Terror. According to this memo.

Greg Easterbrook, an editor at The New Republic, was fired from ESPN.com for anti-semetic comments he made on his blog about the Quentin Tarantino movie Kill Bill. Easterbrook, for those of you who don’t know, is one of the best sportswriters in America, having entertained and informed millions with his weekly football column Tuesday Morning Quarterback (TMQ). He is also a man of letters, having penned a well-regarded book about religion while also writing articles on a variety of subjects for The New Republic, The Atlantic, and others.

Easterbrook’s TMQ column ran on ESPN.com, which is owned, by Disney, the same company that owns Miramax, the company that released Kill Bill. He criticized Disney CEO Michael Eisner and Miramax Chairman Harvey Weinstein (both who are Jewish) for chasing profit at the expense of morals by releasing the hyper-violent Kill Bill. After pointing out that the two executives are Jewish, he went on:

Yes, there are plenty of Christian and other Hollywood executives who worship money above all else, promoting for profit the adulation of violence. Does that make it right for Jewish executives to worship money above all else, by promoting for profit the adulation of violence? Recent European history alone ought to cause Jewish executives to experience second thoughts about glorifying the killing of the helpless as a fun lifestyle choice.

Some have said that his wording, awkward at best, out right disgusting at worst, shows the limits of blogging as a journalism tool. Revision, reflection, and editing being the tools of the writer’s craft, Easterbrook’s misstep was destined to strike the blogsphere. Others have expressed larger concerns. Once again media consolidation and the ability for a few people to silence smaller voices is a worry. As Lawrence Lessig wrote on his blog:

If ESPN fired Easterbrook because it overreacted to his comment, then that’s an injustice to Easterbrook, and a slight to society.

But it it fired Easterbrook because Easterbrook criticized the owner, that’s an offense to society, whatever the injustice to Easterbrook — at least when fewer and fewer control access to media. No doubt, anti-semitism has done infinitely greater harm than misused media mogul power. But if firing your critics becomes the norm in American media, then there will be much more than insensitivity to anti-semitism to worry about in the future.

Some critics of the recall results consider Schwarzenegger’s election as a triumph of style versus substance, the empty headed masses deluded by big screen dreams and empty rhetoric into voting first for a recall that was unwarranted and then to vote for a candidate who was unqualified. "Finally", they proclaimed, "the inevitable triumph of all that is trite in American culture. The ignorant have had their say".

Others aren’t so sure. Andrew Sullivan is a supporter (if not a voter) of the new way shown by the Governor. As he wrote in the Sunday's Times:

Schwarzenegger used his celebrity power to forge a new politics. That politics - the missing element in American life right now - is a blend of fiscal conservatism, social liberalism and foreign policy hawkishness. As governor, Arnold's foreign policy aspect is minimal. But here is a Republican who is pro-choice on abortion, environmentally-conscious, and comfortable with gay people his whole life. But he's also very tough on taxation and very skeptical of excessive government power. When he complained that Californians pay a tax each time they flush the toilet in the morning, he was tapping into deep conservative instincts. But in his transition team, announced last Thursday, he included the left-wing mayor of San Francisco, Willie Brown, and former Michael Dukakis campaign manager, Susan Estrich. He's also married to the Kennedys. This left-right combo plays directly to the new American center. It's far more potent than Howard Dean's bitter Michael-Moore routine. And it's far fresher than Dubya's Texan propriety.

Other high profile pre-election supporters include Mickey Kaus, Most of the Kennedy family, and Warren Buffett. However the latest blow to the “Arnold-voters-are-ignorant-masses-blinded-by-their-lack-of-understanding-of-political-dynamics” meme was the shocking announcement by California Attorney General Bill Lockyer that he voted for Arnold. Interestingly enough his announcement came at a conference populated by a feuding and confused Democratic party still reeling and struggling to make sense of what happened. Since state Democrats are still clearly befuddled, can someone explain what happened? Is there a way for politicians, of every stripe to harness this movement? Is this is a phenomenon or are there larger implications for American politics?

Maybe in America’s most diverse state a new political standard has erupted. If you listen closely, you can hear the old ways scream as they die.

Kaus on the Easterbrook affair.

The FDA is studying if cloned meat is OK for human consumption.

Wild. The Supremes say medical pot is OK!

Harry Truman had a sign on his desk reading "The Buck Stops Here." He felt a leader ultimately holds the responsibility. Tired of politicians constantly shifting blame to others, Californian voters today recalled Gray Davis and replaced him with Arnold Schwarzenegger. Neither the vote on the recall, nor the race to replace Davis was particularly close. The economy, once again, was the deciding factor in an election almost as noticeable for its high voter turnout as it was for its diverse list of candidates. Some consider this a populist vote reflective of the ever changing and accelerating state of political affairs. Others consider the recall campaign another in a long line of efforts to undermine the spirit, if not the law, of high-profile elections. California has once again shown the fearsome power and Faustian bargain that is democracy.

The always engaging Dahlia Lithwick on the Constitutional "smackdown" at the heart of the Do-Not-Call case.

"Even though I'm a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of traitors." Bush Sr. at a 1999 dedication.

Does Andrew Sullivan really think this is much ado about nothing?

Nextel says it doesn't actually "own" the color yellow afterall. Millions of crayon-pushing school kids rejoice.

Does California wine really suck? Mike Steinberger thinks so.

Personally, I think the 1970s and 1980s was the golden age of California winemaking; the most successful wines of that era—Ridge Monte Bello, Phelps Eisele Vineyard, Heitz Martha's Vineyard—had ripeness and power, but they also had finesse and elegance, qualities not currently found in many California wines. These days, the signature California style is flashy and in-your-face—"hedonistic fruit bombs," in the Parker vernacular. Though these wines tend to flow across the palate with all the subtlety and grace of the Soviet Army rolling into Prague, they do have a certain burlesque appeal

George Plimpton has died.

Is America in decline? Laura Secor for the Boston Globe writes that there is certainly a recent rise in “declinism”.

Wherever anyone believes in progress, someone, possibly the same one, believes in decline. Declinism emerges today from the triumphalism of the right: In our greatness, conservatives say, there is much to lose, and many who threaten us. So, too, does it emerge from the pessimism of the left: Power corrupts, and the corrupt will get their comeuppance. At present, both impulses -- triumphalist and pessimistic, chest-beating and self-lacerating -- are on the upsurge. So too, then, declinism….. . .Many of those who argue that US power is currently ebbing draw on the pathbreaking work of Yale historian Paul Kennedy. In his 1987 classic, "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers," Kennedy analyzed former great powers such as the Netherlands, Austria-Hungary, and Spain. He observed that historically, wars were won and empires sustained by those who possessed superior economic, rather than simply military, strength, and that an excess of foreign commitments left great powers particularly vulnerable.

While empires collapsing has long been the stuff of legend it appears as if there are a greater number of vocal declinists today than in recent memory.

In books released in the last 12 months, the leftist SUNY-Binghamton sociologist Immanuel Wallerstein, Clinton security advisor and Georgetown international relations specialist Charles A. Kupchan, and French demographer Emmanuel Todd contend, for very different reasons, but each with a debt to Kennedy, that Pax Americana has come to a close. America, writes Wallerstein in "The Decline of American Power" (July 2003), is "a lone superpower that lacks true power, a world leader nobody follows and few respect, and a nation drifting dangerously amidst a global chaos it cannot control." That the United States has come unmoored is evident, writes Kupchan in "The End of the American Era" (October 2002), from its "contradictory and incoherent behavior" since the end of the Cold War. And as Todd, author of the French bestseller "Apres l'Empire" (forthcoming in English translation from Columbia University Press), told the British magazine Prospect, in Iraq the United States "used military means in response to a nonmilitary problem. I believe this shows it has lost its omnipotence."

What then to make of all this? Is America in decline or a state of flux reflective of a world immersed in change? What can be done to protect this nation state? What should be done?

Dahlia Lithwick and Julia Turner in part one of a four-part series on what the Patriot Act says and does.

Neo-cons showing reservations about our policy in Iraq.

Matt Welch takes another look at blogging.

The John Hopkin’s researcher who last year claimed that ecstasy can cause Parkinson's-like brain damage is retracting the study. The reason? His lab administered methamphetamine not MDMA to the primates in the study.

As Bjork releases an extraordinary career retrospective, it's time to crown her as the most important pop musician of her generation-Salon

Thomas Bartlett takes a look at the astonishing career of Bjork and finds an artist who is as confounding as she is mesmerizing. Able to navigate through the ever changing whims of hipster music fans, the commercial demands of an increasingly segmented music business, and still make music that is challenging, personal, and complete.

But for all that, Bj?rk remains curiously isolated, her music more loved than influential. Radiohead, probably her closest rival in the intersection of popularity and critical acclaim that makes up at least one definition of greatness, has spawned countless baby Radioheads. Bj?rk has no copycats, no one feeding so obviously off her achievements, because those achievements are so alien. Radiohead is very much of our time, the musical zeitgeist for the millennium, but Bj?rk and her music come from a different time and place. There are two options in placing Bj?rk: Either she is an anomaly, brilliant but finally irrelevant, or she is the most important and forward-looking musician of her generation. In either case, we will need to wait 50 years to really make sense of what she has done, and absorb her influence in any useful way.

What is her music about? And who is she? In a business steeped in the laser-like demographic appeal of Madonna and her offspring, Bjork stands atop the apex of culture and commerce. A point with attackers on all sides.

The world of alternative popular culture is none too tolerant of success, as Wilco, the Strokes and even Radiohead have recently discovered, with waves of faddish discontent emanating from Manhattan, leaving no hipster unaffected. But Bj?rk has enjoyed 10 years of uncommonly smooth sailing with nary a backlash in sight.

A “sonic innovator” whose songs use the non-rhyming technique favored by poets, acutely aware of her every note and yet inclined to disregard musical convention, fans, critics, music execs are left with one question; What kind of music is she making, then?

Even George Orwell wasn't able to hide from the all-seeing camera.

Ashcroft is on tour touting the PATRIOT Act (I&II) and thankfully it's bringing a slew of discussion about liberty along for the ride.

Is deregulation and privatization hitting a wall? Some free-market advocates are beginning to temper their enthusiasm for open systems that, as recently as a decade ago, were heralded as the solution for everything from fledgling democracies, to energy companies, to financial services. Lately there have been more calls for government intervention leading some to believe that Big-Government may be on the rebound.

The latest black eye for deregulation came on Friday. FERC announced settlements with the energy companies involved with California’s blackouts. Paul Krugman calls them a “joke”, and point out they were announced on a Friday so that the media cycle would be more likely to pass over the news. The blackouts (which in no small part contributed to Gov. Davis’ descent into recall territory) and $8.9Billion in associated costs (not including future costs of the long term contracts California signed during the peak of the “crisis”) were found to have been wholly or partially due to manufactured energy shortages that were intended to raise prices and manipulate the newly deregulated market.

Yet the charges energy companies agreed to added up to only a bit more than $1 million. That is, the average Californian was bilked of more than $250, but the state will receive per-capita compensation of about 3 cents.

In instances such as the California energy crisis, where a state jumped headlong into “deregulation”, suffered dire consequences, and then the governmental watchdog agency was so beholden to the industry it was established to police that its judgment was as impotent as it was unreasonable, it clearly speaks to the limits of deregulation. Some still argue that California reiterates the importance of deregulation since what occurred there was partial deregulation, which is the worst of all worlds.

But the larger questions remain. What is the proper mix of private sector autonomy and government oversight? Should the State be charged with making the rules, enforcing the rules, or simply allowing for equal access? What does the future hold for deregulation?

Who should you vote for in the CA recall election? This test can help you find out...

TCS: Tech Central Station - A New Road to Serfdom? is a related piece to our discussion of the spector of socialism haunting the capitalism.

Slate chimes in with a few thoughts on Against Love.

Can capitalism survive? It seems an odd question to ask now that Western liberalism and American hegemony seem ascendant. Galal Amin wants us to take another look. Marx doesn't miss the mark as far as we thought even a decade ago. However, Amin offers capitalism hasn’t imploded in the manner that Marx predicated:

Shareholding companies, a form of collective ownership, became common, giving millions of small shareholders a chance to own capital. Through negotiations with labour unions, capitalists had to increase wages, shorten working hours, and generally improve working conditions. Keynesian economics called for the state to intervene in the market in times of depression. And the welfare state, a post-war concept, entailed income redistribution and the provision of a broader range of basic services.

Monopoly eclipsed competition, state intervention blurred the characteristics of free economy, and skilful advertising overshadowed consumer sovereignty. With giant companies engaged in long-term planning to recoup their extensive investment, what was left of the free market system? One may argue that business ownership is still private and investors continue to look for the highest rate of return. Yet, is the form of ownership (private versus public) more significant or the extent in which ownership has spread and come under public control?

It does raise the questions, what is the current state of capitalism and what is its future? Some have argued the current system more closely resembles mercantilism than capitalism. Some argue that Marxian (if not Marxist) theories about capitalism are coming to bear.

Amin offers some intriguing questions, the fact of which illuminates how indistinct the current state of world economic affairs are:

To what extent were these developments a sign of the triumph of capitalism -- in the Marxist sense -- over socialism? Has free market ended the state monopoly over the means of production and terminated the state monopoly over the decisions of production and investment, or has private monopoly replaced state monopoly? Have consumers won back from the state the right to determine the type and quantity of products, or have they forfeited their rights to private business? Has state-run central planning disappeared, or only been replaced by conglomerate vision? Has the role of the state diminished, or does the state still intervene in the economy to promote the interests of big business, such as arms manufacturers, even to the point of waging wars?

Vivendi and NBC will merge entertainment assets. Both expect EU anti-trust approval.

Jim Hightower, at it again.

The apparent success the international peace keepers are having in Liberia has once again raised an interesting suggestion. Perhaps the U.S., the U.N, and the world should consider privatizing peace-keeping efforts on a broader scale. While most troops currently on the ground are not from private firms, some would like this to change. Currently the U.S. uses private firms for a variety of military related services:

From 1994 to 2002, the Pentagon entered into more than 3,000 contracts with private military firms. Companies like Halliburton, Vice President Dick Cheney's former employer, now provide the logistics for every major American military deployment. Corporations have even taken over much of military training and recruiting, including the Reserve Officer Training Corps programs at more than 200 American universities. (Yes, private employees now train our military leaders of tomorrow.)
Perhaps nothing better illustrates the industry's growing role than the campaign against Iraq. Private employees worked on everything from feeding and housing coalition troops to maintaining weapons systems like the B-2 bomber. Indeed, there was roughly one private military worker in the region for every 10 soldiers fighting the war (as opposed to one for every 100 troops in the 1991 gulf war).
And companies will play an even greater role in the occupation. In addition to the proposed security force, the new Iraqi military will be trained by corporate consultants. Washington has also contracted DynCorp, whose pilots have long helped the Pentagon destroy coca fields in Colombia, to train the new police force.

In addition, the U.N. contracts their security to a private firm, and another company, Executive Outcomes, demonstrated considerable success in Sierra Leone in the late 90’s. Some are advocating that the “privatized military firms" get even more involved in “hot” peacekeeping efforts. They would be motivated by profit motive, and hence less inclined to be hamstrung by the political machinations of diplomats and bureaucrats. Additionally they typically operate in a relatively efficient, effective, and cost productive manner.

There are serious risks with working with private peacekeepers in future conflicts. Perhaps most importantly is one of perception. Many consider these firms to be nothing more than mercenaries with slick P.R. firms behind them. Additionally there is a concern that when a nation commits its flag to an intervention it will generally be there for the long haul, whereas a private firm is more committed to the cold calculus of profit. P.W. Singer, long an advocate for privatized military firms, also points to other serious risks:

-First, the good of private companies may not always be to the public good.
-Second, just like lawyers, some military contractors work only for ethical clients while others choose to make money from less savory types.
-In addition, foreign and military affairs are the government's domain. Undertaking public policy through private means can mean that some initiatives that might not pass public approval - such as the increasing American involvement, outside Congressional oversight, in Colombia's civil strife - still get carried out.

Regardless of the risks, some say that often privatized military firms are the only ones willing to go into the places the politicians turn their backs on.

Barry Bonds is the greatest baseball player ever. This season is special. An emotional season is turning even his most dogged opponent into reluctant fans. A son’s love for his father is proving to be, like baseball, a timeless sentiment too powerful to dismiss.

Barry and the media have had a long and tumultuous relationship. Most of the grudge stemming from a Sports Illustrated interview almost a decade ago. But even the writers at SI are starting to thaw over Barry’s latest feats. Coming off of two of the greatest offensive seasons ever, Barry is once again leading the SF Giants in their quest to win their first championship ever. Leading the majors in a number of offensive categories, including walks, home runs, and slugging percentage, has been especially difficult in light of his father’s illness and death.

Bobby Bonds, also a Giants great, spent much of this season and last battling stomach and lung cancer. The illness of his father weighed heavily on Barry. A guarded man who offers little of himself via the media Bonds was clearly fueled by an emotional fervor through much of the season. A desire drove Barry to play the best game possible in honor of the man who taught him how to play baseball. When Bobby was clearly nearing the end he went to the ballpark to watch Barry play. Apparently realizing that there were few sights as magnificent as watching his son’s sweet swing slap another splash hit, he chose to be at the park rather than a hospital bed. Bobby didn’t die in the box that night, but he did see Barry hit a walk off homer to beat the Atlanta Braves. He died shortly after.

Yesterday Bonds returned to the team after taking six days off to deal with his father’s death. Facing second place Arizona, and their missile-launching pitcher Randy Johnson, Bonds took a fourth inning, 93-MPH 1-0 fastball deep to right field with what would turn out to be the game’s winning run in a 2-1 victory. Barry later said his heart raced as he ran the bases. When he touched home plate he looked towards the sky a bit longer than usual. As he walked back to the dugout he took off his helmet and covered his face, apparently to hide his tears. He was taken out of the game later for an irregular and rapid heartbeat. The emotion and anxiety of the moment too much for even him.

So now the media appears to be warming to the surly slugger, and perhaps from there even the fans in other cities will be able to see that just because a man doesn’t get along with reporters it doesn’t mean he doesn’t have heart. Or perhaps Skip Bayless words it best,

Now maybe they'll realize what a once-a-lifetime privilege it is to watch a man who has come far closer to mastering bashing a baseball than any mortal ever.

Concerns about consumer privacy have led to unique ways to slow down the adoption and reach of RFID chips. RSA Security is working on "blocker chips" that you are wearable and will block transmissions back to the mother ship.

Chef Laurent Manrique has enjoyed amazing success in his adopted homeland. His San Francisco restaurant Aqua is considered one the finest in America, and he planned to open another high-end eatery in Sonoma. In addition to chicken, beef, and duck, the restaurant serves the French delicacy foie gras. This has some animal rights terrorists up in arms. They severely damaged the planned location of the restaurant, a historical site, in the latest in a string of disturbing incidents.

The attacks began last month when vandals sprayed red paint on Manrique's Mill Valley home and on the Santa Rosa home of Didier Jaubert, a partner in the foie gras venture. Attackers also put acid-based etching foam on their cars and windows, and glued shut locks and garage doors. The Bite Back Web magazine says that etched on Manrique's car windows was "foie gras is animal torture" and "murderer."
A sacred Buddha statue in Manrique's yard was also damaged. Manrique …is a practicing Buddhist.
The perpetrators left a videotape, which Manrique said was shot from his garden and showed his family relaxing inside their home. It was accompanied by a letter warning that they were being watched.

Laurent Manrique’s experience isn’t unique with radical groups seemingly reacquainting themselves with terror as a tool. Yesterday Chiron, a Bay Area biotech company that contracts with a company that uses animals for research, was the target of two bombs. A warning email sent the day before from animal rights groups, and a string of related threats against company executives at home, points in a familiar direction. Shortly after the blasts the Animal Liberation Brigade claimed responsibility and warned, "You might be able to protect your buildings, but can you protect the homes of every employee?" Earlier this month a $50 million arson attack on a real-estate development in San Diego and a similar-styled attack on a Hummer dealership, has led many to question whether these tactics help or hinder the causes they purportedly support. People wonder, how far is this going?

One more music critic coming to terms with Andrew W.K.

Are you a neocon? Take this quiz and find out.

As thanks for liberating their country an Iraqi couple has named their 6-week-old baby boy George Bush. Now that's winning their hearts and minds!

"We have discovered nothing new in art in 17,000 years."- Picasso, on visiting the caves of Lascaux.

What makes man “modern”? This is a question that’s sent much of science on a search for the dawn of modernity. A question explored by Randal White of New York University in his book "Prehistoric Art: The Symbolic Journey of Humankind".

The discussion about the emergence of modern humans has been going on for close to 100 years, and early in the debate criteria were proposed that might indicate "modern" behavior…(The) suggested hallmarks of modernity included toolmaking, the development of trade and social organization -- and the creation of art.

And it’s art that’s the most vexing. We hardly agree what art is now, let alone what constitutes art from eons past. Artistic discoveries garner more attention than all the other types of archeological finds, which clearly speaks to our fascination with the higher aspirations of mankind. What does our understanding of “representational systems" tell us about our break from Neanderthals?

Many of the techniques of “art” were familiar to ancient man:
"All of the major representational techniques were known at least by the Magdalenian [Period, beginning about 18,000 years ago]; oil- and water-based polychrome painting, engraving, bas-relief sculpture, sculpture in the round, charcoal and manganese crayon drawing, molded clay, fired ceramic figurines, shading, perspective drawing, false relief, brush painting, stamping and stenciling. The Grotte Chauvet even contains the image of a bison colored by dots of paint applied by hand, a technique that White describes as "pointillism -- 300 centuries before Seurat."

But is it Art? It is necessary, cautions White, that "we get away from the 19th- and 20th-century notion that somehow art exists as a universal urge on the part of humans, independent of social, cultural and environmental factors." Much of what we look back on as art may have actually been tools of a different sort. Systems of communication, prayer, maps, ways of warding off spirits, ways of enforcing law.

Adding to the difficulty in assessing what role, if any, ancient art played, is the lack of “artistic” discoveries from places other than Central Europe. Due mostly because of science’s pre-occupation with all things European in the early part of this century, there are relatively few finds from Africa, Southern Asia, and the Middle East, the hotbeds of early human development and the wellspring of modernity. So what does the “art” of the past add to the story of ancient man? And does it offer clues to the path that we have headed down?

Nice article about the fall-out from the dot-com experiment. The main lessons:

• Being a Luddite is bad, but being a technophile can be worse.
• There is a difference between red tape and necessary procedures.
• They are more comfortable dealing with the outside world.
• Speed can connote efficiency as well as recklessness.
• Employee loyalty isn't an outdated concept.
• It is often easy to do more with less.
• The Internet may not be a great business model, but it is a great business tool.
• Managers must value elan and encourage optimism.

"Perhaps the most truly evil aspect of religious terrorism is that it aims at destroying moral distinctions themselves. Its goal is to confuse not only its sympathizers, but also those who aim to fight it’, so writes Jessica Stern, author of Terror in the Name of God; Why Militants Kill. The Harvard professor traveled around the world during the 5-year course of her study of violent, religious militants, hoping to decipher what causes people to kill for God. The analysis is remarkably clear sighted and insightful for such an esoteric topic and leads to some very useful conclusions. Perhaps most notably she differentiates between three types of religious-terror organizations. As described in the San Francisco Chronicle’s review:

The Saints of Christ, a violent American anti-abortionist movement, is an example of "leaderless resistance," a type of group whose actions are troublingly insusceptible to penetration or prevention because its members never meet to discuss specific plans, only the overall philosophy.

By contrast, Harkat ul Mujahideen, the Pakistani Islamist group that murdered Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, operates more like a conventional army, with a centralized command-control structure and military training. Al Qaeda has achieved its devastating impact by combining decentralized infrastructure, composed of sleepers and freelancers, with a military-style hierarchy.

Fundamentalism comes across as a desperate, pathetic, violent effort to hold off the future and force change back into the Pandora’s box of globalization. Fueled by definable benefits the misplaced fervor can actually be used to understand, and destroy the terrorists. While America struggles to better understand its role in creating and fighting the disillusionment and dread that feeds violence it’s helpful to have an idea of what causes religious violence.

George Soros founded the Project on Death in America nearly a decade ago. He outlined what he was hoping to accomplish in a 1994 speech Reflections of Death In America, “The mission of the Project is to promote a better understanding of the experiences of dying and bereavement and by doing so help transform the culture surrounding death.”

America’s conflicted relationship with death is something few people have a firm grasp on, so apologies in advance for the clumsy nature of these questions, I wonder if the deaths of celebrities shed light on our lives and deaths? Do the fawning obits help us grasp our worlds any better or do they serve as nothing more than the culmination in a series of diversions? Is our enthrallment with celebrity death merely an extension of our fascination with all things famous, or another way to collectively explore death?

Soros worried that death has become a subject whose own importance makes impossible its significance in popular culture.

In America, the land of perpetually young, growing older is an embarrassment, and dying is a failure. Death has replaced sex as the taboo subject of our times. People compete to appear on talk shows to discuss the most intimate details of their sex lives, but they have nothing to say about dying, which in its immensity dwarfs the momentary pleasures of sex.

What if the dead were among us and spoke to us now? Warren Zevon demonstrates how it might look. Diagnosed with terminal lung cancer he is feverishly making up for hours spent in relative obscurity. He’s the subject of a VH1 documentary, he recently spent a night as the lone guest on the David Letterman show, he's on the receiving end of many fawning magazine pieces, and he’s about to release his last album, written and recorded after his diagnosis. Called by many a “masterpiece” The Windis an exploration of death, dying, and what that means to living. Themes he’s explored many times before.

So what does a celebrity’s death mean to me? What does it mean to you? What does my death mean? Soros offers words of pain and salve if not clear direction.

In conclusion, let me tell you how I came to terms with my own death -- a subject I gave a lot of thought to in my youth. I spent years thinking about it. Building on my insight that there is always a divergence between ideas and facts I came to the conclusion that it is the idea of my death which I cannot accept because it is a total denial of my consciousness. The fact of dying, when it comes, may be much more acceptable, especially if it comes at the end of a long life. The insight that the idea is not the same as the fact, made the idea more bearable.

You read that the White House ordered the EPA to include misleading statements about the air quality in New York shortly after 9/11 and you work hard to keep your rising level of cynacism below the level of anger and disgust. These are our elected officials.

Pete Sampras, the greatest tennis player of his generation, and arguably ever, will retire on Monday. Sampara’s career includes 14 Grand Slam titles, more than any male in history, he was the youngest U.S. Open Men’s winner at 19,from 1993 through 1998 he finished the season ranked #1 in the world, and he was fresh breath of civility in a game that had been in need.

Early on he wasn’t embraced by the fans who took to players with more extreme personalities. When Agassi was a male Kournikova, and Boris Becker was thrilling people with his aerial circus, Sampras was just winning. Even today he remains mostly an enigma, having never offered much more than devastatingly effective game, and a polite acknowledgement of the crowd.

Pete’s never won the French Open, a surface too foreign to his game, and this is part of why some consider Rod Laver (or Borg, or Emerson, or…) to be greater than Sampras. Others, citing his “lack of charisma” say that the shortcomings of his persona override his dominance on the court. As always the argument becomes; style vs. substance. Regardless of what the criteria is used to judge athletic greatness, in New York on Monday, we will see a champion of the ages step off the stage for good.

"To restore morality we must first recognize the source from which all morality springs. From our earliest history in 1776 when we were declared to be the United States of America, our forefathers recognized the sovereignty of God."-Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore

"Is it possible for the state to celebrate a plurality of religions without establishing one or several as more legitimate?”-Chief Justice William Rehnquist

Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore is a Christian and often uses God’s Higher Law to guide him on the bench. When he became Chief Justice he had a two-ton monument to the Ten Commandments placed in the state judicial building rotunda. U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson ruled that the monument was impermissible since its “primary effect (was to) advance religion” Moore (and his growing legion of followers) have refused to remove the Commandments. The Chief Justice lost in the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and was once again ordered to remove the monument or face fines of $5,000 per day. The other justices on Alabama’s Supreme Court have also ruled against Moore, ordering the building manager to take down the monument. While true believers flock to the monument in droves Moore is appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The issue highlights America’s divided beliefs about the role that religion should play in public life. While there is no mention of “separation of church and state” in the Constitution, America has a long and conflicted relationship with religion. Dahlia Lithwick explains the legal matters,

There is… a constitutional problem highlighted by Moore's conduct and by the popular support he's garnered in some circle A sentiment expressed frequently by elected officials, religious leaders, and even the occasional U.S. Supreme Court justice, is that the principle of separating church and state has morphed into unbridled state hostility toward the church. The founders of this country were, for the most part, deeply religious men. Would they, like Moore, object to the ways in which religion has been chased out of the public square?
The Constitution itself codifies two conflicting impulses. The First Amendment guarantees simultaneously that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" and that Congress won't "prohibit ... the free exercise thereof." Which one is it? How can Congress avoid promoting religion, while also encouraging its free exercise?

Religion matters a great deal. To the people who have made the pilgrimage to the monument of The Commandments, it’s clear they see this fight as something larger than a legal matter.

Hundreds of Moore's supporters have held round-the-clock song and prayer vigils at the court building, and many vowed yesterday to risk arrest to fight the removal.

Gene Chapman, a preacher who walked more than 1,100 kilometers to Alabama from Austin, Texas, said he has not found any religion that opposes the Ten Commandments.

"I fear this could come to bloodshed," he said.

"This is how revolutions start."

How bad is PowerPoint really?

"The Smoking Gun, which digs up arrest records, mug shots, show business contracts and divorce papers, became a tip sheet for journalists and a cult Web site for reality show aficionados. It managed to embarrass seemingly squeaky-clean contestants on reality shows from CBS's "Survivor" to Fox's "Joe Millionaire." (Most memorably, it uncovered the early bondage films of a bachelorette, Sarah Kozer.)

Inevitably, but contrary to the laws of nature, the Web site will mutate…into the very thing it feeds on: a television show"

So writes the New York Times Alessandra Stanley. The challenge is to translate the instantaneous nature of the website into the relatively slothful format of the TV.

The early reviews are mixed and some are wondering what the show will do to separate itself from the overabundance of celebrity sleaze-TV that fills the airwaves. The larger issue is one that is near and dear to those of us who ponder how Carl might make a few bucks; Can a successful website be turned into TV gold? And if so, how?

Mo Rocca, most notable for his stint on the uber-satirical Daily Show, is the host and he dons a variety of guises in search of the perfect comedic pitch. Some have called the show a “comedic nugget”, which bodes well for websites brimming with “breezy cynicism.”

It’s easy to scoff at the Ron Popeil inventions hawked on infomercials (and buried in some of our closets). However you just never know when today’s odd contraption becomes tomorrow’s must have cooking tool. The San Francisco Chronicle celebrates the birthdays of two such devices; the microwave oven and the Cuisinart. Both were disregarded as inane novelties at first and have over time become must-haves for any cook’s kitchen.

So in celebration of these two labor saving devices I ask you for your best microwave/food processor stories/recipes, and your thoughts on what gizmos of today will work their way into the cook’s canon.

The spy-cams in Florida are gone!

It’s World Series time again. But this World Series includes teams from Japan, Saudi Arabia, America, the Caribbean, Mexico, and others. The Little League World Series is the brainchild of a Pennsylvania rubber company and has captivated the baseball-playing globe since 1948. ESPN is broadcasting an unprecedented number of games, which has some pundits pining for a return to simpler times. (A time, which others argue, never existed except in the wistful memories of overly nostalgic grown-ups.)

Coming off the Danny Almonte scandal the Series is doing its best to regain its wholesome innocence, which is clearly the game’s biggest draw. (Even if the success of the teams seems to be less dependent on skill than on size.) Regardless of how many levels of player verification exist, there is a sense to some that the media glare is distorting what should be a simple proposition: Kids playing baseball.

Dean sends spam. Techies upset.

Bin Laden's Boys try to claim credit for the blackout.

California, “the land of fruits and nuts” chortle the clue-less wags from fly-over states and the eastern seaboard. The absurdities they scoff at today are the trends they breathlessly chase months later. From spinning classes to Prop.13, California is an important bellwether for changing norms.

The recall election is no different. While self-styled pundits, cartoonists, and even some Californians themselves chuckle at the whole affair a real revolution is coming to a head. Californian political historian Kevin Starr understands what is happening,

“Something powerfully transformative is underway in state politics, and it is nothing less than voters' self-liberation from a claustrophobic and demeaning political culture out of sync with today's 24/7 information society and unworthy of the larger creativity of the Golden State.”

Just as the political powers that be were caught off guard by Howard Dean’s campaign strategy, this one has left the unimaginative lights grasping for hoary old insults in a desperate attempt to hold back the clock. This is a nightmare for many, true democracy in action, emboldened and enhanced by a limitless sense of possibility and technology.

Starr relishes what the recall truly signals; “No wonder California voters seem to be in a state of emotional and moral release, seeking a new connection to their politicians. Far from being a circus or even a grand opera, the current situation, as personally painful as it must be for Gov. Gray Davis, offers a breakthrough opportunity to rethink, reform, revitalize — indeed, refound — state government".

Many politicians clearly are hunkering down in an attempt to fight the future. To them (and the yucksters) the question is: What are you afraid of?

Video Game maker Ubisoft spokeswoman Cassie Vogel reports, "If you look at stats, in 1990 the average age of your typical gamer was 18, and now it's 29."

While some of that change may be due to peter-pandemonium it’s clear that the game makers anticipated this shift. New titles have come out reflecting the changing perspectives, as has a not so subtle shift in marketing focus. Oft heralded leader of this trend is the Madden football franchise. Madden is a classic game with a devoted following among professional athletes. Slate offers the news that Madden is so well regarded within the inner-sanctum of the NFL that simply being in the game is considered a validation of one’s entire sports life, being on the cover has been mentioned as a “career highlight” by last year’s star, and the game is now in the NFL Hall of Fame.

Jacksonville Jaguars running back Fred Taylor admitted that he plays up to six hours a day of Madden during the season. "In the offseason, I'll play from 2 in the afternoon to 11 or 12 at night—every night."… The Sporting News reported that Vick, the league's most electrifying player, nonetheless finds that his "ultimate rush comes from beating the snot out of a Madden NFL opponent."

That kind of cool you can’t buy. (Actually, the museum has a massive marketing arrangement with EA Sports, the maker of Madden) The NFL has a lock into the prime male demographic range, and now it appears, so does video games.

What’s next for games? Are they truly the “new movies”? And how exactly did a fat man in a bus replace Nike as the ultimate arbiter of cool?