What's perhaps the biggest argument against using torture as a tactic in the War on Terror? Bad intel. It doesn't get much worse than this.

Jesus. Aristotle. Alexander. Hitler. Dr. King. These men have all cast long shadows over human affairs and ultimately have driven the forces of history. As this century takes form it’s clear that this age will be shaped by one of two people; Ayn Rand or L.Ron Hubbard.

Both leaders have spawned legions of influential disciples who drive the twin engines of culture and commerce. The followers of both groups often find themselves under attack from critics from within and without, but each day their reach expands.
Jenny Turner chronicles the quiet ubiquity of the Randians in the latest London Review of Books:
Objectivism is also promulgated by the Objectivist Center in Washington DC, ... The Center supports lectures and social events, a journal called the New Individualist (until recently the Navigator), a venture called the Atlas Society and an online Objectivism Store selling T-shirts, bags, hats, badges and inspirational posters.
Rand is everywhere on the internet: stickers, coasters, car number plates, CDs featuring a Randian ‘Concerto of Deliverance’ at starshipaurora.com. Randians can meet ‘at least’ four thousand others, it is claimed, through the Objectivist dating agency at theatlasphere.com, …Professional philosophers can join the Ayn Rand Society at aynrandsociety.org.

Rand’s influences are noticeable in the political ethos that flourished in the literary environment she provided. A politics that manifested itself in the form of Ronald Reagan and his political offspring. An ideology that focused on destroying the overt collectivism of the Soviets and the more subtle socialism found in western democracies. Money is the fountainhead of political societies and her impact is even more direct in this regard. The business focused climate she facilitated ushered in an unrepentant form of hyper-capitalism that remains the hallmark of her adopted nation. Long time U.S. Federal Reserve Bank chairman Alan Greenspan (who was a flute playing early acolyte of Rand’s) has used his pulpit to shape global monetary policy in a way that many consider to be in adherence with Randian goals.

Her death hasn’t stalled the movement. The emotional content of her writing has helped her words to find leverage in the hearts of adolescents around the world, and her books continue to be bestsellers. Turner describes Rand’s continued popularity as a combination of rapture and intellectual fireworks: Post-Rand, Objectivism has become more secular and suburban, but as is the way with suburbs, also more widespread. If nothing else, Objectivism might inject romance, victimhood, entertainingly bohemian personal chaos, into the otherwise uneventful right-wing life

Her adherents are diverse and growing. As Scott McLemee describes:
(Randians include) the novelist and screenwriter Nora Ephron, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and the Canadian bombast-rock group Rush. (The album 2112 was inspired by her philosophy.) Rand died in 1982, but her spirit lingers in Silicon Valley, with its anarcho-entrepreneurialism. At least one dozen Playboy centerfold models have named The Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged as their favorite book. And Camille Paglia has proclaimed Rand an intellectual prototype of her own bad self--than which no higher praise can be imagined, from that source.

Meanwhile Scientology has grown to become the pre-eminent religion in the employ of those who control celebrity culture. Since its beginnings, Scientology targeted celebrities to grow the profile of the fledging church. To this day the high profile of some the church’s more celebrated members like Tom Cruise and John Travolta are only the most public face of group that has been able to recruit followers from all walks of life. From prison out-reach, school drug treatment programs, to the foot soldiers offering e-meter testing on the sidewalks of cities across the globe, Scientology has used yeoman tactics to grow its base. Hubbard’s text Dianetics (subtitled: The Modern Science of Mental Health) has become the bible for millions of followers around the world. Recently, the Guinness Book of World Records recognized the late founder as the most translated author in the history of the world.

Scientology’s appeal lies largely in its ability to tap into man’s quest for self-examination and self-improvement. While rigorously (and litigiously) maintaining secrecy about the inner-workings of the church the faith is welcoming to any and all who strive.

Like the Randians, Scientologists are mired in controversy. Some consider the church little more than a pyramid scheme wrapped in a pious veneer. Others criticize the church for being more cult than religion. And most recently the church has found itself waging an increasingly public (and at times surreal) battle with the medical establishment. These skirmishes over the image of the church has brought the fight into a battlefield it knows all too well; the realm of popular culture.

Even Wall St. sees the folly of the current drug policy.

It's time to consider a dramatic shift in policy. Instead of the battle cry "war on drugs," let's try the mantra "legalization, regulation, and taxation."

Speaking of nutty right-wingers, Pat Robertson says God will smite a town for voting against intelligent design.

Bill O'Reilly thinks San Francisco shouldn't be a part of America. But he doesn't stop there:

"If Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead."

What a douche.

Thanks for all the kind words of support about Dublin. Some of the emails have been really amazing.

One of the funniest shout outs came from the reader who said the posting reminded them of this Onion story.

Americans love their dogs. We spend more on pets than on candy or toys. Philanthropists have funded research into cloning pets, and recent genetic successes have created a nascent industry.

This isn't about America in the aggregate, it's about me. More to the point, my dog. Her name was Dublin. We put her down this morning. She was diagnosed with an extremely aggressive form of cancer, operated on, had a kidney removed (along with the tumor) and struggled for the past two weeks. We waited with desperation for her to pee the first few days after the surgery, in the hope that her one remaining kidney would work. About 3 days after the operation she walked out into our bushes and squatted. It was night and we realized we might not be able to see her urinate so I shoved my hand under her and felt the warm, golden liquid. I was ecstatic. Never before had being peed on by a dog brought me such unmitigated happiness.

But the next few days put to rest our fledgling hope. Even though she continued to pee test results showed that her lone kidney wasn't working as hoped. She hadn't eaten since the surgery and was losing weight and what little strength she had. The only time she got up from her bed was to vomit. Each day brought less and less hope that she'd make a real recovery.

She was my dog, but really she was my wife's dog. She got Dublin from a pound in Southern California just before she left for college. Her first dog on her own, a sign, to my wife at least, of her growing independence and connected to her sense of the possible. Many years later I met my wife in a dog park. Of all the gifts our dogs gave us, this was undoubtedly the greatest.

So now we have one dog. A strange sensation for two people who spent so many years going to dog parks and learning to watch two dogs simultaneously go in opposite directions. The four of us went to Chrissy Field, an expanse of beach on the San Francisco Bay that is a favorite for all City dogs, and watched the fog roll over the bridge and waves crest against the sand where Dublin once chased giant black birds with an abandon that is reserved for the innocent and the free. This was our last act as a family of four before we took her to her in. Before we held her as the vet injected one shot, and then another, and she went to sleep forever.

Often people without pets are amazed. "How can you spend so much money on medical bills?" they ask. "How can you spend so much on toys...on food...on everything?" As I sit at home self-medicating (i.e. getting drunk) in the misbegotten hope that the virgin chasm will somehow ignore me for a moment or two, I realize that our love affair with animals is as much about us as it is about them.

Finally! Bush makes an appointment all Americans can get behind.

It is possible to fail in many ways...while to succeed is possible only in one way. -Aristotle

The USC Trojans, down by three, facing a 4th down and 9, deep in their own territory, knew for the first time all season the vicious sting of uncertainty. The 27 game winning streak was in peril, as was their season long quest to become the first team to win three consecutive national titles. Perhaps worst of all, it was going to happen on the hallowed, but hostile, ground that Notre Dame calls home. Everybody’s All-American Matt Leinart made a pass that kept the Trojan’s dwindling hopes alive, and then he made the decision that instantly became legend. The Trojans won in a game that some are calling the greatest college football game ever. A magic game on a day filled with the sublime spectacle that college football is at its very best. As Josh Levin, writing for Slate offered:

In what might have been college football's best day ever, Michigan and Boston College won on last-gasp touchdown passes, Alabama took out Ole Miss on a final-play field goal, and West Virginia and UCLA came from way back to win overtime slugfests.

College football is a game that is fueled by friendly controversy. Who deserves to be #1? Perhaps as importantly, who deserves to be #2? How soon until we get a playoff system? What is the greatest rivalry in all the land? Which conference is the strongest? Did USC cheat to win and does it even matter? Who will win the Heisman?

Part way through this season we can mostly only speculate, but this past Saturday gives us a chance to reflect and look ahead. As the leaves turn and the crisp air of autumn renews our school ties, for a few hours this past weekend a group of young men reminded us what the only appropriate answer is when faced with immovable obstructions; Fight On!

Uof Chicago poli-sci professor and uber-blogger Daniel Drezner was up for tenure. He was denied. Now many are wondering if his blog was the reason.

I didn't realize FEMA was rappin' to kids. This changes everything, they aren't incompetent.

Frear. What is it goof for? Apparently for the fear entrepreneurs it's a chance to make a buck or a point.

Fads are over. Cool, isn't. Cool-hunters look for work. (actually, they just change their names)

Adam L. Penenberg wonders if Google has peaked.

A new structure is cause for pause and reflection. After years of political squabbles the new M.H. de Young Memorial Museum is about to open in San Francisco. Designed by Swiss architects Pierre de Meuron and Jacques Herzog, the resurrected fine arts museum is over 293,000 sq. ft, offers breathtaking interiors, and is draped in a copper skin that blends into the trees of Golden Gate Park and simultaneously stands in stark relief.

The most controversial element of the design is the soaring, twisting tower that rises above the redwood trees. Some derisively compare the tower to an aircraft carrier, others to an undulating snake. It’s clearly the signature design element of the exterior, and one meant to be provocative. John King, the Chronicle’s Urban Design writer muses:

The tower, for instance, defies all efforts to pin it down or sum it up. It is a presence more than a distinctive form -- blunt from one angle and statuesque from another, muddy in the fog and aglow in bright sun. On the north and south sides it seems to dissolve, where the copper encasing the fire stairs becomes a lacy web that lets the light stream through.

The original de Young was irreparably damaged in the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. City voters twice turned down initiatives to fund the rebuilding of the de Young and instead turned to private financing. Museum board president Dede Wilsey led the fundraising effort, a challenge that was compounded by contentious battles over parking, park use, and the collapse of the dotcom economy. Wilsey’s pitch was created when she spoke with a wealthy patron at a cocktail party, ``You have money, and I need some.'' She never stopped asking. And now in the year 2005 San Francisco has its de Young back. (Quicktime tour of the musuem)

King goes on to describe how Mueron and Herzog refreshingly create structures that place function over form and make full use of familiar materials in evocative ways. The duo is notable by the fact that they don’t have a signature look. The space, materials, purpose, and location have a greater impact on their designs than does their egos. King writes, “The key to Herzog and de Meuron's work: They're interested in sensations, not forms. They strive to create architecture that touches all your senses -- an overall experience rather than an image on a page.”

This sensual construction occurs, perhaps most successfully, with the interior. Kenneth Baker, the Chronicle’s art critic, takes us on a (podcast)tour of the inside, describing the building and the pieces it houses.

The new de Young deploys its resources to encourage our recognition that the meanings of art, even of the decorative arts, lie neither wholly within the art object nor wholly outside it.

The layout of the building encourages visitors to take a path of their choosing, rather than creating a de facto hierarchy of branches of art. The central court, which has elements left from the original de Young, is at the beginning (or end) of any path taken. As always with Herzog ad de Meuron’s designs that materials on the inside are precise, stoic, and generous. From the rich eucalyptus of the second floor, to the grand staircase leading up to the Oceania collection (the one section that could truly be called extravagant) the importance of materials to the overall design of the museum becomes apparent.

Kenneth Baker ponders at the beginning of his review “What should a 21st century museum look like?” Pierre de Meuron, Jacques Herzog, and Dede Wilsey have given their answer.

So Catholic bishops in England have discovered (or more germane, disclosed) what most of us accepted once we grew past believing in Santa Claus, the Bible shouldn't be literally interpreted.

Â?We should not expect to find in Scripture full scientific accuracy or complete historical precision,Â? they say in The Gift of Scripture

Now if we can get Bussupportersrs on board, we might start making progress.

Malcolm Gladwell on Harvard's long history of using a variety of tools and tactics to keep the university WASP-y enough to maintain its "elite" perception.

Vlad Putin stole Robert Kraft's SuperBowl ring. There's nothing odd about that story at all.

The fall television season is a few weeks old and all ready winners and losers are starting to emerge. As always, there is a mix of quality and dreck, shows that are at risk too soon, and shows that should have been shot at the first pitch meeting.

Perhaps the biggest potential flop is NBC's latest offering from the Apprentice franchise. The Martha Stewart version has the hottie ex-con running an obstacle course for a bunch of nattily attired, upwardly mobile, professionals. The reality genre seems to be showing its age in general, the Apprentice in particular, and Martha's comeback appears to have hit a road block. The lastest ominous sign is that NBC has moved the program's start time (never a good sign) and positioned it against ABC's juggernaut Lost.

Showing more early success is the Geena Davis vehicle Commander in Chief. The show, about a woman ascending to the Presidency, enjoyed strong support from ABC, driven by a Disney-sized marketing campaign that included an inaugural ball. In a minor controversy reminiscent of the political wrestling that is occurring over movies, conservative critics have pointed out that the show is actually a nefarious effort by liberals to promote the notion of a female president.

The successful new shows run the gamut in terms of networks and show a return of sorts for scripted programming. Winners include the Chris Rock project Everybody Hate Chris. Considered by many an updated Cosby show, it has all ready become one of the most successful shows in UPN history. NBC has scored with My Name is Earl the story of a ne'er-do-well who wins the lottery and attempts to go back and do good to all the people he has done bad to. Fox is enjoying a surge with the serial Prison Break, a bright light on a dark night for Fox. Prison Break follows two quality programs that seem headed to oblivion. (It's not a new show, but Fox treats it like a new show. Arrested Development is so money, if anyone has a cousin who works at Fox, implore them not to cancel the show)

Another struggling new show is FX's ripped from the headlines Over There. Steven Bochco, of Hill Street Blues and LA Law fame, has brought a searing and poetic look into the lives of soldiers serving in Iraq. A verisimilitude that is perhaps, a little too close for comfort.

Perhaps even more than the movie business, television responds and reacts to the whims and desires of the viewing public. And like the variety that marks the American populace there are a variety of television shows, one of which is perfect for you.

This defies the imagination. Bush is threatening to veto (his first veto ever) the recently passed anti-tortue bill.