Saturday, November 10, 2007

Thr Meaning of America

It is not that often that I find articles which are so compelling that they demand to be included in my blog -- but this is just such a piece. Read this thoughtful analysis of the impact of our government's willingness to torture, with comments which rise to the level of the original piece:

Tuesday, October 2, 2007

Time for you to get your Money!

The Hidden Rip-off

Hundreds of thousands of computer workers, throughout the country are being denied a big chunk of the wages they have earned. How? These workers have been improperly classified as “Salaried - Exempt Employees.” Any employee so classified, receives a fixed annual salary. Every paycheck will be exactly the same, no matter how many hours the employee worked each week.

That classification saves employers millions of dollars a year, by the simple trick of not paying overtime wages. Whether out of ignorance, or deliberate intent, many companies automatically assign this category to all employees who are classified as “Computer Workers.”

Sorry, employers. It’s not up to you. Instead, both Federal and State Law sets forth the conditions by which employees may be classified as Exempt Workers. By far, most computer workers are mandated to be classified as “Salaried – Non exempt.” That means they are required to be paid the following

1.5 times their calculated hourly rate (annual salary/2080) for each hour beyond 8 hours in each day worked, or each hour exceeding 40 hours in a week.

2.0 times their calculated hourly rate for each hour beyond 12 worked in a single day.

Salaried Non-Exempt personnel must also be paid for two fifteen-minute rest breaks within each eight hour period worked.

2.0 times their calculated hourly rate for each hour worked on a legal holiday.

What Qualifications Must the Employer Meet to Assign Exempt Status?

As of September 2000, California recognizes an hourly computer professional exemption for certain employees in the computer software field. A computer software field employee is exempt from overtime pay if all of the following requirements are met:

  1. The employee is primarily engaged in work that is intellectual or creative and that requires the exercise of discretion and independent judgment; AND
  2. The employee is primarily engaged (spends more than half his or her time) in duties that consist of one or more of the following:
    1. The application of systems analysis techniques and procedures including consulting with users to determine hardware, software, or system specifications.
    2. The design, development, documentation, analysis, creation, testing, or modification of computer systems or programs, including prototypes, based on and related to user or system design specifications.
    3. The documentation, testing, creation, or modification of computer programs related to the design of software or hardware for computer operating systems. AND
  3. The employee is highly skilled and proficient in the theoretical and practical application of highly specialized information to computer systems analysis, programming, and software engineering; (Job title not determinative) AND
  4. The employee's hourly rate of pay is not less than $45.84 per hour for every hour worked.

If the employer cannot show all of the above, the employee is non-exempt and entitled to overtime pay and other benefits. Such employees can recover wages going back three years (and in some cases four years) from the date a complaint is filed, but only up to those wages earned since September 2000.

If you are working as a computer worker for a company, you don’t need a law degree to determine whether you should be qualified as a Salary Exempt worker. First, let’s determine whether you are, indeed in that category generally qualifying for the classification, “Computer Worker.” Here is a list of titles and tasks which will be instantly suspect, if classified Exempt:

· Computer Technicians

· Software Engineer

· Customer Training Consultants

· System Administrator

· Graphic Designers
Software Testers

· Hardware Testers

· Debuggers

· Coders

· Engineers, Administrators, Analysts Employed by any of the Gaming Industry employers

· Systems Analysts

· Programmers

· Tech-Support

· Computer Hardware and Software Installers

· Computer Operators

· Desktop Services

· Configuring Employees

· Bug Fixing Employees

· High Tech Employees, Computer Professionals who do not require and advanced degree beyond a B.S. or B.A.

· Information Technology (Regardless of Title)

· Trainees or entry-level employees (Technicians to Programmers)

· Employees in computer-related occupations who have not attained the skill and expertise necessary to work independently and without close supervision

· Employees who are engaged in operation of computers or in the manufacture, repair, or maintenance of computer hardware and related equipment

· Engineers, drafters, machinists, or other professions whose work is highly dependent upon or facilitated by the use of computers and computer-aided design software, including CAD/CAM, but who are not in a computer systems analysis or programming occupation

· Employees who write material related to computers for print or on-screen media or who write or provide content for computer related media such as the World Wide Web or CD-ROMS)

· Employees who create imagery for effects used in the motion picture, television, or theatrical industry

· Employees engaged primarily in technical support and client support

But if you have any doubts, go back to item 4. If your annual salary is less than $95,000 per year, and have one of these titles, or do these tasks, you are probably qualified to be classified as Salary Non Exempt, entitled to overtime wages, now, in the future, and for three or four years in the past.

So, How do you Collect?

You are not going to do it simply by complaining to your employer. Employers tend to have corporate personalities much like that of George Bush. They are the “Deciders,” especially, when you tell them something they don’t want to hear.

Unless you have kept very accurate records of your overtime hours, the employer can simply brush off your complaint, by saying you have no proof that you have worked these hours. Having classified you as a Salary Exempt worker, the employer has no obligation to track your hours, as it does when you are Salary Non-Exempt. You have the burden of proof that you indeed did work the claimed overtime.

Also, unless you have been laid off already, in an age where firings and layoffs are rampant, lodging a complaint is a quick way to hear, “Don’t let the door hit your butt as you leave.”

What it all comes down to is that it is far more difficult to take on the company as an individual, than as a group. Having successfully done so, I can tell you that it is a lot of work, a lot of frustration, and a lot of time spent waiting. If you wish to pursue that route, in California, your next step is the Department of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE). There will be similar departments in each of the remaining states, but the law will vary. California is largely seen as among the most employee friendly states with respect t this issue.

The Class Action Lawsuit

The Class Action lawsuit is to the 21st Century knowledge worker what the labor union was to the 20th Century blue collar worker. It requires group action by a large number of workers within a company taking concerted action to collect the overtime wages. Someone has to start the ball rolling by collecting the names of all computer workers within the company.

Once you have made the decision to explore the possibilities for a class action, that is the time for you to consult with an attorney specializing in this just this kind of action. This group of workers comes to be called the Class. One of few barriers to this kind of action is that you have to have a substantial number of individuals composing the Class, in order to make it worthwhile for an attorney to spend the time and money necessary to pursue this action. I am told that having at least one hundred in the class is a good starting number. (This is why I was forced to use the DLSE route. I took my action after being laid off, and no longer had access to my many co-workers, so had to resort to an individual action.)

Word of mouth is he best way to do this. Do not use company computers, company Blackberries, company cell phones, employee’s company email addresses, or the company IM. Instead, make your contacts personally, outside off company facilities, phone from home, use your personal email to the personal emails of others.

Your selected attorney will give you valuable advice on organizing and getting members of the class ready to pursue action. There are a whole number of advantages which may come very shortly after action begins.

  1. Except for a named individual who represents the class, all others in the class are completely unknown to the employer.
  2. All members of the class, including the named representative, are completely protected from any retaliation by the company. That may mean, that if you or other members of the class were to have been laid off, the company can quite possibly be stopped from taking this action, because it could easily be interpreted as retaliation – for which the penalties are very severe. Thus, if you know that layoffs are scheduled in the next several months, you might well use this as a mechanism to hold on to your current job while this action is in process.
  3. But in the end, what are the monetary benefits you can expect to receive, should this action be successful?

a. All overtime wages due to you, for up to four years preceding the date of filing your claim

b. 10% Interest on these overtime wages

c. 30 days regular wages, as a “Waiting Time” Penalty against the employer, for having failed to pay your wages when they were due.

That’s about it. Know that the hardest part is getting yourself motivated to take action – All the rest is down hill.

When you are ready, contact this law firm. They are the ones I have used in the past, and I have been very pleased with the guidance they gave me.

Thursday, August 9, 2007

Congress and the Return of the Body Snatchers

The behavior of members of the House and Senate is compared with the "Pod People," seen in the 1956 Sci-Fi Classic, Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Proposed is the beginning of a solution.

Congress and the Return of the Body Snatchers

Sunday, July 22, 2007

Could it be?

While by no means ready to abandon my previous position of a 9/11 conspiracy having a low probability of having originated with the Bush Administration, this article makes a compelling case for further investigation and review of the entire event.

Friday, July 20, 2007

Driving a stake in the heart of Conspiracy Theories

What makes conspiracy theories so tiresome is that they lead nowhere. While their construction may provide great pleasure to their authors, even in the unlikely event that they are accurate, because the alleged perpetrators are always presented as the mysterious ,”They,” there is no one to indict, take to trial, and convict.

In the seventy years since the “saucer” crashed in the New Mexico Desert, the little grey guys have yet to make a public appearance (except at costume parties and in motion pictures), so it seems safe to say that whether they exist or not has little consequence for most earthlings.

Think back to the JFK assassination. CIA? Mafia? Or maybe it was LBJ. (One report asserted he was seen chuckling over the Kennedy coffin as it was carried on Air Force One!) Among the most inspected historical events, none of the named suspects (and there were a lot of them) besides Oswald was ever convicted. There was, of course, prosecuting attorney Jim Garrison who took Clay Shaw, a shadowy underworld figure to trial in 1967. Charged with Conspiracy to kill the President, the Not Guilty verdict put an end to this effort, and incidentally to Garrison’s career.

Now we come to all of the extant theories, directed at explaining the 9/11 attack. There are enough holes here by which can be flown a hijacked jet. The first, if not the biggest hole, is the simple question of gain resulting from scenarios different from the official explanation. Suppose the twin towers were subject to the two plane crashes, but never collapsed. Would any of the national policies adopted by the Bush Administration have been different? All who were above the floors impacted by the plane would have died whether the buildings collapsed or not. Between impact and collapse, many in the floors below, escaped. Certainly more died from the collapses, but the marginal value of increased casualties, real, economic, and psychological is certainly elusive.

To posit that the Pentagon was impacted by something (missile, a different plane) other than Flight 77, seems even sillier. Whatever hit the building, the hole was there. More importantly, if it was not caused by Flight 77, where did the plane, crew and passengers go? The Bermuda Triangle, perhaps?

For every question conspiracy theories appear to an answer, more are instantly generated. If your inclination is to construct such explanations, no matter what the nature of the event you are trying to explain, there is a gauntlet of questions you must run before you can expect to gain credibility:

Keeping the Secret

When you are planning an event that is going to go down in the history books, it takes, you don’t accomplish it with two or three others; in an event as complex as seen with 9/11, a large number of individuals would have to know of, agree to, and participate in the preparation of the attacks. Moreover, there had to be coordination of timing of the events with the 19 terrorists. Enlisting training and coordinating the efforts of this diverse group of individuals, while keeping the whole thing a secret, boggles the mind considering the numbers, and the complexity of the tasks and the skill required of the conspiracy leaders.

The biggest question of all is simply this: With the large number of people required to successfully implement this conspiracy, how is it that not a single person has talked in the six years that has elapsed since the event?

Explosives Needed

Along with tens of people who assisted in the 9/11 attacks, there was a non-trivial collection of explosives needed, along with whatever weapon is alleged to have made the large hole in the Pentagon wall. Whatever that was, it had to be acquired from somewhere. Unless you want to assume that all forensic investigators from the FBI and the ATF are either a part of the plot, or painfully incompetent, evidence of explosive residue would have been found in the weeks and months following the attack. Nothing could possibly have better rescued the forever damaged reputation of the bungling FBI, than being able to announce that there were identifiable domestic participants in this terrible act.

Risk/Benefit

Whoever the mysterious leaders of this horrendous conspiracy, they had to have seen enormous value in adding to the destruction they already knew was coming. That value had to greatly outweigh the almost inexorable odds of getting caught. If you are going to spin the conspiracy story, you must, more than anything else, have to account for this difference in value and you must present a scenario by which the conspirators could have confidence that they would go undetected.

The Need for Alternative Explanations

Among all the issues related to the development of conspiracy theories, this one is for me, the most puzzling. Perhaps only the Kennedy assassination has received the attention of so many law enforcement agencies, and authors. Yes, there are always going to be some details which will escape total consistency, and will remain unanswered. The physical world in which we live contains uncertainties, anomalies, and unexplainable events. “Beyond a reasonable doubt,” means just that. There is always a possibility that the convicted criminal is in fact, not guilty. The stuff of which conspiracy theory is composed is a grey, foggy area of the just possible doubt. It is that tiny sliver of possibility between reasonable doubt and absolute certainty.

That sliver of the “just possible,” is simply not enough to propel us from proposal to action. No prosecutor has convened a Grand Jury to investigate these claims; there are no congressional investigations or hearings to give life to these fantasies. All that can be accomplished is to raise the anxiety level of the uninformed, and titillate the fantasies of the like-minded.

The only result from the publication of these fantasies is, frankly, negative. Our country is populated by a significant percentage of those who are at best, ignorant and gullible, and at worst, paranoid, in their readiness to accept some very bizarre and incredible explanations for events. When three Republican candidates for President express their outright disbelief in evolution, you know you are in trouble. The number of Americans who are convinced they have been subjects of alien abductions can be nothing less than frightening. How many individuals have had their identities stolen, directly resulting from the most rudimentary carelessness while online?

Dating back years before the availability of the Net, there still remains, in our culture, the apparently unshakeable belief that if something is in print, it has to be true. While reading of books has become a lost art, this same readiness to believe has transferred itself to the blogosphere. In a time when students and adults alike have great difficulty in discriminating between sense and nonsense, you do them no favor in publishing fantasy as truth.

Sunday, July 15, 2007

What's wrong with American Education?

Along with the Iraq war, dealing with immigration, and health care, the poor performance of the institution of American Education is among the most severe of the problems seen facing the nation. Yet, depending on the source, the definition of our unease varies widely.

The definition of Educations failure comes in many forms, largely based on the source from which it originates. The victims (students) of course, have their own definition school is boring, useless, with its only value one of meeting friends and, for some, participating in sports. Try asking a kid what he learned in school today, and you will get the thousand mile stare, which quickly informs you of your membership in the group of those, intellectually challenged.

Parents have many complaints. If children are in their teens or older, they have changed from the compliant, respectful children so fondly remembered, to defiant, lying, empty-headed, drug-using, promiscuous brats. (Think Beaver Cleaver morphing into Damien). They are certain that it results from their kids heads being filled with all kinds of ideas that have no place in a traditional American home. Worse yet, if the parents are financially supporting a $25,000 a year college tuition to get these results.

Teachers look at their unmotivated, cheating, noisy classes, with occasional deadly violence thrown in, and either leave the profession, or stay, longing for the days when students were eager to learn, respectful, did their homework, and trembled at the threat of a parent conference or a failing grade.

Employers come closest to describing the problem as they bemoan the inability of employees to perform their jobs, their lack of productivity, motivation, and perhaps most of all, honesty and integrity. Remedial and on-the-job training have become the norm rather than the exception in the private sector. There no longer exists a ready pool of exceptional candidates for positions requiring knowledge, skill, and judgment, even with many more graduates coming from the colleges and universities. Instead, employers seek an increasingly immigration-restricted pool of foreign technical and scientific workers. In Government, from the President of the United States all the way down to the lowliest DMV clerk, raging and complete incompetence is the rule of the day. None of them can get it right, even when they try, and most of the time theyre not even making the effort.

If all of the above is true, how have we made the enormous leaps in technology, science, medicine, and consumer electronics during the last half century? The answer, it seems to me, is that this progress has resulted in spite of, rather than because of the institution of Education in this country. From the rebellious drive that fostered the Revolution through the tenaciousness of the 19th century inventors, to the non-conforming brilliance of Einstein and the purposeful drive of the thousands of university academics and their graduate students, we still maintain a hugely rich source of intellectual power. Yet, we no longer stand alone as the worlds leader in brain power.

Billions of dollars, a giant bureaucracy (the Department of Education), new Internet instructional tools, and thousands of people have been thrown at the challenge, with no evident reversal of this problem. All of the statements above represent different perceptions of the results of educational failure, but fail to make clear what is and has been missing. Thus, it seems appropriate to attempt a specific description of those elements of the educational process which have proved to be so intractable to any and all efforts to remedy them.

If we look at the research, and engage in honest discussion with the participants (educators and students) the missing or distorted pieces of the puzzle are really not that difficult to isolate. They come down to three specific failures: Neurobiology, Mission Ambiguity, and Untaught Skills. The origin of these failures and how to fix them are well beyond the scope of this article; the dialog which must first be opened is to secure agreement about just what needs to be fixed.

Knowledge of Neurobiology:

Some things about the development of a growing brain are very evident. You don't expect a seventh grade student to handle the concepts of calculus. You don't need formal training in neuroscience to understand that this particular brain is just not ready to deal with such complex ideas.

Yet, parents and teachers are puzzled and concerned at the emotionally driven behavior demonstrated by high school students. Promiscuous sexual behavior, emotional outbursts, drug and alcohol use, and dangerous driving all come from the same cause.

That part of the brain responsible for careful judgment has far less power than does the amygdala, the center of the brain driving emotional impulse and behavior. Having peers around makes the situation even worse. Still, with all the research already assembled, many adults fail to accept that this is a part of the adolescents storm which must be weathered. Nonethelesas, adults interacting with this kid tend to react with anger, and mete out punishment, rather than providing responses appropriate to helping him gain control over his problem.

Mission Ambiguity

Ask any high-school student to name something he considers important, that he has learned today, this semester, or for that matter, during his school career to date. The chances are pretty good that he is going to have a difficult time providing a credible answer. Have friends who teach? Ask this: Suppose the classes you teach were removed from your schools class offerings. What would students taking these classes have lost? If everyone is being honest, any answer other than conformity to social expectations is going to be hard to find.

Students spend their lives in public schoosl, (and a good chunk of their undergraduate education) wondering just why they are there. For many, it is like learning a role for a play. You play your part, are rewarded with good grades, but when the curtain comes down (graduation), what are you left with? It seems to me that this ambiguity, this undefined sense of purpose and value, explains a good deal of the failure of the institution to impart genuine learning. Without a perception of real value, motivation directed at making use of what is offered simply is not going to be there.

Untaught Skills

American children spend something in excess of 20,000 hours attending school from the time they enter elementary education until they graduate some 12 years later. Yet, while repeatedly tested, it is really somewhat of a mystery what learning actually occurs. And there is a great deal of research that suggests that approximately 80% of everything taught in public education consists of rote memorization. Another 10 to 15% of learning is devoted to "problem-solving." This is stuff like solving an algebra problem, programming your computer, or building a birdhouse. Students, in essence, learn rules to achieve certain desired results.

When you ask those who are critical of education what it is that students lack, you will repeatedly hear the phrase, "critical thinking skills." Indeed, those are the skills moat students never are taught. In 1957, an educational psychologist, Benjamin Bloom, forever changed our understanding of the possibilities for structuring learning in our schools. He developed what has come to be known as a Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. This taxonomy (classification system) categorized all learning, using a set of descriptive action verbs, making it possible to objectively measure whether desired new behavior was or was not acquired by the learner.

Three categories of behavior, to which less than 10% of the instructional effort is devoted, comprise this sought after domain we call critical thinking. Using some of the definitions and examples as applied to employment settings, it is expected that most readers will agree that these tasks are both essential, but seldom, if ever a part of the public school curriculum.

Analysis: Separates material or concepts into component parts so that its organizational structure may be understood. Distinguishes between facts and inferences. Business Examples: Troubleshoot a piece of equipment by using logical deduction. Recognize logical fallacies in reasoning. Gathers information from a department and selects the required tasks for training.

Synthesis: Builds a structure or pattern from diverse elements. Put parts together to form a whole, with emphasis on creating a new meaning or structure. Business Examples: Write a company operations or process manual. Design a machine to perform a specific task. Integrates training from several sources to solve a problem. Revises and process to improve the outcome.

Evaluation: Make judgments about the value of ideas or materials. Business Examples: Select the most effective solution. Hire the most qualified candidate. Explain and justify a new budget.

For the last forty years, schools have been using a variety of standardized tests and other measurement tools to compete in the mad scramble for funding, and escape the regulatory nightmares imposed by their respective state Departments of Education. During that period test scores have largely held their own or made modest gains. School integration, affirmative-action programs, and bilingual education all have impacted to varying degrees on the performance scores which have been reported.

If schools are doing as well or a little better than they did 40 years ago at providing instruction to students, what then serves to explain the increasing discontent with school performance? The answer comes from the tremendous changes in the American workforce during that same time. Our national requirements have changed from a workforce largely composed of those who performed physical labor, or provided services to customers to one which is predominantly requires knowledge workers. Those who are engaged in management, scientific, technical, and creative work must have the skills listed above, to a far greater degree then earlier required.

This problem will only be addressed if we apply the same principles and methods of political activism we use to affect public policy, to influencing the curriculum and environment in which public schools operate. There are many pressure points available to parents and teachers. School board elections, teacher unions, and Parent-Teacher associations all provide entry points to the educational system. Yet, nothing will change until there is consensus of just what has to be changed.

Saturday, July 7, 2007

It's Time to Go!!

President George W. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Washington, D.C.

Dear Mr. President,

Even in the isolated environment that you have designed for yourself, I am certain you are now aware of the passionate call for your resignation issued by Keith Olbermann on his Countdown show for July 3, 2007. While it is unlikely that you gave much consideration to it (except perhaps amusement at its futility), I am writing to suggest that such an action would very much be in your own self interest, and perhaps serve to forestall some very unpleasant consequences in your future.

While not a physician, and not having access to your personal records, your performance provides many indications demonstrating that, for many years, you have experienced the effects of brain damage, resulting from your long-term alcoholism, along with extended cocaine usage. There is certainly ample evidence of your addictions, to these drugs, and equally to the inevitable consequences resulting from their use.

But for the fact that you selected a sociopath, far more intellectually capable than you, as your Vice President, the evident brain damage which you display would have triggered the 25th Amendment, long ago. Your intractability with respect to the Iraq War, your support of politicalization of the Department of Justice, your disastrous mismanagement of Hurricane Katrina, your total disregard for the law demonstrated by the Libby commutation, individually and severally conclusively demonstrate your inability to hold the office of President of the United States.

What is particularly fascinating is your apparent total disregard for the views of your fellow citizens, and the media which report upon them. That none but a few show any support for any of your policies causes you not the slightest concern. Your serene movement through the swamp of contempt and disgust surrounding you is truly astonishing.

"...And yet Bush does not come across like a man lamenting his plight. In public and in private, according to intimates, he exhibits an inexorable upbeat energy that defies the political storms. Even when he convenes philosophical discussions with scholars, he avoids second-guessing his actions. He still acts as if he were master of the universe, even if the rest of Washington no longer sees him that way."

"You don't get any feeling of somebody crouching down in the bunker," said Irwin M. Stelzer, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute who was part of one group of scholars who met with Bush. "This is either extraordinary self-confidence or out of touch with reality. I can't tell you which."

Since you have ample time to explore your interests, you might find it of interest to consider the end game for a man who must certainly rank among your short list of those you consider your heroes. Joseph McCarthy did his very best to use the tools then available, to foster the same kind of fear and loathing that has been the hallmark of your administration. His targeting of “Communists,” and the methods you employ to interrogate prisoners, stifle dissent, and wiretap American citizens have much in common. Yet, as you consider the end of McCarthy’s life, will you give even a passing thought to your life after January 20, 2009?

The senate investigations into the United States Army were televised and this helped to expose the tactics of Joseph McCarthy. One newspaper, the Louisville Courier-Journal, reported that: "In this long, degrading travesty of the democratic process, McCarthy has shown himself to be evil and unmatched in malice." Leading politicians in both parties, had been embarrassed by McCarthy's performance and on 2nd December, 1954, a censure motion condemned his conduct by 67 votes to 22.

McCarthy, who had been drinking heavily for many years, was discovered to have cirrhosis of the liver. An alcoholic, he was unable to take the advice of doctors and friends to stop drinking. Joseph McCarthy died in the Bethesda Naval Hospital on 2nd May, 1957. As the newspapers reported, McCarthy had drunk himself to death.

In his Special Comment calling for your resignation, Olbermann distinguishes your action from that of even Richard Nixon. He pointed out that once Nixon was finally convinced that impeachment was inevitable, he did the one final and honorable act that avoided the torture which the nation would have been put through; he resigned. While there is no indication that you have even the most passing interest in the lives of the citizens you govern, or the fate of the nation, it can be assumed that you have considerable interest in your own lifestyle once your cruel monarchy has ended.

The best future you have to which you can look forward is one of wealthy isolation. The nation and its media will wish to forget you as soon as possible. You can be certain there will be little, if any, demand for your gifted speech making abilities. Nor will there be a line at your door to seek your executive acumen being put to work as a director of many companies. Being left alone and forgotten is a best-case scenario for you.

If you have gotten this far, you are asking, “So, why should I resign?” The answer, George, is really very simple. While time, logistics, and pure politics make it unlikely that you will be impeached, there are a whole lot of people just waiting for the time you can be indicted for the many high crimes and misdemeanors you have committed during your two terms in office. How long do you think it will take either the new Administration or a petition from the public to convene a Federal Grand Jury, certain to indict you on any of a number of charges?

A solution to your problem looks something like this: Prior to resigning, you arrange with your crime partner, Cheney, to issue you a complete pardon, issued within hours of the time he takes office. Of course, he will shortly be impeached, but I’m sure with all the highly capable lawyers hanging around the White House, he can figure out a way to protect himself. After all, Spiro Agnew was able to walk away from criminal prosecution, and Cheney, all will agree is among the most gifted of criminals.

Tuesday, July 3, 2007

Timing is everything

All across the blogosphere are heard calls for the impeachment of Bush and/or Cheney. Others suggest that a Federal Grand Jury be convened via public petition. The point that everyone seems to miss is that with only 18 months left to go, and with the composition of the current Congress, the probability of removal from office of either or both is at best, very low.

Whatever your level of fear, loathing, contempt, and disgust for the evil twins, it comes down to the fact that we let ourselves get conned when we reelected them in ’04. Collectively, we as an electorate had plenty of evidence of just who and what these people were. The lies, the repression of dissent, the disregard for our position in the world, the failure to secure our borders, were all more than evident by the time we went to the ballot box, that November.

Before moving on, consider for just a moment what would happen if Nancy Pelosi was sworn in as President sometime in early 2008. Gonzalez would be gone, having left the Justice Department in total shambles. Being an election year, even the most competent and honest of the Bush Administration would be scrambling to get out and find new jobs for themselves. Pelosi clearly would not be a candidate for continuing incumbency. Obstructionism would be the word of the day from the Republican side.

It would be most interesting to hear from readers as to how such a scenario is more desirable than is the current one, where Bush is functionally totally isolated. He can continue the war, for a while, but even there, there are signs that constraints will soon become imposed on his ability to keep our troops facing the current level of danger. Domestically, he is paralyzed by increasing resistance and suspicion from Congress.

Looking back, failed presidencies and failed candidacies have both contained a common element – broken promises. LBJ was going to win and end the Vietnam war, which instead deteriorated to a stunning failure; Bush 41 promised no new taxes, and drove the popularity derived from the stunning management of the Gulf War to the cellar with the deep recession of his last years in office. While there were many factors in play, Kerry lost the ’04 election because he failed to communicate a clear philosophy of governance.

So, instead of concentrating your time and attention on Bush/Cheney, it seems far more productive that we insure the next President and Congress will reverse the direction taken by the current administration and their now diminishing congressional support. We can do this by demanding of candidates that they make commitments in as specific terms as possible, their policy intent, should they be elected.

Participation in nominating and primary campaign election activity, particularly for members of the House, would seem to be among the more beneficial uses of time and effort for those who have genuine interest in bringing about reform --- rather than whining about that which we cannot realistically change.

This is not to say that Bush/Cheney will escape responsibility for their criminal behavior. Indictments can be quickly obtained once the new administration and Congress are in place. An honest government will bring with it far more opportunity for real prosecution without the chaos and interruption that impeachment or indictments would bring today. And one thing we can be certain of… there won’t be any pardons which they can expect to receive.

Saturday, June 16, 2007

A Cancer on the Face of America

With the most recent NBC poll showing sixty-eight percent of Americans see the country as moving in the “wrong direction,” this represents a level of pessimism about the nation’s future, seldom, if ever, seen before. While it is true that we are immersed in a war without a discernible end, a President who is incapable of resolving national problems, and a Congress mired in endless argument, the direct effects of this incompetence are relatively unfelt by most citizens.

This in no way mitigates seriousness of the problems we face. A Middle East, where peace is a distant dream, an immigration flood with no solution in sight, a national debt beyond anything we have seen before, all confront us on a daily basis. Yet, the nation has faced equal or more severe crises than currently experienced and have met them with confidence, enthusiasm, and pride.

If this perception is correct, how do we explain the deep national depression in which we find ourselves? Having lived through the Administrations of twelve Presidents (Truman to Bush 43), I can remember no time when there was such public cynicism, while at the same time an unwillingness to participate in changing or managing the national leadership responsible for our problems.

In a recent blog, Joel Hirschhorn makes a telling comment:

“For a nation that was built on a revolt against oppressive governance by the British, something has been lost from our political DNA. We apparently no longer have the gene for political rebellion. It has been bred out of most of us. And those of us that urge a Second American Revolution are seen as fringe, nutty subversives.”

It’s not as if there were no options available to people. Ultimately, as a nation, we could “throw the bums out,” through the use of a provision of the U.S. Constitution contemplating just such a situation as that in which we find ourselves. This is the provision for a new Constitutional Convention.

Article V -- The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.

Hirschhorn argues that we are not yet in sufficient distress to make the massive effort which would be required for such a major reorganization of governance. He further takes the view that the Internet provides a “release valve,” allowing free complaint, while damping pent up demand for action.

There is little reason to doubt the validity of these arguments, but I believe that, at this point in our national experience, there is an additional element at work. George W. Bush and all who have been his ardent supporters, have introduced a cancer into the system which has metastasized to an effect on the national spirit which may prove to be fatal. This symptoms of this cancer are already manifest:

1. The Rule of Law no longer exists: The operation of any legal system requires that once a law exists, it must be enforceable. George Bush has demonstrated that breaking the law is readily achieved with complete impunity. From ending of Habeas Corpus, the politicization of the Justice Department, the treatment of prisoners held in Guantanamo Bay to the disregard for FISA protections, we see a continuing pattern and practice of failing to even acknowledge law applies to him. He is after all, “… the Decider!”

2. Congress is a law unto itself: Congress has chosen to take its own path, passing legislation which directly counters the desire and needs of the citizens who they represent. Moreover, they have failed to hold the President accountable for his winding detour from the constitution. Instead, they focus on granting amnesty to illegal immigrants, a position opposed by 80% of the citizenry. Presented with overwhelming evidence from their own investigations, they are unwilling to even issue a non-binding vote of No Confidence in the “leadership” of Alberto Gonzalez.

The defining characteristics of the American spirit are those of honor, trust, integrity, selflessness and sacrifice for others. Telling the truth, keeping promises, loyalty are the ideals which upon which all of our commitment to and pride in country are based. There are, of course some aspects of American life where these values remain constant. We see them reflected in the courageous behavior of the vast majority of our combat-engaged military.

Yet, that qualities of behavior and attitude are far more the exception than the rule. For most of us are sole experience with this nation’s leaders, be they in business or government, leads us to distrust all that they say or publish. We have been fooled sufficiently often, to have an instant response of distrust and cynicism.

That is the cancer that has spread unchecked, through the body of America. It has spread into every facet of our interactions not only with institutions, but with our personal lives as well. Do we have to look much beyond dishonesty to find the most likely explanation for our soaring divorce rate? How about the billions in uncollected taxes resulting from the cheating of average citizens? What lies abound on our resumes? Then, there is the scandal of the protection of sexual predators by church leaders. I challenge readers to identify any area of their lives where truth is the rule.

Worst of all is the spread of approval of dishonesty to our children. Do you need evidence of that? Just spend some time reading this article about a major cheating scandal by school administrators in Camden, New Jersey. While there are some educators who will forever battle cheating by their students, its rampant prevalence makes this effort a lost cause. In this kind of atmosphere, those students who seek genuine knowledge must be the increasingly few, since reward comes all so clearly to those who dishonor themselves, and choose to take the easy path.

I wonder whether this was the same mechanism that ended or diminished of the great civilizations that have gone before, Greece, the Roman Republic, and the British Empire. Those who question the threat of man’s influence on global warming point to the cyclical history of world climate. Perhaps it is inevitable that all civilizations, as wonderous and powerful as they may be at apogee, must fall into the same pattern of decline and rebirth as those that have gone before.

Monday, June 11, 2007

The New Atheists

A careful look at the prevalence of atheism in the United States

RichardDawkins.net - The Official Richard Dawkins Website

Friday, June 8, 2007

Religion and the Dumbing of America

Religion and the Dumbing of America: "Description: A discussion of the impact of religion and the conservative orientation in the development of the intellectually incompetent; Consequences and a possible solution are presented."

Sunday, June 3, 2007

I'm not planning to vote in '08

I'm not planning to vote in '08

A quick assessment of why I think taking the time to vote is an exercise in futility.

Thursday, May 31, 2007

Data Mining White Paper

I address in this monograph a number of techniques for those without a great deal of training to engage in some productive methods for mining data -- from Text Mining, through Exploratory Data Analysis, to a focus on the use of Contingency Tables, using some advanced methods of text tagging.

Wednesday, May 23, 2007

The Immigration Puzzle

For years, I have watched the debate on attempts to develop a rational policy to encompass the problem of illegal immigration. Given the proposition that no politician votes for anything unless it meets the test of personal self interest, the proposed Senate proffered legislation would appear to violate this “Natural Law” of political behavior.

That this beleaguered President has been able to achieve, in the face of substantial opposition from legitimate legal citizens of the United States, agreement, uniting congressional forces which are otherwise locked in a political war missing only lethal weapons, is among the most puzzling of societal mysteries.

Far beyond this mystery is the genuine risk to national security, and to an end of an American culture which has evolved over the last quarter millennium. An OpEdNews.com contributor, Donna Poisl, has written a four part Article, titled Everyone will benefit from immigration reform. These writings frankly are very, very scary. Why? Because the naiveté demonstrated by the writer, is the same dangerous naiveté shown by people of goodwill and compassion as they join with special interest groups in advocating what amounts to total amnesty for illegal aliens.

What is even stranger is that the members of the House and the Senate who are trying to push through an Immigration Reform Act, are quite possibly committing political suicide, since the proposed legislation is in total opposition to the electorate. Look at some of the polls collected by FAIR (Federation for American Immigration Reform, as it mounts the battle against the currently proposed Act.

Here are the results of just one of several polls found on that site:

89% of Americans think illegal immigration into the U.S. is a problem (30% "extremely serious," 33% "very serious," and 26% "somewhat serious." (Time Magazine, Jan. 2006)

82% think that not enough is being done along the borders to keep illegal immigrants from crossing into the country. (Time Magazine, Mar. 2006)

68% feel that the number of immigrants who cross the border, whether legal or illegal is “too high”. (Polling Company, Sept. 2006)

62% oppose making it easier for illegal immigrants to become citizens of America. (Quinnipiac Univ., Feb. 2006)

Leaving aside the Hispanic and special interest groups spearheading the call for amnesty, there appear to be three elements being employed, all irrational and factually unsupported by those who support the Guest Worker element of the act.

1. Finding and deporting illegal aliens cannot be achieved: Poisl quotes George Bush asserting, “… the idea of finding and deporting all illegal immigrants might sound good, but it won't happen,” during a recent Arizona speech. It is unclear whether her personal view is that she agrees with Bush, or that she believes that he has made a personal determination not to enforce the laws of the United States.

As we have seen with the Iraq war, the last thing this President attends to is rational analysis of issues. It is he who has decided that adherence and enforcement of this country’s laws are simply a matter of his personal choice. From his intractable stubbornness in holding to his Iraq war prosecution against all evidence, despite universal advice to the contrary, to his disregard for and manipulation of NSA wiretap law, there is ample proof that this is a President responding only to his own inner voices, regardless of external reality.

2. The Guilt Trip: Poisl asserts, “Most people admit that we are all responsible: whether we hire the workers; buy what they produce; vote for the people who passed the laws that allowed it to get this far or if we didn’t vote at all. And since we are responsible for the problem, we should be responsible and try to fix it.

Sorry! I had nothing to do with allowing any illegal to enter this country, nor have I hired any, nor knowingly purchase any goods or services from any of these people. Nor did I vote for the incompetent President who actively thwarts enforcement of existing law – so please take your ridiculous guilt trip and dump it somewhere else.

3. Integrating illegals will economically benefit the United States: This assertion flies in the face of every economic and security study bearing on the subject, of which I am aware:

“The people who are against this should consider that legalizing these people will benefit the whole country; the military, Social Security, our economy, our future economy, education, even our national security.”

In an article by David Limbaugh, titled, ”The Immigration Debacle,” some estimated real costs of amnesty are projected:

“As reported in the Washington Times, the Heritage Foundation's Robert Rector calculates that during their lifetimes, they will likely receive "$2.5 trillion more in government services than they will pay in taxes." Among those benefits are Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, SSI, public housing, subsidized college education and Social Security Disability Insurance. So those persisting in challenging the amnesty characterization should be reminded that many illegals will be receiving an enormous economic windfall to accompany their anemic wrist-slapping.”

Even if all of the above assertions made by Poisl were, in fact, accurate, the dangers faced by our society override any or all of these justifications. To understand these dangers, we must wade into the thousand page document with which the Senate is wrestling. Title VI: Nonimmigrants in the United States, Previously in Unlawful Status.

In essence, key provisions of this Act allow almost everyone to acquire a “Z-Visa,” which once held gives the holder access to all services offered to a citizen with the sole exception of voting. This short summary makes that provision crystal clear:

· Creates a Z nonimmigrant visa program for illegal aliens and illegal aliens only. No one else is eligible.

· Probationary benefits, including work authorization, protection from removal, and a social security number are granted to illegal aliens immediately, based only on the submission of an application (with fingerprints) and a 24-hour wait on a background check.

· These probationary benefits are not subject to the trigger in Title I of the bill. Z nonimmigrant visas are valid for 4 years and may be renewed indefinitely.

· Numerous criminal provisions are waived for eligibility purposes. No medical exam is needed to get a Z visa.

· There is no English requirement to get a Z visa. A Z nonimmigrant must only demonstrate “an attempt to gain an understanding of the English language” upon the first renewal of a Z visa (i.e. after four years).

· State and local governments are required to assist illegal aliens in providing documentation to support a Z visa application in order to receive state impact assistance money.

· State impact money will be granted to states to provide services for non-citizens (see § 402(b) (p. 156-159)).

· Z nonimmigrants may apply for green cards and become citizens. While they must wait until some existing applications are processed, they are not required to wait in line behind those who have applied for green cards after May 1, 2005. Moreover, they get to live and work in the U.S. while they wait.

Literally, all that stands between the granting of a visa to any terrorist, drug dealer, violent criminal, or homicidal maniac, is a background check which must be completed within 24 hours of receipt of application. Presumably, under these provisions, Osama Bin Laden, could, with little difficulty, become a legal resident of this country, and freely access medical treatment for his various ailments, before he set off to attack on an American City!

The net result of this admissions policy is that of giving complete freedom to roughly six time the number of currently incarcerated violent prisoners currently imprisoned in the United States,

To become an LPR (Legal Permanent Resident), a Z-1 nonimmigrant must pay a $4,000 penalty (Z-2 and Z-3 aliens are only required to pay applicable fees).

Even if we were to somehow find a way of separating and deporting or containing the criminal element of all who will seek the Z-Visa, that does nothing to ameliorate the billions of dollars that has already been spent and will continue to grow in an accelerating spiral, if this legislation passes. A 2004 study by the Heritage Foundation demonstrates some of the governmental programs where expenditures will always exceed revenue from this unskilled and dependent population.

While these expenditures may ultimately be simply too large for most of us to grasp, there are three elements, directly experienced which result from the presence of these unwanted, unneeded, and uninvited additions to our population:

1. Public Education: Once having arrived, immigrants either bring existing or form new families. Inevitably, their progeny adds overwhelming numbers to the existing school infrastructure. Unlike previous immigrant populations, these children have little motivation to learn, are disruptive, and most importantly seek to require the schools to provide instruction in their native (predominantly Spanish) language, rather than being motivated to rapidly acquire skills in English. Resulting in overcrowded classrooms, the need for multilingual faculty, disruptive and aggressive behavior, the results for those students for whom the process was intended are nothing but bad.

2. Health Care: The next time you are stuck for hours waiting for emergency medical services, or the next time you find your medical insurance premiums have become more costly, you know who you have to blame. All over the country, emergency rooms are closing, medical practice is deteriorating and costs are rising – due largely to the uninsured illegal who demands free medical services.

I started these thoughts with a mystery – the presence of congressional willingness to, rather than attempt to limit the damage caused by the flood of illegal immigrants, become willing participants in increasing the damage they cause. While most may be greedy, power hungry, and self serving, the majority are far from stupid people. With a constituency dead set against the provisions of this bill, a President who has lost almost all support, there remains only the advocacy of corporate America to motivate passage.

Saturday, May 19, 2007

Where Have All The Leaders Gone?

November, 2006 was a time of celebration and high hopes. The newly elected Democratic majority would soon wrest control of a hated war from the sole control of a megalomaniacal President, and begin the process of returning our courageous military to their families and loved ones. Beyond the progressive thinking of Congress the country could expect a field of presidential candidates, any of whom could be counted on to bring the dawn of new hope to despondent America.

That was then. Today, the country remains mired in a war showing no signs of progress, and in fact has become even more deadly. Not only has the surge failed to end the violence, the current deployment has increased the casualty rate for our soldiers and marines. While the visible death and injury rate continues to grow, while the once relatively safe Green Zone is now subject to almost daily shelling, it seems far too optimistic to expect that the President will give even the most passing thought to the terrible psychological damage suffered by repeated deployments to the combat zone. A recent MSNBC article sheds the light of day on Athis dark problem:

“While much of the attention has been on physical wounds like traumatic brain injuries, as well as squalid living conditions for recovering soldiers, doctors, families and lawmakers are expressing growing concerns that veterans are not be getting the right mental health help.

“Those worries come as President George W. Bush has ordered almost 30,000 more troops to Iraq. Already 1.5 million soldiers have been deployed in the U.S.-led war on terrorism, with one-third serving at least two combat tours, which increases the chances of PTSD.

“The Department of Veterans Affairs estimates 12 percent to 20 percent of those who served in Iraq suffer from PTSD. A 2004 Army study found 16.6 percent of those returning from combat tested positive for the disorder.

“Individuals suffer from PTSD if they relive the trauma, experience emotional numbness, isolation, depression, substance abuse, and memory problems. These often lead to job instability and marital troubles."

The July/August 2006 issue of Foreign Affairs makes clear the extent to which the Iraq war has decimated the ability of the United States Military to maintain, let alone expand its war fighting manpower resources.

"The U.S. military suffers from a glaring manpower deficiency. The ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have demonstrated that in operations such as counterinsurgency, counterterrorism, stabilization, and peacekeeping, even the United States' impressive technology cannot substitute for soldiers. As Kagan observes, only soldiers possess the requisite combination of brainpower and weaponry to "mix with an enemy's population, identify the combatants intermingled with that population, and accomplish the critical tasks of governance and reorganization that are so essential in persuading an enemy government to surrender."

The Bush administration, however, does not share this assessment, as evidenced by its handling of the invasion of Iraq. Before the war, Rumsfeld was dismissive, even contemptuous, of warnings from senior U.S. military officials, such as former Army Chief of Staff General Eric Shinseki, that securing Iraq would require a vast number of boots on the ground. The secretary and his allies contended that the war and the occupation could be managed with a relatively light and short troop deployment. This belief reflected the strategic theory underpinning Rumsfeld's military-transformation agenda, which prioritizes long-range airpower and the development of ever more technologically sophisticated equipment and weaponry over expanded ground forces."

And so the war rages on. Congress talks and talks and talks, passes legislation aimed at starting withdrawal, while the President scolds, and ignores. Meanwhile the slate of Democratic presidential candidates universally decries the continuation of the war. Yet none offer a plan for ending the actions of a President run amok. Instead we here vague references to “phased withdrawal,” and “benchmarks,” as though either of these concepts will be implemented during the remainder of Bush’s term.

I have yet to hear a single candidate, Democrat or Republican, present an action plan for addressing the war. By “action plan,” I mean something more substantive than John McCain’s lemming-like fantasy of adding more non-existent warriors to achieve what even he acknowledges, is, at best, a hoped for, “Victory.”

When the pejorative, “Surrender Monkeys,” issues from an O’Reilly, Hannity, or Beck, most will simply discard such primitive name calling as the drooling product of the low end of the spectrum of knuckle-draggers. Yet, when carefully considered it seems quite appropriate as a description of our elected leaders – bereft of solutions, and lacking the courage to implement, even when they are clearly available.

Can there be any among us that can make a single argument on behalf of retaining Alberto Gonzalez as the Attorney General of the United States? Are there any who find reasonable doubt in the assertion that he has violated the sacred trust that he shall protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, prosecuting lawbreakers, while protecting citizens from the excesses of an unfettered government? Daily, new evidence of his criminality, dishonesty, and incompetence is piled higher and higher for all to see.

An argument can be made explaining the failure to find solutions to the problem of a chaotic, confused and disorganized Middle East Region. The consequences are serious, options limited, and resources, few. Yet the same cannot be said for the continuing criminality of Bush, Cheney, Gonzalez and Rove. The solution is clear. Removal from office is the only way we can rid ourselves of those who have either forgotten or never knew of their responsibility and accountability to those who elected them.

The process for removal is available now. But it takes moving from talk to action. It takes courage to take the lead, or just simple agreement to act in a way that potential political consequences; it take placing the good of the country in place of self-interest.

In short, it takes Leadership. Between now and the primaries, and the 2008 election, we all will have the opportunity to find who will lead, and who not.

Sunday, May 13, 2007

Atheists, take heart!

Perhaps it is the difference between theoretical and applied science, but one gets the sense that a far greater preponderance of astrophysicists, or mathematicians remain advocates of theist positions than, let’s say the biologist, or statistician. Perhaps if true, the difference rests with the expectation that the applied scientist will develop something of value, while the pure theoretician, in the end is accountable to the acceptance or rejection of his peers. I for one, have an aging brain which finds it impossible to make much, if any, sense out of this singularity, stringy, banging universe stuff, in which the students of the universe apparently find so much pleasure conjuring up. While it all sounds very intriguing, I am completely unable to remotely relate it to anything in my daily life.

Assume (please, only momentarily) that "God," whatever it is, exists. Now, what do I do with it? Unlike electricity, gravity, or even a pet goldfish, its behavior is totally unpredictable. We can predict with varying accuracy the occurrence and location of such natural phenomena as pandemics, tornadoes, floods, blizzards, and earthquakes. All can, and do, have terrible consequences for real people, yet with all of our technology, the best we can do is to warn of their occurrence, marginally mitigate their results through varying levels of preparation, and clean up after they occur.

Just recently astronomers have celebrated the existence of a potential "Goldilocks" planet. That it it may be capable of supporting life is indeed interesting, but again, so what? We aren't going there anytime soon, its potential inhabitants not soon likely to pay us a visit, nor even chat with us. We have no way to make any use of our knowledge of its existence.

If, by some unlikely chance, Dr, Paul Tipler, a much maligned author of (allegedly terribly boring and useless) physics textbooks has got it completely right when he asserts, “Sorry Atheists, God has been Scientifically Proven,” his complete disregard for Occam’s Razor, and Marketing 101, dictate that his shining pearls of wisdom will remain forever, unused.

Recall the frequently used adage, “Observations are gold; hypotheses, silver; and conclusions, bronze.” When it comes to discussing the theoretical construct that theists have labeled, “God,” I see a whole bunch of differing and frequently contradictory conclusions, no discernable, testable hypothesis(es), and surely not a single repeatable, verifiable observation.

Tuesday, May 8, 2007

This Is Your Brain Online, How Video Games, Multitasking And Blogging Are Shaping The GenTech Brain - CBS News

A CBS News discussion of the impact of online multi-tasking on teen brain development

This Is Your Brain Online, How Video Games, Multitasking And Blogging Are Shaping The GenTech Brain - CBS News

Military Recruiting - A Seduction of the Innocent

In a recent article, Titled, Lying and Dying, Missy Comley Beattie suggests that if only military recruiters would fully disclose the lies perpetrated by the Bush Administration, potential recruits would make far more informed decisions, resulting in far fewer additions to the combat forces.

This writer holds a quite different view than does Ms. Beattie. There are a number of problems with her proposed solution, making its implementation a forlorn fantasy, impossible to achieve.

Army recruiters are first and foremost, true believers. They are career NCOs (Non-Commissioned Officers), all with a minimum rank of Sergeant First Class. Invariably they have had several combat deployments. Whatever political opinions they may hold, any public policy criticism is certain career ending behavior (perhaps only running a close second to having a relationship with one’s Commanding Officer’s underage daughter!)

Whatever criticism one may have of military effectiveness, efficiency, or intelligence, there is one thing the Department of Defense does exceedingly well. It operates a marketing/public relations machine that might well engender the envy of any private sector company.

Beyond TV ads advertising the “opportunities” offered by the Army, special appearances by combat veterans are designed to motivate and co-opt the interest of potential recruits As one example, the “Why I Serve” program is a careful appeal to the protection of personal family, and the camaraderie of one’s military family. The comments of one of the participants leaves no question as to the focus of this program.

“’My biggest reason for serving is my family,’ said MacDonald, a combat medic who returned in 2006 from a deployment to Iraq. ‘I looked at my family, and I realized that I want them and their way of life to be protected,’ he said. ‘And one of the only ways to do that is to go overseas and take the fight to the enemy who are perfectly willing to come here and kill themselves just to kill an American. … It requires some sacrifice, but I am willing to do that.’”

America’s Army provides a sanitized view of combat that offers the immature the ultimate pain–free virtual opportunity to “kill people and break things.”

“’America’s Army,’ offers a range of games that kids can download or play online. Although the games are violent, with plenty of opportunities to shoot and blow things up, they avoid graphic images of death or other ugliness of war, offering instead a sanitized, Tom Clancy version of fantasy combat.”

In the end, it is not the PR, not the advertising, not the computer games. nor any of the other varied recruiting techniques employed by the Defense Department.

Rather, it is the gullible readiness of the targeted group – young adult men and women – to uncritically accept all of the promised opportunities as accurate and truthful, while rejecting the more probable threats to health, and life itself.

Regardless of the portrait painted by recruiters, can potential recruits be so unaware of the increased deployment time, and the ugly conditions that exist in a combat situation? Even were recruiters to disclose all of the ugly lies, misrepresentations, and distortions engaged in by Bush, Cheney, et al, would this information dissuade those who choose this career?

The answer would seem to be that the “truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,” would have little effect on the number added to the military each year. This view is readily understood after reading this description of adolescent risk taking:

“The socioemotional system, which processes social and emotional information, becomes very active during puberty allowing adolescents to become more easily aroused and experience more intense emotion, and to become more sensitive to social influence. Conversely, says Steinberg, the cognitive-control system is the part of the brain that regulates behavior and makes the ultimate decisions, but is still maturing during adolescence and into a person's mid-20s at least.”

The ideal recruitment target can be typically described as an adolescent male endeavoring to satisfy his ever present need for thrill-seeking, risk-taking, adrenaline producing behavior. Military service additionally provides both peer and adult community approval and support. Coupled with a frequent lack of a respected male role to help guide and place limits on impulsive, self-destructive behavior, the successfully recruited trainee resembles nothing so closely as the “groomed target” of the sexual predator.

For those who may find the above to be an insult to the courage, commitment and driving sense of duty to country and comrades alike, be assured it does not. Rather, it is a critique of the essential slavery under which the military “volunteer” is placed once having accepted employment as a member of the United States Military. He must go where sent, do anything assigned, accept any environment, allow himself to be placed in harm’s way, with no option to withdraw from such assignments until his employers allow it. In fact, even after having left active duty, as a member of the military reserve, he can be recalled at the whim of the Federal Government.

For those who choose to perform their civic duty as first responders to natural disasters, through membership in their state National Guard, they can be Federalized, placed in an active combat environment, and ripped from their homes, jobs, and families for whatever period of time the government deems necessary.

The soldier relinquishes his Constitutional rights during his service with the military, under the draconian provisions of the United States Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Here are a couple of items, illustrative of the surrender of personal rights to which all member of the military must acquiesce. These behaviors, engaged in by a civilian, at worst case, might result in loss of employment. However, under military law each can result in imprisonment:

Article 86—Absence without leave

“Any member of the armed forces who, without authority— (1) fails to go to his appointed place of duty at the time prescribed; (2) goes from that place; or (3) absents himself or remains absent from his unit, organization, or place of duty at which he is required to be at the time prescribed; shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.” Depending on the duration of the absence, maximum punishment can include forfeiture of all pay and benefits, Dishonorable Discharge, and most importantly, up to 18 months in a Federal Prison!

Article 89—Disrespect toward a superior commissioned officer

“Any person subject to this chapter who behaves with disrespect toward his superior commissioned officer shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”

This behavior is defined by the following behaviors: 1) That the accused did or omitted certain acts or used certain language to or concerning a certain commissioned officer; (2) That such behavior or language was directed toward that officer; (3) That the officer toward whom the acts, omissions, or words were directed was the superior commissioned officer of the accused; (4) That the accused then knew that the commissioned officer toward whom the acts, omissions, or words were directed was the accused’s superior commissioned officer; and (5) That, under the circumstances, the behavior or language was disrespectful to that commissioned officer. Maximum punishment can include: Bad-conduct discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 1 year.

This is neither an argument for nor against the provisions of UCMJ. Rather the failure of the recruitment process to inform potential trainees of all of the negatives, potentially consequential to signing a largely inescapable commitment to a dangerous and inflexible employer, appears to this writer to be an egregious breach of a most fundamental ethical concept applied to the citizen vis-à-vis his government. That concept is that of informed consent, to employment or circumstances putting the individual in danger, at economic risk, of unknown duration, etc.

Quite frankly, the nuances of why we are fighting which enemy pale before this deliberate “Seduction of the Innocent,” achieved through planful omission of risks and costs associated with military membership, vs. the offered benefits dangled before wide-eyed, willing victims.